Going with instinct??

Instinct can win or lose you money - it's about how good your instincts are, that's the difference.

I would agee with that, mine seem pretty good the problem is I try to apply logic and therefore end up not acting on that gut feeling. Something I am going to work on, logic has its place but If i get that gut feeling from now on, im going to have to act on it, not doing so has meant I missed out on a small fortune recently.

What you refer to is called 'thin slicing'.  It's where your memory instantly recollects similar scenarios that you've faced before and allows you to build a picture of what'll happen next quickly without huge amounts of analysis.  Personally, I believe it only goes so far and detailed research is a much better way of making decisions, but if you want to learn more read the book 'Blink' by Malcolm Gladwell - it'll give you a different perspective.

Excellent response Marky Sparky, I certainly agree that detailed research is better and I will always use that, but the small amount of times I do get that gut feeling I am going to try and act upon it.

I actually have that book , I dug it up after kicking myself for not putting the free bet on Chelsea. Going to read it over the next couple days and hopefully it will help me recognise the benefit of thinking without thinking as its called.

Another book I guess applies to this is the black swan theory, which is about randomness and the unexpected. Good read. Like all knowledge though its all good knowing and understanding it but it needs to be applied

If you had put your money on Chelsea and it was Man City who were next to score, given that you had considered both wagers, I'm sure you'd be on here saying that your gut feel was for City to score next.

Not at all, Im mot claiming every gut feeling I have is correct but more often than not they are and last night I was texting a mate who also bet on the game and said im going to put the £50 free bet on chelsea (I had a feeling that was the correct thing to do) and I didnt, hence coming on here and asking for peoples views

Gut feeling + the best prices, maybe.

You would have to analyse it over a longer period of time . Gut instinct being right v gut instinct being wrong.
Personally I would always try and keep to my logic as I have seen my gut instinct be wrong.

For example / I've researched a game and backed home teams I feel very confident will win , then watched the first 20 mins as the away team dominates without scoring . My gut instinct tells me that I've got this one wrong and its just a matter of time before the away team will score , but my logic and research tells me I still have the better team so I stick with it and more often than not my logic proves right as the home team get better and win. I guess what i'm trying to say is that if I went with gut instinct more than logic I would probably lose more. But this is just my opinion.

The problem arises when your gut instinct goes against what your head is telling you.
Which to listen to then ?
Sod's law then invariably comes into play.

I think what you describe is basically superstitious nonsense, sorry to be blunt :) no offence.

Your gut instinct on the 44/1 horse because "something told you" will not make you money.

Jamieboy is correct IMO, you are remembering the potentially good gut feeling results and forgetting the bad ones. Keep an accurate record and you'll see in black and white that you won't profit from gut feelings.

... and particularly interested in hearing from those with a specific edge and set of ruls if they ever follow gut instinct.

That applies to me, and you can probably guess by now the answer is no :)

knew you'd disagree Trev. but i agree with you for doing so

No offence taking Trevh, I asked for opinions and appreciate the feedback

I would never just bet on instinct, I understand the need for research etc and I rarely get one of these 'gut feelings' and from now on I will be acting on them when i do get them and dont worry I will most certainly be keeping a record.

I know I be in profit if id acted on them so far as im not a big better (cant afford to be as a student) and the 44-1 and yesterdays certainly mean my gut instinct bets had made a profit.

Funny you should say that I once tried betting with a crystal ball, unfortuently I got a winner at 100/1 and now I dont know what to do with the 101 crystal balls I have?

I hope you are better at gambling than you are at being 'funny'

Well I certainly have the balls

Fellow Arsenal fan i assume frimpong, looking forward to the city game?

lol nope im not im afraid

lol, think we got half a chance, as expect lescott to have to play lb and theo could cause him problems, however we got defensive problems of our own. If we get anything it be bonus points for me

im laying arsenal im afraid mate

I have just renamed one of my mathematical models "gut feeling". Hence, from now on, I will often be betting according to gut feeling.

for all your maths Bayes is it not just about gambling on a positive odds movement?

That's why he has done some remodelling.
He realised, after reading this thread, that he had forgotten to put an all important element into his algorithms.
Phew, that was close Bayes.
Dodged a bullet there methinks.

No bet for me, cant bet against my own team,put money on tottenham to beat us earlier in the season and still felt crap when they won and whenever and dont bet on my own team. Watching Arsenal is stressful enough without money on

Mock all you want boys it was a serious question and I appreiciate the serious responses. Yesterday followed my gut when playing poker and it ended well (before you say anything, of course i still used pot percentages etc)

If your instinct is just capturing something you have learned sub-conciously after experiencing similar situations then it is to be used and valued. 

I definitely think this is useful in poker, because the same game is repeated many times so learning by instinct can be successful.  For example, I know I have had many bad experiences calling early position raises from tight players when I am on the button with, say, AJ, so despite my head telling me I can play position etc, my instinct is to fold, which is probably something I have 'learned' but my head is to overconfident to accept.

As for sports betting, I think the constantly fluctuating prices can have many more negative impacts on your emotions (greed, fear) so instinct becomes clouded.

Gut feelings are complex intuition or fuzzy logic programs in out brains and can mean something and some days you can do better with this approach then following the form but it is too unreliable to be of any long term practical use and I cant see the many pro-punters in the world dropping their systems to adopt "gut feelings".

i agree bff

Nowhere do i suggest anyone relies on it or pro punters drop their systems to adopt gut feelings. I simply asked if when people do get them do they act on them

I had a gut feeling earlier today and acted on it immediately and rushed straight to the toilet. Phew. Don't let it linger that's what i say.

My Gut instinct is usually correct.......unfortunately it usually tells me its gonna end in tears.

I wish your chat name didn't continually remind me of how I like one of my favourite foods to be made.
Every time I read one of your posts, I feel like calling up for pizza delivery.

Think I probably need something to eat right now with the stiff drink I'm having, watching one of my bigger bets of the day go down the gurgler, with Dinamo Kiev imploding in a blaze of red cards.

Thanks for the reply Marntich, i agree with what you said.

Fine as frog hair, kiev a busted 1.01?

Nah I was on the off.
Bad enough though.

Btw I don't trade in play and so don't follow the prices after the off.
But I would be surprised to hear that Din Kiev  to win ever got down to 1.01 during the game.
Did it somehow stupidly ?

Is the same thing now going to happen to Fulham ?.
I was heavily on them to win at the off too.
And they've gone 2 goals up.
Looking ominous.

Sorry didnt mean had you got on at 1.01 n got it busted just if it had gone to 1.01

Saw it mentioned on the football forum but it can be a circus there at times so thought i ask here. Fair enough if you dont trade inplay

The football forum is without doubt the biggest circus in town.
Lotsa clowns if that's what you want.

I told you so.
Equaliser by OB in the 2nd minute of extra time.
Just one of those " black swan' betting days.
You have to be able to take them on the chin, if you want to be a successful long term punter.
But geez they do p!ss you off in the short term, that's for sure.

Frog : I told you so.

Should have listened to your gut instinct Frog

From experience, gut feelings often turn out to be correct. And if I'm picking out teams for my Saturday 'fun fiver acca', I make a point of always sticking with my initial convinctions rather than changing my mind based on form, price and even logic. Better to lose that way than for your original picks to win and not be on them.

Having said that, you only have to watch Premier League football in England every weekend of the season to know that gut instinct, that intangible 'edge', exhaustive research, call it what you will, all crumbles in your hands when some dipstick of a referee or linesman makes a bad decision that goes against you. There is usually no legislating for that, although the 'red card' bet looked safe on Monday the way Prattenberg was dishing them out like confetti in the Chelsea-Man City game. If he'd happened to send off a Chelsea player, or given City what was a blatant penalty that would probably put them 2-0 ahead, then the outcome would easily have been so different.

In that case, it was much more to do with sheer luck than gut feeling or logic.

Serious minded punters don't like to attribute most of what they do to luck, preferring to convince themselves that their winning bets were all inspired decisions based on knowledge and nous and that favourite expression of the wannabee pro gambler, 'the edge. But, without most of us even recognising it or admitting to it, luck can often determine how ultimately successful a punter you are.

One problem with this gut/instinct stuff is that it is too easy
to "create" one of these feelings yourself.

Trying too hard to "receive" one of these feelings is too easy.

Maybe I'm not explaining this too wellbut how many times have you
scanned the racing page (for instance) and found your eye drawn to a
certain runner (not necessarily reminding yourself that you've backed
it before or you know something about its form or whatever)?

The name just "means" something in your subconscious (possibly) or reminds
you of something totally outside of racing/gambling.

The amount of times these go in is very spooky in my opinion/experience!

But, as I say, the minute you start noticing
them win, you start "looking" for them and that's when you start "creating" them.

Phew !!!

On the topic of the thread(a change for me) I was once in a bookmakers and placed a £10 bet on see the stars to win the 2000 g race at newmarket, the race was a few minutes from start and my gut feeling was telling me this horse will run well and prove why it was anti-post favourite weeks earlier, also I had a feeling it would win the derby and looked at the anti-post price of 10/1 .My gut feeling then was do an anti-post double for both races as it would make me £2000 as I was going to put £20 on it as I had the cash.

How I wish I had followed my gut instinct.

I think the 'gut feeling' winners are remembered
better than the losers, it's as simple as that.

The other explanation IMO is the expression 'gut
feeling' actually being 'experience' ringing in
your head, not so much about flagging up a 20/1
winner, but warning you against an odds on loser.

I trade with educated instinct...

I trade with educated instinct...

Luck does play a factor, but 'luck' is reduced the more bets you turnover. It's no mistake that long term betfair returns are eerily close to 100% (commission not included).

McChicken_Sandwich
.   
I trade with educated instinct...

''educated instinct'' = experience.

Yesterday's match ManC v Arsenal was a classic example
with the home side leading 1-0 on the hour. This match
was looking full of goals but experienced punters would
have realised that it was a score the City were happy
with and capable of not conceding, and so it turned out.
If Arsenal had scored first I'm sure it wouldn't have stayed
that way. City did their 'defending' in the visitors half.
I suspect the same thing happened in the other three matches
yesterday.

Instinct is very different according to the level of experience you have.

You might have an instinct to back a horse as it's colours and blue and blue is your favourite colour.

You might have an instinct to back a horse as it's lashing down with rain and you remember last time out he won in heavy rain.

Two different instincts - 2 different likely gambling outcomes. And then there is the whole issue of pricing.

Ken: experienced punters would
have realised that it was a score the City were happy
with and capable of not conceding, and so it turned out.
---------------------------------------------

This may be true of previous City sides under Mancini but was most definitely not the case yesterday. You're right, the game did have goals written all over it, both before KO and even more so once it got underway. Indeed, a more end to end, free-flowing encounter between two teams wholly committed to victory has not been seen in the PL all season and it was amazing that it remained 1-0 for 90+ mins. Nasri should have put a second goal on a plate for Balotelli while the left-back smashed a shot against a post. Arsenal also had clearcut chances.

People often ridiclule accas on here, so it was ironic that my £5 treble of Liverpool-Spurs-City paid around 3/1 . . . but my much bigger £100 bet of 1.5+ goals in the City-Arsenal game was a loser! And I could not blame Mancini or City's tactics for that, just poor finishing and good goal keeping.

I obviously regret losing £100, but the way the game panned out at least let me feeling that my gut instinct was not misplaced. As I said earlier, luck (bad luck in this case) came into effect again.

Plechy, it was a fact that City were happy with the score
also capable of not conceding from that point (60 mins)
and I take on board your comments as to how the game
played out. Serious bad luck with your bet, and refreshing
to read an 'after time' losing bet ! GL in the future.

Anything can happen in a single match, some punters gut instincts will pan out to be right and at the same time some others will be wrong, it's all largely nonsense as far as making profits is concerned IMO, but that's what creates the betting market in the first place. If nobody had an opinion we would have sparse markets, so opinion bettors are most welcome.

I like your description of the game Plechy, but it just reinforces what I've said if you analyse it. Your gut instinct was misplaced IMO, you're saying it wasn't because you have the benefit of hindsight which is irrelevant.   

Maybe I'm wrong though and guessing based on experience does produce consistent profits for some punters? In the other thread (u25k I think) reports tens of thousands of profit by guessing outcomes in-play, which I would not have thought long term to be possible.

My GUESS is that you're right trevh.
I think the most appropriate usage of the word " gut" in a gambling context would be in some such phrase as " I've had a gut full of bad luck, and I'm sick of it "

An example of Gut instinct +experience is when you see one side
pressing hard for a goal, betting shortening, and a little voice in
your head saying ''Haven't I seen this before ?''.
Without the experience you dive in as the attacking side are 'bound
to score'. More often than not, they do score etc, but the market has
over reacted to the possibility.

I could be argued that the perfect time to bet is when far to many punter have a gut feeling of an event occuring and over bet on it, then its very profitable to lay off the accumulative"gut feeling"

look at the effect of the prices of every runner a jockey sits on when he has a good run of winners, or a trainer that has had a good week, all the horse with bad form suddenly drop from oursiders to say 4/1 shots,easy pickings if you can spot the confirmed bad runners out of the reduced tissue prices layed by the firms.

market compilers are always looking for the next big flame to burn the fingers of many punters.

Kato star is a classic example now that its in the twilight of its career and the odds are via historical reckoning of the horse and many other semi-retired runners that the horse will not win.

I thought last evening's match at Wigan was a classic example. There must
have been some who were thinking ''have I not seen this before'' at L'pool's
failure to score. As the match progressed the visitors price was always about
4 times that of the home side, which I always thought was too big also the
draw price, with Wigan clearly happy to take a point.

I take it you mean the home side was about 4 times the price of the visitors?

And careful, that sounds dangerously like aftertiming

Careless of me but you know what I mean. I also know
what you mean regards after timing, as it happened I
wasn't playing in markets relating to the result i.e.
I didn't lay Liverpool, nor did i back the draw.
Corners and bookings were  my interests but on reflection
Liverpool ran out of ideas in the second half becoming
less dominant though the market seemed to be ignoring
that.

Ken: Have to admit that I was seduced into backing Liverpool on the evidence of the first 10 mins of total domination and a goal looking likely with every attack they made. Beforehand, and in light of Wigan's draw with Chelsea, I thought Liverpool were too short at around 1.58 but they came flying out of the traps and suddenly the price didn't look so unreasonable. It wasn't gut instinct that convinced me they woudl take an early lead - it seemed inevitable.

I wasted £30 but what can you do other than act on the evidence of your own eyes?

No-one watching the first half an hour of this game would have bet a penny on it ending 0-0.

Wigan may have been happy to have gained a point at the end, especially after enduring so much sustained pressure early on, but one of Martinez's endearing qualities is that his team do not merely sit back and soak up pressure; they also try to be progressive. So, the 0-0 never looked on.

This was the only game of seven in the PL last night that let me down in an over 1.5 goals 7-fold acca (including one of under 2.5 for Everton v Swansea.

My gut instinct is telling me to lay Chelsea tonight and back over 1.5gls.

Ken: I'm intrigued by your comment that 'corners and bookings' are your interest. Presumably you have enjoyed good results from them.

There is an element of luck/risk involved in whatever we back or lay, of course, but these seem to me like two markets that are particularly prone to horrendous moments of bad luck and the costly ill judgement of match officials.

When weighing up the likely outcome of, say, Spurs v Chelsea tonight, how on earth do you begin to predict how many yellow cards will be dished out or how many times the ball will deflect off a player for a corner? I suppose some refs have a record of issuing cards more than others. But do you keep a record of teams who have a habit of conceding most corners, for instance?

Just interested, that's all.

GL