The thrill of professional gambling.

Surely an oxymoron ?
I know it has all been said and discussed before, but
if you find gambling thrilling , you're doing it wrongly ?
If you find it boring, you're doing it correctly ?
Whatever you think, don't let it spoil you Xmas.
Have a good one to all on here, both my admirers and detractors.
( Note I use the plural very hesitantly in relation to the former ).
But however you gamble, just make sure you control it and not vice versa.
Here endeth the lesson.
Made the birds of paradise------.

I guess some may say the thrill in Professional gambling is in the winning as opposed to the actual process of winning assuming the term 'professional gambler' is defined by the majority as a way in which, it only entails betting strategies that only include mundane practices, such as the use of bots or betting in thousands upon thousands of markets weekly or arbing, cold trading etc, to be more precise the thrill would be watching your bank grow daily and substantially over time from a much smaller bank, setting yourself challenges and achieving them and finding new edges.

However, imo, you can be a Professional gambler without any aids and enjoy the thrill of the actual process of winning such as betting in play with the delayed bet process in Tennis for example - having good instincts/game knowledge in a sport like that/anticipating the projected odds movements and acting upon them locking in a profit - is a big thrill - assuming you consistently make a living -  as a bare minimum - then you are deemed a Professional in my eyes.

I find that the more desensitised I become either to in game ebbs and flows or end game final results, the better, and dare I say it the more professionally, I feel that I am gambling.
If and when I ever get to the utopian state of truly feeling that, whatever the results, whatever the misfortunes or good fortunes that happen to me along the way, my system is prevailing irregardless, then I will have become a true pro.
The act of winning will become a mere side factor, a mere by product of my edge and discipline. A mere measure of my success. There will be no thrill, just quiet satisfaction of doing something that most can't.
But until then, I can but dream.
At the moment, I confess that whilst I may not hang on like death waiting to hear the final whistle of each and every game I bet on, I do not wait around too long after a game has finished to find out what happened.
If I'm somewhere I can't for some reason access any and all results real time if and when they are coming in, I'm like a bear with a sore head.

That's why I like horse racing, it's over relatively fast, normally find at least one bet a day and losers/winners aren't far apart. So many races turned over doesn't leave much room for crushing streaks.

Winning is nice whether you win long term or not -no body wants to lose a bet ,even if it's inevitable along the way.
So yes, there should be a thrill in winning -it should be more than just a way to earn a living ,it should stir your soul  -

FAFH - you seem fairly well educated, what job do you do that is so poor that makes you want to become a pro ?

becoming a pro has  disadvantages if you already have a healthy work background -

I want to be pro but I think my best bet is remaining semi-pro until I have enough winnings to sustain me for a few years with a betting bank on top.

I think Coach that it is perhaps a mistake to say that trying to gambling professionally is necessarily the same as meaning that you are trying to use gambling as your main, if not sole, means of earning a life sustaining income.
In my case, I'm not at all concerned about making a living, part or whole, out of it, I am just doing it as a hobby, but trying to do it in the manner of a pro.
That is totally objectively and without " undue" emotion.

If you enjoy your job,it pays your bills then that's good - then you can gamble for fun ,lose some - win some.

Pro's have a different approach depending on their personality type .

Some take high risks -seat of your pants stuff 
Some take a conservative approach ,easy does it  (a bit like a routine office job really)

Personally i prefer neither - i prefer medium risk and a bit of excitement - a losing week is common, but my aim is to make that back and more the following week . (i understand the nuts and bolts at making it alone- it's hard going)  but i would advise anyone in a decent job to stay where they are - i had nothing to lose.

Yeah I prefer that approach Coach. I like to ramp up my stakes a little beyond normal sometimes and it does pay off more often than not because my strike rate is consistently good.

It's not even chasing, I just have boundries, and then an extra outer boundry for when I'm feeling a bit cocky/confident or the price is about to crash.

Coach
You're correlating risk with return.
Which is fair enough.
High risk = high return and so on.
But to correlate risk with excitement/thrill, I'm not sure that has anything to do with being professional.
An example in point maybe.
I like senior bank executives to be professional risk takers, not high or medium thrill seekers, which they have turned out to be to the misfortune of the world in general.

Wicked Whisper
"---It's not even chasing.--- "
I sincerely hope not, because that is definitely not professional, but is certainly potentially thrilling.
The ultimate thrill perhaps.

Ha no, not a chaser though I have been in the past. Dangerous game, very dangerous.

Agreed Wicked regarding the stakes.

FAFH- maybe not professional in the discipline sense- i'm not sure i even like the word professional really .

We wouldn't call a Pilot a professional Pilot

Certainly not if he is a thrill seeker.
But then again, stunt pilots presumably have to be the ultimate professionals, I would have thought.
As you say, perhaps the wrong adjective to use altogether.
Of course nobody thankfully has brought up its use as in professional street walkers.

If you have an edge - It's a pretty straight forward choice between slow and steady (controlled variance but that may come with slower growth) or going for it (at risk of much higher variance but with the opportunity for much faster growth).

I instinctively go for the latter - which is great when it all goes to plan but then when it does go t1ts up, I have to revert to the former, until I am back on track and I find that a grind!

I expect there are people (much cleverer than me!) that have established their optimal balance between the two - but I find that the prospect of maybe having to revert to grinding, keeps me on my toes.

Why do you instinctively go for the latter ?
Is that a strength or a weakness ?
After all you could argue that the greatest value investor of all time, Warren Buffet, instinctively goes for the former.

Btw MGIA, a particularly merry Xmas to you.
I just wish you would reconsider you recent resolution to start smoking again in the near future.
Not a very intelligent decision for someone as smart as you.

It's instinctive - so I can't explain it - DNA maybe. I am old school, so a risk taker at heart.

Is it a strength or a weakness? - That can only be answered with hindsight but long term - swings and roundabouts imo. When it all comes together it is a strength, when it doesn't, it's a weakness. The knowledge that you can revert to grinding it out is a reassuring safety net but I detest it and prefer to use it as a last resort.

Nothing worse than waking up in the morning knowing that you are going to grind it out. I can't imagine waking up to that as a way of life. Nothing better than waking up in the morning knowing that you have earned the right to take some considered risks.

I never smoked heavily but I always really enjoyed it - simple as that really. I don't drink, I exercise and I eat well, so if three smokes a day is going to kill me - so be it!

Merry Christmas to you too.

It's just that it was a particularly gruesome end for Christopher Hitchens.
But no comparison I suppose really.
After all he was reported as having even smoked whilst taking a shower.
Btw interesting that you should describe being an old schooler, as being equivalent to a risk taker.
I would have thought the opposite personally.
But maybe you're just referring to old school sports bettors ( which mainly means horse racing punters I suppose).
In other areas of life, earlier generations were much more risk averse.

Yeah - I don't even smoke between courses, whereas I think CH probably smoked between mouthfuls.

I meant old-school in that, yes, horses are my chosen poison and I even still read form books. There is still nothing more satisfying than picking out a couple of short ones that you don't think will act on the surface at Suuvval!

BF has changed the game completely but you have to move with the times. I was on here from the outset, so whilst I always have been (and probably still am) one step behind some younger players, I think I have adapted ok.

i dont see how it's possible. also never seen proof

What limiting yourself to 3 smokes a day ?

TheManIsAGent     21 Dec 11 00:03 
It's instinctive - so I can't explain it - DNA maybe. I am old school, so a risk taker at heart.
___________________
definately in our DNA

if 10 folk drove to Bristol from London on an empty road we'd  get their at different times -all driving at the speed we'd feel most comfortable with (taking into account unlikely risk of accident/economy/speed we prefer too travel at -

Why put yourself outside YOUR comfort zone ?

Zero excitement on a result by result basis. Joy at continued long term profit and quality of life, wretched cold excepted.

The Hitch was a brilliant man and i was very sad at his (not unexpected) death.

Did you like that cutting phrase in one of his books "---England---the has-been country par excellence " ?.

I'm pleasantly surprised for this random talk and admiration of Hitch :)

Gonna have to buy some Johnnie Walker Black Label and pay respects in style.

One of thr thrills is in knowing the potential outcome of your bet, but not knowing how to achieve it.

What I means is this (using tonight's Sours v Chelsea game as the example):

Pre-match odds are now:
Spurs 3.00
Chelsea 2.60
Draw 3.4

So if I have £1,000 in my bank now, I know that by placing the right bet it will have more than doubled within 90+ minutes. But I have three choices. So which to choose?

That is the tantalising bit. Knowing I have a one in three chance of increasing my bank by at least £1,600 (before commission) if I were to back Chelsea.

But, for me and I many others, it's the natural fear of making the wrong choice of three that will prevent me from placing this bet.

There must be people out there, though, who go all in at times and thrill to their success. Their luck/judgement will eventually let them down and many would lose the lot as quickly as they won it, but if they happen to get lucky several times before that happens, it's possible for them to win life-changing amounts.

It would be interesting to know how many have been brave/foolish/reckless (delete as appropriate) and got out while they were in front, or were content to continue building their bank in a more measured and smaller scale after having taken that initial bigger risk.

Plechy, they'd be better off playing roulette as the house only takes 2.7% rather than 5% + potential premium charge.

I think it's likely that anyone who goes down this road and takes initial big risks to get rich quick will have a high chance of returning to the same tactics at some point in the future and blowing the lot, or worse building up debt.

WW, the breakfast of champions

WW, the breakfast of champions

"That is the tantalising bit. Knowing I have a one in three chance of increasing my bank by at least £1,600 (before commission) if I were to back Chelsea."

that isn't professional imo

Quite right marky.

without dismissing any of the above comments all from guys i respect on here i really can say i get no thrill. Just a job really.

Trevh
Date Joined: 21 Jul 06
Add contact | Send message
When: 22 Dec 11 20:25
Joined:
Date Joined: 21 Jul 06
| Topic/replies: 1,355 | Blogger: Trevh's blog
Plechy, they'd be better off playing roulette as the house only takes 2.7% rather than 5% + potential premium charge.

I think it's likely that anyone who goes down this road and takes initial big risks to get rich quick will have a high chance of returning to the same tactics at some point in the future and blowing the lot, or worse building up debt.


Someone on 5% commission would pay an average of 2.5% on turnover not 5%, so it is better than roulette. Someone betting for fun is not that likely to be confronted with PC. The best thing for a fun bettor to do to get a good deal on here, is place bets on multiple selections in a market, that will get the comm on turnover percentage down further, for instance, backing or laying multiple correct scores.

Not sure if I count as professional but the thrill is coming back from the pub and finding how much money the bot has made in my absence.

i know i could never do it

i see a loss as a bigger psychological burden than a potential win

but i can say i dont hav the best of diets

Well at least you know you're not an addict then xmoney X.
Because if and when you start getting as many, or even more, thrills out of losing as out of winning, then you've really got serious personal problems.
Btw to all on here, I'm not talking about the thrill of winning.
That's there for all, professional or other.
I'm talking more about the thrill of gambling, in the sense of it being a generally exciting and glamorous way of making a living.

The thrill of being a professional gambler wears off as the novelty of the initial thrill wears off - if that makes sense to you, consistency is not thrilling, it's satisfying,

But then again -I am not in the league of people like U25k or investor, I'm the league of people who make a decent living(that's how I perceive a Pro) as of now - so you'd have to ask the real big players here that question as I don't know what it feels like to comfortably make high 4 figures weekly, month in month out.

Can't imagine many pro's would call it glamourous. 50 hours (at times) a week trading pretty much rules it out for me anyway.

The 'thrill' of making a lot of money is still there, and my biggest wins - which tend to be short odds lays which are decided relatively quickly after placing the bet - can be pretty damn exciting. The daily grind is pretty damn dull though.

A bit off topic but I would like to ask if you pros pay income taxes for your goverment or not. I know basically BF is free of taxes at least in most of Europe but if you do it as your main income you must pay taxes?

Tax treatment

In the UK and some other European countries the profit from spread betting is free from tax. The UK and some other European countries tax authorities designate financial spread betting as gambling and not investing, meaning it is free from capital gains tax and stamp tax, despite the fact that its regulated as a financial product by the Financial Services Authority in the UK. Most traders are also not liable for Income Tax unless they rely solely on their profits from financial spread betting to support themselves. The popularity of financial spread betting in the UK and some other European countries, compared to trading other speculative financial instruments such as CFDs and futures is partly due to this tax advantage. However, this also means any losses cannot be offset against future earnings for tax calculations.

Conversely, in most other countries financial spread betting income is considered taxable. For example the Australian Tax Office issued a decision in March 2010 saying "Yes, the gains from financial spread betting are assessable income under section 6-5 or section 15-15 of the ITAA 1997".[7] Similarly, any losses on the spread betting contracts are deductible. This has resulted in a much lower interest in financial spread betting in those countries.
==================================================================

Check INLAND EVENUE UK ....or GOOGLE on subject.

Punting on HORSE RACING is not "taxable income"......in UK.

BIM22017 - Trade: Exceptions & alternatives: Betting and gambling - the professional gambler

The fact that a taxpayer has a system by which they place their bets, or that they are sufficiently successful to earn a living by gambling does not make their activities a trade.

The case of Graham v Green [1925] 9TC309 concerned a man whose sole means of livelihood came from betting on horses at starting prices. Rowlatt J says at pages 313 and 314:

Now we come to betting, pure and simple… the man who bets with the bookmaker, and that is this case. These are mere bets. Each time he puts on his money, at whatever may be the starting price. I do not think he could be said to organise his effort in the same way as a bookmaker organises his. I do not think the subject matter from his point of view is susceptible of it. In effect all he is doing is just what a man does who is a skilful player at cards, who plays every day. He plays to- day and he plays to-morrow and he plays the next day and he is skilful on each of the three days, more skilful on the whole than the people with whom he plays, and he wins. But I do not think that you can find, in his case, any conception arising in which his individual operations can be said to be merged in the way that particular operations are merged in the conception of a trade. I think all you can say of that man ... is that he is addicted to betting. It is extremely difficult to express, but it seems to me that people would say he is addicted to betting, and could not say that his vocation is betting. The subject is involved in great difficulty of language, which I think represents great difficulty of thought. There is no tax on a habit. I do not think ”habitual” or even “systematic” fully describes what is essential in the phrase “trade, adventure, profession or vocation”.

This shows that having expertise or being systematic (“studying form”) is not enough to create a trade of being a ”professional gambler”.

Some ”professional gamblers” do carry on a trade, for example, where they receive appearance money for appearing on television programmes. They are providing a service to a customer (the television production company) for reward. Whether their gambling winnings are proceeds of that trade would depend upon the facts.

BIM22016 - Trade: Exceptions & alternatives: Betting and gambling - what is a bet?

The first, and obvious, question is simply what is a bet? A definition of a bet or “wager” was given by Hawkins J in Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company [1892] 2QB484 and has been followed in later cases:

It is not easy to define with precision what amounts to a wagering contract, nor the narrow line of demarcation which separates a wagering from an ordinary contract; but, according to my view, a wagering contract is one by which two persons, professing to hold opposite views touching the issue of a future uncertain event, mutually agree that, dependent on the determination of that event, one shall win from the other, and that other shall pay or hand over to him, a sum of money or other stake; neither of the contracting parties having any other interest in that contract than the sum or stake he will so win or lose, there being no other real consideration for the making of such contract by either of the parties. It is essential to a wagering contract that each party may under it either win or lose, whether he will win or lose being dependent on the issue of the event, and, therefore, remaining uncertain until that issue is known.

Check the rest from :-

BIM22000 - Trade: Exceptions & alternatives: Contents

This section deals with some activities which are at the fringes of trading income. If you need to make assessments you should consider whether alternative assessments are needed in order to protect the HMRC position. This procedure, which has been approved by the courts, is not considered to involve double taxation (see Bye v Coren 60TC116 and Lord Advocate v McKenna 61TC688).

It covers the following:

BIM22001     Furnished lettings
BIM22005     Illegal activities - introduction
BIM22007     Illegal activities - the trading test
BIM22008     Illegal activities - no moral test
BIM22010     Illegal activities - what is a trade?
BIM22015     Betting and gambling - introduction
BIM22016     Betting and gambling - what is a bet?
BIM22017     Betting and gambling - the professional gambler
BIM22018     Betting and gambling - organised activity
BIM22019     Betting and gambling - element of existing trade
BIM22020     Betting and gambling - spread betting
BIM22025     Insurance receipts
BIM22030     Activities not connected with an existing trade
BIM22035     Miscellaneous income
BIM22040     Co-workers of the Camphill Association

If I for example have 18years old(I have more) and winning on betfair is my first earned money(income), and Im paying premium charge(20%) Can I buy house?

The basic position is that betting and gambling, as such, do not constitute trading. Rowlatt J said in Graham v Green [1925] 9TC309:

A bet is merely an irrational agreement that one person should pay another person on the happening of an event.

This decision has stood the test of time.
====================================================================

However, an organised activity to make profits out of the gambling public will normally amount to trading.....eg a BOOKMAKER!

siwadupa


If you were....go see a tax consultant and a mortgage adviser....as you can afford to pay em fees!

Thank you for reply. Im new in this country. I wanted to be self employed. Not looking easy at beginigs. Even with openning bank account. And forgive me that I dont know to much about your law :/

Well there you have it folks.
Never, ever ask DFC a question unless you sincerely want the answer in spades.
Btw if you're making all that amount of money from gambling alone, do it from a tax haven or better still from the deck of a super yacht.

do you lose enjoyment of betting if its a job or income

there must be a few alcoholics or a few suicides about after finding out the hard way.

I would imagine any enjoyment is directly correlated to the amount you win day in day out.
Start losing large amounts of money over a reasonably extended period, and just see how the enjoyment quotient decreases exponentially.

Some more FAFH




Is an on-line professional gambler still just operating a system by habit or are they trading? Provided that the “pro-punter” is not carrying on an organised activity to make profits out of the gambling public, it is considered this will not amount to trading.


The betting exchanges have produced a number of sophisticated pro-punters who approach their work on a scientific, well-researched basis.  This is not “irrational” but the profit is “tax free”.  For tax purposes there is no distinction between recreational and non-recreational players.  How does the pro-punter deal with the issues of tax compliance?


The safe answer has to be to make HMRC aware of the position.  This can be done by simply writing to the pro-punter’s local tax office stating that he or she has income from gambling and to record the details each year on a tax return.  It is also important to obtain clearance from HMRC via “Code of Practice 10”.



Why is Gambling “Tax-free”?



It is assumed that the simple answer is that HMRC could not cope with the tax claim for gambling losses! The sporting world involves a large amount of gambling at all levels.  In practice, if HMRC tried to assess the “winners” to tax there would be a deluge of tax loss claims.



Practical Tip


Keep a record of winnings in case evidence is required at a later stage.  HMRC always need to verify sources of income and windfalls in an enquiry situation, so it is important to keep records to avoid any future problems over (say) the identification of any capital introduced in to a business.

Fine@ what do you mean"tax heaven" I came to UK coz i thought UK is most liberal country for betting, trading etc. What do you think if my winnigs coming only from betfair and I would go and buy house for that money? Will I get trouble?

pros must get there losing streaks but confident enough to get it together again

im in the ---bet for fun not ruin league

here a pro who did it all---died age 45 thou

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stu_Ungar

Tax heaven.
I love it.
But not an apt description of the UK I'm afraid to say.
Anyway, first make the money ( from gambling), you will not be taxed on it, put in a bank, find a house, write a cheque and buy it, and bob's your uncle.
Then DON'T lose all the money you have won ( again from gambling) and have to sell your new house, and end up back where you started with the same crummy landlord.
OK. Comprende ?

You may run into "MONEY-LAUNDERING" queries...........so important you can PROVE where you got money from.......

What do you think what proves they will need? Cant I just get Betfair PL. If all its tax free (except premium charge-which is tax) Why I might get troubles if I will buy house?

Bank account also needed to tie in/ RECONCILE with DEPOSITS/PAYMENTS from BF.

Ungar a role model xmoneyx ?
I surely hope not.
If that's what being a real pro gambler is, then no thank you.
The price of genius. Far too high, far too often.

Oh, thanks DFCIRONMAN and the others for answers!
I will tomorrow read them more carefully but already checked most of them.
- So, is it safe to conclude that 0% (or close to that) of BF heavy earners pay taxes of their winnings?
- How do the pros usually relate with the job market? I my country if you are "active job seeker" you can have some financial benefits from the governement. But it does not make sense to get any benefits if you make enough money at BF. And can you be active job seeker really? Any of you pros declare yourself as "outside of the job market" or you continue to receive benefits?

Please do not understand my questions wrong, there is no moralism included, not too much anyways, I am just interested. I actually got interested in this because in my country there are some poker players who are at the lists of the top tax payers. I suppose no BF pros there then.

unger wasnt a role model but was certainly a thrill

I think it would be interesting to be wired up to a heart rate monitor for a day's betting.

I bet Greyhound BAGS, typically 1 session per day ... 3 hours when it's a morning meet. 5 years ago I'm sure my heart rate will have upped a fair bit at times but now even with the bigger wins and losses I doubt if it changes much at all.

Agree with those who say theres no thrill in it really after a while, just another way to earn a crust and can be quite repetitive without any social interaction either much of the time.
The pluses are being able to break off and do what you want when you want within reason without being dictated too of course.

McChicken_Sandwich     23 Dec 11 17:04 
Can't imagine many pro's would call it glamourous. 50 hours (at times) a week trading pretty much rules it out for me anyway.

The 'thrill' of making a lot of money is still there, and my biggest wins - which tend to be short odds lays which are decided relatively quickly after placing the bet - can be pretty damn exciting. The daily grind is pretty damn dull though.
____________________________________

Can't understand this mentality at all - unless your earnings only just cover expenses .

Why don't you simply work fewer  hours -and if possible work the 'optimum' hours .

I draw the line at 32 hours - i could do more ,i could make more -i also enjoy gambling but i also like time for other avenues -  surely you need time for yourself Mc ?

Coach, there are a few reasons why I sometimes put in such extreme hours.

1. The opportunity to make a lot of money might not be there in 5 years time, with betfair's increasing dislike of anyone who takes money out of the system, who know's what measures they'll take next to push out their unwanted pro's.
2. While the opportunity is there I want to use it to set myself up for life financially. I couldn't justify doing this for a living if I was just scraping by and making enough to pay rent and take a few holidays. My CV is pretty much a black hole as it is, and so unless I make significant money doing this then it's not worth me giving up these years, which would put me a long way behind where I could be career/job wise.
3. I don't like missing opportunities, and if I put in those hours I can be content I'm not missing too many of them.

I take a few holidays a year, generally, usually an extended block of a month or so, aside from the time off I get when the tennis season finishes in december. My working hours are extreme, probably similar to a guy my age trying to work his way up in the City etc etc, but I wan't to make a lot of money out of this and exploit the opportunity why it's there, so I'll put in the hard work now even if it does come at some price.

fair enough Mc - that's a pretty good reason ,in which case  it's not so much  a job as an investment of your time - so this isn't really your job at all .

For someone who's job IS gambling then it has to beat digging holes imo .

For most though Coach, their gambling is probably exactly the same as digging holes unfortunately, job or no job.

Btw I think Mc Chick's reply was excellent in content also.
Probably a mite depressing for a few on here, but probably a good eye opener for what is really involved ( unless you can design and write an in play betting bot, that is . )

It's not something that I could maintain forever, nor would I want to, I'd probably burn out and/or get too bored of it, but being at the mercy of a company who have abandoned their principles and seem intent of driving people who make a living off them away I doubt I'll be the one who makes the decision when the time to move on is. At least I'll have made enough money to give me opportunities to do other things.

Anyway, I am sure many people out there put in more than 50 hour working weeks, perhaps not healthy, but sometimes to get where you wan't to go you have to push it.

Bit of a contradiction there Mc Chick ?
"---- a company-------driving people away who make a living off them----. At least I'll have made enough money --- ".
I know what your basic gripe is, but aren't you rather missing the essential point that without BF in the first place you wouldn't even have had any opportunity to make what you are making ( and please, please don't say the traditional bookies would have been a viable alternative ever).
Also I think if your admirable, though perhaps too exhaustive for most, work ethic is based primarily on the potential concern and fear that BF might eventually go off your radar for whatever reason, known or unknown, I personally think you are being overly alarmist, and thus creating pressures on you that are quite unnecessary.
But each to his own I suppose.
All the best for the new year of gambling.

Only the real pros post here on Christmas Eve

Christmas Day- an excellent time to catch up on all the backlog in research, with a 24 hr respite till the next lot of soccer games.
Sad if true ?
Nah.
I hate Christmas- a complete waste of a day.
I want action 24/7.
A minute wasted is a minute lost.
Time is of the essence.
Blah. Blah. Blah.
Have a good one jimmy.
Remember gambling and drinking do not mix ( except for me of course).

spartacus--i hate xmas

Btw my BF window is not the only one I have open today or any day.
I have many others open at the same time, flipping back and forth.
The net is an endless source of opportunity to make and spend money, not just in gambling.
Real estate, stocks, commodities, collectibles, art, music, books - the list is endless.
Always busy looking and exploring and thinking jimmy.
You too I hope.

Great film though.
Russell Crowe vs Kirk Douglas.
Not even close.

FINE AS FROG HAIR
24 Dec 11 21:43 Joined: 12 Mar 07 | Topic/replies: 4,751 | Blogger: FINE AS FROG HAIR's blog
Bit of a contradiction there Mc Chick ?
"---- a company-------driving people away who make a living off them----. At least I'll have made enough money --- ".
I know what your basic gripe is, but aren't you rather missing the essential point that without BF in the first place you wouldn't even have had any opportunity to make what you are making ( and please, please don't say the traditional bookies would have been a viable alternative ever).


It might have taken me a while longer but I could have made the same amount via bookies as betfair...... as things stand (but it woulda been a lot more difficult)

I feel the same as Mc_S, in that I want to get a lot out of this opportunity while I can. The future is certainly not clear: Betfair could tighten the screws with further charges, legislation might cause problems etc. That's why I'm paying myself the equivalent of a salary far below the national average, while making a profit far above it. I'm also paying Betfair considerably more in commission than I pay myself (and that's not even counting PC).

The big difference is that I enjoy doing this. I spend about 40 hours a week trading (20 mon-fri/ 20 weekend), and quite a few extra hours doing research and projects etc. getting into automation now.

I firmly believe that if these opportunities persist, the profits will concentrate more and more in fewer hands as smaller players get weeded out by more sophisticated players and bots. Therefore I am positioning myself to be part of the group that makes it through that.

Merry Xmas!

Back to work tomorrow ;)

Can anyone else find the Monday in-play list on the website, I know they're listed on the Announcements forum but I can't find them on the website?

I'm completely the opposite to McChick  & Investor.
All my betting strategies are very long term, designed to accumulate profits slowly but surely over time, compounding in bet size by totally reinvesting any and all profits.
I withdraw nothing and I am pretty confident that BF will be around in exploitable format for many, many years to come.
I have a lot of patience, but I am helped by the important fact that if it all fails eventually, then it matters not one iota.
But one thing I do have in common perhaps at least with Investor, I basically enjoy the whole exercise. It is not really a chore or a grind, either mentally or physically, in any form or manner.

Investor- not sure about fewer hands .

Given that my IQ isn't exactly up there with Einstein i haven't done too badly considering i was a late starter - according to the experts on here i wouldn't have stood a chance .

I can't believe i would have made 100s of thousands from the start if i had known about the site in 2001

Hope you had a nice Xmas btw