General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 249 comments are related to the topic:
Question for the Pros.
Question for the Pros.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 249
|
By:
Im not debating ROI, but perhaps a better way to acheive a profitable one
|
|
By:
You won't get it by STRIKE-RATE obsession......only getting value in odds.
|
|
By:
clearly you can if your strike rate is better than your average odds.
 |
|
By:
Is that average odds of WINNERS or average odds for all bets?
|
|
By:
Lex, price is everything
|
|
By:
Forget my last post ..as not paying much attention to thread....racing on etc etc etc
 |
|
By:
I think the more this is debated the more I feel that
A strike rate that is greater than the price bet is everything eg 45% strike rate of odds 6/4 is better than 40% strike rate of odds 7/4 for useful betting that is, not a maths excercise (which is the point Im making) |
|
By:
it's better for all purposes
|
|
By:
You need a strike rate that is greater than the price bet to make a profit.......
However, it is a case of deciding whether the 6-4 shot is VALUE on that race........some are and some are about right in odds and some are just lays. You say you are using "skill".....but does your brain work consistently well enough compared to systematic approach to betting. RATED races can indicate which ones are VALUE and which are not.....consistently. The brain tends to be less likely to be as consistent compared to systematic approach. You are just betting for "fun".......which is fair enough. GL with bets. |
|
By:
ok dfc (cant use that surely)
whats better 45% strike rate of odds 6/4 or 40% strike rate of odds 7/4 ? |
|
By:
1st one as higher ROI
|
|
By:
Bank 5000 pts.
Bet 1) Liverpool not to win v Blackburn @ approx 2.10 My estimate: 1.80 Stake = 15.5% = 776.93 pts |
|
By:
Numbers keep changing too quickly in running, so going to kkep info to a minimum.
Bet 2) Rochdale v Sheff Utd over 7,5 goals @ 1.83 My estimate 1.70 Stake = 279.00pts |
|
By:
Bets 1 @ 2 losers. Bank = 3944.07 points.
That was almost impossible to make the calculations on in-running games, things were changing so fast. Also chose not to cash out big Blackburn profit in injury time, despite feeling Liverpool looked dangerous. A clear mistake. Two lessons learned. |
|
By:
ul H Bomb,yes hard to price up in running, the people that do likely have detailed charts for that
Lex , Getting a SR better than your average odds over time you have to be placing value bets wether you believe in it or not. The 'missing a winner' is a red herring . People who take the value approach want to back anything that is a value price. They do not decide on a selection and then hope it reaches a value price. eg Frankel at Newbury next month...... Given the sort of opposition i'd expect him to have i'd say 4/11 would be a value price and i'd certainly like to back him at those odds . If he is 2/9 then i wouldn't bother . If he then won easily i would not regret not backing him @2/9 as i never had any interest in doing so to begin with. |
|
By:
45% strike rate of odds 6/4
40% strike rate of odds 7/4 I know both examples are value bets of course (!) But what Im saying is, from a punting point of view, a higher strike rate is better  |
|
By:
My "strike-rate" in naps competition is probably the lowest rate in league.......but still have a plus figure at SP for this year.
There are many in Divisions who have significantly higher SRs....but are lower down the YEARLY NAPS table than me. So when you say a higher SR is "better", this is just not factually correct. Most of winners I get in NAPS comp are at significantly higher odds on BF , than the SP used for the comp. Only roughly 2 points up at SP in current year in comp.......which may not appear to be much good......but still with a low strike-rate ( probably about 5%) there are many with 45% strike-rates who have negative figures in comp....  |
|
By:
My SR in comp is only about 21% at best this year ....and down near 5% on poor months....
|
|
By:
Lex,
what's better here: 40% strike rate of odds 6/4 39% strike rate of odds 7/4 ? |
|
By:
now youre just teasing me.
only one is value now. But that (again) aint wot me is sayin. a higher strike rate is better |
|
By:
yes, but there are other factors... that's what I was trying to demonstrate
|
|
By:
Statistics are always over 'the long term'
but long term is not realistic. 6/4 winners might do well this week but over the next month, not so much. So over an indefinable term then strike rate is more important. if youre betting odds against then over the long term you will get more losers than winners but short term you may not. |
|
By:
say your 'long term' is 1000 bets
and your average odds for your system is 3.0 you want to win £100 from your system asap your bet is £20 (a bigger stake will reach your target faster) as soon as your strike rate is better than 33% then you get £100 (eg better than 333 wins) You profit because of value but it was strike rate that was more important. |
|
By:
Probably nobody was interested anyway, but I think I'm going to have to abandon my trial. Posting info on all the bets is simply too time consuming, especially if trying to bet in running.
It's been a crazy day today, made lots of bets. Nicely up though thanks to a bet that didn't even really fit into the system...a rogue accumulator: All Sports Man City, Over 2.5 Goals, Under 3.5 Goals, Over 2.5 Goals, Australia, Mumbai Indians Back 30783352 11-Apr-12 13:46 1 - 800.0 Matched Man City, Over 2.5 Goals, Under 3.5 Goals, Over 2.5 Goals, Australia, Mumbai Indians Back 237962537 11-Apr-12 13:46 - 13.18 800.0 Matched Man City v West Brom Match Odds: Man City Back 918296246 11-Apr-12 13:46 - 1.28 - Won Wolves v Arsenal Over/Under 2.5 goals: Over 2.5 Goals Back 918296247 11-Apr-12 13:46 - 1.55 - Won Wigan v Man Utd Over/Under 3.5 Goals: Under 3.5 Goals Back 918296248 11-Apr-12 13:46 - 1.41 - Won Valencia v Rayo Vallecano Over/Under 2.5 goals: Over 2.5 Goals Back 918296249 11-Apr-12 13:46 - 1.59 - Won West Indies v Australia (1st Test) Match Odds: Australia Back 918296250 11-Apr-12 13:46 - 1.86 - Matched Mumbai v Rajasthan Match Odds: Mumbai Indians Back 918296251 11-Apr-12 13:46 - 1.56 - Won Aussies have just won, so that takes the pot to over 10,000 now. But like I said, just so time consuming. Apologies. |
|
By:
Not to mention:
2012-04-12 02:46 19321532901 2012-04-12 02:22 Doubles Matches Blake/Querrey v Souza/Zeballos / Match Odds / Blake/Querrey Back 4.00 1,000.00 Won 3,000.00 2012-04-12 02:46 19321530180 2012-04-12 02:22 Doubles Matches Blake/Querrey v Souza/Zeballos / Match Odds / Blake/Querrey Back 2.60 983.00 Won 1,573.39 Which takes the pot to over 15,000. Staking in running getting out of control though. No time to calculate Kelly stakes properly when prices are moving so fast. I can see this leading to big problems. |
|
By:
Sorry for hi jacking your thread h-bomb, I for one thnk youre doing a very impressive job here and if my selection skills were half as good as yours I would be betting much more seriously!
Well done and if you do get the time, please keep posting.  |
|
By:
h-bomb - thanks for starting thread. Some useful information/ideas posted by contributors.
JLivermore 's post early on re STAKING was particularly useful for me ( Using KELLY and edge/odds to arrive at STAKE %). I had checked BACKING top 3 in market to WIN, and had stats lumping results together. This produced ROI 13.55% from 2,410 selections. However, have now broken stats down to those for favs/2nd favs/3rd favs and the ROI for each category is 13.09%, 4.54% and 21.57% respectively. Average odds , using BF SP, naturally differs for each category, and the STAKING % now indicated is as follows - FAVS with average odds 3.06 ( ie 3.06-1)...STAKING % 4.27 2ND FAVS...............4.53 ...............STAKING % 0.96 3RD FAVS...............7.21................STAKING % 2.99 STAKING is , for me, one of hardest parts re betting. I am aware that even armed with above STAKING %s for each category, that I will still be betting in a crude way, as no account being taken to try to evaluate the value on each bet. However, the above STAKING %s at least are attemptig to bet in a more efficient way than the even cruder LEVEL STAKES method on all bets. GL with bets. |
|
By:
Again, not really time to post. But I'm going for Chardy in the tennis, and Chennai to do better than expected in cricket. Currently getting pummelled by Bangelore, but I think they can make it close. Will try post later.
|
|
By:
Couple of big priced winners there.
|
|
By:
I'm glad people are getting something out of the discussion. It's good that we can have a discussion without people getting abusive, as usually happens on the Betfair forum.
For what it's worth, and I'm sure there'll be plenty of you who disagree with me, this is what I think. For me it's quite simple: Strike Rate x Price = RETURN eg. 50% x Evens = money back. or 0.50 x 2.00 = 1.00, to a one unit stake. (Not counting commission) Therefore: Increased S.R. needs price to remain the same for your return to increase. Likewise, getting an increased price (or as we like to call it - Value) means your S.R can't afford to drop. To profit, you have to: 1) Be able to get an above-expected price (i.e. value) with EVERY SINGLE SELECTION YOU MAKE. This is extremely difficult to do. Also, if you get value, but only back one football team for example every day, then there is a very real chance that all your selections, no matter how good value, could all lose. It ONLY WORKS,if you get value every time AND you can maintain an expected strike rate. OR 2) Be able to pick an above-expected number of winners with a fair market price. Value here isn't crucial, but you do at least have to get what would be the true market price or very close to it. 3) Combine both 1 and 2. Utopia. Most people on here advocate getting value. This makes total sense. You're getting a better price than others. But you need to get it consistently or you'll lose. Otherwise we could all just be watching matches all day, and the moment an in-running price went above its S.P. we would back it, get value and retire in the sun. For those who can do it consistently though it should mean a regular, if perhaps small, profit. Almost everyone here thinks it's impossible to back more winners than the odds suggest. a Dream world. I disagree. All my trials and experiences tell me it's entirely possible. But, I think very, very, very few people can do it. So in this sense I agree with Lex. Strike rate is as equally as important as value. It's just harder to achieve. But they are brother and sister. One is dependent on the other. Getting value relies on your strike rate remaining as odds would expect. And an above average strike rate depends on your prices being close to S.P. My trials have shown consistent profit using bookies prices (which I don't think anyone would call value). That's because my strike rate is consistently above expectation. The issues I'm now trying to work out (as I do believe I'm sitting on a potential goldmine) are issues that I believe people continue to underestimate, but which are just as crucial as value and strike rate. These are BANK MANAGEMENT, DISCIPLINE and MARKET LIQUIDITY. These are proving difficult skills for me to master. But my efforts continue. I appreciate that many of you will probably disagree with my comments. And I may well be wrong. But at this particular moment in time, I strongly believe them to be true. |
|
By:
Cheers H
You put it better than me ! |
|
By:
P.S.
Thanks to everyone for their contributions. A lot of intelligent observations have been made, which I have personally found very useful. The fact that I've put on an occasional accumulator (old habits die hard) again shows you I'm struggling with a lack of discipline, as I know they will eat into any profit. But for old times sake, and for fun, here is my acc. for this weekend 1 Birmingham v Bristol City (Backing Birmingham @ 1.49) 2 Pune v Chennai (Backing Chennai Super Kings @ 1.6) 3 Berlocq v F Lopez (Backing Carlos Berlocq @ 1.54) 4 Norwich v Man City (Backing Man City @ 1.54) 5 Sunderland v Wolves - Over/Under 3.5 Goals (Backing Under 3.5 Goals @ 1.48) 6 Zenit St Petersburg v CSKA Moscow (Laying Zenit St Petersburg @ 2.15) 7 Levante v Barcelona - Over/Under 2.5 goals (Backing Over 2.5 Goals @ 1.5) 8 Nottm Forest v Blackpool (Laying Nottm Forest @ 2.57) Combined odds. of 39.26 using Betfair's outrageous, multiples rip-off prices. |
|
By:
Amazing that you people can spend hours discussing strike rate vs value when it's basically the same thing.
It's only possible to have a better than expected strike rate long term because you get value prices. |
|
By:
I am smiling, but the last few comments make me feel like I should stop posting... but some sick part of me wants to try again, so here goes:
"1) Be able to get an above-expected price (i.e. value) with EVERY SINGLE SELECTION YOU MAKE." - this is VALUE. "2) Be able to pick an above-expected number of winners with a fair market price." - if the market price is fair then this must be LUCK "Most people on here advocate getting value. This makes total sense. You're getting a better price than others." - this isn't true... everyone betting the same direction as you can get the same (value) price "Be able to get... value... with EVERY SINGLE SELECTION YOU MAKE." - Value is not observable (because exact chances of things happening are not knowable) - you can only estimate it - so determining whether value was found is just not possible in single selections, so, in that sense, you just shouldn't worry about it. This might help: http://www.beatbookies.com/blog/value-bets-and-value-odds/ |
|
By:
That column advises backing at odds higher than you'd expect them to be i.e. value. which I think is now agreed upon.
You've suggested that picking an above-expected number of winners with a fair market price is LUCK. i.e. Good luck. Which means you believe it can't be maintained, as to maintain good luck forever is surely impossible. We'll agree to disagree. |
|
By:
Amazing that you people can spend hours discussing strike rate vs value when it's basically the same thing.
yes It's only possible to have a better than expected strike rate long term because you get value prices. nope you can have a better than expected strike rate at anytime and not make any money. look at my example above again. the quicker you get the strike rate the faster you profit |
|
By:
"you can have a better than expected strike rate at anytime and not make any money."
and this is exactly why it's not a good measure to look at. |
|
By:
ok you said
Value is not observable (because exact chances of things happening are not knowable) if thats the case then you need a good strike rate that is better than the mean odds. so strike is better. |
|
By:
Be able to pick an above-expected number of winners with a fair market price.
You mean by luck right? It's impossible to apply skill to pick an above-expected number of winners with a fair market price, as the fact that the market price (the price you struck your bet at) is fair, means you can only expect to break even over time (GP). |
|
By:
I'll try an example then.
You place a lot of bets of £1 at 1.1 and a lot of bets of £1 at 20. What are your mean odds and what strike rate do you need to be profitable? |