|
By:
So will we see people banned if they win to much from the sports books?
|
|
By:
No mention of front running unless you count this
we have formed the infrastructure for this project through assembling a crack trading team from some of the strongest players in the bookmaking industry |
|
By:
Can't imagine the "crack trading team" operating without a swatch at what successful players are doing. The game's a bogy imo.
|
|
By:
I guess it all comes back to the same old bookie business model problem. If they're not going to ban people, at least from the sportsbook, then they're going to have to be making exceptional prices..
Is that how you see it? |
|
By:
Do you mean unexceptional JL or am I reading it wrong?
|
|
By:
They will get people who win against them and they will have to decide what to do about them.
|
|
By:
They have stated that they will only be operating in the less liquid markets, so I guess maximium bets will apply. More than £3.65 I hope.
Will loses be PC deductable for any churners ![]() |
|
By:
will there be any way to identify which bets are coming from the sportsbook? or will it be like at present (w/cross matching) where we can't tell which bets involve betfair in more than their most basic middleman role?
how will we have confidence that betfair won't deliberately settle/void markets with debatable outcomes in their favour? |
|
By:
(actually we can generally tell but by the time you've worked it out it's often too late to get a bet on)
|
|
By:
It's clear that they intend to make them separate markets, so you'd have an exchange market and a sportsbook market.
The "technology enabling this" they're talking about is the ability to keep bets open (i.e. loaded up but not "fired in") while switching markets. This isn't possible pre-beta but in theory is possible in beta. |
|
By:
They have stated that they will only be operating in the less liquid markets
That will be them all then hazel until Last5minutes.com kicks in. |
|
By:
Agree with ror - I expect it to be a separate bet choice:
"the product will highlight exactly how superior it is the vast majority of times." "This product will complement the Exchange, rather than compete and it is for this reason that we refer to the two together as a ‘Next Generation Sports Site’" Feck - I did mean 'exceptional' - if they were able to make very efficient prices then there wouldn't be any value for shrewdies. Of course making 'unexceptional' prices is perhaps a more realistic way to achieve this ![]() |
|
By:
They will basically be inline with what other bookmakers odds are. If they are not then there is value to be had somewhere.
|
|
By:
you may be right. i took complement rather than compete to mean they were sticking them together. either way they still complement and compete.
|
|
By:
How does Betfair SP fit in with their new sportsbook ?
I would have thought BFSP is all they needed to be added to all markets? and will the sportsbook offer lay betting as well? to be competitive against other bookmakers wont they need to offer better prices? so exhange users can lay off the sportsbook markets ? Or am I fick ? |
|
By:
They are going to have to restrict stakes or ban winners. I can't see how this book can hope to compete with the high street.
|
|
By:
i dont understand this, whhy dont they simply create an entity which will offer liquidity in the exchange markets. as long as they dont have any time advantage or matching prefernce it should be acceptablle for most here.
|
|
By:
It wont be a faceless market like on the exchange. They will be able to pick and choose what business they want. Could offer good customers higher stakes etc. They couldnt do this if they have to offer it on the open market to the fleecers on here.
|
|
By:
Good point, henok. frog is probably correct (it's so they can restrict betting with the people they want and to the amounts they are happy with)... but their approach has terrible downsides.The site at the moment is a pain to navigate. With the new product,will punters have to first visit the exchange, decide the prices are rubbish,and then try to find the corresponding market on the new bookie site? That's just great. More pointless clicking around getting in the way of betting.
Betfair should do something about just making the site easier to find stuff.Like for example, making the sports front page load fast. |
|
By:
To be fair,the beta site *does* have a faster front page load. They are doing something right with the beta!
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
btw, does anyone know whether punters who take their bet from this new product pay commision?
![]() |
|
By:
Almost certainly henok. As with exchange games, customer gets stuffed twice. Firstly on the under EV odds, secondly on commission on the winners.
|
|
By:
I don't really see how this can be worth betfair's time and resources. If a market is illiquid and then betfair offer an overround book on it through their sportsbook, surely people will just offer slightly higher odds through the exchange? Unless they stop stuffing us twice and remove the commission with a 95% + book, or run a 100% book I can't see it working? That's assuming they keep the existence of an exchange market for an event obvious from their sportsbook, rather than duping unknowing customers into thinking they've got no choice...
|
|
By:
Betfair could pioneer new ground here, offering better liquidity, whilst avoiding being picked off. They have made a big mistake recruiting a "crack trading team" ("expensive" would be a better description, compared to the limited value the team will generate).
Betfair have looked at the huge profits Bet365 have made compared to Betfair, and want a piece of that kind of action. That is fair enough, but what they have chosen to do is very inefficient. The real way forward is to use a system of dark pools. The higher the percentage win rate on an account, the less they can see on the screen at prices set/available. The on screen amounts displayed to a shrewd customer would be in fivers/tenners, and small amounts would move the price quite a lot. Whereas big losing accounts would be able to see the full liquidity up on the screen in the hundreds/thousands of pounds. It doesn't really matter on the occasions when a price is quite far away from EV, a non-shrewd customer is just as likely to back as to lay at the on-screen prices, and will not be able to discern which is value. The shrewd punters would nibble away, forcing the market up or down (and if the market has say £5 at 1.78/1.79/1.80 to back and £5 at 1.81/1.82/1.83 to lay, then each time the shrewd punter nibbles at say the back price, say with £5 at 1.79 and £5 at 1.8, the Betfair algorithms would automatically try to get back out of the bet by placing a bet backing on screen at 1.79 and 1.8 in the lay queue). Each time the shrewd punters have nibbled away more than say 0.05 units (e.g. moved the price down to 1.75 from 1.8) an alert would be generated, and the Betfair 'crack trader' could then move the backs and lays up or down accordingly, to bring the real market into line with where the shrewd punters have nibbled away. This system is much cheaper than what Betfair have done. It would still generate valuable information from the shrewder accounts, whilst not letting them take big nibbles/chunks out of Betfair profits. Then the losing customers would have big chunks/liquidity available to them. The non dark pool system Betfair have put in is a sort of copy of what Bet365 have done. Instead, Betfair should have gone for the much cheaper, much more efficient, much more lucrative, and much more satisfying for losing customers system of constructing dark pools where shrewd accounts can't see the full liquidity available, and have to in effect 'declare their hand'. |
|
By:
Interesting post ballabriggs, it does seem a bit crude for an innovator like Betfair.
I'm wondering if the sport book data will be available to the api so that the bots might use it as a basis on which to populate the exchange. |
|
By:
Do dark pools exist on other betting sites ballabriggs or is this an idea from elsewhere?
Cannot see BF charging commission on this new product at all as then it would be a non-runner against the competition with the target audience they are aiming for. Wonder if they will do early prices on the horses - that would be fun to see from the "crack" trading team ![]() ![]() |
|
By:
Instead, Betfair should have gone for the much cheaper, much more efficient, much more lucrative, and much more satisfying for losing customers system of constructing dark pools where shrewd accounts can't see the full liquidity available, and have to in effect 'declare their hand'.
I thought they had already been doing that for the past 12 years ballabriggs. |
|
By:
This could be bad news for anyone playing in illiquid or semi-liquid side markets, Betfair could replace these with their own sportsbook markets. A lot of people have been complaining recently that the side markets and minor sports are dead, this could be a perfect time for Betfair to replace them with their own markets.
|
|
By:
catflappo, if Betfair would just post their bets on the main exchange then they'd get this kind of integration for free!
I wonder if Betfair will continue their 'best execution' through this new product? e.g. if you back a team at 6.0 on the exchange and the other site had had them at 7.0, will they increase your odds? (And vv if there are better odds on the exchange than on their new betting product) Would anyone like to guess which markets they will be targeting here? The article mentions horse AP betting which seems an odd choice, it's prone to huge odds swings based on information known only to a few people... |
|
By:
Can't I just use someone elses account to see whats in the dark pool?
|
|
By:
I don't believe AP would be a wise choice. Very difficult to make that pay IMO.
|
|
By:
There was another much cheaper, simpler and more effective way Betfair could have done this.
The trading team set a price at what they judge is fair value, say evens for an NBA team to win or lose. A winning account logs in and sees 5/6 the pair. A losing account logs in and sees 19/20 the pair. The rate of winning/losing on every account could be calculated automatically (and updated automatically after every market). This way, the price available to the biggest winners is the furthest away from the price set, whilst the price available to the losing accounts is very close to FV. It doesn't matter if a big losing account ends up getting value on a selection, they are just as likely to take a poor price as take a good price. Its arguably quite good to give losing customers value from time to time too. What matters is to keep them playing. By having in effect the same price for everyone, you need an expensively assembled "crack" trading team, judging bet by bet what to accept, what not to accept, and what price to offer/change to. Instead, if the overround was tailored automatically to each account, there would be built in protection, and the only times the big winners would take 5/6 (etcetera) would be when the price set by the trading team was a very long way from the real FV. The trading team would then know they had to move the price immediately. Under this current system, they wouldn't necessarily know that, to anything like the same degree. Automatically triggered increases and decreases in overround would cut the cost of the trading team, and their time and toil involved in keeping out the big winners, whilst giving a good service to the accounts they really want to be laying bets to. Betfair kind of does this after the event with the PC, but it is possible to do it before bets have even been laid. |
|
By:
'Crack team' aside, is this not just linked into the cross-matching anyways.
Once the bet is placed, the algorithms take over. Back a football team to win, it's just balanced against every other market on the game. The only decisions that need to be looked at is where the liquidity is and isn't (i.e. when multiples first go up for baseball, the spread is huge early in the morning in the UK since the market hasn't formed). And once they have an extensive "all green" in one area, they can spread it / invest it into other markets creating revenue through commission (every 1000 they invest is a commission return of X to 5%). Thinking linear based on 'results' doesn't show the true potential that this can have if actually managed properly. |
|
By:
Betfair's concern is also poor liquidity when markets haven't formed yet, or poor liquidity on side markets, hence the need for this crack trading team to supply liquidity for the "30%" of markets which Betfair want covered.
Betfair have a real invaluable tool to deal with this already, and they don't use it. If markets are too quiet, then incentivise them. 0% commission on these markets during the quiet times for bets placed in that relevant period, where Betfair wants liquidity to be boosted. Its even possible to have negative commission - if you offer prices at this time, and someone else matches it, you are charged 0% commission if you win, but if your opponent wins, Betfair take half of the commission paid, and you get half of your opponent's commission. That is surely better than the market being dead? Betfair have to respect that working out prices takes skill, time, and in reality money. They seem to want that service for free, without making any concessions for it. They just have to tailor their product and charging, so that the people who price events up share in the profit with Betfair from these currently illiquid markets. |
|
By:
Ballabrigs you said, "They just have to tailor their product and charging, so that the people who price events up share in the profit with Betfair from these currently illiquid markets. "
surely they do this already, its called the premium charge. |
|
By:
Completely agree with ballabriggs on this one. I've tried a few pricing strategies that don't pay because of transaction charging. similar concessions could be made there to allow seeding in quiet side markets to be cheaper.
|
|
By:
ballabriggs, your approach only works if someone matches a position then doesn't play the market again. i.e. bet on League two football Thursday night for Saturday).
But then, once I had my zero, I could trade elsewhere. The only way I see to bring early liquidity and lock in would be to offer zero on multiples if placed, say, 24 hours in advance, thus contributing to their seeding and trading. |
|
By:
Poor liquidity breeds poor liquidity. Who wants to put a decent sized offer into a quiet market when they know it will only end up as a book end while parasitic traders and copycats leapfrog them with their £1.99 bets. Betfair's "crack trading team" front running them will only make matters worse. Will last5minutes.com become last2minutes.com? It's about time exchanges realised it's their crummy stock market interface that's the cause of tumbleweed markets. Requiring a degree in computer programming to get a decent sized bet on kind of restricts your prospective customer base.
|