General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
20 Jun 13
21:57
Joined:
Date Joined:
12 Mar 07
I would suggest that this must be close to being the most often repeated phrase on here, and yet perhaps it is the least understood by the average punter/reader on here.
Someone recently said that the they had given up trying to educate their friends on the need to look for value inorder to win long term.
Now I have been reading this forum for quite a long time and I don't recall ever seeing anyone post up a tangible example of what this phrase exactly means.
Most when challenged to illustrate exactly what they mean when they use this phrase usually say that to do so would be to reveal their edge ( the equivalent of the old joke phrase " if I do I will have to kill you " ).
Fair enough if that is the case using a current example.
But how about someone posting up an example based on an "edge" long since eroded, and effectively now in the public domain.
Anybody care or willing to do that ?
There are a lot of unhappy punters out there who might just stick around a little longer on the exchange for the benefit of all, if they are shown at least the theoretical way(s) some " clever chappies" win consistently on here, in the past if not now.
Someone recently said that the they had given up trying to educate their friends on the need to look for value inorder to win long term.
Now I have been reading this forum for quite a long time and I don't recall ever seeing anyone post up a tangible example of what this phrase exactly means.
Most when challenged to illustrate exactly what they mean when they use this phrase usually say that to do so would be to reveal their edge ( the equivalent of the old joke phrase " if I do I will have to kill you " ).
Fair enough if that is the case using a current example.
But how about someone posting up an example based on an "edge" long since eroded, and effectively now in the public domain.
Anybody care or willing to do that ?
There are a lot of unhappy punters out there who might just stick around a little longer on the exchange for the benefit of all, if they are shown at least the theoretical way(s) some " clever chappies" win consistently on here, in the past if not now.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 83
|
By:
I'll give you a current edge to get you going.
Lay Liverpool in every EPL game of the season. |
|
By:
To pre-empt the usual critical responses my posts usually generate in spades, I will say that I personally cannot post up any such an example because it is not the way I have ever approached my betting, at least not deliberately.
I may well be getting value in some indirect form or manner, but I do not specifically search for it to find my betting opportunities. But I fully accept the validity of the concept. |
|
By:
UA
Surly that is just an example of projecting the past to repeat in the future. The essential gambler's fallacy isn't that ? |
|
By:
an edge.... local radio during inplay football games
betfair have of course sorted it with their 8 second clock is that not an edge as so much as a sure thing ? i used to back 3-3 draws at 66/1 to 100/1, it seemed a decent long term thing until one of the racing papers wrote a feature on it and suggesting true odds were less than 66/1 and bookies chopped to about 50/1 at which point there was an edge to the bookies this was shortly after newcastle drew 3-3 with tranmere in zenith data cup, funny thing was, once the big prices went there seemed to be less 3-3 draws |
|
By:
ok one more and then i'm off to bed
Be the first one in the queue to lay 1.01 on all outcomes. Offer up bets at deliberately wrong prices and hope they get matched. Or get your mate to go to a football game/tennis match and tell you of price changing events exactly when they happen down the phone. Or pay someone lots of money who is involved in a particular match/event to act in a particular way so as to alter the outcome of said game/event. By the way i'm a little confused you want an edge that has long since eroded but then surely this argument would be automatically countered by "ah but it wasn't really a true edge if it disappeared over time". Right bedtime. |
|
By:
The old draw biases at certain courses were a fact. Backing the draws with a strong bias would have been value bets, simple enough.
You must know by now a value bet is taking a price which is longer than it's true chance of winning. |
|
By:
Phew! I don't know why I'm posting on here cos I too am looking for that magical edge!
Sometimes when an event is in play and it looks like a player/team etc. is almost certain to win the odds of the opposition are jumping about all over the place. 50 - 70 - 40 - 60..... It's easy to back then lay, BUT whether it's profitable in the long run I don't know??? |
|
By:
The thread thus far is just reinforcing my basic point.
That is the concept is either too mystical to explain with tangible examples, or too important to reveal with tangible examples. It seems to be destined to remain in the realms of theory, to be unravelled/exploited only by a select few. God bless'em. |
|
By:
I've learnt a lot by writing silly little computer programs that go through lots of results to try and find an edge. I've got really excited cos I'd have been up after 5 months. Then the 6th month has completely wiped me out! Fortunately I've not done it for real. But if I only had 5 months I may have done! I'm currently getting the 7th month (July) into my program. I'll keep you updated...
This was backing horses that were big odds. |
|
By:
"Looking for value"
There is value to be obtained whether it is from top 3 favourites in HORSERACE or whether it is in "high" odds ones. To "see" the value you can devise a horse race rating system that is consistent in producing ratings to a high standard. The RANK position of a horse in a rated race will for example then indicate a horse's chance of winning. A horse say rated 3rd top rated is a 2-1 shot for comparison purposes. If the horse is 3rd top rated and is at SP odds of 3-1, then it is a "value" back. If the horse is an EVEN money shot at SP, then it is not a value BACK...........though laying it in WIN market may be dangerous as it is in top 3 rated. Some may say this a CRUDE way of getting "true" odds for a horse's chances of winning..........but if the system of ratings consistently gets it "right", then in long run you should win. I've just picked an old race that was posted on here in 2009 for an example.......of how such a system can indicate VALUE, both from LAYING and BACKING perspective. From 6th MARCH 2009 at WINCANTON 16:20 Handicap Chase 5yo plus 3m 3f 110y Class 4 9 runners Soft 1,National Petition 2ND 4 JT 2ND/3RD FAV BFSP 3.96 LOW ODDS IR 2.55 2,Rebel melody 1ST 100-30F BFSP 3.89 LOW ODDS IR 0 SFC: £26.54 Tricast: £208.05 Exacta: £27.60 3,Kilty Storm 2ND 7-1 4TH F BFSP 8.19 LOW ODDS IR 0.61 4,Himself Dreams On 40 5,Laudamus 4 JT 2ND/3RD FAV -------------------------------------Swingers:1&2:£4.70, 2&3:£12.10, 1&3:£6.10 6,Wizard of Edge 11 7,Classic Clover 3RD 10-1 8,Tradingup 14 9,Blaze Ahead 8 5TH F Trust this helps......................... |
|
By:
I altered the top rated horse as it was shown as ...
1,National Petition 4 2ND 2ND/3RD FAV BFSP 3.96 LOW ODDS IR 2.55 I wrong typed 2nd twice.......it should only be JT 2nd/3rd fav........and it did not finish 2nd...... the horse ranked 3rd finished 2nd at 7-1 SP...... Sorry...but late now and a bit knackered................ |
|
By:
If you are a long time punter and still looking for an edge you are probably missing a lot by trying to look for something exotic. It's a lot simpler than that.
UA gave you a cast iron value edge and you dismissed it, it really is that easy. |
|
By:
Both the top rated and 2nd top rated are at VALUE SP odds...to back.......( the JT 2nd/3rd fav and FAV).
The JT 2nd/3rd fav ranked 5th is a 4-1 SP shot according to RANK position.....therefore at 4-1 SP it is neither a back or a lay............... |
|
By:
The system generally gets it "right" on 4th and 5th favourites......in that whatever horse is RANKED above the other, then the one below it it is a LAY....whether at VALUE odds or not !
The VALUE in respect of such a strategy is the generally accuracy for such a horse, that is below the other from 4th and 5th favs, does rarely win................. |
|
By:
FAFH, backing or laying the prevailing score during the last
20 minutes play, but dependent on prices available, can produce profits in most matches, especially if the sides are of fairly even ability. |
|
By:
This the most obvious example (that indeed doesn't work any more )
The Hole-in-One Gang (1991) ''In the summer of 1991 Essex boys Paul Simmons (an on-course bookmaker's clerk) and John Carter (a former betting shop manager) toured the British Isles looking for independent betting shops who would give them odds on a hole-in-one being scored at the British Open, the Benson & Hedges, the Volvo PGA, the U.S. Open and the European Open. Their research had shown the probability of a hole-in-one at any of these events was no bigger than even money but they were still able to get odds of up to 100/1 on the occurrence and managed to place several doubles, trebles and accumulators (of it happening at all five events) placed at double-digit prices. There was a hole-in-one at all five tournaments and when Spaniard Miguel Angel Jimenez sunk the last of them at the European Open at Walton Heath, Surrey, Simmons and Carter's winnings totalled more than £500,000 not including the 12 bookmakers that refused to pay them out, declared themselves bankrupt or did not renew their betting permit. '' double figure odds on something they calculated at Evens , can't get a better example of value betting than that |
|
By:
No doubt about the value edge in that story tober.
Thanks for reminding us all about it. In my case, more than reminding, as I had never actually heard it before. |
|
By:
why bother.......once you regularly start to find an edge betfair will tax you and remove it?
|
|
By:
Froggie, it seems the unblock function has stopped working, so I can't read your OP, but I assume you are asking about edges.
Firstly, an edge by definition, is something most people don't know about. By posting an edge on here rather more people will know about, and it becomes somewhat less of an edge. Secondly, the advice I gave someone recently is to trade a lot of markets for small stakes and just watch happens. When the market moves, understand why it moves. If you know why it moves, you can predict it. There are still edges to be found. I found a great one a few weeks back. And I'm kicking myself for not seeing it years ago. Some of the edges I have been using for years are still good. Some are no longer worth the bother. Thirdly, look at less popular sports and matches. I made good money on Singapore soccer for several years. |
|
By:
To me, it seems like the best value is found in big odds, BUT the problem is they're unlikely to win.
There are tennis players that are 1000 to win Wimbledon that would surely win it in less than 1000 attempts. Even though their true odds should be much less, it's so unlikely that they'll win that 1000 still seems like a safe lay. I just used Wimbledon as an example but the same could be said about other sports etc. I hope I'm not talking a load of crap here, which wouldn't be too uncommon for me! |
|
By:
basically any research can lead to an edge. it is understanding what is going on and using this information to make future decisions. a simple look at your profit and loss can give you an edge. even knowing that you are rubbish at gambling can be considered an edge if you use this knowledge to restrict yourself from betting or to change your betting style.
|
|
By:
Specialise - Be more knowledgeable than the masses about one sport,team or market.
|
|
By:
"knowing that you are rubbish at gambling means you know you have no edge"
That's not really the kind of edge people on this forum are likely to be talking about, is it? I guess it's an edge over those who are rubbish at gambling and DON'T know it, but it's not an edge over the prices available to bet at... and surely that's closer to the best definition of an edge |
|
By:
My definition of 'edge' is recognising wrong prices, caused through
over reaction to minor things like team selection in football. |
|
By:
Unless you are "cheating", you never know when you place the bet whether you are actually getting value. You only think you are!
It is only the analysis of long term results that can indicate this... (even then you may just be lucky!) |
|
By:
everybody has there own opinion of what is value and what isnt...theres no such thing as the correct price
|
|
By:
everybody has there own opinion of what is value and what isnt...theres no such thing as the correct price
not in sports betting as probabilities are not mathematically fixed but there is such a thing as the incorrect price - and that's not an oxymoronic statement, an edge is having an advantage over the oddsmakers, inside info being the biggest, |
|
By:
I strike numerous value bets every day by laying horses at short odds that are panic backed in running.
Everybody believes in value (properly described as "expected value") - even those people who say they don't. Anyone who has ever asked themselves "is that a good price?" is making an analysis of value however crudely and/or badly. Everyone has some grasp of relative likelihood ("probability") and they have a notion of how much money they'll get back from a bet, the balance they make between those two things is an assessment of value. Your results as a gambler tell you exactly how good you are at making that assessment. Even people who don't bet make value calculations, any decision that you take in the presence of uncertainties about the outcome can be described as an assessment of expected value. These decisions may involve money but they needn't necessarily. You can almost never say whether you achieved good value for an individual bet, however for a large group of bets an average value can be determined, each bet in the group must therefore have had an individual value (positive or negative), that number does exist - it's just unknowable. |
|
By:
sheppy123 21 Jun 13 09:20 Joined: 28 May 12 | Topic/replies: 117 | Blogger: sheppy123's blog
To me, it seems like the best value is found in big odds, BUT the problem is they're unlikely to win. There are tennis players that are 1000 to win Wimbledon that would surely win it in less than 1000 attempts. Even though their true odds should be much less, it's so unlikely that they'll win that 1000 still seems like a safe lay. I just used Wimbledon as an example but the same could be said about other sports etc. I hope I'm not talking a load of crap here, which wouldn't be too uncommon for me! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm afraid you are talking crap.  How can you say something is a "safe lay" at 1000 when the true price is 500? That is a guaranteed losing strategy. Also I'd like you to give me an example of the players who are 1000 to win Wimbledon that are value, I haven't looked at the winner's market but I'd guess there isn't one who is value. Also I can say with 99.99999% certainty that since Betfair began the layers are up on the backers at the 1000 price, even with the big in running horses errors. |
|
By:
sweetchildofmine
Date Joined: 26 Aug 07 Add contact | Send message 21 Jun 13 15:50 Joined: 26 Aug 07 | Topic/replies: 15,212 | Blogger: sweetchildofmine's blog everybody has there own opinion of what is value and what isnt...theres no such thing as the correct price -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Of course there is you just can't quantify it. If you were omnipotent you would know the exact price of everything. |
|
By:
well yes i suppose that could be argued is right, its just none of us can be sure what the correct price is
for example chelsea v man utd, you couldnt say for certainty whether 6/4, 13/8, 7/4 etc is the correct price, but if chelsea were 6/1 then thats obviously the incorrect price |
|
By:
sheppy123 21 Jun 13 09:20 Joined: 28 May 12 | Topic/replies: 117 | Blogger: sheppy123's blog
To me, it seems like the best value is found in big odds, BUT the problem is they're unlikely to win. There are tennis players that are 1000 to win Wimbledon that would surely win it in less than 1000 attempts. Even though their true odds should be much less, it's so unlikely that they'll win that 1000 still seems like a safe lay. I just used Wimbledon as an example but the same could be said about other sports etc. I hope I'm not talking a load of crap here, which wouldn't be too uncommon for me! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm afraid you are talking crap. Happy How can you say something is a "safe lay" at 1000 when the true price is 500? That is a guaranteed losing strategy. Also I'd like you to give me an example of the players who are 1000 to win Wimbledon that are value, I haven't looked at the winner's market but I'd guess there isn't one who is value. Also I can say with 99.99999% certainty that since Betfair began the layers are up on the backers at the 1000 price, even with the big in running horses errors. ................................................................................................................................................................................................... Get On MASSIVE - Show me where I said that something is a "safe lay" at 1000? You can't cos I never said it! Who's talking crap now! |
|
By:
"Also I'd like you to give me an example of the players who are 1000 to win Wimbledon that are value, I haven't looked at the winner's market but I'd guess there isn't one who is value."
You'll definitely think I'm talking crap now, but I believe that every single player @ 1000 is value! If a team is 10/1 to beat Utd and you think that if they were to play 10 times they'd win at least once then that's value. Well I don't think it would take 1000 attempts for any of these 1000 players to win. Nadal, Djokovic & Federer will get injured at some point!!! |
|
By:
sheppy thats where i take issue..most players are @ 1000 purely for the reason they cant be any higher on here..the majority should be 10,000 plus..you get golfers in the majors @1000 some of whom are in their eighties and will struggle to break 90, and should be a million
|
|
By:
also..yes those 3 players will get injured at some point, but all at once, in the same tournament?
|
|
By:
another example, look at the world cup 2014 betting, the likes of wales, ethiopia and burkino faso are 1000, and a million wouldnt be enough
|
|
By:
I doubt there are any players 1000 at Wimbledon that are value, maybe 1 or 2
 , certainly not more than thatMost of those would be 100/1 just to win 1 match vs any of the big 4 |
|
By:
The RANK position of a horse in a rated race will for example then indicate a horse's chance of winning.
A horse say rated 3rd top rated is a 2-1 shot for comparison purposes. If the horse is 3rd top rated and is at SP odds of 3-1, then it is a "value" back. DFC ,with that system you would have decided the 2nd/ 3rd favs would always have been value backs against Frankel . They were usually double figure odds, and even that was poor value against such a horse. It's very simple to look at the form and decide which order horses should be in the betting but the probability depends on precisely how much better the favourite is than the 2nd fav etc |
|
By:
Phew! How do I get myself out of this mess!
Firstly - sweetchildofmine - I definitely see your point about 1000 being the most. Some things should be far more than that. I am constantly being amazed at how many good players there are that I've never heard of. They lose BUT they often don't get slaughtered like their odds suggest. I got carried away when I said that every player is better than 1000, but I'm sure that a lot are. I'm gonna make a note of all the 1000 players and then come back and slaughter you all when one wins!!! See you in 2025!!! tobermory - Phew! 100/1 - have they got their feet tied together! I get your point. I think though that they might be massive odds to beat several players but not all of them. You only have to win 7 games, and I believe that some of these big odds guys could do it. The way Nadal's going, he'll be scratching his arse when the ball is coming at him!!! |