General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Bots are killing the markets. The set winner markets in tennis for example is totally destroyed by this. Can we hope for a change or will it just be worser?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 149
|
By:
Slowly get worse and worse. You notice the bots more as less and less is being bet. It's game over betting on here it's a pain.
|
|
By:
Only big football matches are worth betting on now due to shocking liquidity.
What's the point of having tie break played, set 1 correct score, 6-0 set, number of sets, player x to win a set nothing gets bet on it. |
|
By:
I prefer a totally dead market in front of one runned by bots, you don´t stand a chance of getting matched with any kind of value on the lay side with them operating. The ones that allways puts his lay bets one tick higher annoys me very much.
|
|
By:
Bots everywhere. I Agree.
|
|
By:
Yeah the set winner one is a great example of a bot that costs betfair money. Totally killing the market stone dead. No-one else is going to bother with it and the most anyone can get on is about £100.
The basketball points/cap one is worse still. Filling the screen with £5,6,7 bets, changing price every second. A match can go by with less than 1k matched. That would never happen if the bot wasn't there. I really can't see how it's going to change though as obviously some bots are good for betfair. So just add it to the list of things that p1ss you off about this place. |
|
By:
It kills all the doubles matches aswell.
|
|
By:
I know what you mean about that basketball points bot. I can´t trade that markets anymore. I get epileptic seizures of that flashing small bets.
|
|
By:
Who can swedebank - who's going to bother?
I'm sure betfair have no idea what a painful experience some previously good markets have become. |
|
By:
i think the biggest killer for the exchange are bots. most punters who come to the exchange are people who genuinely aspire to win and most will leave the market when they fail to compete with bots. surely clearing them from the markets will be tried at least and its effect on liquidity examined
|
|
By:
Or, in the real world, most punters who manage to find there way here past "the labyrinth of sportsbook" have absolutely NO idea if they are being matched by a bot or even that bots exist, and want the best price they can get for their bet of choice, and if the odds are even 1 tick better than a human because a bot is there, they'll prefer that. I think that's a fairer analysis. With no bots there would be virtually no liqudity in many markets, now BF is directing everyone to the sportsbook. That's the problem.
|
|
By:
Yeah ok, just checking I'm sure the casual punter would rather see £5 at 1.81 that's available for 2 seconds before it moves or £1k sitting @ 1.8. Problem is the £1k isn't there anymore because of the annoying bot.
|
|
By:
Then they leave their bet on 1.81 and it'll get matched. The bot has no place to go.
You guys must be talking about very illiquid markets. Which brings us back to BF directign all new customers onto their sportsbook. |
|
By:
Flashing's been getting on my tats on the darts HCs tonight. There's at least one other bot running on it too.
|
|
By:
Side markets are very illiquid now. It's dropped off a cliff in all the sports I do. The only exception is cricket innings runs in cricket.
I only do a handful of key events each week now and while the shambolic treatment of the exchange and its customers continues, I can only see it getting worse. |
|
By:
I mostly do football so I'm maybe not seeing what you are seeing. If they are changing bets an awful lot they'll be paying data charges.
Also .. as I say it must be pretty illiquid markets or their bets just wouldn't be that visible. |
|
By:
They're illiquid now, because everyone's p1ssed off with the bots killing them.
Basketball points used to be ok, set winner in tennis used to be ok and many more. Not major markets by football and tennis standards, but you'll get nothing matched in-play now. As you say, it's a miracle people reach the exchange in the first place, then they get met by this bot flashing £5 rubbish, no wonder they don't stay. |
|
By:
If this is the inplay bot on tennis set winner then its not that bad. Apart from when sometimes it starts leaving odds up only for a second, at least it has decent prices.
The worst bot is the inplay corners one, a few hundred at rubbish odds and if anyone else puts any odds up it switches into £2 mode. |
|
By:
"They're illiquid now, because everyone's p1ssed off with the bots killing them."
Really? Can you back that up? You're pissed off obviosiuly, but personally if I was a recreational punter I wouldn't give a ****. If you want more than 5 pound rubbish why don't you put up 100 pounds of non rubbish and leave it there? All the markets are dying. You do know that all new punters don't come here, BF directs them to the sportsbook? |
|
By:
Just checking, you don't play the markets we're talking about, that's clear.
Of course we know about the sportsbook effect, but there's an equally damaging bot one. |
|
By:
Well fair enough. But identifying things are getting worse (correct), but then because you hate bots, it doesn't mean things would be better without them.
If I was Joe Punter and wanted to get a bet matched I wouldn't care what flashed where, and if there were enough people around placing bets the bots wouldn't be visible. They are an addition to the liquidity, not a repellant. (I've nothing to do with anything you are seeing, I'm just being objective..) |
|
By:
Most of the derivative markets on soccer have been killed stone dead because of bots. Scanner bots deriving prices of the faster moving main markets are wiping out the smaller market makers in the side markets. Look at the asian markets no real liquidity, just slider .bots. The side markets on tomorrows internationl football are all empty. A few years ago these same market would have been full of money. nobody will risk leaving money up now. The future for the exchange does not look good.
|
|
By:
But is that bots doing it? I agree with the side markets being dead but
* New punters are all now on sportsbook * International games would probably attract international punters. France Germany Italy Spain (?) Netherlands, and more, all now kicked off the exchange. When the world cup was on (the previous one) betfair ran a betting league table promo and you could see your position and the nationality of the punters near you in the league. It was like the united nations of punters! There were FAR more international customers on than I'd expected. Most of them will be forced off now. |
|
By:
It's a combination. Take away the fish and it's shark vs shark. But the sharks will cut their losses so it's a death spiral.
|
|
By:
Good point about the Asians, they've always been dead because of 1 bot both pre sportsbook and now.
|
|
By:
I completely agree acc I hate to see what's happening in the exchange, I think we all do, it's just that I don't see bots as the problem. They are all that's left now so more visible? Bots have been around as long as I remember, the differnce now is the customers are gone.
Oh and as others on this forum have said, the PC payers who usde to make markets were also driven out. There are many things in this equation. |
|
By:
I think personally without the bot on the asian markets they would be a lot deader.
|
|
By:
how does the bot kills set winner beeting in tennis? if you whant to give better odds -go 4 it-if not i will take the one the bot gives it is not as high as i whant but 4 sure higher than other bookies-so whats the problem? i really ask to understand..
|
|
By:
Exactly GQ100. That's what I was driving at with "punters .. want the best price they can get for their bet of choice, and if the odds are even 1 tick better than a human because a bot is there, they'll prefer that".
If a bot is a WORSE price, punters will ignore it, if it's a BETTER price, they'll take it, if it's the SAME price it just bumps up the cash. The only real issue I can see here is in very illiquid markets with very little money and big gaps between lay and back, people not wanting to price it up for £2 if they think a bot will jump ahead of them. |
|
By:
If you think of small market makers as worker bees for the exchange, then a superbot might deter them from a market. This imo is one reason the purple exchange will never take off.
|
|
By:
the problem with bots is that manual operators can not compete with them for speed and assiduousness, and hence, kill the process of competitively providing better odds to casual punters. in small side markets bots use annoying techniques such as offering 2 or 5 a tick or two above manual operators bets and snatching value odds when they appear quicker than manual operators. this frustrates many and manual operators leave after few minutes. once manual operators leave market bots revert to offering ridiculously priced odds.
without bots markets can have many punters competing to offer better values as the market will be even field for all involved |
|
By:
How many of these new punters that are getting turned off by the bots changing the odds every couple of seconds actually know what API software is, to even see what you are talking about.
Most will be using the site, and last I knew, that was about a 30 second refresh, which really means they have no fcuking clue if bots are there or not. |
|
By:
the problem with some (not all) bots JC is they cripple the process of market formation.
superficially, yes - if a bot's putting up money one tick higher the recreational punter's getting a better price. but if it's also deterring other market makers from getting involved it's actually worsening prices. prime example, the front-running 1.99 parasite. there are markets I've given up bothering making because on the longer shots the first 99.5% of nearly every bet's being stolen by someone who's hiding their offer. if BF had any sense they'd have shut this pr!ck down years ago. on the other hand for something like DNB in play, joe punter can bet to sub 101% at more or less any point to reasonable size purely because of bots, and it's perverse to argue that that's damaging to the exchange imo. |
|
By:
the problem with some (not all) bots JC is they cripple the process of market formation.
superficially, yes - if a bot's putting up money one tick higher the recreational punter's getting a better price. but if it's also deterring other market makers from getting involved it's actually worsening prices. This is the crux of the matter. Big stakes always scare traders, big reapeating stakes of fast pic bot frighten them even more. Bots surely are killing liquidity. I mean in play liquidity created by traders. In this kind of boted markets there is no place for traders, only recreational punters stay here, but drop in liquidity is huge. |
|
By:
I think there's some really good stuff on the forum at the minute and I would like to think that BF are taking it all in. Unless you work within the markets, you're probably blissfully unaware of how a lot of these factors affect the workings of the thing as a whole.
I still think the biggest problem is a lack of backers' money, however.... At least in the markets in which I operate. |
|
By:
WYSIWYG (but only if play goes against you).
|
|
By:
Bots are generally good for liquidity imo especially now with less manual market makers and if a bot is putting up big offers at competitive prices then that is good (obviously it's not good if it's because of fast pictures but then that's a fast pic problem). IF it can be proved that bot use significantly increases the fast pic advantage then there is a case for getting rid of bots on that market to reduce the problem of fast pics.
Derived markets, sub markets where the prices are derived from the main markets, and fast pics are not a serious issue like in football, because football has suspensions, it is surely fair game. That's how bookmakers price them all up. The asian market and correct score market as examples, because of the amount of number crunching involved, are nearly entirely dependent on bots for their liquidity. Non derived price markets are a different issue, but then bots are obviously not nearly as common on those markets. In any event Betfair could make certain markets bot free and not others, thus catering to different user types. Like Latalomne says the biggest problem is lack of recreational interest |
|
By:
I wonder how aware they are of the problem. And of course the lack of backers is the biggest problem. I really can´t see anything positive with the bots unless you want to back or lay at a correct price. As someone said eralier, a lot of good stuff in this tread.
|
|
By:
Swedebank • October 11, 2013 10:18 AM BST
I wonder how aware they are of the problem I'd be surprised if BF's interest in automated users extended any further than how to charge them more. |