Forums

General Betting

Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
frog2
27 Nov 13 22:02
Joined:
Date Joined: 01 Feb 08
| Topic/replies: 4,229 | Blogger: frog2's blog
I was just looking over the data for October for the horse racing markets.

One trend that stuck out to me was that the average bet size seems to be getting smaller and smaller.

This is October data going back to 2005:

2005    £32.59
2006    £35.81
2007    £31.80
2008    £28.63
2009    £27.09
2010    £24.40
2011    £20.24
2012    £17.13
2013    £15.98

It seems that up until 2008 average bet size on here was over £30. Since then the bet size has been cut in two.

Anyone know the reason for the decline after stability for the years before? I don't think it could be bots because they were around well before 2008.

Overall the racing markets have dropped back again to close around 2008 levels. The years up to 2008 had double digit growth. An astonishing turnaround.

2005    £565,773,809
2006    £710,464,460
2007    £782,440,389
2008    £910,189,515
2009    £1,050,980,727
2010    £1,015,302,252
2011    £1,031,127,671
2012    £1,047,104,682
2013    £958,771,161
Pause Switch to Standard View HAVE THE BIG PUNTERS GONE?
Show More
Loading...
Report pxb November 27, 2013 9:35 PM GMT
A very interesting stat. BF are clearly losing the bigger punters, leaving just the small time recreational punters.

Do you have data for other sports, cricket I'm particularly interested in?
Report Bayes. November 27, 2013 10:26 PM GMT
The bet size will be to do with people getting on more optimally. The more you offer the more likely you are to get matched only if you're wrong.

I suspect the decline in overall volume is for two reasons

1) margins getting tighter and marginal winners withdrawing from the market
2) general decline in interest in horse racing
Report JLivermore November 28, 2013 7:23 AM GMT
I'd guess that it's a change in the customer mix, more automated betting and less manual, as well as what Bayes said there are a few ways in which an automated strategy results in more of what betfair counts as a 'bet'.

How about the sportsbook to explain the volume drop?
Report tinkler November 28, 2013 9:31 AM GMT
Could be partly due to less money at the top of the chain due to the recession and betting seen as a leisure expense
Report ann witt November 28, 2013 10:12 AM GMT
What customers would be most likely to jack it in as a result of the pc? Non automated big gamblers imo.
Report Eldrick November 28, 2013 10:34 AM GMT
Mild cherry picking here - from the data you give, average bet size halved from 2006-2012 yet total turnover went up about 50%

Just sounds like the biggest player in the market changed their strategy a bit

No doubt Zeljko will be along shortly to put us straight
Report Sandown November 28, 2013 11:41 AM GMT
Using the OP figs, the number of bets placed gives a picture of rapidly increasing curve until 2013 when it levelled off, suggesting that over the entire period BF may have succeeded in either increasing the number of players and/or the number of bets placed per player. The latter explanation could be caused by increased bot usage.

No bets M

05  17.4
06  19.8
07  24.5
08  31.8
09  37.6
10  41.6
11  51.0
12  61.2
13  59.9
Report frog2 November 28, 2013 11:48 AM GMT
I know my own betting has moved from betting 100% on here to using betfair for trading and betting in markets where betfair is the only viable option.

pxb I dont have the data for cricket. There is so much data to go through and you couldnt just do a month sample for that because one big match/series there one year and not the next would distort the results.
Report Sandown November 28, 2013 12:12 PM GMT
Whilst the number of a/c holders may have increased somewhat over the period, from memory I don't believe that the numbers increased anything like as much as the growth in the number of bets placed.

The numbers of bets continued during the financial crisis since 08 implying that there was no drop in activity. rather the opposite. I would conclude that the role of the bots in the horse racing market is largely responsible for the rise in number of bets and consequently that has led to a corresponding fall in the average size of bets placed.

In general, I would say that the horse racing market has increasingly become a more trading skewed market. I would agree with ann witt that the larger non-automated players would be put off by the PC (if successful) and also the virtual non-existence of the early pre-play market, the R4 deduction formula, the tiny A/P market which ties up cash funds in any event,and as Bayes says the increased competitiveness/efficiency of the market in general.

Horse racing backers, if successful, whether large or medium size stakers, have increasingly nowhere to go as BM's will have banned them long ago. Perhaps, ironically, a BM backed exchange is becoming the only game in town.
Report Super Hans November 28, 2013 4:15 PM GMT
When was cross matching introduced?

Could be behind the increase in no. of bets.
Report Super Hans November 28, 2013 4:20 PM GMT
Or could it be the c**t who keeps matching your bets for 1p?
Report CLYDEBANK29 November 28, 2013 4:20 PM GMT
I think the opposite is true.  I can't recall the particular stat, but it pointed very firmly to the conclusion that the average rate of basic commission had significantly fallen.  That is also the "feet on the ground" impression that I am getting form using the site.
Report CLYDEBANK29 November 28, 2013 4:26 PM GMT
Bet sizes will get smaller if markets become more difficult to offer prices on.  That is a side effect of the marginalisation of the exchange in favour of the sportsbook as it reduces the amount of casual new money into the market.
Report blank November 28, 2013 6:38 PM GMT
Perhaps Betfair have restarted their high rollers service. It was a bit strange to end it as it was making a big profit.
Report brendanuk1 November 28, 2013 8:56 PM GMT
yes cross matching would split the stake into parts, also cash out?
Report acc November 28, 2013 9:24 PM GMT
Inside information is a big part of horse racing. Leaving large orders up puts 'form' market makers at risk. The market makers have now evolved to drip feed smaller orders. That's my opinion.
Report artie November 29, 2013 5:14 AM GMT
Don't you mean "inside information is a big part of the mythology of horse racing".
Report CLYDEBANK29 November 29, 2013 9:30 AM GMT
Inflation adjusted figures to establish REAL turnover

2005    £715,591,000
2006    £870,745,000
2007    £919,445,000
2008    £1,028,423,000
2009    £1,193,494,000
2010    £1,102,313,000
2011    £1,054,124,000
2012    £1,047,104,682
2013    £958,771,161 (no figures to adjust this yet but obviously you'd have to adjust it down)

£35.81 in 2006 is worth £43.89 in 2012 so the real fall in bet size from 06 to 12 is actually 60%
Report CLYDEBANK29 November 29, 2013 9:31 AM GMT
to confirm figures are based on 2012 values so 2013 is overstated
Report Do wah Diddy November 29, 2013 10:58 PM GMT
NO THEVE JUST LOST ALL THEIR MONEY GAMBLING ON HERE
Report NorwichRob November 29, 2013 11:11 PM GMT
Reckon that the Best Odds Guarantee for certain bookies is a major attratction for many punters, especially those who chuck in multiples which can go under the radar Wink
Report inner city sumo November 30, 2013 2:29 PM GMT
Looks like Betfair are getting the automated penny arcade they always wanted.
Report SHAPESHIFTER November 30, 2013 4:10 PM GMT
Q: where is the data from?  re: average bet.

Also: From my own experience, when I was involved with someone that was trading, over 4 figures was easily put on each runner (i.e. 8 runners 8000.00 traded).  This was in 2007/8

Now, the same person is still at it but last time I was aware of his approach, his strategy had changed and, in conversation, he is creating the same profits with around 40% into each race.
Report frog2 November 30, 2013 4:33 PM GMT
The data is from

http://data.betfair.com/

The average bet is the total matched in all markets divided by total number of bets matched in all markets.
Report Just Checking November 30, 2013 5:09 PM GMT
Average can be easily swayed by a couple big bets. Whats the median bet difference?
Report frog2 November 30, 2013 6:03 PM GMT
That data is not available.

But I think when you are talking a sample size of over 60 million and a finite max bet that liquidity on here can provide that the mean and the median will be very close.
Report Ghetto Joe November 30, 2013 8:41 PM GMT
Can't imagine the average will be swayed much by a few big bets in a £1,000,000,000 pot
Report Just Checking November 30, 2013 10:35 PM GMT
Not so sure about that. On football anyway my experience the last while is the opposite of the above.

It's a lack of small bets (apart from big markets) then the odd great big thumping whopper coming in, which my own personal guess is often arbing bots seeing some profit or bookies balancing up etc, rather than johnny big bollox punter casually having a flutter from his yacht in the caribbean.
Report Just Checking November 30, 2013 10:36 PM GMT
So the median for such markets I think would be quite different than the average.
Report siwaadupa December 1, 2013 12:05 AM GMT
We can write, and write. It wont help. That is sad. The only place to show our saddness is here-on forum, but it wont help. They know it that its declining
How can it increse?
- mobile bets taken to sportsbook-
-main page- sportsbook-
-even on exchange we have multiples
- and charges.
In this environment it will decline.
They accept this because thats how they they made it!
But competition is growing-signifcantly.
Strong discipline, unsocial life-
And huge amout of work thats the only way to make profit here.
Merry Christmas Betfair!
Report Just Checking December 1, 2013 10:48 AM GMT
For example, looked at Tot Man utd 0-1 graph. Right now:
Volume £12,683, that's reasonable.
The graph shows 5 big spikes, roughly
     
  £2,200 < from 2x£1,100
1x£1,600
1x£2,000
1x£2,600
---------
  £8,400

So > half of the volume looks to be just *5* bets making up 2/3
of what is a reasonably fluid market, the big game of the day.
Ok that's not strictly speaking true but generally speaking,
it'll be pretty much on the mark.

I'd think the median in that will very different to
the average. I count about 27 "peaks" on the ziggety zags.
Report Just Checking December 1, 2013 10:49 AM GMT
> half I mean 2/3 of the volume, not sure why I typed that I was even thinking 2/3 as
I typed, I'm POSSESSED! ;)
Report JML December 1, 2013 7:49 PM GMT
I think it's possible to get big spikes from a series of
smaller bets if the price remains the same.
Report Just Checking December 1, 2013 9:04 PM GMT
Yes JML that's what I mean by "Ok that's not strictly speaking true" but for such large large amounts I very much doubt it's lots of little lays by different people just randomly happening? Oh and I didn't say, I think the spikes were all (or mostly) lays I think as 0-1 was drifting.
Report brendanuk1 December 1, 2013 9:40 PM GMT
what would stake size be in 1k matched by 50 * £20 smaller bets/lays Confused
Report Just Checking December 1, 2013 10:07 PM GMT
I *very* much doubt it's lots of small bets/lays with those big spikes, from experience.
Report brendanuk1 December 2, 2013 6:31 AM GMT
so you saying its 1k waiting matched by another 1k? I dont know just asking.
Report CLYDEBANK29 December 2, 2013 9:26 AM GMT
The OP was talking about horse racing.  It's completely different to football on here.
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com