General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
After the terrible little money about on the snooker last few weeks,BETFAIR can exspect there worst ever world cup.
Only chance they have is to suspend the ridiculas pc tax,and players forgive and start splashing money about again,then all markets would be playable.i used to love looking at all there markets and played in many,now its just a waste of time and effort
if nothing is done i fear BETFAIR as an exchange will surely decline even further after the world cup.
Only chance they have is to suspend the ridiculas pc tax,and players forgive and start splashing money about again,then all markets would be playable.i used to love looking at all there markets and played in many,now its just a waste of time and effort
if nothing is done i fear BETFAIR as an exchange will surely decline even further after the world cup.
Show More
They are a sportsbook first and foremost now. I doubt they are bothered the exchange has slipped down slightly.
Snooker's rubbish. No one follows it any more. Barry Hearn's changes haven't worked and there's not many quality players worth watching. Football World Cup will be fine for liquidity at betfair and bet daq.
Football will be fine. World Cup 2010 markets, were huge, much bigger than that year's Premiership matches and we can expect the same again.
Give it a chance. Even at Pinny you can only get around £3k on Brazil at the moment to win the first game at the Betfair top price.
I think Betfair company results are announced that week also. Given the share price performance today they should be interesting.
I think Betfair company results are announced that week also. Given the share price performance today they should be interesting.
Looks like coner is on to something.Betfair shares crashed 3% today.
If betfair had even a half decent pricing system you wouldn't even need to look at bet daq and matchbook. It's actually better to do as much of your betting as you can away from betfair due to their charging.
May 16, 2014 -- 11:43PM, pmbets wrote:
Looks like coner is on to something.Betfair shares crashed 3% today.
With the markets these days, "3%" surely is not a crash.
Since mid-April, huges sell-off on anything slightly 'tech' as analysts and funds targeted sell-offs (nasdaq way down).
My brother works for a very successful tech firm that is and will never be public. All around him in San Francisco, neighbours are fretting as their pieces of paper becoming shreddable.
If anyone thinks betfair is thinking quarter to quarter, then shares in the business are not for you.
World Cup: will be interesting but the fact that the sportsbook will take bets versus an exchange that will be relying on a different timezone means that they would have planned long ahead to not rely on the commission, etc, for profit.
BF will be down a lot I'd say on previous world cups as they've lost a LOT of their customers, Germany, Italy, Spain, France etc all used to be involved big in that.
Many have us have been with Betfair from day one.We know this business inside out.
And trust me it's in trouble and the only way is down.I have no position at all
in Betfair good or bad but since they started dismantelling the exchange and charges winners
up to 60% tax ,the writing has been on the wall.The negative momentum is just building up a bit more.
Also Betfair is not a tech company dispite what they may think.
And trust me it's in trouble and the only way is down.I have no position at all
in Betfair good or bad but since they started dismantelling the exchange and charges winners
up to 60% tax ,the writing has been on the wall.The negative momentum is just building up a bit more.
Also Betfair is not a tech company dispite what they may think.
FA CUP FINAL--Terrific liquidity in extra time markets. at one stage in the under over halve goal market you could bet 1.37 or lay 1.57
What a waste --time and effort no wonder every one looks elswere
What a waste --time and effort no wonder every one looks elswere
Made a conscious decision to put a few systems into practice on purple this past week. Getting matched on racing was no problem, but for anything else, even asking for under BF odds didn't guarantee getting filled. Also, compared to what else is out there, the number of markets available is decidedly on the thin side. Surely to goodness, given their position with Laddies they could implement a system whereby they shared market setup and settling information? I might be alone, but ideally, I just want to have to bet in one place and one place only...
World Cup liquidity will be fantastic (at least the main markets like Match odds, Correct Score and Over/Unders), as there's lots of money to be made and the (big) fun bettors know they will be able to get action.
It's the smaller markets where traders, market makers and the like are giving up in droves, making them less attractive for fun bettors, which in turns lowers volume making them less profitable for traders and market makers creating a downward spiral. I would expect PC has a lot to do with this.
It's the smaller markets where traders, market makers and the like are giving up in droves, making them less attractive for fun bettors, which in turns lowers volume making them less profitable for traders and market makers creating a downward spiral. I would expect PC has a lot to do with this.
How is the liquidity with the 'smaller markets' anyways?
Any time myself or partners have looked into incorporating them into our matrix on an event, there is little liquidity, even pre-off.
Any time myself or partners have looked into incorporating them into our matrix on an event, there is little liquidity, even pre-off.
Tennis handicap markets used to be OK - not brilliant, admittedly - but they are now a total waste of time for any regular tour events, even finals. It'll be interesting to see what it's like for the French Open which starts tomorrow.
Handicap and total games died.
They haven't even put up quarter winners for the French Open.
They haven't even put up quarter winners for the French Open.
The decline of tennis started once the mainstream press made punters aware that people were at events getting the scores well before those on TV. Inplay is a complete non starter in a sport where the price may be 2.02/2.04 but in reality you only get matched if the person you try to back loses the the point and should be 2.2. The 'liquidity' on show is false because the courtsiders just cancel their offers when a player wins the point.
Cannot blame the Premium Charge for this. It is just people finally getting wise to how unfair the markets are.
Cannot blame the Premium Charge for this. It is just people finally getting wise to how unfair the markets are.
With respect, Frog, it did not. The decline started way before then. That is not to say that it hasn't contributed to it.
Darts, snooker and rugby handicaps all experience a similar decline, albeit they never had so much liquidity to begin with. This drop off HAS happened since the introduction of PC2.
Darts, snooker and rugby handicaps all experience a similar decline, albeit they never had so much liquidity to begin with. This drop off HAS happened since the introduction of PC2.
People just got bored, the pc took away the market maker competition which made those markets interesting.
Now all you get is £100 at a terrible price, which is no good for anyone, particularly betfair
Now all you get is £100 at a terrible price, which is no good for anyone, particularly betfair
Latalomne, The Australian Open case this year was just another one on a long list. Chennai 2011, Auckland 2012 are two others I can think of immediately. The case this year where you have three ex-Betfair employees running a company employing courtsiders was just terrible news.
The average punter betting Tennis in play is just giving money to these guys. As I said the market might look tight but in reality you can only get on if you lose the point. The system is basically just handing huge sums of money to these syndicates. Betfair is taking its cut in PC but the average punter must be losing at a rate of about 10-20p of every pound bet. There is no long term future in these markets.
The average punter betting Tennis in play is just giving money to these guys. As I said the market might look tight but in reality you can only get on if you lose the point. The system is basically just handing huge sums of money to these syndicates. Betfair is taking its cut in PC but the average punter must be losing at a rate of about 10-20p of every pound bet. There is no long term future in these markets.
Decline of tennis?
8 million matched on the Rome final in 2010, 15 this year
10 million in Indian Wells, 14.5 this year
i correct every time you come out with this frog, but you still keep banging the same wrong drum.
"As I said the market might look tight but in reality you can only get on if you lose the point."
if you're trying to bet mid point. Which, if you watch the markets, practically no-one does.
Please stop co-opting the illusory actions of the mythical average tennis punter to shore up your flawed views.
Guess when all the money is getting matched? When people aren't exposed to being sniped.
8 million matched on the Rome final in 2010, 15 this year
10 million in Indian Wells, 14.5 this year
i correct every time you come out with this frog, but you still keep banging the same wrong drum.
"As I said the market might look tight but in reality you can only get on if you lose the point."
if you're trying to bet mid point. Which, if you watch the markets, practically no-one does.
Please stop co-opting the illusory actions of the mythical average tennis punter to shore up your flawed views.
Guess when all the money is getting matched? When people aren't exposed to being sniped.
You are not seriously using totals matched as a metric for betting liquidity? No one is getting stale prices? Get a grip. Why do you think teams spend thousands a year getting people to court side in tennis yet not for football?? Why do you think it's the Market ex exchange employees focus on??
?????
so in your dream world no one gains anything by being courtside? Syndicates waste thousands a month getting court side info? Hardly anyone ever bets during a point because the gaps between points is always longer than the tv plus bet fair delay?
so in your dream world no one gains anything by being courtside? Syndicates waste thousands a month getting court side info? Hardly anyone ever bets during a point because the gaps between points is always longer than the tv plus bet fair delay?
DStyle 25 May 14 00:01
Isner Levine was in 2008. 2008 ffs.
do you understand the relevance of this post?
the point i was making?
Isner Levine was in 2008. 2008 ffs.
do you understand the relevance of this post?
the point i was making?
and i've already answered that last question plenty of times for you.
Don't see the relevance of a non tv match 6 years ago. I am not sure where u are getting your stats from about most bets not being matched mid point or even the relevance of that. I think it's all to do with the money going up and being taken down before the home punter bets with the delay. I won't bore u with the details but I studied around 5000 matches 200ms data of order book and traded data and there is a major advantage to getting data first and getting first in the queue at point changes. You can deny this but the stats are against you.
Don't see the relevance of a non tv match 6 years ago.
quod est demonstrandum
i'm going to bed now: as usual, you jump around the points you try and make making it exhausting to reply.
The most erroneous of your claims is the picture you paint that inplay tennis markets are all about action on individual points and that courtsiders therefore prevent everyone without their advantage from fairly betting on in play tennis at all times.
It's a nonsense. Part of the action in in-play tennis is this area, but it is just one area.
As I have stated numerous times before, in conversations with you, yes there is an advantage to being at the front of the queue. You own the spread for the next point and yes there is a market makers advantage in being able to cancel orders
As for stats, 7 years trading tennis on here, plus software with half second order matched updates retroactively synced with live score data when it happened. The score bit's quite important don't you think if you're going to make the claims you're making; you don't seem to have done that.
Yes, there is hoovering. But as i've said before, how do you know what is getting hoovered. An order someone placed thirty minutes ago because they had to go out and wanted to hedge should that price occur, an order someone wants matched regardless of the outcome of the next point because they still consider it value if the point goes against them, or is it always honest joe getting screwed over by the big boys.
It's not ideal, the ideal situation is that everyone has access to fast enough information that allows them to cancel in time (as it was for the AO, despite all your claims then, unfortunately those threads have been deleted).
but to constantly paint this picture of it being impossible for the average punter to bet on inplay tennis is just outright horseshit. There are some areas which mean on some occasions for some of their actions, they have to be acutely aware of the time delays to not disadvantage themselves. but there are times in matches when this isn't important. Plenty of people have told you this before, but you wilfully ignore it. I don't know what your agenda is.
Quite how this is different from any other sport with unmanaged markets is a mystery.
quod est demonstrandum
i'm going to bed now: as usual, you jump around the points you try and make making it exhausting to reply.
The most erroneous of your claims is the picture you paint that inplay tennis markets are all about action on individual points and that courtsiders therefore prevent everyone without their advantage from fairly betting on in play tennis at all times.
It's a nonsense. Part of the action in in-play tennis is this area, but it is just one area.
As I have stated numerous times before, in conversations with you, yes there is an advantage to being at the front of the queue. You own the spread for the next point and yes there is a market makers advantage in being able to cancel orders
As for stats, 7 years trading tennis on here, plus software with half second order matched updates retroactively synced with live score data when it happened. The score bit's quite important don't you think if you're going to make the claims you're making; you don't seem to have done that.
Yes, there is hoovering. But as i've said before, how do you know what is getting hoovered. An order someone placed thirty minutes ago because they had to go out and wanted to hedge should that price occur, an order someone wants matched regardless of the outcome of the next point because they still consider it value if the point goes against them, or is it always honest joe getting screwed over by the big boys.
It's not ideal, the ideal situation is that everyone has access to fast enough information that allows them to cancel in time (as it was for the AO, despite all your claims then, unfortunately those threads have been deleted).
but to constantly paint this picture of it being impossible for the average punter to bet on inplay tennis is just outright horseshit. There are some areas which mean on some occasions for some of their actions, they have to be acutely aware of the time delays to not disadvantage themselves. but there are times in matches when this isn't important. Plenty of people have told you this before, but you wilfully ignore it. I don't know what your agenda is.
Quite how this is different from any other sport with unmanaged markets is a mystery.
The most erroneous of your claims is the picture you paint that inplay tennis markets are all about action on individual points and that courtsiders therefore prevent everyone without their advantage from fairly betting on in play tennis at all times.It's a nonsense. Part of the action in in-play tennis is this area, but it is just one area.
I have never said everyone is prevented from playing. If you only bet at the change of ends clearly you could be fairly if you got the bet in within 5 seconds of the next point happening. So I agree with you on that.
As I have stated numerous times before, in conversations with you, yes there is an advantage to being at the front of the queue. You own the spread for the next point and yes there is a market makers advantage in being able to cancel orders
So we agree on that. The level of advantage we may disagree on. I think its massive.
As for stats, 7 years trading tennis on here, plus software with half second order matched updates retroactively synced with live score data when it happened. The score bit's quite important don't you think if you're going to make the claims you're making; you don't seem to have done that.
Of course I have the scores! You think I just collect Betfair data 5 times a second and guess at the scores? You say you have the stats but what analysis are you doing on them?
Do you break it down to every order and try to work out what type of player made it?
Can you tell from your analysis the percentage of bets matched during/within five seconds of points being played.
Have you done any estimates of how much the market makers profit?
Have you run any tests on expected profit/loss for bets left up for x number of points?
Do you know the expected profit/loss for all 'keep bets'?
Yes, there is hoovering. But as i've said before, how do you know what is getting hoovered. An order someone placed thirty minutes ago because they had to go out and wanted to hedge should that price occur, an order someone wants matched regardless of the outcome of the next point because they still consider it value if the point goes against them, or is it always honest joe getting screwed over by the big boys.
See above. If someone puts up a 'hedge' do you know their expected profit/loss? Is this really a service if the expected loss is a very high percentage? Is there really a long term future in punters hedging bets once they are aware of the margin they are likely to lose at?
It's not ideal, the ideal situation is that everyone has access to fast enough information that allows them to cancel in time (as it was for the AO, despite all your claims then, unfortunately those threads have been deleted).
Fast enough to cancel or a level playing field to get in the queue? Fast enough to ensure efficient pricing so bets left up get a fair go because of competition by informed bettors to take their bets?
but to constantly paint this picture of it being impossible for the average punter to bet on inplay tennis is just outright horseshit. There are some areas which mean on some occasions for some of their actions, they have to be acutely aware of the time delays to not disadvantage themselves. but there are times in matches when this isn't important. Plenty of people have told you this before, but you wilfully ignore it.
I agree if you place you bet between games you will get a more efficient (fair) price. If you bet during points this will apply also provided the point doesn't start or end within 5 seconds of you placing your bet.
I don't know what your agenda is.
Agenda is for a fair exchange that has a long term future. Rather than having a PC to carve up profits from fast picture players I would rather see fairer markets where punters return again and again. If there is a say +/- 3% threshold on winners/losers the exchange is far more healthy than if some are winning at a big margin and same are losing at a big margin. The big margin losers are unlikely to hang around. What is you agenda?
Quite how this is different from any other sport with unmanaged markets is a mystery.
Its no mystery. I would say the worst one is in play racing where there is a one second delay. Thats why so many travel to racecourses and hire boxes to bet using fast pictures. I would suggest that the more people are willing to spend on getting a speed advantage the more they are gaining from it.
I have never said everyone is prevented from playing. If you only bet at the change of ends clearly you could be fairly if you got the bet in within 5 seconds of the next point happening. So I agree with you on that.
As I have stated numerous times before, in conversations with you, yes there is an advantage to being at the front of the queue. You own the spread for the next point and yes there is a market makers advantage in being able to cancel orders
So we agree on that. The level of advantage we may disagree on. I think its massive.
As for stats, 7 years trading tennis on here, plus software with half second order matched updates retroactively synced with live score data when it happened. The score bit's quite important don't you think if you're going to make the claims you're making; you don't seem to have done that.
Of course I have the scores! You think I just collect Betfair data 5 times a second and guess at the scores? You say you have the stats but what analysis are you doing on them?
Do you break it down to every order and try to work out what type of player made it?
Can you tell from your analysis the percentage of bets matched during/within five seconds of points being played.
Have you done any estimates of how much the market makers profit?
Have you run any tests on expected profit/loss for bets left up for x number of points?
Do you know the expected profit/loss for all 'keep bets'?
Yes, there is hoovering. But as i've said before, how do you know what is getting hoovered. An order someone placed thirty minutes ago because they had to go out and wanted to hedge should that price occur, an order someone wants matched regardless of the outcome of the next point because they still consider it value if the point goes against them, or is it always honest joe getting screwed over by the big boys.
See above. If someone puts up a 'hedge' do you know their expected profit/loss? Is this really a service if the expected loss is a very high percentage? Is there really a long term future in punters hedging bets once they are aware of the margin they are likely to lose at?
It's not ideal, the ideal situation is that everyone has access to fast enough information that allows them to cancel in time (as it was for the AO, despite all your claims then, unfortunately those threads have been deleted).
Fast enough to cancel or a level playing field to get in the queue? Fast enough to ensure efficient pricing so bets left up get a fair go because of competition by informed bettors to take their bets?
but to constantly paint this picture of it being impossible for the average punter to bet on inplay tennis is just outright horseshit. There are some areas which mean on some occasions for some of their actions, they have to be acutely aware of the time delays to not disadvantage themselves. but there are times in matches when this isn't important. Plenty of people have told you this before, but you wilfully ignore it.
I agree if you place you bet between games you will get a more efficient (fair) price. If you bet during points this will apply also provided the point doesn't start or end within 5 seconds of you placing your bet.
I don't know what your agenda is.
Agenda is for a fair exchange that has a long term future. Rather than having a PC to carve up profits from fast picture players I would rather see fairer markets where punters return again and again. If there is a say +/- 3% threshold on winners/losers the exchange is far more healthy than if some are winning at a big margin and same are losing at a big margin. The big margin losers are unlikely to hang around. What is you agenda?
Quite how this is different from any other sport with unmanaged markets is a mystery.
Its no mystery. I would say the worst one is in play racing where there is a one second delay. Thats why so many travel to racecourses and hire boxes to bet using fast pictures. I would suggest that the more people are willing to spend on getting a speed advantage the more they are gaining from it.
In tennis there is a massive advantage available for people who are fast. The big tennis markets are very much trader dominated, in that the vast majority of money changing hands is between traders (winning and losing ones), and there is relatively low volume from people 'having a bet' compared to football.
It's a fairly rough estimate, but I think Betfair make about 5x more in commission on football per £1 backer's stake than in tennis, although that's based on fragments of info put together, as Betfair don't publish full figures.
In terms of bet volume (and commission received by Betfair), tennis has been growing.
Regarding this:
frog2
Date Joined: 01 Feb 08
Add contact | Send message
24 May 14 15:16 Joined: 01 Feb 08 | Topic/replies: 838 | Blogger: frog2's blog
The decline of tennis started once the mainstream press made punters aware that people were at events getting the scores well before those on TV. Inplay is a complete non starter in a sport where the price may be 2.02/2.04 but in reality you only get matched if the person you try to back loses the the point and should be 2.2. The 'liquidity' on show is false because the courtsiders just cancel their offers when a player wins the point.
Cannot blame the Premium Charge for this. It is just people finally getting wise to how unfair the markets are.
Despite its obvious failings, there is no better place to bet on tennis and cricket in play than Betfair. Pinny are doing a very good job competing on tennis, and on cricket Betfair is peerless (at least if we disregard the black market).
I can't think of an obvious solution to the tennis speed advantage problem.
In football, there is a much larger proportion of people willing to have a bet, so the commission rate forms a bigger barrier than in tennis and cricket. The same is true of side markets/ small markets for all sports. For the small markets there is the double disincentive of high commission for fun bettors (not many opportunities to trade, only to bet), and high trading costs for winners (commission again and PC, as margins can be sky high, but volumes tiny so there is not much money to be made).
It's a fairly rough estimate, but I think Betfair make about 5x more in commission on football per £1 backer's stake than in tennis, although that's based on fragments of info put together, as Betfair don't publish full figures.
In terms of bet volume (and commission received by Betfair), tennis has been growing.
Regarding this:
frog2
Date Joined: 01 Feb 08
Add contact | Send message
24 May 14 15:16 Joined: 01 Feb 08 | Topic/replies: 838 | Blogger: frog2's blog
The decline of tennis started once the mainstream press made punters aware that people were at events getting the scores well before those on TV. Inplay is a complete non starter in a sport where the price may be 2.02/2.04 but in reality you only get matched if the person you try to back loses the the point and should be 2.2. The 'liquidity' on show is false because the courtsiders just cancel their offers when a player wins the point.
Cannot blame the Premium Charge for this. It is just people finally getting wise to how unfair the markets are.
Despite its obvious failings, there is no better place to bet on tennis and cricket in play than Betfair. Pinny are doing a very good job competing on tennis, and on cricket Betfair is peerless (at least if we disregard the black market).
I can't think of an obvious solution to the tennis speed advantage problem.
In football, there is a much larger proportion of people willing to have a bet, so the commission rate forms a bigger barrier than in tennis and cricket. The same is true of side markets/ small markets for all sports. For the small markets there is the double disincentive of high commission for fun bettors (not many opportunities to trade, only to bet), and high trading costs for winners (commission again and PC, as margins can be sky high, but volumes tiny so there is not much money to be made).
It's a fairly rough estimate, but I think Betfair make about 5x more in commission on football per £1 backer's stake than in tennis, although that's based on fragments of info put together, as Betfair don't publish full figures.
I'd say you were right here. To me, it's pretty obvious that the likes of tennis and some cricket (particularly T20 and ODI) are heavily-trader dominated with vast amounts of money being recycled and recycled.
I'd say you were right here. To me, it's pretty obvious that the likes of tennis and some cricket (particularly T20 and ODI) are heavily-trader dominated with vast amounts of money being recycled and recycled.
Reported last week that 800 million expected to be wagered in the UK on World Cup.
600 million on-line.
The pie is about to go into the oven ready to be split, some pieces bigger than others....
600 million on-line.
The pie is about to go into the oven ready to be split, some pieces bigger than others....
The premium charge once again caught up with me last week. Luckily, for the world cup, I won't have to pay a penny because I can bet elsewhere.
So how would exchanges be included into the 800 million?
Would it be commission or is it not considered wagering?
Would it be commission or is it not considered wagering?
my first world cup since being on betfair trading and the markets seem booming to me better than I expected!
How dare you contradict the predictions of all the forums doom masters......
Got no exact numbers but the markets seem fuller than ever.
Even the side markets have plenty of cash about.
Even the side markets have plenty of cash about.
Everyone loves to bet on the World Cup, it'll go back to the £3 bots once it's finished.
Premium charges at 20% plus commission or 0% commission on correct score markets elsewhere with no offers at all on the Betfair Exchange.
They wonder why people now bet elsewhere.
They wonder why people now bet elsewhere.
Yes Westender, many bookies / exchanges, happy to take my world cup football bets ant 0 percent commission, used to have many mug bets, as just liked to watch and bet on live football games ETC............. just trade one sport only and all other business goes elsewhere, which is becoming the general trend 
but true
but true
correct score markets are zero commission on purple for world cup.
horse racing the same up until 15 mins before race all £5er bets, apart from main meetings
Extra time markets are a joke,pc tax has taken its revenge for all to see.
Most goals at a World Cup, loads of come from behind wins, loads of extra time, loads of short priced losers.... I think they'll be fine. Best to plan for the next event of doom I think
Jul 3, 2014 -- 6:00PM, CONER wrote:
Extra time markets are a joke,pc tax has taken its revenge for all to see.
What were the previous figures and what are they now?
One of the worst World Cup's ever. Knock out stages atrocious. It's not Betfair's fault but I suppose they get blamed for everything!
Bit of a funny knockout stage, I suspect a laying strategy would be paying well but backing outsiders as I've been is not great. Can't quite work out whether Brazil to qualify against Germany is the best bet I've ever seen on the website. Neymar would need to be about 4x the player Pele was to make Brazil 3rd favourites. Or they moved the Brazil semi final to Argentina
Brazil minus Neymar will struggle to score any goals. Hulk and Fred up front don't cut the mustard. Won't be many goals in it. One for either side could be enough.
Even without Neymar they are the best defence in the tournament playing at home. It's hard to shine in a team built around one player when you're not him. Oscar might look a bit better asked to create rather than lead the tackles count. Sadly a lot of this is conjecture!
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539