General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
12 Apr 15
20:11
Joined:
Date Joined:
22 Jun 02
Admittedly I haven't given this much thought so perhaps there are obvious reasons. But say I am betting in-running and put in a large back at 1.4. There are existing lays at 1.7, 1.6 and 1.5 and so I get matched at those prices. But if price setters are considered more valuable to the exchange than price takers (which seems to be the consensus) why shouldn't all the bets be matched at 1.4, giving the benefit of best execution to the price setters?
A potential flaw is that a bot could fire in multiple backs at progressively lower prices, fractions of a second after one another. Perhaps there is a workaround for that. Again, haven't given it a lot of consideration so I thought I'd see what the clever folk on here had to say (if there are any of you still around!).
A potential flaw is that a bot could fire in multiple backs at progressively lower prices, fractions of a second after one another. Perhaps there is a workaround for that. Again, haven't given it a lot of consideration so I thought I'd see what the clever folk on here had to say (if there are any of you still around!).
Show More
Sorry no clever folk left on betfair. Only mugs, aftertimers and bot users.
Surely it works both ways?
If you put up a back at 1.4 then they put up their lays at 1.7, 1.6 and 1.5 then they will get matched at 1.4
Is it April Fools Day? I am pretty naive.
I would also challenge the assumption that either protagonist should be favoured. Surely it takes 2 to tango.
Is not someone who puts up a back bet at a given price just as much a price setter as a layer?
If you put up a back at 1.4 then they put up their lays at 1.7, 1.6 and 1.5 then they will get matched at 1.4
Is it April Fools Day? I am pretty naive.
I would also challenge the assumption that either protagonist should be favoured. Surely it takes 2 to tango.
Is not someone who puts up a back bet at a given price just as much a price setter as a layer?
Exchange is the concept here - put up price that you're willing to play at and get matched, so those players were happy with the prices the asked for. Simples.
Knight Rider
Date Joined: 22 Jun 02
Add contact | Send message
12 Apr 15 20:11 Joined: 22 Jun 02 | Topic/replies: 7,010 | Blogger: Knight Rider's blog
[...]
"But if price setters are considered more valuable to the exchange than price takers (which seems to be the consensus)"
[...]
I'd say that's only true for the subset of winning customers. I think that fun bettors will take a lot more often than make, and they are most valuable of all.
I think the potential flaw you mention is the answer to the question.
If the market is 1.7 and someone wants to back 1.4, they would have to take out each bet individually. I can't see a workaround that would not be to the detriment of the exchange.
So if a liquid selection is 1.61-1.62, and I'm happy to back it down to 1.58, if I got filled at 1.58, I would back 1.6 instead and sacrifice volume for margin, bringing total matched amount and profit down for Betfair.
Date Joined: 22 Jun 02
Add contact | Send message
12 Apr 15 20:11 Joined: 22 Jun 02 | Topic/replies: 7,010 | Blogger: Knight Rider's blog
[...]
"But if price setters are considered more valuable to the exchange than price takers (which seems to be the consensus)"
[...]
I'd say that's only true for the subset of winning customers. I think that fun bettors will take a lot more often than make, and they are most valuable of all.
I think the potential flaw you mention is the answer to the question.
If the market is 1.7 and someone wants to back 1.4, they would have to take out each bet individually. I can't see a workaround that would not be to the detriment of the exchange.
So if a liquid selection is 1.61-1.62, and I'm happy to back it down to 1.58, if I got filled at 1.58, I would back 1.6 instead and sacrifice volume for margin, bringing total matched amount and profit down for Betfair.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539