w.t.f now I'm confusing myself... sorry. The edges are correct but I got the evs all wrong, then I got them wrong again.

Ok: after 6 average bets with £1 stake the backer has lost a pound - IE he's lost £1 5 times and won £4 once. On those 6 bets he has risked £6 so his expected value is -16.6%, not 20% like I said above.

On the other side the layer has won £1, but he risked £24 (£4 six times) to get it, his expected value is 4.1% ish.

A job in B+Q might be more rewarding in financial
and non-financial ways.
this is very true

I would think it's much easier to win 10k on here and 10k from placing over-the-counter bets, even 6.5k Betfair / 13.5k fixed-odds layers than it is to make 20k on here. I'm saying this as someone who has good subject-knowledge (on the horses) and no technical advantages, like being botted-up and hitting the markets many times a second.

The places in the ecosystem have probably been taken by the programmers--and if there's a better way to do it, it's unlikely to be someone retiring from another job who hasn't done it before who's going to displace the incumbent winners. This leaves winning through exploiting a pricing edge. On this point, why should there be a question of scaling up?--if you've won, you should have been able to bet bigger playing up your winnings. It's more likely that the market liquidity only accommodates your size of bet. Then there's expanding into new markets--but how likely are you to do equally well on something you know less well?

Someone like me would also face the problem of only being able to stay engaged for the big days--the events that interest me, that I would talk about down the pub, not the two-bit day-in day-out grind, where I would be inattentive and cavalier. I think I would lose if I went full-time, whereas as it is I have a paying side-interest (that pays me less per hour than my ordinary job).

£1.36 or 13*(2/19)


(Market Price + 1)/(Est Price + 1)

the basic thinking with football markets (match odds, over/under) is that the opening line is almost close to perfect, in which case if you are betting those pre-match odds you will probably break-even even with the best strategy in the world. a bit of tinkering can give you a certain % of an edge (either way!) so it's folly to think you can bet into those markets pre-game and take a profit. any amount of back-fitting won't help you, in fact it will only give you false confidence which will wreck your head when it doesn't do what you think it's supposed to do. even the best are only going to eek out a few % in terms of profit

Some football statistics from this seasons EPL admittedly after just 38 Games Played:

3 x draws from 38 games
0 x 0:0 draws from 38 games
7 x Over 6.5 goals from 38 games

What is different this year? - We could put it down to VAR - but that was around last year and theoretically cancels more goals than it adds, we could put it down to lack of pre-season training/fitness due to Covid/Lockdown or Lack of spectators cancelling out/diminishing Home advantage, Maybe attackers have got better or defenders/goalkeepers have got worse, etc, etc, etc.

But does anyone think these currently short-term (only 4 games played per team out of 38 games) trends will continue or is this just a freak set of results that will have to revert to the mean over the remainder of the season? Either of those views could be profitable.

But for people that use statistics (I'm playing devils advocate) - surely there is quite a strong argument for both - but both cannot happen - it either continues or it reverts!

Winner


You don't have a measure of your variance, nor any estimates of your edge or any modelling of possible drawdown scenarios. There's nothing about your bet size or the size of your bank. Beyond saying 'I did well', the figures you've given are next to useless for anyone trying to assess whether your system would on average win or not.

The Management

There are always people with narratives of why 'it's different this time'. There are so many, possible, that it induces market mispricing; and it's profitable on average to make money by supposing that things will revert.

In other words, oppose the 'narrative fallacy' and other biases from the psychological literature.

But askari - mostly due to the reasons that I have stated - is it not actually very different this year compared to previous years?

Rigsby - If I accept your answer "randomness" - are you also saying that it could not have been predicted and it will revert to the norm?

@ Management
Randomness –“ the quality or state of lacking a pattern or principle of organization; unpredictability”

As an example, relevant to your post. This season, Man U’s 2 home games have had 4 and 7 gpg, and Spurs away 7 and 7 gpg.
My question now is what is your prediction for the gpg in the next Man U home game and next Spurs away game? Answer: any random number between 11 and 0, and  14 and 0.  So place your bets!!
PS. Last season Man U averaged 3.0 gpg at home, and Spurs 2.90 gpg away, but only 4/19 and 5/19 had 3 gpg.
i.e. random scorelines producing an average number

Sorry PP - I do totally agree with this You need to look for a sport/ betting medium where the initial odds are not perfect, the less perfect the better.

But I completely disagree that the opening line for match odds is almost close to perfect. If you look at any game (especially low liquidity but also many with high liquidity) there is (imo) a surprisingly vast range of prices matched. Even in a high profile/liquidity football match - a home team favourite with BFSP (price at kick-off) of say 1.85 - will often have been matched for good money between 1.75 - 1.95 and maybe between 1.70 & 2.00 (to lesser money).

Whatever you bet on (be it Politics or football) is completely irrelevant - it's all about Prices and Maths. It doesn't matter if you bet The Lib Dems at 1.85 or Chelsea at home at 1.85. The 1.85 backers will probably lose to commission in the long term. The guys that persistently get 1.75 will be losers and the guys that persistently get 1.95 will be winners.

I'm sure you would like to see some fresh blood in the politics markets but I'm sure there are plenty of people making pay - even in the mainstream leagues.

You are going to need better bait than that to get a response from me to the above post G Hall - but you have a fine haul here already.

If you are losing - there are two choices available to you to improve your returns imo:

1) As per your friend Dr Crippen - just pick more winners because price doesn't matter.

2) Accept that price is everything - and only play when the price is right (by which I mean wrong!).

GL

Sorry if I sound sceptical - but there are only so many times I can tell you that price is everything.

On a brighter/lighter note somebody has started a VDW thread on the HR forum and I know you love those.

The Management

I also do not believe that there are so many reasons that there should be fewer draws this year. This is what I meant: 'oppose the narrative fallacy', back the draw when it seems to be mispriced.

'Possibly' in my post came out as 'possible', which may have been confusing. I meant that there were possibly many participants in the market who had an unrealistic notion of why draws were less likely. They were distorting the prices. The upshot is that the draw may be a good bet in some cases.

Yes askari, I see that but if a punter let's a football match go in play for 10/15 minutes he is getting a slightly better price than if he bet pre match, if the score remains nil nil.

@GHall
I think your posts over the last couple of years seeking the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow are genuine, so I will give it one final go. You have had a lot of genuine helpful advice from other forumites (me included), but either you don’t believe what has been said or you don’t understand, and because you are still posting, it’s fair to assume that you are still not succeeding. You have also been told that no one is going to post their winning formula.

The 2.5 goals market is probably the tightest market in the soccerbook, especially in high liquidity markets, because it is pivotal to all other markets. The soccer markets are mathematical exercises which are easily managed by bots, with better brains and processors than you or I. They understand the percentage difference interlinking different overs markets relative to the odds at the time, and are programmed to skim any flaws. As has recently been posted, they are happy to skim at 1-2% at a time, which they can do several times in a game and multiple games at the same time. Their algorithms bets cannot lose.
With 2.5 overs there are only 2 outcomes, 2 goals or less or 3 goals or more. In theory (but not in practice) it’s a 50/50 chance – it’s either under or over.
In your example earlier, the market thought, at KO, that there was a 47% chance (2.12) of there being 3 or more goals in 90 mins play. You thought, although you have not explained why, that there was only a 44% chance (2.25) of there being 3 or more goals in 80mins play.
In your scenario, you need to be finding games where the market thinks there is a 44% chance and you think it should be 47%. Then you can chance the decay, because you can bet at 2.38 something you think should be 2.23.
Better still to play in markets where the perceived chance is above 50%, because in your scenario you are betting on something you think has a less than 50% chance of success. The market thinks that unders is more likely than overs. Far better to bet on something you think has a 80% chance of success.
These markets will not be the 2.5 goals market. More likely other overs markets in lower profile leagues. FWIW, I love overs, but not 2.5.
If you want to bet or trade soccer, my advice is to firstly decide what it is you want to do (bet or trade).Then look at and test different markets and strategies in different countries, learn and understand the relationship and decay between the different overs markets relative to the odds. Understand why the market odds of one game in the same league on the same day for the same outcome is 1.25 and another is 1.40, and which represents the best value. See how both sides of a market move during a game and what is actually  traded, and why it is there.

Finally, to answer your other question “Why do so many people lose at gambling?” – because they think they can win (bookies ads sell winning, not losing). But they cannot, because they either don’t believe or understand reality, have an obsession to bet rather than wait for an occasional well researched opportunity, and/or they approach it recreationally rather than business like.
I genuinely hope this is helpful to you and any others reading it, but IMO you will not make 20K a year.

PS. My point about randomness, is that an average number is the outcome of random numbers. 10+2 = av. of 6, 6-6 = av. of 6

PPS. "To my simple mind if I can back over 2.5 goals for example at a few ticks more after 15 minutes, because I have the added advantage of watching the first fifteen minutes am I not getting an edge that way. I have the double whammy of observing the pattern the game may take and a better price."
The market will see this and it wont be 2.25

If you are still trying a system on and off for over ten years, does it not suggest it isn't profitable long term?

Hey, nice! Where were you based?

anyone who wants to try football betting, try in play, there are far more good opportunities. it's still not easy though