Betting for a living

Thanks Askari - and you're quite right, I have nothing to sell to anyone. I've been posting on this forum for the best part of a decade so anyone who thinks it's a marketing strategy has to admit that it's a very long term one.

I mainly post out of boredom when I'm running simulations (which can take ages) but one of my other reasons for posting is that I think it's only fair to let people understand what they're up against before someone like me takes their money. The average punter or even the above average punter has absolutely no chance of ever being a winner. I'd prefer to bet against people who understand that, enjoy their gambling and see their losses as the cost of having fun than against fantasists or simpletons.

Anyone who believes that there are no winners needs only to ask why Premium Charge exists and why extended PC exists for winners over £250k. There are winners, big winners and huge winners, but if you're not already a winner then you'll almost certainly never be one and you'll probably never meet one. I've been telling people that and explaining why for I don't know how long.

you have bots making trades during the race, thats not really gambling to be fair is it, sports trading, you are probably right about average and above average
players have no chance, thats why you have to make it to the top of the mountain. like everything in all walks of life, very few people can do that.

you have bots making trades during the race, thats not really gambling to be fair is it, sports trading,

Thank you roadrunner, that sums it up nicely.

I could make a living if I had a €1K bankroll.

There are many on here who couldn't make a living out of it if God were giving them tips.

Aye Robot is probably the cleverest man on this thread and also possibly the biggest winner, which speaks volumes

aye robot no doubt his making money, wouldnt describe what he is doing as gambling, he made a point about taking money from punters, using his sophisticated
bots hes programming, crucial difference those punters are gambling, hes not. would be interesting to know exactly how much a bot player like you is making on
average each year, compared to the real professional gamblers.

With respect - I doubt that those opining about bots have least clue about how they work or what they do. It's not about programming, the programming aspect of writing bots is trivially easy - real beginner stuff. The challenge is how you find value.

All gambling is the same; whatever way you play you place bets which win or lose dependent on what happens in the event. That's no different if you do it using a computer, if you read the Racing Post or if you stare at a graph and call it 'trading'. 'Trading' is a euphemism used by people who don't want to admit that they're gamblers, I hate the term - it stinks of denial.

It doesn't matter whether some people want to describe what I do as something other than gambling - or don't want to understand that all gambling is the same. Take it from me though; bots aren't magic money printers and writing them successfully isn't about programming, it's about understanding gambling and above all; understanding value.

Roadrunner; there are winners of all types at all levels, and within each type there's a pyramid. Most people who have a go at writing a bot lose money and even most automated winners only make trivial amounts. There are surprisingly few big automated winners.

Undoubtedly there are some traditional players making more than I do although likely not as consistently.

I'm in the 'good for a one man band' category - very secure financially but not flying around in helicopters. Honestly I think that's a sweet spot for me and I'm not really interested in going much further with it. I don't envy the big operators with staff, they have to spend all their time on gambling, I prefer to do other things. I have something akin to an vary well paid weekend job and it suits me very well.

im not disputing the fact you have to find some intrinsic value to what you are doing to make it pay, executing trades during a race, i wouldnt describe you as a gambler and peter webb is a trader, he always has an exit and entry points to his trades, which i presume you operate along the same lines, most of his trades
dont go inplay on horse races, whereas i presume all your trades are IR. ive got nothing against bot players, just wouldnt describe them as gamblers, peter webb
doesnt take risks.

RR - I think your assumptions are very common, but they're not correct. Of course it's possible to bot a planned trade with entry and exit points but it's not an optimal way to play and it's not what I do.

I treat every bet as an independent outright bet on the outcome - that's what the maths dictates you have to do to maximise winnings, anything else is throwing away value. As far as risk goes you might be surprised. I have a lot of bets on almost all markets, even so I very rarely end up with a green book and I have plenty of losses. In a sense my risk is low because my bets are well calculated and my liability is controlled such that I can't accidentally bust out my float but I'm certainly not immune to losses, I have losing days and from time to time even losing weeks - in fact I'm down this week.

As for Peter Webb - please remember that he is a software vendor and take all that he says with a HUGE pinch of salt.

in my opinion

gambling is placing a bet on a coin flip , betting on roulette , dice etc , there is no form or information as to access what is a good bet ( there are no god bets given the odds on offer ) , it's just gambling .

betting is placing bets using information/form and making a judgement as to what you think the outcome might be given the odds on offer ( value ) .

trading is as described here  Of course it's possible to bot a planned trade with entry and exit points

people trading place the first bet in the knowledge that there will be a second bet , an exit bet , whether that is red or green .

that's how i see it .

So if i think a horses price is value at its current price, i back it... price comes in and i decide to 'cash-out' which is effectively a trade... or maybe i close out the trade with all the green on the horse i fancy and levels (no profit/loss) on the others... or maybe i leave a big green on my horse and a small green on the others.

I'm sure the big betting syndicates are now involved in in-play for football, since liquidity for that is now almost as high as pre-match... during the match they'll be taking bets on both sides depending where the value is at any particular time...

Betting/trading isn't black or white any more, it's just various shades of grey. At the end of the day what counts is making money.

To an extent it's a question of semantics and certainly not worth arguing over, but I do have a real problem with the word 'trading' as applied to gambling. It's deliberately intended to make gambling sound safe and sensible - like a job, but it's not. 'Trading' is every bit as risky as any other form of gambling and most 'traders' suffer the same fate as most 'gamblers'. I think dressing gambling up as something is isn't and promoting software on false hopes and delusions is immoral. Betting on a horse is betting on a horse - staring at a graph whilst you do it doesn't turn you into a scientist.

At least betting on a horse and watching it run can be fun, you can do it knowing it's recreational - is clicking that ladder ever fun? Does anyone 'trade' knowing they're going to lose and see that as fun? Have you ever heard someone say "I really enjoyed my trading today, I came out a bit down but one of my trades nearly came in and it was great fun cheering it home". I haven't. The people who do it are genuinely hoping to make money and they're being duped. Calling it 'trading' is part of that deceit.

aye robot
I agree that any bet you place is gambling but as pointed out above there is a difference in methodology between place and go bets and betting with the intention of not letting it run (for want of better word trading).

From what I can gather you only bet on horse racing which is over quite quickly, maybe 15 minutes if you include the 10 minutes before the off when most betting is done. If you consider cricket which can last from three hours to five days then there is a considerable difference. Throw in weather conditions which can frequently determine the outcome then trading seems a more sensible approach. Even on this cricket forum there are many different ideas about methods of betting on cricket, many different opinions about how the game is going and many different ideas about what the odds should be. People trade in and out as they see fit. It's not a deceit it's sensible.

Charlie, obviously I didn't make my point clearly - sorry.

I have no issue with anyone betting in any way they want to. My issue is with the likes of Peter Webb promoting specific types of gambling as something other than what they are as a way of selling software subscriptions - that's the deceit. Encouraging people to think of themselves as 'Traders' rather than 'Gamblers' helps them delude themselves into losing money. Peter Webb knows that and he doesn't care - he just keeps the BS flowing and takes their money. It's wrong.

That's why I hate that term. If you want to back with a view to laying later then go for it - but what you're doing is gambling - no one should hide from that. If want to promote Gambling that's fine, it's a free country - but do it honestly. DC is right to be sceptical of people who want to sell you things, winners have nothing to sell you and no need for your money.

aye robot
I have no gripes with anyone. Peter Webb does what he does. If people want to believe him or not then that's their choice. I have read a lot of bad comments about him but as I've never been involved with him can't offer my opinion.

I thought I'd made my point clear in my previous post regarding gambling; as soon as you post a bet you're gambling. Be it by bot or otherwise. The difference, as I see it, is are you intending to have further bets on the outcome you started with? If so that's trading.

It sounds like you're having a go at people espousing trading rather than the principle of trading.

It sounds like you're having a go at people espousing trading rather than the principle of trading.

More or less - specifically those selling it. I put them with tipsters and the various other charlatans.

I wouldn't argue with that.

It was your 'denial' of trading I was arguing with.

Denial as in being an incorrect strategy.

aye robot 13 Jul 19 20:25 Joined: 17 Jan 08 | Topic/replies: 686 | Blogger: aye robot's blog
I honestly don't know how a regular punter could estimate value, I can't think of any simple and very accessible way. I'd struggle to do it myself with a pencil and paper - I would always reach for a computer.

I know three professional punters on the southern circuit (horse racing) who have made it pay for three decades (there may well be more, but they're the ones I know for sure who have survived). They've all had shockingly bad runs at times over those years, but they've worked their way through those bad runs. And they've all done it by estimating value with pencil and paper. Manual form study, taking it all into account to guess a price for each horse in a race with a 100% book, and backing the ones which are available at bigger prices - not necessarily every horse, as there needs to be an acknowledgement of your own limitations - but that is how they've done it. And if the meeting they attend includes a 25-runner handicap, then that's one of the races they'll cover, however daunting it appears. In fact, that's precisely the race where it's worth putting in the effort, because few other punters will.

What's their secret? In the first place, hardly any interest in past stats, such as form figures or percentage of winning favs. It's the individual horse and conditions on the day which count. But more than that, it's something I can only describe as a feeling in your water. That indefinable voice in your head that articulates decades of experience. "This is the day for that horse"/"You just know the trainer won't be having a go here"/"The horse looks just that bit too fit in the paddock", etc. The thing which distinguishes human intelligence from artificial intelligence.

Let me give an example of the first time I became really aware of this phenomenon. 1st September 1993. I'd been full-time for nearly a couple of years. I was at Fontwell, and the first race was a 3yo claiming hurdle, with an odds-on fav making its debut over timber under Adrian Maguire.

https://www.racingpost.com/results/20/fontwell/1993-09-01/53707

I had £2,000 to £60 the winner (SP 25s), which I'd made 16/1 on my tissue; £1,000 to £200 the second (SP 7/2), which was 2/1 jt fav on my prices - a Karl Burke horse which had been third over hurdles last time out; and £2,000 to £120 and £1,000 to £80 a faller called Grogfryn (Christ knows why).

Now, this winner, Lady Gail, was trained by John Spearing, a man who had winners throughout his career, but outside of the few really good horses, such as Run And Skip, a nightmare to predict when and where. Lady Gail had been touched off in a mile maiden as a 2yo, but as a 3yo had been beaten 42 lengths and 20 lengths on the Flat, and 37 lengths and 60 lengths over hurdles.  Pulled like stink and slowed into half the flights as well.

So, why was that race at Fontwell her day? Just something about the make-up of the race, the question mark over the odds-on favourite, the time of year said THIS is is the race  where a John Spearing horse which had one bit of very decent form might show it again. I defy anyone to quantify the chance by reference to stats. I remember trying to afterwards, and there really was no concrete pattern there to grasp. But there was that feeling in your water. Perhaps she simply looked just right in the paddock.

Whatever it was, I remember remarking to Eddie Fremantle afterwards (who'd also backed the filly, and had recently given up his job on the Life to go full-time):"You know, this is the day I know we've made it."

"a feeling in your water".......on a 3 yo CLAIMER race!!!!!

Why not go by the jockey's birthday....or colour of jock's shirt etc etc

FAVOURITES tend to win such races.......but they don't always.


VALUE is pretty hard to find in such races when same age race type and a CLAIMER. Not worth taking such race types on IMO !

I agree with ayerobot that someone who places money on an uncertain outcome and is paid out (or not) dependent on the outcome is gambling.

It won't work to rely on merely technical advantages. If they're available to you, they're open to someone else.

Suppose your whole technical infrastructure goes down the millisecond you've placed a bet. You want it to be a positive-expectation bet. Also, you want the damage to your bank to be surmountable whatever happens.

I'm a bit less convinced by screaming's post. He's talking about something in 1993 and it's 2019. I'm convinced that he and Eddie Fremantle were able to sniff out the value, but not convinced that this was an intangible that could be not captured by any formula. Could an AI not make sense of the inputs 'John Spearing runner + bits and pieces of form', 'time of year', 'weak fav.', 'class 5 or lower hcap'?

My punting, which is pretty low-level, is based on my interest for the horses and tries to make selections on the basis of features that are hard to get into algorithms e.g. stumbled lto, ran against draw or pace bias lto, plausibly targeted at race. It's got a lot harder in the last 10 years. I would think that the reason for this is that, previously, I only had competition from the opinion players and tissue-makers. Now there's competition from algorithm-designers and machine-learning players.

I'm with aye robot 100% on this one.

For most people a trade or trading is just a fancy term for a bet where the person placing it is deluding themselves that because they plan to exit or green out at some point they have some sort of quantifiable edge or strategy. Worse still greening regularly out of winning bets is effectively sacrificing value long term (unless for life changing amounts of money), cutting winning positions short rather than letting them run.

"Trading" pre-event movements to make a long term profit requires far more knowledge than is available to most casual punters, so for most that is also a losing proposition. No software in the world is going to make you a winner, by all means buy such things if you find the interface beneficial but don't expect it to deliver you any profit.

An interesting read

A bettor with a successful strategy is not going to post on here the secret of that strategy. Not even me in this post.
As human beings we all have different skill sets which we use to create our individual strategy. For example, my brain cannot fathom a ladder interface and all the flashing changing data it projects. I could not do IR on the horses. I cannot trade tennis or limited over cricket.

My skill set is numbers and data, which I use to bet in just two particular soccer markets, because to me it is simply mathematics, and lots and lots of time consuming research has found me an edge.
I prefer non UK matches, because I have no knowledge of the teams which can psychologically taint my thought process – it is just numbers.
I do not trade in play. I place the bets, spend a couple of hours doing something else, and then check the full time score.

Last weekend for example, I crunched the numbers on 24 selected matches (non of them in UK), and only found 3 possible bets. My “tissue prices” were 1.02, 1.03 and 1.05.
The Betfair prices pre kick off were 1.26, 1.36 and 1.27
In my eyes the “value” in these three matches was massive, so they became bets.
Not all selections win. I look at it from a bookies perspective – what percentage profit on capital employed, over time, am I happy with.

On the basis that the OP is genuine, concentrate on your skill sets and building your knowledge of how the markets work in your chosen sport and think outside the box.

PS
"Interesting read"  refers to the thread, not my post

Rigsby,
you beat me to it.
No, nobody who is actually betting for a living is going to announce to the world, and his dog, the secret of  their success.
And by the way, the first two lines of your post says it all.

I would add to this just four words:

BET LIKE A BOT.

No need to elaborate.
You all know what I'm saying and that really is the bottom line.

DR crippen
you said a lot of punters would have to at the beting for a guide.
i had had numberous accounts with bet365...ususlly closed after one day.
i would say 95% of the early prices i take are shorther at sp.
bet i had twp weeks ago.....four selections all won
5/1.....sp 9/4
9/2......sp 11/8
7/2.....sp 9/4
11/4....sp 4/6.
£1 lucky15 on bet 365 returns, £2700+
my mate who followed me in, had a £1 lucky 15 with william hill at sp.
he drew £250+
MY BET WAS VALUE.......HIS WAS NOT

Well done starship.
If you can pick winners as well as that then you've cracked it.

But it's your ability to spot a winner that's carrying you forward, the value is secondary once you know how to find the winners.

My contention is that very few know what they're looking at before they start, let alone judging if the bet is good value or not.
They're simply backing prices, which is a long way from what you appear to be doing.

99.99 plus of punters would not know what to bet until the betting came up.
i worked in a betting shops, and punters rely on newspaper tips and market movers.
me, i do my work the day before, then wait for the early prices,
when i have accounts, which at the moment i do.
then i play on betfair

You need to back horses that are underestimated by the market, where there is effectively nothing to go on ie horses making their debuts ideally not from a top stable. Think about this, if you had a good one from a small stable, would you a) want anyone to know how good it was and destroy the price and b) would you truely know where you stood in the pecking order against a hotpot from a top stable? People like to see form of some form or another before they place a bet. Do the exact opposite, back any horse making their debut to BSP - it would of produced a 2500 point profit over the last 5 years (commision 5%). Think about that £2500 to £1 stakes, over 5 years. Go back as far as records go if you want and check. Then ask yourself how much do I want to win and how can I do this without cannabilsing BSP? I do this with other caveats, the main one being minimum odds of 10/1. I drip feed in at different time intervals before the off as well as back at BSP. The only thing is you're going to have to put up with A LOT of losers, up to 200 in a row, maybe more. Could you stomach that, have you got the bank for it? You're looking at a strike rate less than 5%. I post this because Crippen says it's about finding a good percentage of winners first, then value comes second. That's bolloxs.

On cue Duesenberg goes in at Haydock BSP 35, favourite stuffed at 1.83.

Lol, now one goes in for Roger Teal at Salisbury and he backed up exactly what I said! Kensai Warrior BSP 18. Bit tight when the SP was 16/1

Lol, maybe they can come from a top stable. Snow Shower for Stoute @ Salisbury. BSP 20, SP 16/1 so again a bit tight. What a little lucky streak. Has a post ever been more prophetic?

Very nice, McCoy.

Vaguely remember discussing some stuff with you a while back - not on this thread

but it was to do with betting as a second income or something like that.

Seem to remember that your job is seasonal (?) Could be wrong.

Sounds like you're still battling away here anyway!

Good luck to you.

Yes that's correct raspberry. Don't come on here very often now,(I post on and read the Proform forum as more like minded souls and the forum is more strictly moderated) as you get derided when you talk about system betting, but the thread intrigued me and although I haven't read every post felt compelled to write after what Crippen wrote. I am no way ready to go full time and nor do I want to but I've been doing ok. I run about 50 systems using the Proform software that connects to BF Bot manager and places the bets automatically. I run my systems through TSM (The Staking Machine) to determine drawdowns, longest winning/losing runs, the probability of going bust with a system/stakes to determine the minimum odds I am willing to accept on a system and the percentage of my bank I should back on each system ranging from 0.25% to very rarely 2%. Price, has been said, is everything. But interestingly I do place bets within fairly short ranges ie 2/1-3/1 as well as minimum prices to BSP etc. I would never go back to studying form or backing with bookmakers - even if I had the option to. Good luck.

Pure spam from McCoyCarp.
Burn the form book and invest in Proform software.

Anyone who claims to have something good then gives it away, has usually got something to sell.

Usually called 'a sprat to catch a mackerel.'

football bets to about 103 %.....i dont know anyone who makes it pay
greyhounds early prices bet to 130%+ and bet365 makes massive mistakes.
betfair on greyhounds bet to about 105% and value there is when i make a dog...3/1..7/2 and they trade on betfair at 6/1+
the thing is i more comfortable taking 5/2+ dogs i make 6/4.
there are people who make money out of bots , i would not know where to start,
but one thing i do know if that bet365 early prices were available to people who had  unrestricted accounts,
there would more millionaires than ever,
and bet365 would go skint

As we approach the beginning of a new year and I am currently contemplating the year ahead, I have one question that maybe forumites may be able to help me with.

If my starting bank is 1K on January 1st, what should it be by the end of the year, if betting in a professional manner.

It, of course, depends upon the size of your edge and your turnover.  If your method only generates one bet a week on average, you should expect it to increase by very much.  IF, on the other hand, you are good at working out what prices should be in-play, you could have multiple bets within the same event, in which case, your bank should increase substantially - several hundred, if not several thousands of percent over.

*If your method only generates one bet a week on average, you should not expect it to increase by very much

Today for example I have placed one bet so far.

Bank 1000
Brighton v Bournemouth Lay under 1.5 goals
35 @ 4.0
Liability 105

If I followed the recommended 1% rule my bet would be the following
3.33 @ 4.0
Liability 10

Sep 5, 2019 -- 12:44PM, McCoy Carp wrote:

Yes that's correct raspberry. Don't come on here very often now,(I post on and read the Proform forum as more like minded souls and the forum is more strictly moderated) as you get derided when you talk about system betting, but the thread intrigued me and although I haven't read every post felt compelled to write after what Crippen wrote. I am no way ready to go full time and nor do I want to but I've been doing ok. I run about 50 systems using the Proform software that connects to BF Bot manager and places the bets automatically. I run my systems through TSM (The Staking Machine) to determine drawdowns, longest winning/losing runs, the probability of going bust with a system/stakes to determine the minimum odds I am willing to accept on a system and the percentage of my bank I should back on each system ranging from 0.25% to very rarely 2%. Price, has been said, is everything. But interestingly I do place bets within fairly short ranges ie 2/1-3/1 as well as minimum prices to BSP etc. I would never go back to studying form or backing with bookmakers - even if I had the option to. Good luck.

interesting. how do you determine your staking size? have you got a calculator of sorts

---
my thoughts on stake size, it depends on your odds range. the example of laying at 1/3, using 1% of your bank is too small as the win % will be a lot higher than backing horses at 10/1+, so your stake size as a % of your bank should be higher

Dec 28, 2019 -- 5:05AM, G Hall wrote:

Today for example I have placed one bet so far.Bank 1000Brighton v Bournemouth Lay under 1.5 goals35 @ 4.0Liability 105If I followed the recommended 1% rule my bet would be the following3.33 @ 4.0Liability 10

If I followed the recommended 1% rule my bet would be the following
3.33 @ 4.0
Liability 10

that's just too small for this type of bet, even if you win you'll get discouraged because you won't be getting very far in terms of profit to bank size  so your stake % has to be higher IMHO

You can't determine optimal stakes by deciding how much you want to win, you'll just go bust.

A mathematically optimal stake (for those who believe in maths) can be derived if you know your odds and your expected value but in practice it's not really relevant unless you have a very small float because your stake will be limited by what the market will support - which is always less than people believe.

In practice: whatever your strategy, your odds and your float, your stake is £2 (or whatever the minimum is at your odds) and will be until you have a long term record of winning using a specific strategy or VERY good evidence of your value. You'll know when you've got reason to consider increasing your stakes because you'll have far more money than you started with. Betting at £2 I'd want a few grand profit before having any sort of confidence at all - and that's actual real money including all bets placed not 'what I would have won if....'

This might not be the advice you want to hear if you're indulging a 'Millionaire by Christmas' fantasy, but if you don't have the patience to build up slowly you're not going to make it - just aim to pay for the Turkey and you might be in with a chance (probably not though).

I am thinking about packing it in. I can identify with a heck of a lot that Will Hoffmann detailed in his article the other day, a heck of a lot.

A new year dawns maybe it is time to admit defeat, I can pick winners like most people, better in fact than lots but if the balance sheet doesn't reflect that fact,then it doesn't matter.

@ GHall
I have just noticed your pm. Will reply in a couple of days

Ok thanks.

i cant understand g hall why you would risk 10% of your bank to win 3%, it doesnt make sense, betting with value is also about risk/reward, you need to be winning more than youve risked or at least the same as otherwise you will not win over the longterm

What you're talking about is nothing to do with value, or at least it isn't in the way you've described it.

Would you not risk 10% of your back to win 3% if the bet was that tomorrow was Friday?

As I post I have had a decent start to the New Year, although I am doing much the same as I have for the past number of years, with one exception, I am having fewer bets.

A question, is it a good idea to set targets, and if so, which would be better,daily,weekly or monthly.

Hi G Hall, just my 2 pence, but I don't think it is good to set targets - at least not concrete types of ones. Imagine this scenario - you have reached a daily target and are about to end it for the day, but another bet catches your eye - Chelsea are evens when you think they should be no bigger than 1.8 - are you going to leave this bet because you have reached the target? Good luck - winning on here is certainly not easy.

You can't put a target on good betting opportunities imo.......... my 2 pence.

All opportunities are due to mistakes by other people, competition for them and liquidity.  You can have expectatuions based on previous experiences, but targets are worse than pointless.   

Slightly related, I recall a psychlogical study on taxi drivers in the US.  Most were idiots and set daily targets, which once reached, they would quit for the day.  When the weather was bad/raining business would be better and they would reach their target more quickly and clock off.  When the weather was good, business was harder to come by and they would end up working longer to reach their targets.  The few shrewder drivers mostly worked long hours when it was raining, and took the sunny days off.  Not only did they make more money from the same amount of hours worked, they also enjoyed nicer weather on their days off.

Saturday 25th January having watched the first twenty minutes of the FA Cup tie between Hull City and Chelsea I have laid under 2.5 goals at 4.2.

2.8 now. Are you happy with your 4.2 lay ?

I am now

These type of bets, as soon as they are placed, quickly become poor value. I would prefer to back first,then lay off gradually as the odds drop.

make hay while the sun shines

Tame the Tiger you have hit the nail on the head for me,although my bet obliged on Saturday if it didn't I am down over 3 points. I believe this is one of the biggest obstacles that I need to overcome.

Risk to reward

Is there a way to calculate that Rigsby or is there a rule of thumb.

Usually best not to risk a whole thumb at once.

Thanks for sharing that pecker insightful as always.

It is a subjective thing.

As you quite rightly said, you had a risk of 3.2 points to a reward of 1
Those who laid Liverpool yesterday at 1.02 when they were winning 2-0 had a totally different risk to reward situation.

Lay £20 at 4.2 for a risk of £64 and a reward of £20
Lay £1000 at 1.02 for a risk of £20 and a reward of £1000

You'd need to be at the front of the queue laying 1.02.  That means placing keep bets as soon as the market is added on here.  You'd need better software to scrape the market offerings than the entity that is doing that already.  And of course, have a good automated system to cancel the keep bets when they no longer became value.

a good automated system built on a good knowledge about where the market will end up after a goal.  No point being first in the queue with a keep bet laying at 1.03 if the spread is 1.02 to back 1.03 to lay.

Thanks for sharing that pecker insightful as always.

Your question in the first instance shows incredible naivety for a exchange punter.

I put it to you in simple lay mans terms, if a little ironic or witty, it was to make a stark point.

You will lose your bollox rapidly trying things you are clearly not equipped to attempt without a deep understanding of the game.

WHICH YOU AINT GOT MR HALL............HONESTLY............


I respect your desire to improve but you are not ready to bet on here without suffering losses repeatedly........

I have a lifetime of it and i know success is not showing a loss at the end of the year.

The next 2/3/4% can be very difficult to achieve year on year and that is the truth..

Thanks for the replies all appreciated. No offence meant by my post pecker, I am a witty kind of individual, alas you may well be correct in your assumption about me, but I would love to make it pay, thanks though for your reply.

Pecker where or how would you suggest that I should start afresh in my quest,after all Mt Everest has been scaled, so maybe it's not impossible for me.

January 2020

Profit       630
Football     440
Horse Racing 190

Extremely happy with those figures but one swallow doesn't make a summer.

One swallow doesnt make a sperm bank either

What does swallowing have to do with summer?

Juts been reading a bit of this and there is definitely some interesting stuff on here. Like one of the early posters said, I was working and betting and gave up work because the betting had been more lucrative for about a year. That was nearly 20years ago though and value was a lot easier to find.

I have to 100% support the price is everything argument. Yes a winner is a winner, but nobody finds 100% winners so at some stage you have to accept that if your strike rate has to better than the average odds of your bets (as a %) or you will show a loss in the long term.
Over the years so many people have asked me what they should be on and it is very very rare I will tell them anything because people done understand the importance of odds. If I say horse A is worth doing @4/1 in betfred and they live next door to hills they are going to walk into hills and take 3/1. They will lose long term as my margins have never been bigger than a couple of %.

As a further example, imagine Man City are playing Leeds. City are gonna win obviously. But if somebody offered you 1000/1 for the draw you would throw a few quid on..... you know that is a silly price.... it is way way too big. It's value

Is it possible to make a good annual profit by having one selection per day,whether a back or lay,or does temperament, and the amount of available markets, make it virtually impossible.

Dismiss instantly any ideas of `one a day`, or any other such ridiculously random and arbitrary impositions or requirements; utterly pointless, you must take the opportunities as and when they come, however rare or often that is. For example, I`ve been playing some of the long-term US Politics markets where, in one of them I`ve had over 1500 plays, in another only about 40; in one, I think I`ve found enough value to play, on average, three times a day, in the other, one play every two weeks. Plays must be based solely on value, NOT the calendar.

Re-reading that^^^, I see I used the word `pointless`; I really should have said
`not only pointless, but positively counter-productive, as some days you miss the second third, fourth value bets `of the day`, at other times having to find a bet, ANY bet, right now, for no other reason than that the wife`s calling you to log out and go shopping!`
I fully understand that many pros have relatively few bets, but that`s why they`re pros, they only bet where there`s value; they`d love to find it umpteen times a day, double on Sunday, but if they only find it on average once a day, so be it.

Been meaning to reply to this post for ages, never could quite be bothered, knowing it would involve a lot of writing! Just been reading the `Star Sports interviews` thread on `Horse Racing`, and ended up replying with most of the same points I would have made in posting on this thread, so please forgive the indulgence of re-posting it.


When discussing winning punters, why is there always the general assumption that they`re backing horses, whether it`s with inside info, form studying or just old fashioned hard work? No no no, we`ve all tried that and found it too hard, even impossible for most of us. After realising that, a lot of us will have then tried the next most obvious sport, football, only to find that impossible, too! Some persevere, hoping to find the magic solution, but most never will, for one simple reason; the markets are just too efficient. Sure, we can all find examples of markets getting things wrong, but any mistakes tend to be relatively minor, short-lasting, not wrong enough, often enough, to be worth talking about.

So, what`s the answer??? Well, it`s fairly obvious; you find and specialise in, an area where the markets are highly inefficient! `There`s no such thing` you might say, but you`d be wrong, as I discovered 19 years ago, when my girlfriend was watching this new-fangled programme called `Big Brother` Wasn`t my type of thing, but she had it on every night so I ended up vaguely watching it, and when I saw the bookies were offering 5/1 for a contestant, (Helen, the blondie Welsh hairdresser, for anyone who remembers her), to be nominated for eviction, I felt I knew enough to know that price was ridiculous, should have been odds-on, so I had my first dabble at Specials (X Factor, I`m A Celebrity, Eurovision etc) betting. Sure enough, she was nominated, and so began a 19-year winning stretch with, (so far!!!), not one losing year. NOT because I`m particularly clever, but purely because the markets are so stupid!

Why? Well it`s because each individual series is a one-off, there`s no `form` to really guide the market; whereas the horses, football etc can all be computer-analysed to the nth degree, going over 100 years of form, producing what are, at least in the long term, efficient markets, which is the one thing that makes winning so hard! So, with no form to go on, betting on Specials is much more about instinct, and how well you can interpret the likely views of voters, which is so much easier than studying years-worth of form books; all you have to do is watch a bit of telly and, if in doubt, ask the wife/girlfriend, as women tend to vote much more than men, women choose the winners.

People tend to laugh when I tell them about betting on `Specials`, perhaps seeing it as not quite `macho`; that mocking stops immediately, though, when I mention 19 years of winning at it, and they quickly try and work out how much they`ve lost in those 19 years.

So, what`s the point of this long, seemingly unrelated post? Well, if there`s one thing wrong with betting on Specials, it`s that the liquidity isn`t always great; the more people discover how easy it is to win at, the more liquidity there will be, the more fun to be had, so I`m forever trying to get people to at least have a look into it, maybe see how easy it is, and then come play with us in our unlit little corner of the betting world. On that list to the left, just above `General Betting`, there`s the `Specials` forum; if you read enough threads, you`ll see there`s a hardcore of about 20 regular posters, and it`s 1.01 that every single one of them are long term winners, as you could prove by reading enough of the threads, because they`re an extremely friendly bunch, very helpful, and who tend to let their positions be known BEFORE the result!
Anyway, rather than expect you to believe me about how easy Specials is, two of those forumites have done these Star Sports interviews;

https://www.starsportsbet.co.uk/bettingpeople-daniel-hughes/

https://www.starsportsbet.co.uk/interview-steve-starkey/

We should pay Aye Robot for his posts (and a few others, probably). Worth their weight in flops or bytes
or silicon or whatever they're made from on here.

The internet's a great place - there are genuinely successful people sharing knowledge for free. Wonderful.

BT - you believe "Some persevere, hoping to find the magic solution, but most never will, for one simple reason; the markets are just too efficient. Sure, we can all find examples of markets getting things wrong, but any mistakes tend to be relatively minor, short-lasting, not wrong enough, often enough, to be worth talking about."

"minor" .....I've been bored the last few days so decided to take on Australian races ( horses)…mostly "CLAIMER"type races. Only with small bets, but in races where I believed the favorite /s were poor value , I just selected a number of horses that had "factors in their favour" ( using some factors that I believe are relevant in British races) for the going and time of year when races are being run. It is a "scatter gun " approach used.....but based on criteria and value compared to the favs. I would not call the odds of winners , betting this way, being "minor" mistakes in market.......just what happens relatively frequently ....but based on FACTORS relevant to horse racing.

The USA racing is MORE DIFFICULT due to the time of year.

The "Specials" market ..eg Big Brother....is over a longer period of time.....so you achieved 5-1SP over 1 week ( one bet....) Australian racing gives you more opportunities to bet over the course of 1 week.....etc and  the markets are "efficient"....for BOOKMAKERS.....but still there is always VALUE , if you can spot it, based on knowledge of racing.

Enjoy your "specials" though...GL with them.

DFC; I said `most never will`, as 95%-odd of us fail at the horses, leaving just 5%-odd who have cracked it; if you`re one of those, well done. But you applying your skills to Australian racing doesn`t really help the OP if you`re in the 5%, as he`s clearly still in the 95%. You might be able to spot `value`, and `factors`, but most can`t, never will.

In horse betting, a 2.00 to 1.25, a 5.0 to 2.0, a 33/1 to 8/1 are considered pretty big plunges, but in Specials such movements are the norm, often shooting back out to beyond the initial price five minutes later! We`ve all seen betting shows, we`re all aware of the typical range of movement on those prices, (up a point or two, down a point or two),  but very few of you are aware of the volatility we see in Specials markets; fair enough, you don`t believe things are as extreme as I`m saying, just check it out for yourselves, with massive priced winners, and long odds-on `certainties` being frequently overturned, often two or three in the one series! To compare the volatility, and therefore the ease of winning, with horse betting is to compare different worlds. 95% of horse punters fail yet, of the 20-odd regular Specials posters that I mentioned above, 0% are losers.

One bet in BB? A major aspect of winning at Specials that I haven`t mentioned, is that they tend to go on for weeks, even months, meaning all the time in the world to correct any mistakes. As Steve Starkey says in that interview, `it`s hard getting out of trouble, when things have gone against you in a 5-furlong sprint`, not the case in Specials, especially given the volatility of the markets. I, nor anyone else I know, will have just the one bet and hope for the best, as that would be to entirely miss the reason why winning at Specials is so easy, (back to that word!), `volatility` again. In an `I`m a Celebrity`, on for about three weeks, I`ll typically have maybe 800-1000 plays, on a month long CBB, maybe more than 1500. A blind monkey would get 50% of them right; just getting 51% right is all you need to do to become a long term winner.

Bottom line? Fair play to the few who can win at horses; for the rest of us, there`s always Specials!

Haven't read through every post but I get the general gist of it. I have found that simply concentrating on one or two "sports/event type" is best. There is no magic formula but if your knowledge is deep on your main niche market, you are on the right lines. Basically you need to try and find a category that bookies and exchanges bet on, the more the merrier. Then rule out the usuals, horses, dogs, football. Now look for something that has events throughout the western hemisphere. Next track down every bookie/exchange that bets on them, particularly ones not listed on price comparison sites. Next get a calendar of future events in your specialist market, start studying and price the events up before any firm does. Bookmakers have specialists in all firms that have vast (often inside) knowledge of the main horse/football stuff. They have next to no specialist employees for the events you are interested in. Mistakes are common, howlers less so, but can be extremely profitable when they occur.

Timbuctooth wrote....

To compare the volatility, and therefore the ease of winning, with horse betting is to compare different worlds. 95% of horse punters fail yet, of the 20-odd regular Specials posters that I mentioned above, 0% are losers.

Hmm..

Read as many threads on the `Specials` forum as you need to, before you realise I`m right.

Apr 19, 2020 -- 9:53AM, timbuctooth wrote:

Read as many threads on the `Specials` forum as you need to, before you realise I`m right.

Well, you would have thought that the "20-odd regular Specials posters" would know far better than you ever will whether they have been winning or losing. If every single person won, there would be no bookmakers betting on the events.

Don`t be twisting things, nobody said `every single person won`; I`ve already told you exactly how to verify my assertion for yourself, should you choose to.

of the 20-odd regular Specials posters that I mentioned above, 0% are losers.


0% are losers. That means 100% winners, does it not? I.e every single one of these 20-odd win.

If you are naive enough to believe that is the case on an anonymous betting forum, you are beyond help.

0% of the 20-odd regular posters are losers

Why are you twisting it again, by leaving out the highlighted bit? Are you allowing our differing political views to overflow onto a thread which is all about helping people to win? I`ve posted an easy route and, rather than do the reading required to confirm this, you prefer to remain in willful ignorance, yet decry from the sidelines? Until you`ve read the evidence provided, less of the entirely uninformed twaddle from you would be appreciated. Particularly, I`d imagine, by those who are reading this thread in the hope of becoming winners, to whom I say `I`ve told you where you can see all the proof you want, check it out for yourselves`.

I am not twisting anything, I am quoting your very words on this thread.

To compare the volatility, and therefore the ease of winning, with horse betting is to compare different worlds. 95% of horse punters fail yet, of the 20-odd regular Specials posters that I mentioned above, 0% are losers.

This is from your post April 17, 2020 8:33 PM BST.

If you genuinely believe that all 20-odd of these regular Specials posters are winners, then I have a bridge to sell you.

Specials betting is very much a niche market, with most readers of this probably never having had one bet on it, with fewer still having ever read the Specials forum, and I`m not sure if anyone who`s posted on this thread has ever posted on Specials, pretty much leaving it to my 20-odd regular posters. I`m on there 15-odd years, many of `the 20` were already on there, and I learnt most of what I knew from them. Over the years, other newbies have become regulars, and they form the rest of the 20. In the way that a good and helpful a forum should be, we are posting our reasoning for backing or laying `x`, discussing/debating all the while, our positions are known to each other throughout the series, including final books, before the result is announced.

So, not only do I have 15+ years of proof, I`ve told you where you can see it all for yourself! In fact, I`ve pointed to this evidence repeatedly, you`re boring the forum, so this will be my last attempt at being helpful to you on this matter, I`ll leave it to you to have the last `know nothing, know it all` word.

All 20-odd of you can't win regularly. There are obvious basic reasons why this is, the main one being that the markets you are betting on are so "specialised" that there is not enough liquidity. Now let's all say you were all agreed that the likely "winner" of the current Britains got talent was the act "sign along with us". All the twenty odd of you plump for this so you all place money on here. Currently the price is 6.6 and there is £4 available to back at that price. Can you see why you can't all win? Some of you might win if you bet that act and that act wins (for relatively small amounts). That is assuming that every single one of you back the same act. Now of course there are bookmakers that also bet on the event but no bookmaker is going to take a stash of bets on the same act and retain the price for very long. Even if the bookmaker does and the act wins then the bookie is unlikely to entertain bets on these type of markets for very long from the same regular "winning" customers.
What is much more likely is that some of you back the winning act. Most of you back losing acts.

Please can you take your conversation off to a different forum? :)

Not continuing the discussion but, just in case anyone`s interested in the easiest times to be had on betfair, here`s two of those interviews StarSports did, with two of `the 20`; both long term `Specials` winners. Watch, and decide, for yourselves

https://www.starsportsbet.co.uk/interview-steve-starkey/

https://www.starsportsbet.co.uk/bettingpeople-daniel-hughes/

Specials - Will the English PL resume by 1st of June ?
===========================================================================================================

Only a YES or NO answer required and odds not very attractive. If you had insider information ( not very "legal") , then even then not attractive odds!

"EASY" is the term you used TBT.....and this a word that TRUMP would use and immediately very few would believe such a comment ….other than "red necks"

Just a boring market that probably appeals to those that watch BB.....but as little skill involved in such YES or NO answer type questions...….it is no wonder that such markets are not interesting enough …..compared to horse racing "puzzles'".

GL though .....as long as you enjoy such markets.....but not enough of a challenge compared to the complexities of a horse race.

DFC, in an earlier post, I said `... I had my first dabble at Specials (X Factor, I`m A Celebrity, Eurovision etc) betting...` The fact that some bookie somewhere has the bet you`re talking about as a `Special`, does not mean it`s a Special in the sense we`re talking about; as you can see from the examples I named, the crucial thing about Specials is that the public voting chooses the winner, that`s you, me everybody, WE choose the winner, from multiple runners, over months. Yours might be a special, one-off proposition, but it`s most certainly NOT `Specials.
I really don`t understand the hostility towards this? Not believing me, fair enough, but I`ve provided two links of interviews to two of my `20` who are also doing what I am, what don`t people believe? Why the reluctance?

Nothing to do with "belief"...……….just not enough of a challenge in such markets …..and using the word "easy" probably was just stirring a hornets nest.....or just "fishing"

Did you read my last post? Whatever section a bookie places your example in, it`s not what we`re talking about, it`s not `Specials`. A typical Specials market will have maybe 15(?) to 50+ runners; if you don`t find that `challenging enough`, then you certainly don`t need my help!
Most on here will have spent 10, 20, 30 years trying to crack the more mainstream markets, always thinking they`ve surely learnt enough by now, that success is within sight, but they never get there; in Specials, after doing, say, one year`s apprenticeship, most people will be able top win consistently and long term.

Strange, isn`t it; you see many threads asking `how can I win`, with numerous replies saying `anyone who wins, won`t be on here telling you how`. Then, when someone with helpful intentions does post how, it`s met with abuse and scorn? Funny old world...

The Voice UK 2020
Australian Weather
Big Brother Brazil 2020
Australian Residential Property Price Indexes
UK Weather 2020
Britain's Got Talent 2020
BBC Sports Personality of the Year 2020.

=====================================================

What a mish mash of "specials"...………...and yes there will be a number of choices.....If you watch such TV programs, then might be of "interest" to you. However, if not interested in such markets.....then it to say it is "easy" to win on you probably would need to watch such programs....and watching such programs would be an attractive proposition for me anyway!

I  suspect you might be a lay bet person or a trader ( you mentioned movements in odds etc)………..however as a backer of horses that can be at good value ( as usually more than one in a race backed) and I don't go by "market movements" , as they are irrelevant to selection process. Australian racing  I find to be relatively "simple " race types ( mainly CLAIMERS), so the amount of "knowledge" required is far less than with British races that are "HANDICAP" race types, then I suppose they are "easier" to bet on for me anyway ……………...SO FAR!

GL with bets.

You`re right, that list is a bit of a mish-mash! It`s not just sports that aren`t running, it`s also traditional Specials events, with only three of that list being part of the Specials world (The Voice UK 2020, Britain's Got Talent 2020 and BBC Sports Personality of the Year 2020). The rest aren`t even usually listed, but events are so few and far between at the moment, bf have just thrown them in there. Remember, we`re talking about events the (Eurovision excepted) British/Irish public vote on to determine the winner

Whatever, you seem to have found your niche, well done and good luck to you too!