I don't think you'll find anyone who is making outright betting automation backing/laying profitable.
Trading either manual/auto is the only way to be profitable.
Cipobotter I have sent you a PM
LinusP you may have misunderstood my answer as I am not sure why you have replied with a smiley or for that matter PM'd the originator of the question without an explanation that the forum may be interested in.
My answer was intended to mean that I dont think you can be profitable in the long term ( years ) using automation to place only back bets in an event or only lay bets in an event.
I don't think you'll find anyone who is making outright betting automation backing/laying profitable.
Trading either manual/auto is the only way to be profitable.
Cipobotter I have sent you a PM
LinusP you may have misunderstood my answer as I am not sure why you have replied with a smiley or for that matter PM'd the originator of the question without an explanation that the forum may be interested in.
My answer was intended to mean that I dont think you can be profitable in the long term ( years ) using automation to place only back bets in an event or only lay bets in an event.
if its possible to win long term placing bets manually on the greyhounds why not automaated, there are definitely people succeeding at that
LinusP you may have misunderstood my answer as I am not sure why you have replied with a smiley or for that matter PM'd the originator of the question without an explanation that the forum may be interested in.
My answer was intended to mean that I dont think you can be profitable in the long term ( years ) using automation to place only back bets in an event or only lay bets in an event.
if its possible to win long term placing bets manually on the greyhounds why not automaated, there are definitely people succeeding at that
Do you personally know any gamblers who are manually placing back or lay bets on the greyhounds and are being successful and profitable over the long term?
Thanks Atho, you see, this is exactly what I have been doing so far, playing with implied probs and try to find correlations with other factors. But nothing lasts (and it is not supposed to, ideally). Did you manage to find "rules" that never change?
I tend to analyse the horse data rather than grey data so the example I posted is new as I just wanted to show you what could be done. Saying that, the underlying concept is not new so be interested to see how it does myself.
If I was to look for rules that never change then they would likely be odds based rather than Rank or Trap.
My answer was intended to mean that I dont think you can be profitable in the long term ( years ) using automation to place only back bets in an event or only lay bets in an event.
You think wrong. What on earth are you basing this off?
I would assume trading greyhound markets is difficult. But, their are successful traders in the domain, with long term success. It only takes a track manager to put the bowser out before every race and that's all that form work, data, drained away !!! And a Tesco colleague could price up this market with his / her price gun better than the bookmakers, exchanges.
Definitely exploitable if trading... not so much for winning bets.
You can't make money in the former without the latter.
This! And beautifully put too.
I laboured for way too long under the misconception that "trading" was different to value betting. Once the penny dropped it all fell into place.
Definitely exploitable if trading... not so much for winning bets.
You can't make money in the former without the latter.
This! And beautifully put too.
I laboured for way too long under the misconception that "trading" was different to value betting. Once the penny dropped it all fell into place.
Of course, both are based on understanding which prices are off with respect to the real probabilities (or will be off in the future). I am having problems, as most, in understanding where the clues on the real probs are.
Definitely exploitable if trading... not so much for winning bets.
You can't make money in the former without the latter.
This! And beautifully put too.
I laboured for way too long under the misconception that "trading" was different to value betting. Once the penny dropped it all fell into place.
I have done this many many times.
The figure below is derived from the BSP of about 90k UK and AUS races, without factoring the commission.
This is a plot for all the data, but of course I have made it on: a) shorter timespans; b) segmenting by week-day; c) segmenting by track; d) segmenting by fav; e) accounting for volume.... and many other combinations.
Long story short, yes, each day the blue line has bumps above the red line, but all of that regresses to the mean over time, so any strategy on this is doomed to fail for the gambler's fallacy. I have tried also backtesting systems that look where the bumps where yesterday (or last week on the same day, or over n previous days) and use those intervals for the day after, but it does not work in the long term. The BSP data are extremely efficient in the long term. That somehow is a relief, but tells me that there is need of external data to make a viable strategy.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.