If there is no money on the other side then the 1000 odds runner's bet shouldnt be included in the green up. It is not required.
So I am not talking about a bet being accidentally matched, but one that is going to be matched because there is nothing on the other side eg the runner is not in the race.
This is an error in the program code.
I think I have found serious bugs in BetAngel
-
AllTheGearNoIdea
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 11:02 am
The screen shot timing is irrevant - the p&l position is the same at the point of the bet
- see the timings of the matched bets.
I'm not trying to be difficult here... you could alter the program code to prevent this happening but discounting the 1000 priced runners that have no money on the other side.
Heres another example 15:50 Naas
I laid Mulkear at 9 for £10.26 profit
If I then backed Zaheer and then subsequently greened the error would have occurred again
so are you saying to have the green up working correctly then I would need to stake
100 times bigger than I am now?
- see the timings of the matched bets.
I'm not trying to be difficult here... you could alter the program code to prevent this happening but discounting the 1000 priced runners that have no money on the other side.
Heres another example 15:50 Naas
I laid Mulkear at 9 for £10.26 profit
If I then backed Zaheer and then subsequently greened the error would have occurred again
so are you saying to have the green up working correctly then I would need to stake
100 times bigger than I am now?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
[quote="AllTheGearNoIdea"]I'm not trying to be difficult here... you could alter the program code to prevent this happening but discounting the 1000 priced runners that have no money on the other side.[quote]
Doing that would help you, but not people who are deliberately trying to trade at odds of 1000. The software can't intelligently work out what you are trying to do and we can't restrict it and stop people from using it within it's bounds.
Doing that would help you, but not people who are deliberately trying to trade at odds of 1000. The software can't intelligently work out what you are trying to do and we can't restrict it and stop people from using it within it's bounds.
-
AllTheGearNoIdea
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 11:02 am
No one trades when there is nothing on the other side eg the horse is not in the race.
Who would back a 1000 runner?
like in my earlier example
I dutch 3 runners.
1 is pulled up and the market moves in such a way that the green up now shows a profit.
But in reality the green up actually gives me a loss.
Who would back a 1000 runner?
like in my earlier example
I dutch 3 runners.
1 is pulled up and the market moves in such a way that the green up now shows a profit.
But in reality the green up actually gives me a loss.
lots of horses trade at 1000/1 in play ( with nothing on the other side) and go on to win, just take a look at the chart of the day threadAllTheGearNoIdea wrote:No one trades when there is nothing on the other side eg the horse is not in the race.
Who would back a 1000 runner?
edit: I just re read your post in context, I understand what you are saying now.
Last edited by PeterLe on Mon Jan 04, 2016 12:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
Lots of reason why people back at 1000, but as described it's a situation that occurs when you bet below minimum, so it's not a 'serious bug'. It's a characteristic of the Betfair exchange.
But I'll add a suggestion to the development list to make restricting it an option. Probably the best solution then you can choose if you want to do this. But using above minimum stakes would absolve yourself of the issue.
But I'll add a suggestion to the development list to make restricting it an option. Probably the best solution then you can choose if you want to do this. But using above minimum stakes would absolve yourself of the issue.
-
AllTheGearNoIdea
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 11:02 am
Today's example.
Its getting a bit annoying now.
It's a characteristic of the Betfair exchange.
I dont think thats fair comment in my mind. I think it could be very easily fixed.
On a £10 bet its costing me 20%
To avoid it I need a betting bank many times the size I have, which is not fair.
Sorry to be negative.
Its getting a bit annoying now.
It's a characteristic of the Betfair exchange.
I dont think thats fair comment in my mind. I think it could be very easily fixed.
On a £10 bet its costing me 20%
To avoid it I need a betting bank many times the size I have, which is not fair.
Sorry to be negative.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
spreadbetting
- Posts: 3140
- Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:06 pm
It's irrelevant if the runner is trading at 1000 because they do occasionally win and people with large liabilities on them are quite happy to level out. And suggesting selections should be ignored because there's no money on the other side is also fraught with problems.
Why don't you just close trades on single selections rather than greening the field, you only seem to bet on one or two selections so greening on single selections would seem to be the obvious way to go if you want to ignore 1000 shots with liabilities on them.
Why don't you just close trades on single selections rather than greening the field, you only seem to bet on one or two selections so greening on single selections would seem to be the obvious way to go if you want to ignore 1000 shots with liabilities on them.
-
AllTheGearNoIdea
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 11:02 am
Why do I have to change the way I bet to suit the software? Green up with one click rather than several with lost money in between each one ?
Here's another example and the outsider 1000 can't win! !
My win bet Ziggys Star is in a photo.
If I greened up then I would have profited less than if I left it alone - which is what I had to do. This is costing me money.
Here's another example and the outsider 1000 can't win! !
My win bet Ziggys Star is in a photo.
If I greened up then I would have profited less than if I left it alone - which is what I had to do. This is costing me money.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by AllTheGearNoIdea on Mon Jan 04, 2016 2:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
spreadbetting
- Posts: 3140
- Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:06 pm
AllTheGearNoIdea wrote:Why do I have to change the way I bet to suit the software?
Why should the software change to suit you, you're pressing green the field and that's what it's doing. If you're happy to ignore certain liabilities on your book, green the selections you want separately not the field.
-
AllTheGearNoIdea
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 11:02 am
Because you dont need to include the 1000 odds runner that is no longer in the game!
Surely you can see that??
Surely you can see that??
Post by AllTheGearNoIdea » Mon Jan 04, 2016 3:43 pm
Why do I have to change the way I bet to suit the software?
because the software does not do what you wish. your problem really is a non problem/not worth the effort why bother?
if not happy dont use this software try a different venders software or no software at all
Why do I have to change the way I bet to suit the software?
because the software does not do what you wish. your problem really is a non problem/not worth the effort why bother?
if not happy dont use this software try a different venders software or no software at all
Last edited by to75ne on Mon Jan 04, 2016 2:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
AllTheGearNoIdea
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 11:02 am
No that is not right - it does do what I want - but the program is not doing it correctly.
In my example with the photo finish - you would not want to - or even need to - include the 1000 runner would you?
And your answer is use another program? Why? BetAngel is the best software for my needs.
If I had a Rolls Royce and the door doesnt close properly, surely you fix the door rather than buy a budget car?
In my example with the photo finish - you would not want to - or even need to - include the 1000 runner would you?
And your answer is use another program? Why? BetAngel is the best software for my needs.
If I had a Rolls Royce and the door doesnt close properly, surely you fix the door rather than buy a budget car?
Last edited by AllTheGearNoIdea on Mon Jan 04, 2016 3:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
spreadbetting
- Posts: 3140
- Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:06 pm
How is the software to know something is no longer in the game, how does it know it's in a photo finish? Just because something hits 1000 doesn't mean it won't win.
The softare is doing what you're asking it to and greening the field, the software has options to green individual runners but you choose not to use them.
The softare is doing what you're asking it to and greening the field, the software has options to green individual runners but you choose not to use them.