Hi,
Another newcomer with daft questions. Would it be possible to place a back bet on the top 3 favourite horses at say 1.3 and have that carried over into in-play? Pre-off the bet would be unfilled, and in-play 2 of the 3 would never get filled, but as a winner emerges it will get filled (in advance we don't know which horse, but don't care.
By the time it is steaming through 1.3 then it will be ahead of the field. If it is a close race and none of the horses gets a clear lead then maybe the bet will never fill, but at least that misses the risk of backing a favourite that loses steam in the last furlong.
I have a feeling I am missing something.
2nd question. With greyhounds, it feels like a lot of the money on the favourite is emotional, which implies the price will almost be too low, so would it not make sense to just lay every favourite, regardless, it will average out in time and the edge is that you are winning money that was following emotions rather than odds?
David
Out of the money, hope for fill
You can easily automate backing the first horse to hit a certain price using a rules file to place a bet subject to the condition that the horse's price is <=1.3. You may need to give yourself a margin in case it drops further during the bet delay.dj611003 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 11, 2022 10:36 amHi,
Another newcomer with daft questions. Would it be possible to place a back bet on the top 3 favourite horses at say 1.3 and have that carried over into in-play? Pre-off the bet would be unfilled, and in-play 2 of the 3 would never get filled, but as a winner emerges it will get filled (in advance we don't know which horse, but don't care.
By the time it is steaming through 1.3 then it will be ahead of the field. If it is a close race and none of the horses gets a clear lead then maybe the bet will never fill, but at least that misses the risk of backing a favourite that loses steam in the last furlong.
I have a feeling I am missing something.
2nd question. With greyhounds, it feels like a lot of the money on the favourite is emotional, which implies the price will almost be too low, so would it not make sense to just lay every favourite, regardless, it will average out in time and the edge is that you are winning money that was following emotions rather than odds?
David
As for laying favourites, the best way to find out is to test the idea on paper but I think you'll find Betfair prices are quite accurate on average so you'll most likely break even and lose after commission.
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
Paper? How quaint But you're right of course, prices are correct at scale, wrong on them all individually, taking prices is -EV and offering is marginally +EV but all about your fill rate.
As for horse that get to 1.3 in-running, they have a 77% chance of winning, there's no magic price point where any sort of value is guarenteed. Don't get draw into the idea that just because something is a short price it's going to win and is therefore a good price. You only make money betting where the price you have is better or worse than the real world likelihood, and it being 1.1,1.3 or 10/1 doesn't tell you anything about that.
some prices are more equal than others. And if you beat them you are guaranteed to stay on top(BSP) ....i sound like you nowShaunWhite wrote: ↑Fri Nov 11, 2022 12:08 pmYou only make money betting where the price you have is better or worse than the real world likelihood, and it being 1.1,1.3 or 10/1 doesn't tell you anything about that.
decomez6 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 11, 2022 12:59 pmsome prices are more equal than others. And if you beat them you are guaranteed to stay on top(BSP) ....i sound like you nowShaunWhite wrote: ↑Fri Nov 11, 2022 12:08 pmYou only make money betting where the price you have is better or worse than the real world likelihood, and it being 1.1,1.3 or 10/1 doesn't tell you anything about that.
Made me think. As non-smoking becomes the norm I wonder how many great ideas have been lost because there was no handy fag packet to write it down on the back of?
...and how many good songs have we missed out on because the artist had nothing to write the lyrics on when he thought of them?
Thanks for all the answers, esp Derek27 and Shaun. I did try paper first for the dogs and my actual results bear out the paper expectation - 67-70% of the time, laying the favourite dog is a winner. But of course when it loses the loss is bigger.
My problem, and there are lots of other questions on this, is how to code a stop loss. I have a "green all selections" rule that should trigger if there is a loss if "the green all profit value across all selections" is "less than" an entered amount of "£-0.50"
The rule is set to trigger on ANY selection, but in fact never triggers. have I missed something?
David
My problem, and there are lots of other questions on this, is how to code a stop loss. I have a "green all selections" rule that should trigger if there is a loss if "the green all profit value across all selections" is "less than" an entered amount of "£-0.50"
The rule is set to trigger on ANY selection, but in fact never triggers. have I missed something?
David
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
Hi David. Your first post mentioned in-running horses, but now you're taking about dogs so are you aware there isn't an in-running market for them?
You also mention favs losing 67-70% of the time, but what you're trying to overcome is the effeciency of the markets. Its not so much that favs lose that often more that all selections win or lose at the rate their price suggests.
You also mention favs losing 67-70% of the time, but what you're trying to overcome is the effeciency of the markets. Its not so much that favs lose that often more that all selections win or lose at the rate their price suggests.