Trading What I see !?

[jimibt]

You can also make money with a bad value bet as long as volatility allows you to place the opposite one at a favorable price.

i see that more as luck/chance than anything tbh... altho volatility CAN get you out of sticky situations, it's far better to size up the market in advance and take positions that represent value from the off. i'm afraid in the early days, the above that you mention saw me lose more than one bank - potentially even in a single bet!

[Trader724]

You can also make money with a bad value bet as long as volatility allows you to place the opposite one at a favorable price.

i see that more as luck/chance than anything tbh... altho volatility CAN get you out of sticky situations, it's far better to size up the market in advance and take positions that represent value from the off. i'm afraid in the early days, the above that you mention saw me lose more than one bank - potentially even in a single bet!

I don't know why I can't make myself understood.
A trading strategy takes advantage of price fluctuations regardless of value, while a betting strategy needs value for profit.
It is true that when you trade there are still bets but the fact that they are opposite removes the dependence on the selection result.
If the success of the trade does not depend on whether your selection wins or not, you are no longer interested in the value

[jimibt]

You can also make money with a bad value bet as long as volatility allows you to place the opposite one at a favorable price.

i see that more as luck/chance than anything tbh... altho volatility CAN get you out of sticky situations, it's far better to size up the market in advance and take positions that represent value from the off. i'm afraid in the early days, the above that you mention saw me lose more than one bank - potentially even in a single bet!

I don't know why I can't make myself understood.
A trading strategy takes advantage of price fluctuations regardless of value, while a betting strategy needs value for profit.
It is true that when you trade there are still bets but the fact that they are opposite removes the dependence on the selection result.
If the success of the trade does not depend on whether your selection wins or not, you are no longer interested in the value

yup, like yourself, have been doing this a while. all i'm saying is that you (or should i say I) cannot depend on random fluctuations to guide my strategies. and yes, win or lose it's not about that; agreed - but entry and exit informs us (even if laterally) as to whether we've tuned into value in the trade or straight bet.

[ShaunWhite]

You can obviously make money 'swing trading' without realising one or both bets are value but that lack of understanding comes from two bets being called a 'trade' instead of two bets being called two bets.

That's exactly what I said before, but it's different from what you say above that you need to have value on both bets.
There is no confusion, from the start it is understandable that when you place two bets on the same selection at different prices one of the bets has less value than the other but you can make a profit even so.

I said "one or both" bets. And them being on the same selection isn't relevant because you can group all your day's bets anyway you want and they still have the same bottom line.

[jamesg46]

You can also make money with a bad value bet as long as volatility allows you to place the opposite one at a favorable price.

i see that more as luck/chance than anything tbh... altho volatility CAN get you out of sticky situations, it's far better to size up the market in advance and take positions that represent value from the off. i'm afraid in the early days, the above that you mention saw me lose more than one bank - potentially even in a single bet!

I don't know why I can't make myself understood.
A trading strategy takes advantage of price fluctuations regardless of value, while a betting strategy needs value for profit.
It is true that when you trade there are still bets but the fact that they are opposite removes the dependence on the selection result.
If the success of the trade does not depend on whether your selection wins or not, you are no longer interested in the value

The confusion comes from what exactly is "value"! Is it taking a price that's better than SP? Yeah. Is it taking a trade that offers the potential for more upside than downside? Yeah. The perception of value doesn't have to come from what we believe a price should be, it can be personal strategy value too.... either way, you will only make money long term by taking value & be it you say you ignore value, you probably don't, you probably call it something else, like risk to reward.

[jamesg46]

I might think a break of 4.2 on Cuban Cigar could lead to a move to 5.0 (just as an example) with a bail out of a break below 4.0 so my upside potential would be considerably better than my downside, especially with below 4.0 having a decrease in increment size.... if that was my setup then I would consider that to be value to me & someone who I buy off who got in earlier is taking their value trade to the bank.... I have no idea what the SP will be and nor do I care.

[Trader724]

i see that more as luck/chance than anything tbh... altho volatility CAN get you out of sticky situations, it's far better to size up the market in advance and take positions that represent value from the off. i'm afraid in the early days, the above that you mention saw me lose more than one bank - potentially even in a single bet!

I don't know why I can't make myself understood.
A trading strategy takes advantage of price fluctuations regardless of value, while a betting strategy needs value for profit.
It is true that when you trade there are still bets but the fact that they are opposite removes the dependence on the selection result.
If the success of the trade does not depend on whether your selection wins or not, you are no longer interested in the value

The confusion comes from what exactly is "value"! Is it taking a price that's better than SP? Yeah. Is it taking a trade that offers the potential for more upside than downside? Yeah. The perception of value doesn't have to come from what we believe a price should be, it can be personal strategy value too.... either way, you will only make money long term by taking value & be it you say you ignore value, you probably don't, you probably call it something else, like risk to reward.

The correct price reflects the chances that the selection will win. The market price can be higher or lower than the correct price and any bet at the market price under these conditions has good value and bad value.
The difference between trading and betting is that with trading you can make a profit with bad value and good value, and with betting you can make a profit just with good value.

[Trader724]

I might think a break of 4.2 on Cuban Cigar could lead to a move to 5.0 (just as an example) with a bail out of a break below 4.0 so my upside potential would be considerably better than my downside, especially with below 4.0 having a decrease in increment size.... if that was my setup then I would consider that to be value to me & someone who I buy off who got in earlier is taking their value trade to the bank.... I have no idea what the SP will be and nor do I care.

Yeah sorry for your loss But profit doesn't mean value. Actually that's what I'm trying to say here.

[jamesg46]

I might think a break of 4.2 on Cuban Cigar could lead to a move to 5.0 (just as an example) with a bail out of a break below 4.0 so my upside potential would be considerably better than my downside, especially with below 4.0 having a decrease in increment size.... if that was my setup then I would consider that to be value to me & someone who I buy off who got in earlier is taking their value trade to the bank.... I have no idea what the SP will be and nor do I care.

Yeah sorry for your loss But profit doesn't mean value. Actually that's what I'm trying to say here.

I took the break of 5.6 on the 60 second chart on We Still Believe. I think the SP will be around 5s, I didn't care because the crossover point was working in my favour.

[Trader724]

You can obviously make money 'swing trading' without realising one or both bets are value but that lack of understanding comes from two bets being called a 'trade' instead of two bets being called two bets.

That's exactly what I said before, but it's different from what you say above that you need to have value on both bets.
There is no confusion, from the start it is understandable that when you place two bets on the same selection at different prices one of the bets has less value than the other but you can make a profit even so.

I said "one or both" bets. And them being on the same selection isn't relevant because you can group all your day's bets anyway you want and they still have the same bottom line.

It is not the fact that the bets are on the same selection that matters, but that they are opposites so I don't care if the selection win or not. That becomes irrelevant.

[Trader724]

I might think a break of 4.2 on Cuban Cigar could lead to a move to 5.0 (just as an example) with a bail out of a break below 4.0 so my upside potential would be considerably better than my downside, especially with below 4.0 having a decrease in increment size.... if that was my setup then I would consider that to be value to me & someone who I buy off who got in earlier is taking their value trade to the bank.... I have no idea what the SP will be and nor do I care.

Yeah sorry for your loss But profit doesn't mean value. Actually that's what I'm trying to say here.

I took the break of 5.6 on the 60 second chart on We Still Believe. I think the SP will be around 5s, I didn't care because the crossover point was working in my favour.

Nice

[Trader724]

i see that more as luck/chance than anything tbh... altho volatility CAN get you out of sticky situations, it's far better to size up the market in advance and take positions that represent value from the off. i'm afraid in the early days, the above that you mention saw me lose more than one bank - potentially even in a single bet!

I don't know why I can't make myself understood.
A trading strategy takes advantage of price fluctuations regardless of value, while a betting strategy needs value for profit.
It is true that when you trade there are still bets but the fact that they are opposite removes the dependence on the selection result.
If the success of the trade does not depend on whether your selection wins or not, you are no longer interested in the value

yup, like yourself, have been doing this a while. all i'm saying is that you (or should i say I) cannot depend on random fluctuations to guide my strategies. and yes, win or lose it's not about that; agreed - but entry and exit informs us (even if laterally) as to whether we've tuned into value in the trade or straight bet.

I've been profitable for years so I must be really good at those random fluctuations.

[jamesg46]

I might think a break of 4.2 on Cuban Cigar could lead to a move to 5.0 (just as an example) with a bail out of a break below 4.0 so my upside potential would be considerably better than my downside, especially with below 4.0 having a decrease in increment size.... if that was my setup then I would consider that to be value to me & someone who I buy off who got in earlier is taking their value trade to the bank.... I have no idea what the SP will be and nor do I care.

Yeah sorry for your loss But profit doesn't mean value. Actually that's what I'm trying to say here.

Profit isn't value but potential profit vs potential loss I would consider a very big factor in me percieving something to be of value. If a trade has the potential to pay me 2x what my max risk would be then I would take that trade every time as long as my strike rate on that setup was of a high enough %. If you saw something at £1 and you knew you could sell it for £3 then it's value, it makes no difference if your mate couldn't do the same & if it just so happened he could'nt sell it on for £3 because of whatever reason then it's of no value to him. What I'm saying is value can be very subjective, it doesn't have to be based on what you or I or anyone believe SP should be, it can simply be because you can make 2x your risk.

[jamesg46]

I don't know why I can't make myself understood.
A trading strategy takes advantage of price fluctuations regardless of value, while a betting strategy needs value for profit.
It is true that when you trade there are still bets but the fact that they are opposite removes the dependence on the selection result.
If the success of the trade does not depend on whether your selection wins or not, you are no longer interested in the value

yup, like yourself, have been doing this a while. all i'm saying is that you (or should i say I) cannot depend on random fluctuations to guide my strategies. and yes, win or lose it's not about that; agreed - but entry and exit informs us (even if laterally) as to whether we've tuned into value in the trade or straight bet.

I've been profitable for years so I must be really good at those random fluctuations.

Defo, you've maaged to find yourself a technique that works... is the technique not value? It's certainly valuable to you but not to me. I get what you were saying about not caring about value, but my assumption was that you were making that comment based on a perception that value was only a measure of the prices you take vs sp... and imo that's not true.

[goat68]

Blimey, there's me been busy losing exchange money, while you lot have been talking value here!!
Just read through all these posts, and I think you're all talking the same value! James's "value" is the same as Shaun's value, and the same as Trader724's value...
If price fluctuations over the longer term are random, then the only way to make money is for your overall net "positions" to be "value" relative to BSP. If you think about James's example Lay at 4.2, if the following price movement is random then after 1 min it could equally be at 4.4 or 4.0. Say he Lay'd at 4.2 and backed at 4.4. And say BSP was 5.0. So the Lay at 4.2 was value, the back at 4.4 was not, but the Lay at 4.2 was more value than the back at 4.4 "was not". If the BSP was 4.3, then both were "value".
That's how I read all the previous posts put together!