Markets seems perfectly efficient to me...

[offlimit88]

Statistically i should have a 12% edge on a rare event , if i use high selectivity.
But it seems that the more i use selectivity, the less i gain when i profit.
My research has been very particular, and it is very unlikely that more of 2 or 3 people on the market knows what i know in that specific event.
So, my question is, who is my competitor here? People? I don t think people is stupid but there is no way hundreds of people have that kind of information on the market.

[weemac]

More to the point is: What are the other 2 or 3 people who have the same knowledge as you asking?

[Derek27]

Statistically i should have a 12% edge on a rare event , if i use high selectivity.
But it seems that the more i use selectivity, the less i gain when i profit.
My research has been very particular, and it is very unlikely that more of 2 or 3 people on the market knows what i know in that specific event.
So, my question is, who is my competitor here? People? I don t think people is stupid but there is no way hundreds of people have that kind of information on the market.

Everybody who trades the market you do is your competitor. If one hundred people carry out individual statistical research, each one has a unique dataset that the others don't. But it will still result in traders opening the same trades for different reasons, especially if it's a 4 horse race! Your own research may lead you to open a particular trade but a manual trader may just happen to think it's a good trade also.

[offlimit88]

Statistically i should have a 12% edge on a rare event , if i use high selectivity.
But it seems that the more i use selectivity, the less i gain when i profit.
My research has been very particular, and it is very unlikely that more of 2 or 3 people on the market knows what i know in that specific event.
So, my question is, who is my competitor here? People? I don t think people is stupid but there is no way hundreds of people have that kind of information on the market.

Everybody who trades the market you do is your competitor. If one hundred people carry out individual statistical research, each one has a unique dataset that the others don't. But it will still result in traders opening the same trades for different reasons, especially if it's a 4 horse race! Your own research may lead you to open a particular trade but a manual trader may just happen to think it's a good trade also.

The point is, as football markets, i don t see emotions. It seems all mathematics and statistics. I m paper trading mostly breakpoints and all i see is that every situation has the perfect win/loss ratio, even the most particular, it s perfectly right. Are all people playing with statistics? And are all people so deep in research like myself, or you in this forum?
I doubt it, but however, this is the situation. People would panic if a breakpoints is scored in the third set by the underdog at 4-4, the result would be a bigger win than average, or less then average, but it is always the exact probability. The only explanation is that only Betfair has the resources to do control prices

[sa7med]

Statistically i should have a 12% edge on a rare event , if i use high selectivity.
But it seems that the more i use selectivity, the less i gain when i profit.
My research has been very particular, and it is very unlikely that more of 2 or 3 people on the market knows what i know in that specific event.
So, my question is, who is my competitor here? People? I don t think people is stupid but there is no way hundreds of people have that kind of information on the market.

Everybody who trades the market you do is your competitor. If one hundred people carry out individual statistical research, each one has a unique dataset that the others don't. But it will still result in traders opening the same trades for different reasons, especially if it's a 4 horse race! Your own research may lead you to open a particular trade but a manual trader may just happen to think it's a good trade also.

The point is, as football markets, i don t see emotions. It seems all mathematics and statistics. I m paper trading mostly breakpoints and all i see is that every situation has the perfect win/loss ratio, even the most particular, it s perfectly right. Are all people playing with statistics? And are all people so deep in research like myself, or you in this forum?
I doubt it, but however, this is the situation. People would panic if a breakpoints is scored in the third set by the underdog at 4-4, the result would be a bigger win than average, or less then average, but it is always the exact probability. The only explanation is that only Betfair has the resources to do control prices

Don't mean to sound rude but do you think you're the only one using data to place your bets? How long have you been at this? Some people have been doing this for decades. Even before betfair was around. Nothing new under the sun.

[Derek27]

Statistically i should have a 12% edge on a rare event , if i use high selectivity.
But it seems that the more i use selectivity, the less i gain when i profit.
My research has been very particular, and it is very unlikely that more of 2 or 3 people on the market knows what i know in that specific event.
So, my question is, who is my competitor here? People? I don t think people is stupid but there is no way hundreds of people have that kind of information on the market.

Everybody who trades the market you do is your competitor. If one hundred people carry out individual statistical research, each one has a unique dataset that the others don't. But it will still result in traders opening the same trades for different reasons, especially if it's a 4 horse race! Your own research may lead you to open a particular trade but a manual trader may just happen to think it's a good trade also.

The point is, as football markets, i don t see emotions. It seems all mathematics and statistics. I m paper trading mostly breakpoints and all i see is that every situation has the perfect win/loss ratio, even the most particular, it s perfectly right. Are all people playing with statistics? And are all people so deep in research like myself, or you in this forum?
I doubt it, but however, this is the situation. People would panic if a breakpoints is scored in the third set by the underdog at 4-4, the result would be a bigger win than average, or less then average, but it is always the exact probability. The only explanation is that only Betfair has the resources to do control prices

If you see £1000s available to back at 2.5 and £1000s available to lay at 2.52, it doesn't mean that everybody agrees that that's the true probability. There will be punters, traders, botters, statistical researchers that would back it at 2.44 or lay it at 2.56! The thing is, those bets have been swept up and the market has found its mean position.

[offlimit88]

Everybody who trades the market you do is your competitor. If one hundred people carry out individual statistical research, each one has a unique dataset that the others don't. But it will still result in traders opening the same trades for different reasons, especially if it's a 4 horse race! Your own research may lead you to open a particular trade but a manual trader may just happen to think it's a good trade also.

The point is, as football markets, i don t see emotions. It seems all mathematics and statistics. I m paper trading mostly breakpoints and all i see is that every situation has the perfect win/loss ratio, even the most particular, it s perfectly right. Are all people playing with statistics? And are all people so deep in research like myself, or you in this forum?
I doubt it, but however, this is the situation. People would panic if a breakpoints is scored in the third set by the underdog at 4-4, the result would be a bigger win than average, or less then average, but it is always the exact probability. The only explanation is that only Betfair has the resources to do control prices

Don't mean to sound rude but do you think you're the only one using data to place your bets? How long have you been at this? Some people have been doing this for decades. Even before betfair was around. Nothing new under the sun.

You're right, some people, not all people. You're talking about a minority. The problem is, i don't see the majority. Are the markets full of sharks, that know always the perfect chance of an event, or is it likely that there is less people than we think, and bots are running on softwares like "Bet angel" , betting syndacates etc etc

[offlimit88]

Everybody who trades the market you do is your competitor. If one hundred people carry out individual statistical research, each one has a unique dataset that the others don't. But it will still result in traders opening the same trades for different reasons, especially if it's a 4 horse race! Your own research may lead you to open a particular trade but a manual trader may just happen to think it's a good trade also.

The point is, as football markets, i don t see emotions. It seems all mathematics and statistics. I m paper trading mostly breakpoints and all i see is that every situation has the perfect win/loss ratio, even the most particular, it s perfectly right. Are all people playing with statistics? And are all people so deep in research like myself, or you in this forum?
I doubt it, but however, this is the situation. People would panic if a breakpoints is scored in the third set by the underdog at 4-4, the result would be a bigger win than average, or less then average, but it is always the exact probability. The only explanation is that only Betfair has the resources to do control prices

If you see £1000s available to back at 2.5 and £1000s available to lay at 2.52, it doesn't mean that everybody agrees that that's the true probability. There will be punters, traders, botters, statistical researchers that would back it at 2.44 or lay it at 2.56! The thing is, those bets have been swept up and the market has found its mean position.

I m not talking in a "static" way, i make an example:

Let ' s say Federer sucks when is 40-0 ahead against all players : for fun, let s say the chance of deuce is 30 %
Did he lose the first set? then 40 %, did the opponent break back twice, then 50% , etc etc

You can test all variables you want (of course, they have to make sense) and you realize that there is no edge, because it seems EVERYBODY knows it.
It is not plausible. In situation 1 you win 30 and lose 70, in situation 2 40/60, in situation 3 50/50.
You are always break even. How can you be break even if you constantly rise statistically your strike rate, assuming that the majority of people does not consider that variable?

The example is trivial, my research was way deeper , but i hope you understand what i meant.

[gutuami]

You can test all variables you want (of course, they have to make sense) and you realize that there is no edge, because it seems EVERYBODY knows it.
...
The example is trivial, my research was way deeper , but i hope you understand what i meant.

there's a quick video that explain collective wisdom.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOucwX7Z1HU

[offlimit88]

You can test all variables you want (of course, they have to make sense) and you realize that there is no edge, because it seems EVERYBODY knows it.
...
The example is trivial, my research was way deeper , but i hope you understand what i meant.

there's a quick video that explain collective wisdom.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOucwX7Z1HU

So, if the market is always right, you can't beat it. I don't see any reason to continue then

[BetBuddy]

You can test all variables you want (of course, they have to make sense) and you realize that there is no edge, because it seems EVERYBODY knows it.
...
The example is trivial, my research was way deeper , but i hope you understand what i meant.

there's a quick video that explain collective wisdom.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOucwX7Z1HU

So, if the market is always right, you can't beat it. I don't see any reason to continue then

If the market is always right then just go with it and you will be quids in.

[Derek27]

The point is, as football markets, i don t see emotions. It seems all mathematics and statistics. I m paper trading mostly breakpoints and all i see is that every situation has the perfect win/loss ratio, even the most particular, it s perfectly right. Are all people playing with statistics? And are all people so deep in research like myself, or you in this forum?
I doubt it, but however, this is the situation. People would panic if a breakpoints is scored in the third set by the underdog at 4-4, the result would be a bigger win than average, or less then average, but it is always the exact probability. The only explanation is that only Betfair has the resources to do control prices

If you see £1000s available to back at 2.5 and £1000s available to lay at 2.52, it doesn't mean that everybody agrees that that's the true probability. There will be punters, traders, botters, statistical researchers that would back it at 2.44 or lay it at 2.56! The thing is, those bets have been swept up and the market has found its mean position.

I m not talking in a "static" way, i make an example:

Let ' s say Federer sucks when is 40-0 ahead against all players : for fun, let s say the chance of deuce is 30 %
Did he lose the first set? then 40 %, did the opponent break back twice, then 50% , etc etc

You can test all variables you want (of course, they have to make sense) and you realize that there is no edge, because it seems EVERYBODY knows it.
It is not plausible. In situation 1 you win 30 and lose 70, in situation 2 40/60, in situation 3 50/50.
You are always break even. How can you be break even if you constantly rise statistically your strike rate, assuming that the majority of people does not consider that variable?

The example is trivial, my research was way deeper , but i hope you understand what i meant.

The fact that people make money trading tennis (I've made modest profits but I've only traded about 100 matches) is confirmation that the market isn't always right, everyone doesn't know the probabilities so you can have an edge. Just take a look at some of Dallas's posts on the tennis thread. There have been some crazy prices on offer. Everybody has their own opinion of a player's chances which is why the market bounces about, and it's the opinions that are on average more accurate that come out on top.

[gutuami]

You can test all variables you want (of course, they have to make sense) and you realize that there is no edge, because it seems EVERYBODY knows it.
...
The example is trivial, my research was way deeper , but i hope you understand what i meant.

there's a quick video that explain collective wisdom.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOucwX7Z1HU

So, if the market is always right, you can't beat it. I don't see any reason to continue then

the market always has deviations, overreactions, trends that can be followed. these are opportunities that you (depending on your skill and knowledge about the markets) spot and take. If you are more that 50 percent (+ commission) on the right side you make money.

[Derek27]

there's a quick video that explain collective wisdom.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOucwX7Z1HU

So, if the market is always right, you can't beat it. I don't see any reason to continue then

the market always has deviations, overreactions, trends that can be followed. these are opportunities that you (depending on your skill and knowledge about the markets) spot and take. If you are more that 50 percent (+ commission) on the right side you make money.

Good example to illustrate the point, if the market was always right the pre-start graph would always be a near straight horizontal line.

[Euler]

Efficiency is all down to how you measure it but NO the market is not efficient, unless you do everything at random.

The market is made up of good and bad guesses and there are a lot of a bad guesses. We all sit on the other side of these and accept thin margins sharing out the spoils.

Efficiency is one of the things thrown at me all the time, yet I've been sat here for 20 years profiting in a market where there isn't supposed to be any profit because it's efficient. Either the market is inefficient or my I've been the luckiest person ever born.