Over zealous suspend monkeys
Really noticed this in the last month or so. Markets being suspended all the time. It seems as soon as the commentator raises his voice they hit the button. Seen some tackles that aren't even yellows being suspended. Liverpool Chelsea first half must've suspended 10 times with only 1 goal scored! Maybe they have had an order from senior management but it's bloody annoying.
My strategy is much more micro, focusing on one match and actively trading small price discrepancies throughout it. The main issue I have with the constant suspensions is that I will often have a bet that is about to hit the market which then gets cancelled upon suspension. I often then have to take a worse price a few seconds later to close my position. But I think whatever you are doing it's got to have an effect.
Could be wrong but it does seem to me that it is just a person listening to the radio. They seem to react to the commentary more than what is happening on the pitch, (although obviously there's a correlation). I've learnt over the years that different commentators have different styles and some are more easily excited than others. The guy last night on five live will raise his voice a lot more than Alan Green for example who only does so for a genuine chance/half chance. The main commentator on talksport is a bit of a joke. When you listen to the commentary while watching the pics you soon realise he overhypes almost every attack, (maybe something to do with it being commercial radio).
It seems to me that BF only realised the radio feed was faster than TV a couple of years ago. They used to regularly suspend 2-3 secs after a goal. They are much faster now but in turn they have reduced delays on these matches from 8 to 5 seconds. They sometimes increase this delay if the radio feed is down which is why I suspect they use this. But I don't trade a variety of matches so can't comment on a wider range.
Could be wrong but it does seem to me that it is just a person listening to the radio. They seem to react to the commentary more than what is happening on the pitch, (although obviously there's a correlation). I've learnt over the years that different commentators have different styles and some are more easily excited than others. The guy last night on five live will raise his voice a lot more than Alan Green for example who only does so for a genuine chance/half chance. The main commentator on talksport is a bit of a joke. When you listen to the commentary while watching the pics you soon realise he overhypes almost every attack, (maybe something to do with it being commercial radio).
It seems to me that BF only realised the radio feed was faster than TV a couple of years ago. They used to regularly suspend 2-3 secs after a goal. They are much faster now but in turn they have reduced delays on these matches from 8 to 5 seconds. They sometimes increase this delay if the radio feed is down which is why I suspect they use this. But I don't trade a variety of matches so can't comment on a wider range.
Thanks for the reminder, I often need one!
I was talking to a variety of different companies at the ICE show last week and it looks like the suspend monkeys have been killed off, replaced by automated systems.
So the tolerance to which the systems act on suspensions is related to the data they receive from the match. I got hold of the system and process they use to have a look and within it there is a string to flag possible situations occurring within the match. For example, "possible red card".
When I looked at a match live the suspensions appeared to occur when the "possible" situation occurred. You could easily make the system more tolerant but I guess they are triggering the suspensions automatically on probable situations. That's what it looks like to me.
I was talking to a variety of different companies at the ICE show last week and it looks like the suspend monkeys have been killed off, replaced by automated systems.
So the tolerance to which the systems act on suspensions is related to the data they receive from the match. I got hold of the system and process they use to have a look and within it there is a string to flag possible situations occurring within the match. For example, "possible red card".
When I looked at a match live the suspensions appeared to occur when the "possible" situation occurred. You could easily make the system more tolerant but I guess they are triggering the suspensions automatically on probable situations. That's what it looks like to me.
New on here, hello all.
Interesting last bit of info from Euler.
Just wondering what folk here think about who (e.g. various subsets of traders, courtsiders, betfair themselves) would really lose/gain from totally unmanaged In-Play markets i.e. no suspensions at all? And how this might change across various sports?
Managed IN-Play markets seems to me just a PR exercise for Betfair (making sure there are no "This punter lost £20K on filthy Betfair when his telly ran out of batteries" headlines). But do people think other substantial groups of stakeholders (dread word) would be against 100% unmanaged markets?
Interesting last bit of info from Euler.
Just wondering what folk here think about who (e.g. various subsets of traders, courtsiders, betfair themselves) would really lose/gain from totally unmanaged In-Play markets i.e. no suspensions at all? And how this might change across various sports?
Managed IN-Play markets seems to me just a PR exercise for Betfair (making sure there are no "This punter lost £20K on filthy Betfair when his telly ran out of batteries" headlines). But do people think other substantial groups of stakeholders (dread word) would be against 100% unmanaged markets?
