Back on 1.01

[FabioC13]

Hi again guys, thanks to everyone who spent time to answer at my stupid question.
What I would say is that in almost every football match I noticed the same as I attached, so I suppose it means on football is a profitable strategy? Or not? I would to talk about football trading, no tennis or horses, thanks

F.

It's unlikely you'll find a profitable strategy by simply laying every market in a particular sport at 1.01 or any other price. With a bit of refinement regarding selecting the criteria and perhaps closing some or all of the trade, there can be profitable strategies around laying at a low price.

Ok, we assume that is not profitable, but why they do that? Have you seen my attached images? You find the same in every football match almost, so my question is still the same, what are they doing? Just a lay? Or there's a strategy?
Thanks
F.

[Kai]

Well, it was only a matter of time before someone discovered my fatfinger strategy.

Back to the drawing board I guess.

[Derek27]

Hi again guys, thanks to everyone who spent time to answer at my stupid question.
What I would say is that in almost every football match I noticed the same as I attached, so I suppose it means on football is a profitable strategy? Or not? I would to talk about football trading, no tennis or horses, thanks

F.

It's unlikely you'll find a profitable strategy by simply laying every market in a particular sport at 1.01 or any other price. With a bit of refinement regarding selecting the criteria and perhaps closing some or all of the trade, there can be profitable strategies around laying at a low price.

Ok, we assume that is not profitable, but why they do that? Have you seen my attached images? You find the same in every football match almost, so my question is still the same, what are they doing? Just a lay? Or there's a strategy?
Thanks
F.

We don't assume it's not profitable - I said it can be profitable used selectively. If somebody backs a football team at 2.5 you don't assume he's adopted a strategy revolving around backing teams that are 2.5. He might just fancy that particular time to win the match at 2.5.

[Anbell]

got a feeling this could be a LOOONG thread. good luck to all participants

we're going to have to copy/paste all those threads that have all the answers that we're not allowed to link to.

[gazuty]

Hi guys,
easy question, can please anyone exaplain me what you see on that images attached?

Is this the socratic method? A slow reveal after you ask many questions?

Why people back on 1.01?
Is it a strategy?
Is it profitable?

When anyone back or lays, whether at 1.01 or 1000 and everywhere in between ask yourself this - does the backer or layer believe that the back or lay will be profitable (either immediately or in the long run)?

Would the backer or layer deliberately follow a strategy or even an individual bet of doing something that they believe to be unprofitable or likely to be a loser?

Is the backer or layer pursuing a strategy or simply having a punt or throwing a dart - who knows the motivations of the human exchange participant in an anonymous market place?

[jamesedwards]

Hi again guys, thanks to everyone who spent time to answer at my stupid question.
What I would say is that in almost every football match I noticed the same as I attached, so I suppose it means on football is a profitable strategy? Or not? I would to talk about football trading, no tennis or horses, thanks

F.

It's unlikely you'll find a profitable strategy by simply laying every market in a particular sport at 1.01 or any other price. With a bit of refinement regarding selecting the criteria and perhaps closing some or all of the trade, there can be profitable strategies around laying at a low price.

Ok, we assume that is not profitable, but why they do that? Have you seen my attached images? You find the same in every football match almost, so my question is still the same, what are they doing? Just a lay? Or there's a strategy?
Thanks
F.

A strategy that lays every single selection at 1.01 with greening in any liquid market for not in-play only is absolutely guaranteed to be profitable as there is zero risk (other than human error/BF charges) and eventually you will hit upon someone's "fat finger" and profit by their mistake. But you will need to lay in 1000s or perhaps 10000s of markets before you chance upon one that delivers a return. Therefore one would argue whether the return is worth the effort even though it is guaranteed profitable. Perhaps that is what this 1.01 money is doing?

[Kai]

People are offering to lay at 1.01 but the bets will only get matched in running if the horse goes close in the race (or somebody makes a huge fat-finger mistake pre-race). The layers are trying to win big with small risk, the backers are trying to win small with huge risk, supposedly compensated with a high probability of success.

Thnak you. But in football what's the % of success in that cases?

This is really something you need to research yourself. Any information handed to you over the internet, by its very nature of transparency, can't be highly prized.

Fully agree with Fabio Capello on this one, why waste your own time finding answers to easy questions when others can do that faster and better? Makes no sense.

Like Winston Churchill once famously said : "If it's on the internet, then it must be true."

[Derek27]

Thnak you. But in football what's the % of success in that cases?

This is really something you need to research yourself. Any information handed to you over the internet, by its very nature of transparency, can't be highly prized.

Fully agree with Fabio Capello on this one, why waste your own time finding answers to easy questions when others can do that faster and better? Makes no sense.

Like Winston Churchill once famously said : "If it's on the internet, then it must be true."

The reason I suggested doing research is that I sense if somebody could provide him with the answer the next question would be, what about 1.02, 1.03, etc. If you're building a strategy at some point you'll have to some research.

[Kai]

This is really something you need to research yourself. Any information handed to you over the internet, by its very nature of transparency, can't be highly prized.

Fully agree with Fabio Capello on this one, why waste your own time finding answers to easy questions when others can do that faster and better? Makes no sense.

Like Winston Churchill once famously said : "If it's on the internet, then it must be true."

The reason I suggested doing research is that I sense if somebody could provide him with the answer the next question would be, what about 1.02, 1.03, etc. If you're building a strategy at some point you'll have to some research.

Sure, but nowadays in this instant gratification culture asking easy questions on a public forum = research

[FabioC13]

Thanks a lot to everybody to spent a little time trying to answer to my questions.
Actually, in three pages of threads nobody has been able to provide me a clear answer.
But thanks anyways

[Anbell]

got a feeling this could be a LOOONG thread. good luck to all participants

Ping

[gazuty]

Thanks a lot to everybody to spent a little time trying to answer to my questions.
Actually, in three pages of threads nobody has been able to provide me a clear answer.
But thanks anyways

The answer has been given, whether you choose to accept it is another question.

[Naffman]

Thanks a lot to everybody to spent a little time trying to answer to my questions.
Actually, in three pages of threads nobody has been able to provide me a clear answer.
But thanks anyways

The answer has been given, whether you choose to accept it is another question.

These people will actively be in the markets too

[FabioC13]

Thanks a lot to everybody to spent a little time trying to answer to my questions.
Actually, in three pages of threads nobody has been able to provide me a clear answer.
But thanks anyways

The answer has been given, whether you choose to accept it is another question.

If you check better, and read again, there's not any clear answer.
Not Any.

[Derek27]

This is really something you need to research yourself. Any information handed to you over the internet, by its very nature of transparency, can't be highly prized.

Fully agree with Fabio Capello on this one, why waste your own time finding answers to easy questions when others can do that faster and better? Makes no sense.

Like Winston Churchill once famously said : "If it's on the internet, then it must be true."

The reason I suggested doing research is that I sense if somebody could provide him with the answer the next question would be, what about 1.02, 1.03, etc. If you're building a strategy at some point you'll have to some research.

I must have been answering that in hurry to not have noticed that you were taking the piss.