Aggressively Working a Bankroll

[Morbius]

Assuming of course that you have an edge and all things being equal, I would just like to ask a few opinions of the sages on here about how best to aggressively work a bankroll. Rather than bug Peter with everything and me become annoying at warp speed, I guess I best share the love

My question (based on my limited exchange understanding compared to you lot) is to do with what the best way is to work a bankroll. Hypothetically lets say someone started with £1k. I am assuming (what's the saying about assumption) that backing to lay is superior to laying to back because you can use more of your bankroll with the former...or is there more to it than this??? I just don't have enough confidence in my own opinions at this stage to say that backing to lay is definitely superior and the best way to work your bankroll although it seems intuitively to be the right way.

I recall Peter saying (everyone seems to call him Euler on here ) saying that he could double a £1k bankroll in a week. Now I know this is horses for courses and his strategies wont be yours or mine but surely this would be very difficult to do laying to back because the liability of the lay trade would eliminate the ability to use the full grand in the same way that backing to lay would....have I understood this correct???

Sorry if I am being a pain...just eager to learn stuff as quickly as I can guys

[spreadbetting]

. Now I know this is horses for courses and his strategies wont be yours or mine but surely this would be very difficult to do laying to back because the liability of the lay trade would eliminate the ability to use the full grand in the same way that backing to lay would....have I understood this correct???

Whether you're laying or backing first as soon as you close your trade those funds are available to use again. Plus if you're laying odds on shots the reverse becomes true.

At the end of the day £1000 should be enough to cover your liabilities for the everyday markets whether it's backing or laying. Remember in general you'll be focusing on one horse only so only one unclosed bet at a time.

[Derek27]

Don't forget the API could go down any minute leaving you stuck with heavy liabilities so placing a back bet larger than what you can lay for with your £1K bank at the same price would be quite risky and probably overly aggressive.

[Morbius]

Don't forget the API could go down any minute leaving you stuck with heavy liabilities so placing a back bet larger than what you can lay for with your £1K bank at the same price would be quite risky and probably overly aggressive.

whoa ...that's an eye opener...how often does this happen Derek??

[Kai]

It has been 12 days since last major outage.

[Dallas]

I'd say a rough guide would be 3-4 major outages a year (half hour to a few hours)
at least a dozen minor ones (5-30mins)
then several dozen brief/blips where they don/don't turn a market in-play correctly, have a 60second freeze at just the wrong time

You'll get an idea from the dedicated thread
viewtopic.php?f=55&t=1162&start=5260

In the grand scheme of how many markets they manage every year its actually only a tiny fraction of a percent, but then again so is the number of markets you'd trade even a fully automated trader

[rik]

good traders are limited by what the market allows to sensibly stake not bankroll
trading much less scalable than punting

[ANGELS15]

Assuming of course that you have an edge and all things being equal, I would just like to ask a few opinions of the sages on here about how best to aggressively work a bankroll. Rather than bug Peter with everything and me become annoying at warp speed, I guess I best share the love

My question (based on my limited exchange understanding compared to you lot) is to do with what the best way is to work a bankroll. Hypothetically lets say someone started with £1k. I am assuming (what's the saying about assumption) that backing to lay is superior to laying to back because you can use more of your bankroll with the former...or is there more to it than this??? I just don't have enough confidence in my own opinions at this stage to say that backing to lay is definitely superior and the best way to work your bankroll although it seems intuitively to be the right way.

I recall Peter saying (everyone seems to call him Euler on here ) saying that he could double a £1k bankroll in a week. Now I know this is horses for courses and his strategies wont be yours or mine but surely this would be very difficult to do laying to back because the liability of the lay trade would eliminate the ability to use the full grand in the same way that backing to lay would....have I understood this correct???

Sorry if I am being a pain...just eager to learn stuff as quickly as I can guys

I'll try and give my opinion as best I can. This is based on my assumption that backing to lay or laying to back are your main activities? If that is the case then I would strongly suggest that unless you have a proven track record of a high consistent strike rate with such trades that you do not pursue 'agressively working a bankroll'.

There are many reasons for this. In my own case I do a lot of back to lays and DOBS. I have a fairly consistent strike rate of average 56% with the DOBS over the years. There are occasional months where it's been in the low 60s or occasional losing months where it's been in the 40s.

For this reason I use a % of my bank each time I DOB. and treat each one the same. So for a bank of £1000 I would likely use £25 stakes. This would allow me to adjust my stakes if I hit a losing run. I would never use the whole £1000. It's all very well if you did that and doubled it to £2k, but remember in order for that to happen your selection has to win or trade very low odds on. That dosen't happen as often as you may wish.

In my own experience I may have 6 trades a particular day, win 4 lose 2. Another day it may be the other way. We don't have a crystal ball to put all our money on martingaleesque style.

On the subject of lay to back this does as you say carry more risk. In the early days of the exchange I very briefly had success laying dodgy favourites. Nowadays the markets are pretty accurate as to a horses chances so you have to have some compelling reasons to lay things. Even big priced horses which you think have no chance will be massive prices on the exchanges and you're not going to win very much if they lose. The damage they can do if they win is considerable.

In any case good luck with your trading.

[Morbius]

Assuming of course that you have an edge and all things being equal, I would just like to ask a few opinions of the sages on here about how best to aggressively work a bankroll. Rather than bug Peter with everything and me become annoying at warp speed, I guess I best share the love

My question (based on my limited exchange understanding compared to you lot) is to do with what the best way is to work a bankroll. Hypothetically lets say someone started with £1k. I am assuming (what's the saying about assumption) that backing to lay is superior to laying to back because you can use more of your bankroll with the former...or is there more to it than this??? I just don't have enough confidence in my own opinions at this stage to say that backing to lay is definitely superior and the best way to work your bankroll although it seems intuitively to be the right way.

I recall Peter saying (everyone seems to call him Euler on here ) saying that he could double a £1k bankroll in a week. Now I know this is horses for courses and his strategies wont be yours or mine but surely this would be very difficult to do laying to back because the liability of the lay trade would eliminate the ability to use the full grand in the same way that backing to lay would....have I understood this correct???

Sorry if I am being a pain...just eager to learn stuff as quickly as I can guys

I'll try and give my opinion as best I can. This is based on my assumption that backing to lay or laying to back are your main activities? If that is the case then I would strongly suggest that unless you have a proven track record of a high consistent strike rate with such trades that you do not pursue 'agressively working a bankroll'.

There are many reasons for this. In my own case I do a lot of back to lays and DOBS. I have a fairly consistent strike rate of average 56% with the DOBS over the years. There are occasional months where it's been in the low 60s or occasional losing months where it's been in the 40s.

For this reason I use a % of my bank each time I DOB. and treat each one the same. So for a bank of £1000 I would likely use £25 stakes. This would allow me to adjust my stakes if I hit a losing run. I would never use the whole £1000. It's all very well if you did that and doubled it to £2k, but remember in order for that to happen your selection has to win or trade very low odds on. That dosen't happen as often as you may wish.

In my own experience I may have 6 trades a particular day, win 4 lose 2. Another day it may be the other way. We don't have a crystal ball to put all our money on martingaleesque style.

On the subject of lay to back this does as you say carry more risk. In the early days of the exchange I very briefly had success laying dodgy favourites. Nowadays the markets are pretty accurate as to a horses chances so you have to have some compelling reasons to lay things. Even big priced horses which you think have no chance will be massive prices on the exchanges and you're not going to win very much if they lose. The damage they can do if they win is considerable.

In any case good luck with your trading.

thank you Angel for taking the time to compose that reply...much appreciated. However something that I am a little unsure about. When you are trading say with no more than 5% of your (at this stage theoretical) 1k bankroll because you are exiting trades then is it not advantageous to work your money when the time comes that you know you have an edge?? I only trade favs. You clearly have tons of experience since you mentioned the "early days". So are you effectively saying that backing to lay/laying to back and taking these outright positions when combined with strike rate will leave a bankroll exposed?? Or are you advocating placing multiple entries and not trading as a single stage process???

I am just Googling what DOBS means

[ANGELS15]

Assuming of course that you have an edge and all things being equal, I would just like to ask a few opinions of the sages on here about how best to aggressively work a bankroll. Rather than bug Peter with everything and me become annoying at warp speed, I guess I best share the love

My question (based on my limited exchange understanding compared to you lot) is to do with what the best way is to work a bankroll. Hypothetically lets say someone started with £1k. I am assuming (what's the saying about assumption) that backing to lay is superior to laying to back because you can use more of your bankroll with the former...or is there more to it than this??? I just don't have enough confidence in my own opinions at this stage to say that backing to lay is definitely superior and the best way to work your bankroll although it seems intuitively to be the right way.

I recall Peter saying (everyone seems to call him Euler on here ) saying that he could double a £1k bankroll in a week. Now I know this is horses for courses and his strategies wont be yours or mine but surely this would be very difficult to do laying to back because the liability of the lay trade would eliminate the ability to use the full grand in the same way that backing to lay would....have I understood this correct???

Sorry if I am being a pain...just eager to learn stuff as quickly as I can guys

I'll try and give my opinion as best I can. This is based on my assumption that backing to lay or laying to back are your main activities? If that is the case then I would strongly suggest that unless you have a proven track record of a high consistent strike rate with such trades that you do not pursue 'agressively working a bankroll'.

There are many reasons for this. In my own case I do a lot of back to lays and DOBS. I have a fairly consistent strike rate of average 56% with the DOBS over the years. There are occasional months where it's been in the low 60s or occasional losing months where it's been in the 40s.

For this reason I use a % of my bank each time I DOB. and treat each one the same. So for a bank of £1000 I would likely use £25 stakes. This would allow me to adjust my stakes if I hit a losing run. I would never use the whole £1000. It's all very well if you did that and doubled it to £2k, but remember in order for that to happen your selection has to win or trade very low odds on. That dosen't happen as often as you may wish.

In my own experience I may have 6 trades a particular day, win 4 lose 2. Another day it may be the other way. We don't have a crystal ball to put all our money on martingaleesque style.

On the subject of lay to back this does as you say carry more risk. In the early days of the exchange I very briefly had success laying dodgy favourites. Nowadays the markets are pretty accurate as to a horses chances so you have to have some compelling reasons to lay things. Even big priced horses which you think have no chance will be massive prices on the exchanges and you're not going to win very much if they lose. The damage they can do if they win is considerable.

In any case good luck with your trading.

thank you Angel for taking the time to compose that reply...much appreciated. However something that I am a little unsure about. When you are trading say with no more than 5% of your (at this stage theoretical) 1k bankroll because you are exiting trades then is it not advantageous to work your money when the time comes that you know you have an edge?? I only trade favs. You clearly have tons of experience since you mentioned the "early days". So are you effectively saying that backing to lay/laying to back and taking these outright positions when combined with strike rate will leave a bankroll exposed?? Or are you advocating placing multiple entries and not trading as a single stage process???

I am just Googling what DOBS means

Hi Morbius my suggestions were based on the strategy of back to lay as I was assuming this could be what you did? However do correct me if I'm wrong and you don't do that. The idea of using a % of your bank is NOT to over expose it

You cannot assume that one trade or bet is more important than another trade or bet. So if I had £1000 I wouldn't put it all on one market and if that was successful put it all on another market. Rather I may use say a small % like £25 per market. That way if I had 6 selections I'm only risking £150 of my £1000. With a back to lay or DOB strategy you can use this approach if you know what your average strike rate is over time therefore knowing what to expect long-term.

Now if wer'e talking about scalping or swing trading it may be possible for a very experienced trader to use larger chunks of the £1000 at any one time as they've more than likely learned to know exactly what to look for and when to enter and exit a market.

Also it's important to know when you can scale up bets/trades. It's quite one thing to trade a race at Plumpton mid week compared to a big race at Newbury on a weekend when there's a lot more volume and a £1000 trade would be easily absorbed compared to a small quiet meeting where it may spook the market.

I think the most important thing is to understand what you're doing and why in whatever trading approach
you take, bank management/preservation is crucial though.

[Morbius]

I'll try and give my opinion as best I can. This is based on my assumption that backing to lay or laying to back are your main activities? If that is the case then I would strongly suggest that unless you have a proven track record of a high consistent strike rate with such trades that you do not pursue 'agressively working a bankroll'.

There are many reasons for this. In my own case I do a lot of back to lays and DOBS. I have a fairly consistent strike rate of average 56% with the DOBS over the years. There are occasional months where it's been in the low 60s or occasional losing months where it's been in the 40s.

For this reason I use a % of my bank each time I DOB. and treat each one the same. So for a bank of £1000 I would likely use £25 stakes. This would allow me to adjust my stakes if I hit a losing run. I would never use the whole £1000. It's all very well if you did that and doubled it to £2k, but remember in order for that to happen your selection has to win or trade very low odds on. That dosen't happen as often as you may wish.

In my own experience I may have 6 trades a particular day, win 4 lose 2. Another day it may be the other way. We don't have a crystal ball to put all our money on martingaleesque style.

On the subject of lay to back this does as you say carry more risk. In the early days of the exchange I very briefly had success laying dodgy favourites. Nowadays the markets are pretty accurate as to a horses chances so you have to have some compelling reasons to lay things. Even big priced horses which you think have no chance will be massive prices on the exchanges and you're not going to win very much if they lose. The damage they can do if they win is considerable.

In any case good luck with your trading.

thank you Angel for taking the time to compose that reply...much appreciated. However something that I am a little unsure about. When you are trading say with no more than 5% of your (at this stage theoretical) 1k bankroll because you are exiting trades then is it not advantageous to work your money when the time comes that you know you have an edge?? I only trade favs. You clearly have tons of experience since you mentioned the "early days". So are you effectively saying that backing to lay/laying to back and taking these outright positions when combined with strike rate will leave a bankroll exposed?? Or are you advocating placing multiple entries and not trading as a single stage process???

I am just Googling what DOBS means

Also it's important to know when you can scale up bets/trades. It's quite one thing to trade a race at Plumpton mid week compared to a big race at Newbury on a weekend when there's a lot more volume and a £1000 trade would be easily absorbed compared to a small quiet meeting where it may spook the market.

Hi Angel, thanks for that response.....I am not quite sure what you mean by "spooking the market". Could you please explain the consequences of what would happen in a situation like this if you were to overstake in such a market

[ANGELS15]

thank you Angel for taking the time to compose that reply...much appreciated. However something that I am a little unsure about. When you are trading say with no more than 5% of your (at this stage theoretical) 1k bankroll because you are exiting trades then is it not advantageous to work your money when the time comes that you know you have an edge?? I only trade favs. You clearly have tons of experience since you mentioned the "early days". So are you effectively saying that backing to lay/laying to back and taking these outright positions when combined with strike rate will leave a bankroll exposed?? Or are you advocating placing multiple entries and not trading as a single stage process???

I am just Googling what DOBS means

Also it's important to know when you can scale up bets/trades. It's quite one thing to trade a race at Plumpton mid week compared to a big race at Newbury on a weekend when there's a lot more volume and a £1000 trade would be easily absorbed compared to a small quiet meeting where it may spook the market.

Hi Angel, thanks for that response.....I am not quite sure what you mean by "spooking the market". Could you please explain the consequences of what would happen in a situation like this if you were to overstake in such a market

Spooking the market means placing a large order in a relatively quiet, low volume market. using our previous example of a small midweek meeting at a small track, it the current lay odds were say 2.0 for your selection say the favouriite. If you placed a lay order for £2k at 2.0 the money will run away from your bet and the lay price will jump to 2.1 or 2.2 as traders will try to compete to lay thinking that there's knowlegeable money around. The same thing applies on course at snall meetings. If a punter walks up to a bookie and wants to have £2k on a 5/1 chance, immediately the price goes to 4/1.

DOBBING refers to double or bust. There's some excellent Bet Angel videos on youtube which illustrates and explains it very well/

[Morbius]

Also it's important to know when you can scale up bets/trades. It's quite one thing to trade a race at Plumpton mid week compared to a big race at Newbury on a weekend when there's a lot more volume and a £1000 trade would be easily absorbed compared to a small quiet meeting where it may spook the market.

Hi Angel, thanks for that response.....I am not quite sure what you mean by "spooking the market". Could you please explain the consequences of what would happen in a situation like this if you were to overstake in such a market

Spooking the market means placing a large order in a relatively quiet, low volume market. using our previous example of a small midweek meeting at a small track, it the current lay odds were say 2.0 for your selection say the favouriite. If you placed a lay order for £2k at 2.0 the money will run away from your bet and the lay price will jump to 2.1 or 2.2 as traders will try to compete to lay thinking that there's knowlegeable money around. The same thing applies on course at snall meetings. If a punter walks up to a bookie and wants to have £2k on a 5/1 chance, immediately the price goes to 4/1.

DOBBING refers to double or bust. There's some excellent Bet Angel videos on youtube which illustrates and explains it very well/

Thanks Angel, I had already Googled Dobbing but thanks for explaining it anyway. I do believe in getting up off my backside and doing some work myself

That makes sense now and I would imagine a large lay order would work against you in more ways than just spooking the market as it's basically there to be shot at like a sitting duck isn't it???

[ANGELS15]

Hi Morbius

If you had a large lay order sitting there and it had spooked the market, it's only a nusiance in that your order hasn't been matched. If you really felt that you wanted to lay at the particular price the best thing to do would be to dribble in your order in smaller stakes, i.e feed it slowly into the market. One reason is that you want to lay at the lowest price to maximise your profit when the price drifts back out. Spooking the market makes it less likely for your trades to be matched.

[Morbius]

Hi Morbius

If you had a large lay order sitting there and it had spooked the market, it's only a nusiance in that your order hasn't been matched. If you really felt that you wanted to lay at the particular price the best thing to do would be to dribble in your order in smaller stakes, i.e feed it slowly into the market. One reason is that you want to lay at the lowest price to maximise your profit when the price drifts back out. Spooking the market makes it less likely for your trades to be matched.

thanks Angel, that makes a lot of sense