Three days isnt a long time for most of us.Fugazi wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2024 7:29 amI've been making money on greyhounds!! Ive done 3 long days of trading in it to test over a reasonable volume.
Sadly, its at £1 stakes and my eyeballs hurt.
Seems a lot simpler to me than whats been said on the thread...I assume the catch is that when I try up my stakes to anything significant i'll end up with a lot of partial matches and mess up my strategy...
Trading Greyhound racing
In terms of variance, maybe not. In poker it can take a million hands to smooth out variance.Anbell wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2024 9:27 amThree days isnt a long time for most of us.Fugazi wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2024 7:29 amI've been making money on greyhounds!! Ive done 3 long days of trading in it to test over a reasonable volume.
Sadly, its at £1 stakes and my eyeballs hurt.
Seems a lot simpler to me than whats been said on the thread...I assume the catch is that when I try up my stakes to anything significant i'll end up with a lot of partial matches and mess up my strategy...
But its encouraging so far.
Unless you meant the eyeball strain after just 3 days hah
- jamesedwards
- Posts: 2478
- Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2018 6:16 pm
In all the greyhound models I've done through the years I've always found a huge relationship between ↑stakes and ↓ROI%. Something that works well at £1 can crash and burn at £2.
He's right, early days as they say. Difficult to curb your enthusiasm when starting but it's extremely likely there will be some false dawns before it dawns on your real etc.Fugazi wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2024 10:03 amIn terms of variance, maybe not. In poker it can take a million hands to smooth out variance.Anbell wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2024 9:27 amThree days isnt a long time for most of us.Fugazi wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2024 7:29 amI've been making money on greyhounds!! Ive done 3 long days of trading in it to test over a reasonable volume.
Sadly, its at £1 stakes and my eyeballs hurt.
Seems a lot simpler to me than whats been said on the thread...I assume the catch is that when I try up my stakes to anything significant i'll end up with a lot of partial matches and mess up my strategy...
But its encouraging so far.
Unless you meant the eyeball strain after just 3 days hah
For eye strain however 3 possible suggestions
1) https://justgetflux.com/ (had zero eye strain issues last 15 years or so thx to f.lux)
2) slightly lowering bet refresh rate might help
3) blink more often
Thats really useful information. Going to build volume at £1, then start messing with stakes and see what happens if im certain its a working strategy at £1jamesedwards wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2024 12:31 pmIn all the greyhound models I've done through the years I've always found a huge relationship between ↑stakes and ↓ROI%. Something that works well at £1 can crash and burn at £2.
Yep, no stranger to false hope. Must be the hundredth time I've been convinced i've finally discovered a winning strategy in something!Kai wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2024 12:33 pmHe's right, early days as they say. Difficult to curb your enthusiasm when starting but it's extremely likely there will be some false dawns before it dawns on your real etc.
For eye strain however 3 possible suggestions
1) https://justgetflux.com/ (had zero eye strain issues last 15 years or so thx to f.lux)
2) slightly lowering bet refresh rate might help
3) blink more often
- Crazyskier
- Posts: 1185
- Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2016 6:36 pm
Wise words that mirror my own experiences, and I've been at it daily for almost a decade.jamesedwards wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2024 12:31 pmIn all the greyhound models I've done through the years I've always found a huge relationship between ↑stakes and ↓ROI%. Something that works well at £1 can crash and burn at £2.
CS
I'd be interested in a discussion on modelling the dogs.jamesedwards wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2024 12:31 pmIn all the greyhound models I've done through the years I've always found a huge relationship between ↑stakes and ↓ROI%. Something that works well at £1 can crash and burn at £2.
I went through an exercise last year where I downloaded every single race card from The Racing Post each day, for about 6 months (approx 22,000 races), and wanted to test if historical stats had any relationship to performance and results for straight backing and laying. I took the usual card data, with 5 previous race stats, and had my code calculate a few averages on time, split, avg grade, avg 1st bend, avg time, relationship between 1st bend\finish, trap bias etc
I ended up with about 15 stats that I wanted to assess, and decided to give each of those stats a random weighting out of 100, with all 15 adding up to 100% of the total available. Then I created 5000 random permutations of the weighting amounts and applied those to each race card in turn, giving each dog a score. One permutation may have had split at 80% , avg grade at 20% , with the rest at zero, or all at around 7% to make up to 100
Using the lowest (lay) or highest score (back) I was able to apply all 5000 permutations to the downloaded BF results\odds data and assess results based on every race, and by track and by distance\class. The theory being that by applying the best performing permutation to each days upcoming race\type track\class I would hopefully come up with a winning weighting for each.
I then dropped those into The Staking Machine and was able to analyse possible edge %, p-value, Archie score etc, and also assess the most profitable odds ranges. Results showed I had quite a decent edge, at specific odds ranges
Most tracks\classes were showing a decent profit for the top performing permutation. But, then you get the question re is that just back fitting ? So, using a lot of useful info from Sean's posts I used 80% of the 22k races, regenerated the best permutations from those, then applied the top performers to the unused 20%
Which is the stage when my edge dropped to almost nothing lol. So, the conclusions were that historical stats have no affect on predicting future results for dogs, or my reasoning was flawed
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
- MemphisFlash
- Posts: 2222
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 10:12 pm
- Location: Leicester
people rely to much on data from previous races which is irrelevant to the actual days race
same as any other stats for any other sport.
what has gone before is dead and buried and should not be used.
what only matters is what happens on the day of the event.
same as any other stats for any other sport.
what has gone before is dead and buried and should not be used.
what only matters is what happens on the day of the event.
Which was one of my conclusions. But it was an interesting exercise, and I learnt quite a bit doing it. So it wasn't wastedMemphisFlash wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2024 2:33 pmpeople rely to much on data from previous races which is irrelevant to the actual days race
same as any other stats for any other sport.
what has gone before is dead and buried and should not be used.
what only matters is what happens on the day of the event.
- The Silk Run
- Posts: 975
- Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:53 am
- Location: United Kingdom
I concur. Of the four instances I deploy each day none of which rely on historical data !!!
- MemphisFlash
- Posts: 2222
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 10:12 pm
- Location: Leicester
All historical data does is turns you into a geek that can use excel, and takes away from the real objective - trading.
It's like in football when they talk about number of passes, or time of possession .
It doesn't mean anything
The only stat that matters in a football game is the final score.
It's like in football when they talk about number of passes, or time of possession .
It doesn't mean anything
The only stat that matters in a football game is the final score.
- The Silk Run
- Posts: 975
- Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:53 am
- Location: United Kingdom
I couldn't agree more Tom. Keep it simple, basic fundamentals. Each animal has a 1:6 chance of winning ....
- MemphisFlash
- Posts: 2222
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 10:12 pm
- Location: Leicester
yes that is correct, finally someone gets it.The Silk Run wrote: ↑Mon Jan 22, 2024 6:19 pmI couldn't agree more Tom. Keep it simple, basic fundamentals. Each animal has a 1:6 chance of winning ....