End of Race Scenario - Fixed Back at Price - Matched at much higher odds - Ruins Bet

[smgreyuk]

Hi,

I am fairly new to Bet Angel, so I fear I may be missing something obvious here, but here goes:

I want the Automation Software to wait for a horse to be in the lead with it's price steaming towards 1.01 (about to win the race maybe 10-15 seconds before it crosses the line) for the back bet to be placed at 1.1. to cash in on 10% on the stake when it goes to plan - I accept in a close race the first horse to get MATCHED at 1.1 may not be the winner

I have put the following settings into Guardian for a rule "Back at 1.1"

General

Rule Type: Place Back Bet

Rule Trigger Times: In Play Time

Arm trigger 00:00:00 after even goes in play

until 10:00:00 after even goes in play

Allow rule to trigger 1 time

Wait 5 seconds before rearming

Applies to any selection

____
Then for Parameters
Place at Fixed Price at odds of 1.1
Stake fixed amount of £10
Noting for Global Settings (in this example to simplify things)
_____
Then for Conditions
One Condition called Back Price <1.11

Condition Type is "Fixed Odds Condition"
Selection is Current ANY Selection

The selection's back price is less than 1.11


Now after doing all of that, after a race in the log files I see the following race:
21/08/2024 19:35:43: [G_Auto 1] : £ 10.00 Back bet placed on Malago Rose at 1.1. Fully matched at 5. Ref: 10025
21/08/2024 19:40:44: [G_Auto 1] : £ 10.00 Back bet placed on Dynamite Kentucky at 1.1. Fully matched at 1.23. Ref: 10026
Why is it matching at 5 for the first horse and then 1.23 on the second horse?

Dynamite Kentucky ended up wining and this loses overall.

I can accept the odd time it's close between two horses and one loses out but why match at 5 on one horse and 1.23 on the other when the rules specifically state FIXED at 1.1 and have a condition less than 1.11?

I can only assume the condition applies only to the the price when put in an unmatched state, but I don't want it to then match with worse odds, I just want the horse to be ignored

I just want it to only match a bet on one horse when at can match at 1.1, not back the horse that has drifted and is about to lose, if this is even possible

I also accept that sometimes the horse may not be backed in time due to how quick the market runs, so there is no outcome, that's fine

I have had it work as I wanted at times in terms of backing the winner, I suppose I am trying to avoid the loss by wanting it to match the bet at 1.1 (or less, that's still fine) but not match higher when I didn't even want it to do this on a horse that is about to lose

To add to the confusion I tried to use trailing stop with an offset bet and I couldn't get that to work properly either as well as using fill/kill with 15 seconds (not sure what amount of seconds to use, even if I should be considering this)

Could someone please help me? I guess I am either expecting:

a) the software to do something it cannot, or
b) there needs to be a tweak / addition to my setup.

[weemac]

The bot correctly did what you asked, but I can spot several flaws in the structure and methodology of your bot, and more importantly in your understanding of market/bot/betfair dynamics, so that's where you need to learn first. It won't be quick or easy.

[jamesedwards]

The key problem is this will lose significantly in the long run. There is a 1 second Betfair delay to bets placed in running so if you try and back a horse when it reaches 1.1 then one of two things will happen:
1) The horse goes on to win and most likely the 1.1 will be long gone by the time your bet hits the market.
2) It fails to win and your 1.1 will get matched every time as the price moves back up.

Betfair will always match a bet at the highest possible odds available. So if you back £10 @ 1.1 and the price drops out to 5.0 in the second between trigger and the bet hitting the market then your bet will get matched at 5.0.

That said, Malago Rose never traded anywhere near 1.1 so there must be something wrong with your rule. If you post the .baf file here then probably someone will take a look at it and find the issue.

[andy28]

I had almost the exact same strategy and it was an epic fail, for the reasons mentioned above. The odds can shift dramatically in the final seconds of a race and with a 1s delay you are at the mercy of the Gods.

But I did carry on making a few changes that made it better and was slightly worse than breakeven, but nonetheless unprofitable.

1 Was a volume rule it had to have X amount traded in the last 2 secs
2 My bet was put into the market for 0.50s and only once
3 There had to be X amount unmatched money between 1.21-1.3

So in essence if say 1K was traded on the horse in the last 2s and had lay money waiting to be matched between 1.21 and 1.30 (not traded at but waiting to be matched) it put a bet in at odds of 1.10. I did find I still had the odd bet matched at 5 but the flip side I was getting match quite a lot at 1.15-1.20

The issue I found was the strike rate, you need to go at 90%+ so if you get hit with 1-2 loses in a row you need to get the next 10-20 right just to break even , and factor in commission. You could look into being on the other side

I gave up on it

[jimibt]

at this end of the betting and race period spectrum, i think you'd be best to look at this the other way round. i'd gather data (or source it) and review the number of runners that hit 1.1 odds and then go on to lose from that position. then, look at laying within that arena. for obvious reasons, you won't win based on using the stats presented to you, but, if you look at things such as book%, gap between back/lay prices etc, etc, you'll realise that there is a mechanical way to get into the zone required to profit from laying at low odds.

the above is the 30k foot view on laying at low odds and is worth exploring as the bang for buck on laying low is pretty convincing when executed inside a proven/tested system.

[ForFolksSake]

Straight 'Back' bets below 2/1

[ForFolksSake]

End-Of-Race considerations - I wouldn't want to be 'laying' these

[Duaneyk]

The question being asked is how do you set automation to trigger a back bet at a set price that is lower than the start price, not whether the strategy itself is any good. It's a valid question as it can also apply to those that want to set a stop/loss, or at least limit loses, on lay bets. It seems the bot will assume if you are placing a back bet, you'll want the best (highest) price available.
I looked at this in the past but was distracted by other things. I did try setting a rule to say the odds needed to be below x, but it still backed at a higher price. There are automation files in that section of the forum that may help, I just haven't had the time to look, but that's where I would start.

[ForFolksSake]

at this end of the betting and race period spectrum, i think you'd be best to look at this the other way round. i'd gather data (or source it) and review the number of runners that hit 1.1 odds and then go on to lose from that position. then, look at laying within that arena. for obvious reasons, you won't win based on using the stats presented to you, but, if you look at things such as book%, gap between back/lay prices etc, etc, you'll realise that there is a mechanical way to get into the zone required to profit from laying at low odds.

the above is the 30k foot view on laying at low odds and is worth exploring as the bang for buck on laying low is pretty convincing when executed inside a proven/tested system.

I wouldn't get too fixated about the odds range 1.1 - it could be any odds 2.1, 3.1 etc.
In fact I would say the lower you go the harder it gets
It's the strike rate that matters

[jimibt]

at this end of the betting and race period spectrum, i think you'd be best to look at this the other way round. i'd gather data (or source it) and review the number of runners that hit 1.1 odds and then go on to lose from that position. then, look at laying within that arena. for obvious reasons, you won't win based on using the stats presented to you, but, if you look at things such as book%, gap between back/lay prices etc, etc, you'll realise that there is a mechanical way to get into the zone required to profit from laying at low odds.

the above is the 30k foot view on laying at low odds and is worth exploring as the bang for buck on laying low is pretty convincing when executed inside a proven/tested system.

I wouldn't get too fixated about the odds range 1.1 - it could be any odds 2.1, 3.1 etc.
In fact I would say the lower you go the harder it gets
It's the strike rate that matters

being honest, when i used to party around this area, it was usually somewhere in the lower odds ranges that these mechanical properties made themselves known. i guess it's an imbalance in the book or the gap between back/lay price that is the main driver. however, it is definitely more prevalent when you have a closely contested finish viz a viz 2 runners on low odds...

the bit that will always cause issues tho is which runner to target with a lay in this situation, but the mechanical fingerprint is there..

[ForFolksSake]

at this end of the betting and race period spectrum, i think you'd be best to look at this the other way round. i'd gather data (or source it) and review the number of runners that hit 1.1 odds and then go on to lose from that position. then, look at laying within that arena. for obvious reasons, you won't win based on using the stats presented to you, but, if you look at things such as book%, gap between back/lay prices etc, etc, you'll realise that there is a mechanical way to get into the zone required to profit from laying at low odds.

the above is the 30k foot view on laying at low odds and is worth exploring as the bang for buck on laying low is pretty convincing when executed inside a proven/tested system.

I wouldn't get too fixated about the odds range 1.1 - it could be any odds 2.1, 3.1 etc.
In fact I would say the lower you go the harder it gets
It's the strike rate that matters

being honest, when i used to party around this area, it was usually somewhere in the lower odds ranges that these mechanical properties made themselves known. i guess it's an imbalance in the book or the gap between back/lay price that is the main driver. however, it is definitely more prevalent when you have a closely contested finish viz a viz 2 runners on low odds...

the bit that will always cause issues tho is which runner to target with a lay in this situation, but the mechanical fingerprint is there..

You need to start partying again

[markzily]

Hey, sounds like you're close! Try adjusting the condition to only trigger if the back price equals 1.1 instead of <1.11. This should prevent backing at worse odds. Also, consider using fill/kill with shorter times to avoid those unmatched bets lingering. Hope this helps!

[smgreyuk]

Thank you for all the suggestions and help guys. It's still something I want to "party" with myself at some point. If it has helped anyone else in anyway then I am happy.