Inplay Racing and getting out of trouble

[Fugazi]

WHAT?!?! That is TERRIBLE advice. If people are getting into trades that blow their banks, yes obviously they need to stop getting into these trades, but exiting for a much smaller loss IS the thing they should do. In my example letting it ride is horrendous advice. WOW. I see horses all the time that the "true odds" are plain wrong. But I have my staking limits and rules and therefore am not wiping out or taking up the whole market. An example from two days ago I think was the Adaay horse in the sprint. It looked beat after 100 yards so I laid to my maximum loss. The "true odds" were completely wrong it should have been close to 20 and I laid 5.8. I do sometimes get it wrong, OR I think my reasons for entering aren't as strong so I close the trade. Im not losing EV or ROI because its by far the best thing for my trading, both P/L and mentally. Maybe it isn't for you and others and maybe in time as I hopefully continue to improve the percentage of my trades that are solid gets higher and higher. But currently im not perfect.

Surely you see people backing and laying poor value all the time, I do! Im taking their bets a lot of the time. They should be trading out!

Blindly trading out at any cost to limit a loss is for people emotionally attached to their initial trade. Best view every trade (entry and exit) individually on their own merits which will improve your ROI in the long run.

The OP's concept of a button 'to get you out of trouble' says to me this is the former, and the advice from seasoned pros on this thread is appropriate IMO.

Who said "blindly trading out at any cost"? No one?

Why are people solely concentrating on those words?? What if the button was called "sometimes I change my mind and want to exit for a SMALL loss"? Would this even be a discussion?

Why is it so hard to get help on this forum?? I had the same problem and somebody else who asked for the same automation as me a YEAR before never got the help. He posted after you eventually did help us, others didn't seem to care to be honest or posted incorrect links or instructions I couldn't follow, to say what im saying now and his post was deleted.

I understand what people are saing re ROI etc, but why cant people just help OP? Why all the suspect lectures and "we know best"?

When you spend a lot of time on the forum you figure out who is profitable and listen to them. It's a simple formula I learned. It turned me profitable in months (NB, not a brag, I'm scraping up pennies in comparison and have a long way to go). I could probably list 10 profitable people whose whole post history / journey would be worth trawling, though would probably cause a lot of offence to post such a list .

The reason people don't help in the way you expect, is it can take a long time to setup someone elses automation. It's not a valuable use of time to set up an automation for someone because either

A) it is not profitable, and wastes everyone's time
B) It is profitable, and would become unprofitable once shared

But 99.9 percent, it's reason A

And then, it is better to encourage someone to read the manual and have a go themselves first. That way even when the bot doesn't profit, they have the tools to start making something else themselves . If the post was "I've tried making this bot. Here are my settings so far, what am I missing " , it would probably have someone fix the problem in 5 minutes for them.

[ruthlessimon]

So say at 50% the best lay price is 5.0 and best back price 3.5. true odds 4.2

That's a giant amount of ROI to concede. And I don't deny people have the issues you explained.

But what I'm saying is the optimal solution is to fix your psychology and stake sizing,and let it ride.

hallebloodylujah

As an aside, the average of the spread is such a good starting point for spotting value in illiquid markets. Should be talked about wayy more

[Fugazi]

So say at 50% the best lay price is 5.0 and best back price 3.5. true odds 4.2

That's a giant amount of ROI to concede. And I don't deny people have the issues you explained.

But what I'm saying is the optimal solution is to fix your psychology and stake sizing,and let it ride.

hallebloodylujah

As an aside, the average of the spread is such a good starting point for spotting value in illiquid markets. Should be talked about wayy more

Funny you say this. It's something I've been pondering lately if the midpoint gives any real clues. The really illiquid markets I've observed don't seem to confirm to the idea - I get matched one side of the spread and then see the price continue to plummet. But is on my list of things to backtest

But I'm taking what you just said as a hint, so it's just shot up my task list of ideas to explore

[ShaunWhite]

As an aside, the average of the spread is such a good starting point for spotting value in illiquid markets. Should be talked about wayy more

Aka overround? Or do you mean avg spread of the selection?

But I think you're referring to EMH? The one about betting blind at mid being gross breakeven, so offering is therefore value and theoretically the bigger the spread the more the value.... if you can avoid adverse selection.

[ruthlessimon]

As an aside, the average of the spread is such a good starting point for spotting value in illiquid markets. Should be talked about wayy more

Aka overround? Or do you mean avg spread of the selection?

But I think you're referring to EMH? The one about betting blind at mid being gross breakeven, so offering is therefore value and theoretically the bigger the spread the more the value.... if you can avoid adverse selection.

Let’s say the best back is 6, the best lay is 3 & 80% of the vol has traded between 6 & 3 & a bookie is offering 5.5. I’m backing at the bookie all day long.

The bookie allows you to avoid that adverse selection. Like playin fifa on amateur. How you do it organically backing & laying on the exchange I’m not sure myself yet, but gimmie time

[ShaunWhite]

Let’s say the best back is 6, the best lay is 3 & 80% of the vol has traded between 6 & 3 & a bookie is offering 5.5. I’m backing at the bookie all day long.

I'm not because the true price is probably 7 if the bookie is offering 5.5 and Betfair users want 6.
(I'm also not because I despise bookies and wouldn't patronise them if they handed out free fivers)

This stuff works on theoretical large samples (1000s a day) because efficency is an average, made up of individual deviations, and as soon as you start being selective the underlying premise collapses. You can't tell if your small sample is representative and also the outcome due to fortune is statistically much more significantant than the EV.

But each to their own, if it works for you then who's to argue.

[ruthlessimon]

Let’s say the best back is 6, the best lay is 3 & 80% of the vol has traded between 6 & 3 & a bookie is offering 5.5. I’m backing at the bookie all day long.

I'm not because the true price is probably 7 if the bookie is offering 5.5 and Betfair users want 6.
(I'm also not because I despise bookies and wouldn't patronise them if they handed out free fivers)

I wanna strangle you mate, I really do That mindset is like nails on a chalkboard to me, & I love ya, but erghhhhhh

[ShaunWhite]

Which part, the fact about prices or the price I put on my principles ?

[ruthlessimon]

Which part, the fact about prices or the price I put on my principles ?

Both.

Remember, speed of the match is the clue to which side is correct. If 7 is fair value 6 will be matched quickly, if not, it means layers are unwilling… hmmm

Regarding patronise. I personally don’t see the difference. We’re both stealing from Paul Merson’s wallet. You steal directly, whereas I rob from the shareholders.