Psychoff Bank Management Example Discussion

[JustLukeYou]

Why do you need 6 girls - one's enough for me.

Can you not see that backing at 1.1 is exactly the same as laying the other side at 11.0?

I don't understand why you have an issue with laying when it's exactly the same thing. Laying at high odds or backing at short odds is not only highly risky but there's not much to gain. You can't make more than 10% at 1.1 even if you let the bet run, if you trade out you make even less, with the scope for the market to go badly against you if a girl is scored.

If it is exactly the same then is there a benefit?

If a goal is scored then the lay odds will increase so again I can't see what the benefit is to laying. If a goal is scored yes the back odds will increase but also the lay odds. If you back (or lay) under 6 goals and it goes to 2-1 after 85 minutes the under 6 goals will still be closed.

[Derek27]

It's not your choice of back/lay that's the issue but the odds you're choosing to back at. Backing at 1.1 doesn't have much potential to profit - you're only looking at single-figure percentages. There are better strategies with a much better risk/reward ratio where you can make over 100% so you don't need such a high strike-rate to succeed.

[JustLukeYou]

It's not your choice of back/lay that's the issue but the odds you're choosing to back at. Backing at 1.1 doesn't have much potential to profit - you're only looking at single-figure percentages. There are better strategies with a much better risk/reward ratio where you can make over 100% so you don't need such a high strike-rate to succeed.

Yes I agree, I could trade O/U 2.5 goals.

[Kai]

It's not your choice of back/lay that's the issue but the odds you're choosing to back at. Backing at 1.1 doesn't have much potential to profit - you're only looking at single-figure percentages. There are better strategies with a much better risk/reward ratio where you can make over 100% so you don't need such a high strike-rate to succeed.

Yes I agree, I could trade O/U 2.5 goals.

That is why I suggested earlier to play around with that strategy of laying u2.5 or u1.5 goals on the cheap when a match is 0-0 around HT, not because it's a great strategy or anything but because it will help you to at least grasp the basic concepts of trading. You only need 1 or 2 goals to pull off a proper trade for minimal risk and minimal stake.

[JustLukeYou]

It's not your choice of back/lay that's the issue but the odds you're choosing to back at. Backing at 1.1 doesn't have much potential to profit - you're only looking at single-figure percentages. There are better strategies with a much better risk/reward ratio where you can make over 100% so you don't need such a high strike-rate to succeed.

Yes I agree, I could trade O/U 2.5 goals.

That is why I suggested earlier to play around with that strategy of laying u2.5 or u1.5 goals on the cheap when a match is 0-0 around HT, not because it's a great strategy or anything but because it will help you to at least grasp the basic concepts of trading. You only need 1 or 2 goals to pull off a proper trade for minimal risk and minimal stake.

I am making a profit and you want me to play around with something that you have said isn't a great strategy. I am not sure how this would benefit anyone if they tried it.

[Kai]

I am making a profit and you want me to play around with something that you have said isn't a great strategy. I am not sure how this would benefit anyone if they tried it.

It can be a great strategy if used properly, I did show you the Portuguese traders that use it profitably with a video and timestamp but slightly tired of repeating and over-explaining since it obviously has no effect That's fine Luke, you can do whatever you want. Spoon-feeding is one thing but force-feeding is where I draw the line

If you think of yourself as both profitable AND a trader, a profitable trader (without a bank?) if you will, then you don't need this forum, you've only somehow regressed over the past month anyway instead of progressing. I suspect that you might have some sort of a learning disability (ADHD and some form of dyslexia or something idk), a lot of your sentences are missing a key word, and if that's the case then you should definitely look for a proper job.

[JustLukeYou]

I am making a profit and you want me to play around with something that you have said isn't a great strategy. I am not sure how this would benefit anyone if they tried it.

It can be a great strategy if used properly, I did show you the Portuguese traders that use it profitably with a video and timestamp but slightly tired of repeating and over-explaining since it obviously has no effect That's fine Luke, you can do whatever you want. Spoon-feeding is one thing but force-feeding is where I draw the line

If you think of yourself as both profitable AND a trader, a profitable trader (without a bank?) if you will, then you don't need this forum, you've only somehow regressed over the past month anyway instead of progressing. I suspect that you might have some sort of a learning disability (ADHD and some form of dyslexia or something idk), a lot of your sentences are missing a key word, and if that's the case then you should definitely look for a proper job.

I am in the process of setting up BetAngel so I can automatically trade out when my stake goes below 80%. Then I am going to test trading with Under 5.5 and 6.5 goals. Trading Under 2.5 goals seems like to much of a rollercoaster. What I am finding is that many of the live streams on Bet365 are breaking down and SkyBet hardly shows any live football.

[Derek27]

Yes I agree, I could trade O/U 2.5 goals.

That is why I suggested earlier to play around with that strategy of laying u2.5 or u1.5 goals on the cheap when a match is 0-0 around HT, not because it's a great strategy or anything but because it will help you to at least grasp the basic concepts of trading. You only need 1 or 2 goals to pull off a proper trade for minimal risk and minimal stake.

I am making a profit and you want me to play around with something that you have said isn't a great strategy. I am not sure how this would benefit anyone if they tried it.

Get real Luke, 25 pence isn't really profit, when you account for the electricity your computer's using and the time you waste trying to learn and going round in circles!

[JustLukeYou]

That is why I suggested earlier to play around with that strategy of laying u2.5 or u1.5 goals on the cheap when a match is 0-0 around HT, not because it's a great strategy or anything but because it will help you to at least grasp the basic concepts of trading. You only need 1 or 2 goals to pull off a proper trade for minimal risk and minimal stake.

I am making a profit and you want me to play around with something that you have said isn't a great strategy. I am not sure how this would benefit anyone if they tried it.

Get real Luke, 25 pence isn't really profit, when you account for the electricity your computer's using and the time you waste trying to learn and going round in circles!

Better than losing 25 pence. I don't want to be one of the people who lose a £1,000 bank. At the moment I am setting up a rule to trade out when my stake is 20% down.

[Derek27]

I am making a profit and you want me to play around with something that you have said isn't a great strategy. I am not sure how this would benefit anyone if they tried it.

Get real Luke, 25 pence isn't really profit, when you account for the electricity your computer's using and the time you waste trying to learn and going round in circles!

Better than losing 25 pence. I don't want to be one of the people who lose a £1,000 bank. At the moment I am setting up a rule to trade out when my stake is 20% down.

Not really, winning or losing 25 pence is so insignificant it's barely noticeable. You've been 'trading' long enough now and you'd rather stick to winning pennies and say you're winning than learn anything useful and gain experience. Ever heard the story of Vladimir and the garlic?

[JustLukeYou]

Get real Luke, 25 pence isn't really profit, when you account for the electricity your computer's using and the time you waste trying to learn and going round in circles!

Better than losing 25 pence. I don't want to be one of the people who lose a £1,000 bank. At the moment I am setting up a rule to trade out when my stake is 20% down.

Not really, winning or losing 25 pence is so insignificant it's barely noticeable. You've been 'trading' long enough now and you'd rather stick to winning pennies and say you're winning than learn anything useful and gain experience. Ever heard the story of Vladimir and the garlic?

Okay Derek, I will do what you say and lose £1,000. Thanks mate.

[Derek27]

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=zya ... ic&f=false

You really need to do a CBT course. It's folly to think that changing what you feel comfortable with and steering a new course will always lead to the edge of a cliff.

[Jukebox]

Ever heard the story of Vladimir and the garlic?

I haven't, but you have me intrigued. Is it a Grimm tale?

[Derek27]

Ever heard the story of Vladimir and the garlic?

I haven't, but you have me intrigued. Is it a Grimm tale?

I've just posted a link in the above post. A CBT therapist told it to me a long time ago and I was surprised how close I could relate to Vladimir.

[iambic_pentameter]

CBT is brilliant. I had some delivered by the NHS and it helped massively with my anxiety issues.