Greening versus leaving in-play

[Zenyatta]

Peter Webb's latest blog entry:
http://www.betangel.com/blog_wp/
'Should I Green Up?'

If you've done a form-analysis and you think you are more acurate than the market, it's actually better to leave some money In-Play. Often I've tried to trade something, the price didn't budge, then the horse in question went on to destroy the opposition. Many of my biggest wins have come when the price didn't budge pre-race. So if you think you can beat the market, it's best to leave some money In-Play.

What I like to do is set up a trade for 20-ticks with greening pre-race, but then 'Take SP' at the off if I'm not matched. If I get my 20-ticks, fine, I'm happy for it to green and no need to punt. If I don't get the 20-ticks however, I'm willing to take the market on, when 'Take SP' leaves some excess In-Play. 'Take SP' (with attempted greening pre-race) will ensure that I get 20-ticks no matter what the price does pre-race, provided of course,that I make the correct selection. 'Take SP' (with attempted greening pre-race) only affects how much I lose (and if I win, the loss is never realized).

The market is often dumber than you think. The perfect example is the first race at Cheltenham on Friday. There was a big big wrap on 'Zarkandar', a horse with huge class and potential. It was at $8, far too long, did the price budge pre-race? Not an inch! In fact, insanely, the price went out to over 42.00 In-Play! Of course, shortly after the wonderfully efficient market (sarcasm intended) pushed Zarkandar's price In-Play to over 42.00, he suddenly roared home and destroyed the field, winning the race, just as I expected.

In short, I win far more leaving some In-Play.

[Euler]

If I lay something at 6.00 and hope to back it at 6.20, I could let it go in-play. 83% of the time it will lose, so I will automatically stand a very high chance of getting matched. But if he romps home and bet never gets matched then it's a 100% loss. It takes a lot of trades to get that back so I'd need to change the initial approach. It all depends what you are doing at the end of the day.

[rubysglory]

I think I understand what you are saying Zenyatta, but for me I see your stance as no different to a bookmaker and taking a liability against a runner. Have I perhaps misinterpreted what you are saying ?

Dont get me wrong, each for their own, but I do not have the intestinal fortitude for letting my liability run in play - sods law just kills me !

Appreciate your thoughts as I am always keen to learn.

rg

[Zenyatta]

If I lay something at 6.00 and hope to back it at 6.20, I could let it go in-play. 83% of the time it will lose, so I will automatically stand a very high chance of getting matched. But if he romps home and bet never gets matched then it's a 100% loss. It takes a lot of trades to get that back so I'd need to change the initial approach. It all depends what you are doing at the end of the day.

Yes I realize that, I wouldn't leave a trade In-Play like that, rather, I would put a straight punt in.

The problem I have with Greening up is that I'm not that convinced that the market is always so efficient, especially for horses at longer odds. If you think the market has got it wrong, you shouldn't Green-up surely? My 9-1 punts for example, come in a lot more often than 10% of the time.

[Euler]

I'd probably agree that large odds are mis-priced in general.

[corbus]

I've no idea about this "take SP" business Keniatta, I've seen something on the Betfair site but never investigated much.
Would you be so kind to explain how one uses them? and how to use them with BA (where are they?)
Do they not move?

Thank you