Hi , in a vain attempt to make any profits at all and rapidly becoming last throw of the dice saloon i thought of this idea and wondered if it could be do-able.
I have been BACKING both the first 2 in the market , then as the prices move , quickly laying the drifter and " hoping " the other one continues to be backed , thus showing a profit. It has worked to some degree but you do occasionally get the 2 of them drifting , giving a " double loss " so to speak.
i have read many times traders saying you DO NOT need to try to predict the direction ( still baffling to me after 3 years of trying ! ) and this idea clearly does that , ie leaving the market to do it`s thing then react quickly to it.
The other problem i see , is the market trying to be around the 100% mark so very quick decision making is essential .
Is this idea worth further investigation.
Any mileage in this idea ?
I am also a relative newbie also. So take this how you want. I would suggest that if this really is 'last chance saloon' that you leave inplay horse racing alone. It is to quick a market place and the on track traders will always have the edge on you. Unfortunately for me I tried your way and the same on laying nags whilst in play. Luckily I am only doing practice mode now having already reached the saloon doors so it didnt matter to me. Problem is a nag can sometimes find a bit of a muscle and come back if its hogged up. The top two could also have had a rough night and cant be arsed so will go backwards. The on track traders along with the advanced bots that other traders use will see this before you and then you are in trouble.
Hi , sorry if it`s not clear but i never mentioned i was trading inplay.
I`m talking about horse a) 3.50 horse b) 4.50.
Horse a) moves into 3.30 , b) moves out to 4.70 - so clearly moving in opposite directions ?
Quickly lay horse b) for a small loss of 2 ticks. Then " hope " horse a) continues being backed into say 3.00 :- PROFIT made.
Hope that`s now clear to everyone ?
Thanks for any input.
I`m talking about horse a) 3.50 horse b) 4.50.
Horse a) moves into 3.30 , b) moves out to 4.70 - so clearly moving in opposite directions ?
Quickly lay horse b) for a small loss of 2 ticks. Then " hope " horse a) continues being backed into say 3.00 :- PROFIT made.
Hope that`s now clear to everyone ?
Thanks for any input.
All you are doing in effect is cutting out losses quickly and hoping the profits go longer.
This is the essence of trading and yes it will work if executed properly
.
but i carn't really see why do you need to back both horses first ???.
assuming one is moving in and the other out by equal amounts, then there is really no gain.
as one will be a winning trade and one a losing one,
you might as well just wait for something to move in and then just back it and hope it continues, it's the exact same thing.
This is the essence of trading and yes it will work if executed properly
.but i carn't really see why do you need to back both horses first ???.
assuming one is moving in and the other out by equal amounts, then there is really no gain.
as one will be a winning trade and one a losing one,
you might as well just wait for something to move in and then just back it and hope it continues, it's the exact same thing.
an example would be
Horse A moves in 10 ticks
Horse B moves out and is stopped at -5 ticks.
you have made a 5 tick profit yes, but it is exactly the same as backing horse A after it's moved in by 5 ticks.
obviously this is a simple example and tick sizes and greening amounts complicate things, but i don't really see the point in backing both.
All you are doing is jumping on a trend and hoping it continues, this can work but the skill is in spotting good entry / exit points.
Horse A moves in 10 ticks
Horse B moves out and is stopped at -5 ticks.
you have made a 5 tick profit yes, but it is exactly the same as backing horse A after it's moved in by 5 ticks.
obviously this is a simple example and tick sizes and greening amounts complicate things, but i don't really see the point in backing both.
All you are doing is jumping on a trend and hoping it continues, this can work but the skill is in spotting good entry / exit points.
Trading rule number 1:
Have a reason to enter the trade.
Guessing isn't the way to go.
"The first 2 in the market? " You might as well say - "I'm going to back Doncaster Rovers when they play away on a Monday night" because I have done some back testing and over the past 3 seasons this is in profit!
Look at the whole market
What is happening?
Wait for some clear indicators.
There are plenty of markets where the first 2 steam and drift.
Why back anything until you know why. I say this often. Somedays I wait for 2 hours before I even put any money in. But when I do I make it count, and I'm not often wrong. That's not because i'm amazing. It's because I understand what I want to achieve and I wait for the opportunity to present itself before pulling the trigger. jumping race to race guessing isn't for me. Although I can see some of you do ok with this tactic. But for me it's the same as being in a betting shop. Most of those guys happen to be losers - is there a pattern?
Have a reason to enter the trade.
Guessing isn't the way to go.
"The first 2 in the market? " You might as well say - "I'm going to back Doncaster Rovers when they play away on a Monday night" because I have done some back testing and over the past 3 seasons this is in profit!
Look at the whole market
What is happening?
Wait for some clear indicators.
There are plenty of markets where the first 2 steam and drift.
Why back anything until you know why. I say this often. Somedays I wait for 2 hours before I even put any money in. But when I do I make it count, and I'm not often wrong. That's not because i'm amazing. It's because I understand what I want to achieve and I wait for the opportunity to present itself before pulling the trigger. jumping race to race guessing isn't for me. Although I can see some of you do ok with this tactic. But for me it's the same as being in a betting shop. Most of those guys happen to be losers - is there a pattern?
Hi Freddy,
After so long trying to be successful , it appears i just don`t have the necessary skill set to succeed by finding those good entry points that are so highly prized so i thought of this idea to eliminate thought / evaluation of the market and let IT tell me when it is moving in one direction or the other. I fully understand what you mean about tick sizes and greening ie having to put more on the shorties etc to balance profit/loss per tick - in fact i know a lot about the theory but can`t seem to put it into practice no matter how hard i try .
A small loss on one side leading to a bigger profit on the other appears fairly sound thinking ( but maybe not ? ).
Hi Mugsgame,
You have very kindly gave me lots of advice on various threads based around finding a reason to enter and i have tried all the obvious ones i can think as CLEAR INDICATORS such as:-
1. top / bottom of ranges.
2. following trends / going against trends.
3. watching one horses price moves and placing trades on another in opposite direction.
4. big bets coming in one one side or the other and jumping in front.
5. ignoring those same big bets and going against them.
6. WOM.
7. Over round.
8. placing money well out of the current price and hoping for a big swing.
9. Scalping with offset.
10. And so on - all the usual suspects.
After 3 years plus, i am no further forward it seems so at a crossroads as to what to do/try next.It is not for the want of trying and believe me i have spent 100s of hours trying !
In another thread i did ask if the Betangel Team would do a straightforward video , taken over an hour or so using small stakes to show/prove to us that it is possible to win consistently over several races , however there is no sign of this to date and my one wish is that the challenge will be taken up.
I do appreciate all comments , thank you.
After so long trying to be successful , it appears i just don`t have the necessary skill set to succeed by finding those good entry points that are so highly prized so i thought of this idea to eliminate thought / evaluation of the market and let IT tell me when it is moving in one direction or the other. I fully understand what you mean about tick sizes and greening ie having to put more on the shorties etc to balance profit/loss per tick - in fact i know a lot about the theory but can`t seem to put it into practice no matter how hard i try .
A small loss on one side leading to a bigger profit on the other appears fairly sound thinking ( but maybe not ? ).
Hi Mugsgame,
You have very kindly gave me lots of advice on various threads based around finding a reason to enter and i have tried all the obvious ones i can think as CLEAR INDICATORS such as:-
1. top / bottom of ranges.
2. following trends / going against trends.
3. watching one horses price moves and placing trades on another in opposite direction.
4. big bets coming in one one side or the other and jumping in front.
5. ignoring those same big bets and going against them.
6. WOM.
7. Over round.
8. placing money well out of the current price and hoping for a big swing.
9. Scalping with offset.
10. And so on - all the usual suspects.
After 3 years plus, i am no further forward it seems so at a crossroads as to what to do/try next.It is not for the want of trying and believe me i have spent 100s of hours trying !
In another thread i did ask if the Betangel Team would do a straightforward video , taken over an hour or so using small stakes to show/prove to us that it is possible to win consistently over several races , however there is no sign of this to date and my one wish is that the challenge will be taken up.
I do appreciate all comments , thank you.
Hi Joizzy,
You aren't going to give up are you?
I suspect you are suffering from strategy overload and rather than trying to be a Jack of all trades you need to become a Master of one.
Yes, you have covered many of the angles that traders use but the important thing to remember is that few traders use all the methods you have listed. Most successful traders concentrate on a single strategy and study it, test it and try to make it profitable. With that success and operating at a profit overall it is a single notch in your belt and can make you a respectable wage. The problem with single strategies is that you need patience and cannot ply it in every race and so you will later on (later on I repeat) learn to add a 2nd strategy that allows you to trade more races.
The idea of backing 2 horses is not as useless as some people are advising, so long as you are selective in your races. For example; trading 2 horses under 3's and trading a 1/3 shot with a 10/1 as pairs will present very different results.
The reason there is merit in your suggestion is the fact that when odds are stationary they will match only 10-15% compared to the money matched whilst the odds are moving rapidly. It actually does make more sense to back both (or lay both) than to try and catch a steamer/drifter in flight.
A second meritable consideration has to be the fact that for every pair that drifts when you have backed, there will be a pair where both will steam.
Do yourself a favour and concentrate on getting yourself just one simple strategy that will give you an edge.
You aren't going to give up are you?
I suspect you are suffering from strategy overload and rather than trying to be a Jack of all trades you need to become a Master of one.
Yes, you have covered many of the angles that traders use but the important thing to remember is that few traders use all the methods you have listed. Most successful traders concentrate on a single strategy and study it, test it and try to make it profitable. With that success and operating at a profit overall it is a single notch in your belt and can make you a respectable wage. The problem with single strategies is that you need patience and cannot ply it in every race and so you will later on (later on I repeat) learn to add a 2nd strategy that allows you to trade more races.
The idea of backing 2 horses is not as useless as some people are advising, so long as you are selective in your races. For example; trading 2 horses under 3's and trading a 1/3 shot with a 10/1 as pairs will present very different results.
The reason there is merit in your suggestion is the fact that when odds are stationary they will match only 10-15% compared to the money matched whilst the odds are moving rapidly. It actually does make more sense to back both (or lay both) than to try and catch a steamer/drifter in flight.
A second meritable consideration has to be the fact that for every pair that drifts when you have backed, there will be a pair where both will steam.
Do yourself a favour and concentrate on getting yourself just one simple strategy that will give you an edge.
That doesn't make any sense to me 
maybe im missing the point ?
why not just back every horse in the race ,
cut the losses out quickly and let the winners go on.
Even that would work in some races.
but it doesn't matter how you dress it up, all you are doing is jumping on a streamer and hopeing it continues into profit,
so why not just do that in the first place ???,
yes you would miss the first few ticks of the move but you would also not have losses on the other horse. So swings and roundabouts really.
I myself do often trade two horses at once but only because i have an opinion on both, if it was a seesaw type situation i wouldn't back them both or lay them both as one is always going to be a loser.
But however like with anything if you were to apply some logic and some rules, then there are occasions backing two horses to trade will work, but that's not what was originally suggested hence the reason i don't see any merit in it at this stage
.
maybe im missing the point ?
why not just back every horse in the race
, cut the losses out quickly and let the winners go on.
Even that would work in some races.
but it doesn't matter how you dress it up, all you are doing is jumping on a streamer and hopeing it continues into profit,
so why not just do that in the first place ???,
yes you would miss the first few ticks of the move but you would also not have losses on the other horse. So swings and roundabouts really.
I myself do often trade two horses at once but only because i have an opinion on both, if it was a seesaw type situation i wouldn't back them both or lay them both as one is always going to be a loser.
But however like with anything if you were to apply some logic and some rules, then there are occasions backing two horses to trade will work, but that's not what was originally suggested hence the reason i don't see any merit in it at this stage
.Hi Jeff,
Casual traders or newbies tend to disregard this fact when deciding whether to scalp or to trend trade and getting bets filled is key to successful trading. I will explain by dissecting Richard Hughes 7th winner yesterday, Mama Quilla 5.40pm Windsor. This is an interesting race given Hughes previous 6 winners had the layers running scared and the expectation would have been a fairly frantic trading session.
The trading session (from 13.5 mins out) started with 3.5 minutes of the odds ranging between 3.4 and 3.55 where a total of £15,500 was matched (approx £74 per second). Typical amounts being matched were in the hundreds or less. The net balance after 3 1/2 minutes was only £1k to the back side.
The next 3.5 minutes saw the odds drop from 3.55 to a low of 2.7 with almost £99,000 matched (approx £470 per second). Typical amounts being matched jumped to 5k+ with a few over 10k. The net trading balance was then almost £32K to the back side. Clearly the match rate accelerates dramatically once the odds start moving; the ratio being 15%:85% over the 7 minutes.
The following and final 6 minutes saw a rebound of the odds from 2.7 to the mean at 3.05 with another £216,785 matched at a rate of £600 per second and with a net balance overall of only £4.5k to the lay side. [ie the equivalent of a single lay bet of $4.5k].
Despite a total of £372K being traded on what should have been a steamer (given the bookies liabilities), the net position was that the horse was layed for more than it was backed even though it went off at 3.05. I realise that this is an irrational dichotomy but it often happens.
The point is that when odds are stationary or ranging in a small band then the match rate is only a fraction of the sums matched when a horse is trending.
Casual traders or newbies tend to disregard this fact when deciding whether to scalp or to trend trade and getting bets filled is key to successful trading. I will explain by dissecting Richard Hughes 7th winner yesterday, Mama Quilla 5.40pm Windsor. This is an interesting race given Hughes previous 6 winners had the layers running scared and the expectation would have been a fairly frantic trading session.
The trading session (from 13.5 mins out) started with 3.5 minutes of the odds ranging between 3.4 and 3.55 where a total of £15,500 was matched (approx £74 per second). Typical amounts being matched were in the hundreds or less. The net balance after 3 1/2 minutes was only £1k to the back side.
The next 3.5 minutes saw the odds drop from 3.55 to a low of 2.7 with almost £99,000 matched (approx £470 per second). Typical amounts being matched jumped to 5k+ with a few over 10k. The net trading balance was then almost £32K to the back side. Clearly the match rate accelerates dramatically once the odds start moving; the ratio being 15%:85% over the 7 minutes.
The following and final 6 minutes saw a rebound of the odds from 2.7 to the mean at 3.05 with another £216,785 matched at a rate of £600 per second and with a net balance overall of only £4.5k to the lay side. [ie the equivalent of a single lay bet of $4.5k].
Despite a total of £372K being traded on what should have been a steamer (given the bookies liabilities), the net position was that the horse was layed for more than it was backed even though it went off at 3.05. I realise that this is an irrational dichotomy but it often happens.
The point is that when odds are stationary or ranging in a small band then the match rate is only a fraction of the sums matched when a horse is trending.
-
JollyGreen
- Posts: 2047
- Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:06 am
Apart from the accumulators held by delusional punters who will have told people they didn't fancy Ever Fortune so they left it out!!mugsgame wrote:this horse was due to be ridden by Ryan Moore, he gave it to Hughes so he could get 7. There would not have been any Hughes accumulators on this. Thats why it didn't cave in.
Thanks JamesJames1st wrote: The trading session (from 13.5 mins out) started with 3.5 minutes of the odds ranging between 3.4 and 3.55 where a total of £15,500 was matched (approx £74 per second).
To put the £74 per second figure into a scalping context, how many turns could you have gotten through the market if you had been offering money to the queue and using very small stakes (and only entering new money into the queue when the existing offers had been taken in full by the market)?
Jeff
