Football betting and odds, discussion and other gambling stuff
- Thread starter ffsear
- Start date
Of course they can. I used to keep a spreadsheet of all my bets - one bet per day, £2.00 unit stake. The aim of maintaining a spreadsheet was to monitor performance, narrow bets down to what worked and what didn't. Keeping the losses to as close to 10% to allow for overround and commission was counted as a victory of sorts, the ultimate target was to turn a profit over a twelve month period*. Like a lot of betting, this involved looking at form, calculating the implied probabilities and trying to find an edge wherever possible - betting into obscure, low liquidity markets like cycling could be useful on that last one.
The whole point of the exercise was because...*drumroll*...it was fun. More fun than my 5p lucky 15s I used to put on so I had something to do while I watched the horse racing at work.
*3% loss over ten months before I stopped due to being the sole earner in the house and not really being in a position to carry on.
mauvais
on reddit or something
Maybe fun was the wrong word - casual, perhaps? What you've just described isn't casual in anything but amount.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Appears to me that this is what the OP isn't doing, or is doing wrongly. Pretty much all the bets quoted so far in this thread with very short odds have struck me by the extreme reasonableness of the outcome you're betting against. Anything but 'sure things'.
Given the nature of the way odds are worked out, you're setting yourself up against the herd wisdom, which is very hard to do. Obscure markets sound a good idea in that regard to minimise the crowd you're against, plus certain things like betting against England in England because so many English punters bet with a tinge of patriotism in their guts. But I'm afraid the more I think about it, the worse ffsear's method appears. It's very likely to lose him rather a lot of money rather quickly.
Systems I've heard of that worked have been really simple. EG in a snooker match where one player has come back from a few frames down to force a final frame, if you can get close to evens, take a bet on the player who lost the lead winning the match. Bookies are probably wise to that one now, but if you're betting against the herd, you might get value.
I also read once of a racing punter who specialised in photo-finishes. He'd stand at the finishing line with his head fixed in place. If he thought the far horse had won, he'd not bet as he'd allow for the bias of any kind of look at the horses before the line. If he thought the near horse had won, he'd bet. Simple, but hard work.
Last edited:
ffsear
Well-Known Member
How? I have stated that its £20 starting balance and 1 bet a day. Once its over, you wait until the next month/payday to start again. If you lose within the first 4 or 5 then maybe throw another £20 in. But its not gonna lose more then £40 in any 1 month. How is that losing a lot of money very quickly?
Would you rather lose £20 in 1 bet, or maybe see if you can stretch that £20 to 10 or even 15 bets.. If you want to hit a streak of 10 winners, odds on is the only way your going to do it. Either way, i still can't see how this equates to losing money very quickly.
ffsear
Well-Known Member
adidaswoody
Like a star
It's annoying how much your having to defend every post you upload!
Guys
It's for fun, it's meant to be conitinuous low risk to build little cash just to see if it works
Like if a guy had 2 dice n said look, give me a tenner n if it's Not a 12 I'll give you 12 quid, some people would say hell no it's only 2 quid profit and some would say yah I'll take that 2 quid I'm almost guaranteed to get and I'll have another fuckin ten go's if you please sir!
It's only a fun challenge don't get yer knickers off.
Guys
It's for fun, it's meant to be conitinuous low risk to build little cash just to see if it works
Like if a guy had 2 dice n said look, give me a tenner n if it's Not a 12 I'll give you 12 quid, some people would say hell no it's only 2 quid profit and some would say yah I'll take that 2 quid I'm almost guaranteed to get and I'll have another fuckin ten go's if you please sir!
It's only a fun challenge don't get yer knickers off.
Take that up with him/her. I was addressing the point that a fun bet can't also be done with a serious eye on value, gaining an edge and trying to turn a profit - it's basically the same problem solving approach as, say, trying to complete a crossword.
Casual is certainly what it felt like, tbf - see my comment above about solving a crossword.
It was just a distraction, a challenge, a puzzle to be solved as best I could.
ffsear
Well-Known Member
Less than 2 goals in a game happens all the time. So does less than 1 goal. I don't particularly object to the idea of the thread, but you don't seem that hot at choosing "near certs".
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
What's 1.07 in proper odds?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
He's done another secret one of course. Half the food budget for the month gone.
keybored
Well done. You remember cat good.
1/14 ish
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Ta.
I could do 20 of them tmw never mind a month. I think we could do a knockout thing thing here - all start on the same day and see whose left at the end.
ice-is-forming
I was born naked, shameless & fucking outrageous..
I'm in
Just put $20 into a sports bet account.
bet 1 of $1. is Oriol Gaset to win @ $2.66 against JJ Ambrose MMA (HEX) this sat.
Damn you Oriol! submitted by Guillotine in the first round
I should have bet from my head and not my heart, Oriol's a friend & Ambrose is the last fighter to beat McGregor. gotta turn this around.
Bet 2. $2. Dan Henderson to win against Victor Belfort at UFC nov 8th. odds are $3.70 to $1.25
adidaswoody
Like a star
Bet 1. Baztan vs mendi.
I clicked on the live matches and saw this match was 1-1 after the first 20 minutes, so I was sure another goal would happen
Bet over 2.5 goals and Baztan just scored, 20 --> 22
I clicked on the live matches and saw this match was 1-1 after the first 20 minutes, so I was sure another goal would happen
Bet over 2.5 goals and Baztan just scored, 20 --> 22
adidaswoody
Like a star
Bet 2. Lazio vs ac Milan over 0.5 goals.
Both good teams who love to score goals!
The last 7 times they have played each other the least goals scored were 2, the most being 5 I think, so I should think there will be at least one goal ^.^
Both good teams who love to score goals!
The last 7 times they have played each other the least goals scored were 2, the most being 5 I think, so I should think there will be at least one goal ^.^
Athos
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure how much fun this is. At best, you're only gonna end up £130 up; at worst £40 down in a month. And you many only get one bet a month. Personally, I'd much rather be looking for longer prices which represent value. Maybe a tenner a week, possibly on a double of two good value bets. Won't lose any more, probably getter a better spread of action through the month, and potential for some half tasty wins.
adidaswoody
Like a star
22 --> 24 thanks to Milan and lazio getting 4 goals between em
isvicthere?
a.k.a. floppybollocks
In the old-fashioned fractional odds it's 1/14.28.
fractionMan
Custom Title
Have you ever made it to the end of the month a winner?
adidaswoody
Like a star
I bet my 24 on Limerick vs Finn harps, over 0.5 goals scored, turned my 24 - 28! Then turned my 28 into 34 by backing same bet on Spurs match vs villa
So 20 is now 34!
So 20 is now 34!
rekil
to menny cranks
There was a guy on betfair who was really good at this - see thread here about him making 10k in a few days.
adidaswoody
Like a star
City up 3-1 at half time, back city to win will turn 34 - 38! Just one more bet tonight n I'll have doubled if they come in!
adidaswoody
Like a star
City won, giving me 38.84, nuggets vs lakers I fancied Denver anyway as they've won most their recent meets, I'd have watched it if I didn't have to be up so early for work, damn those American basketball games on at 3am GMT 
I just woke up and Nuggets are up 93 - 81 or something like that, it's towards the last Q of the match, nuggets to win gives me 48.36 God speed Denver!
I just woke up and Nuggets are up 93 - 81 or something like that, it's towards the last Q of the match, nuggets to win gives me 48.36
God speed Denver!
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Due to the power of compound interest, if the bookies are giving themselves a relatively modest 10 per cent edge on the probabilities as they work them out (paying out 10% less than what they reckon to be the real odds), you're effectively increasing that edge massively with this system. If you're given 1.09 rather than 1.10 each time, you're getting winnings on 20 quid at the end of the month of 245 rather than 330. You've turned that edge of 10% into 25%.
Bookies love this system. And a brief scan of the internet shows me pretty obvious plants about it on blogs sponsored by bookies. 'Find value in compound low-odds bets,' they say. It's pretty insidious.
Bookies love this system. And a brief scan of the internet shows me pretty obvious plants about it on blogs sponsored by bookies. 'Find value in compound low-odds bets,' they say. It's pretty insidious.
ffsear
Well-Known Member
City won, giving me 38.84, nuggets vs lakers I fancied Denver anyway as they've won most their recent meets, I'd have watched it if I didn't have to be up so early for work, damn those American basketball games on at 3am GMT
I just woke up and Nuggets are up 93 - 81 or something like that, it's towards the last Q of the match, nuggets to win gives me 48.36
Great work! keep it going!
Athos
Well-Known Member
Whilt I agree that combining bets leverages the effect of the overround book to the punter's disadvantage, I think you've underestimated the size of the phenomenon.
For example, take two snooker matches: In match 1, between players A and B, both have an equal chance of winning. The same in Match 2 between players C and D. In a 'fair' book, you'd be offered evens for each. In reality, there'd be an overround book, meaning you'd probably get, say, 5/6 on any of the players winning their respective matches. This would give the bookie a total book for each of the matches of 109.09% (100 × (6⁄11 + 6⁄11)) i.e. 9.09% overround.
The combined outcome of those two matches could see either of the following pairs winning: AC, AD, BC, BD. Since all four are equally likely, the true odds of any one would be 1/4 (and 3/1 against), meaning a 'fair' price of 4/1. That would result in a £10 winning £40 (10 x (3/1 + 1)). Whereas, the actual return in the overround book (using the figures in the paragraph above), would be £33.61 i.e. 10 × (5/6 + 1) × (5/6 + 1). That represents odds of 2.361/1 i.e. 29.752% (100/3.3611), which when applied to all four outcomes gives the bookie a book of 1.1901 i.e. an overround of 19.01% i.e. his edge has more than doubled, compare to each of the singles!
On a double, the overround (0) can be calculated as 0 = B1 × B2 × 100 − 100, where B1 and B2 is the whole of each respective book e.g O = 1.0909 × 1.0909 × 100 − 100 = 19.01%. Obviously, the more in the accumulator, the greater the book gets overround, calculated for a bet of y selections as B1 × B2 × ... × By × 100 − 100.
To do as the OP hopes i.e. to turn £20 into £150 with 10/11 prices (at the longest), would take a minimum of 20 bets. If we assume a reasonable overround of 10% on each, the combined overound accross the whole is massive: something like 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 1.1 x 100 -100 = 640% i.e a total book of 740%. No wonder bookies love it!
Last edited:
