Are we mimicking inside activity?

For prices to shift on the exchange closer to the specified back odds (the very opportunities we jump on) there usually has to be a good amount of support on the exchange for such a change to occur in order to shorten the price accordingly and to keep the price down long enough for a match to materialize. This can sometimes be a number of general punters jumping on the bandwagon causing such a price to shorten much like a domino effect which can be down to mere speculation having no relation to the outcome whatsoever.

Other times it can be a network of insiders who know trainers/owners and have connections within the racing industry who are waiting for the right time to put down huge amounts of money on the horse in question that they may have information about that others do not have access to. Naturally they are going to choose exchanges to do this because there will be no restrictions on they’re bets. We then jump on these opportunities and lay accordingly at a small loss before bookies make their adjustments…

Of course we know there are no guarantee’s in racing but our aim is to get the best possible value when placing our bets.

To increase our chances of picking the winning horse, theoretically one would need to determine the difference in betting patterns between people jumping on the bandwagon and genuine ‘insider’ activity on the exchanges. I’m not saying i know the answer to that but maybe someone with trading experience in this area might have some idea on it?…

For instance… If there is a gradual shift in price over time, one could put this down to people jumping on the bandwagon with small to medium stakes i.e standard punters following the trending horse.

On the flip side, If there is a sudden, large impacting shift in price where a huge amount of money is being backed on the exchange, could this be an indication of insiders at play? Why else would such a large amount of funds be put at risk? and for it to happen that quickly surely it cannot be a vast amount of people causing that shift. These people are not messing around…

I’m not saying there is any truth to my examples here i’m just giving food for thought and talking theoretically… I have read there is a direct correlation in the horses we end up choosing and the horses that end up winning due to what i have explained above…

I have been matchbetting for around one and a half years and overall I am thousands up on the bookies and naturally thousands down on the exchange. I’m talking specifically horse racing here. Not football and the rest of it. Is this luck or is it a possibility, I am for the most part mimicking insiders and they’re betting patterns thus winning more than usual in consequence?

Could one beat the bookies by doing essentially everything we do to get the matches but not laying the outcomes?

And more importantly would this be more profitable than matchbetting in the long run?

+0

Sy
3

May 30, 2016 at 10:13 pm

New to matched betting?

My Matched Betting Academy is the best place to get started. Learning the fundamentals takes 10-15 minutes and you’ll make £15 in the process.

Learning the fundamentals takes 10-15 minutes and you’ll make £15 in the process.

Learn Matched Betting

FoG_BLoG 60 May 30, 2016 at 10:31 pm

It’s very interesting sy.

Just to say though that the main reason that you are up in the bookie is because of the free bets they give.

The reason you’re down on the exchange is a combination of commission and not knowing a thing about horses/football and risk. So we’re not getting the best value on our exchange bets.

That’s my opinion. It’s how I see it.

+0

theslosty 0 May 31, 2016 at 1:50 am

Interesting post.

I’ve actually stopped laying my bets for a couple of reasons – to avoid commission and in the past I’ve found matched betting a bit boring – not laying my bets adds a bit of an edge and so I don’t feel an urge to mug bet.

My profits are indeed considerably higher since I started not laying, but bear in mind you can have long periods where it feels like you’re getting no luck.

However I’ve only been doing this for a couple of months which isn’t a sample size large enough to draw any real conclusions from.

+0

Walter Mitty 0 May 31, 2016 at 8:13 am

Are you sure FoG? Surely over a large enough sample size you would expect to be up at the bookies to the value of your free bets, less 2-5% to account for commission at the exchanges.

I have also experienced the same phenomenon as Sy and came to the same theory. At every bookie my profit is 10-20x bigger than the free bets I’ve had out of them. This is on a variety of offers (eg 4/1 channel 4 and mbs 2nd to fav. I’m currently averaging about 25% winners across about 400 bets, which is a ridiculously high strike rate compared to most of the so called expert tipsters out there.

From watching the exchange prices there is definitely insider trading going on a number of horses per race. Most of which usually do well in the race. Conversely the horses where the exchange price is miles higher than at the bookies nearly always do poorly from what I have seen.

Definitely something to test further i think.

+0

FoG_BLoG 60 May 31, 2016 at 9:56 am

I am pretty sure 😉

25% winners across 400 bets. You need to take into account the odds you are taking. Are you taking on average about 3/1? For example I could hit 50% winners if I only tip horses evens and below. Wouldn’t make me a great tipper or wouldn’t make me rich.

You can’t read too much into one individuals experience. For example your profit at Bet365 is 10 times your free bets maybe. I am running a HUGE loss at Bet365. On average your profit at the bookie should be and probably will average out long term at about = (total stakes wagerd) * (1-bookie edge) + (Free bets) * 0.8 + FPTP Bonuses + BOG Bonuses + Rule 4 Bonuses.

Maybe you are getting a positive edge on the bookie, but I would be sceptical. I know by comparing the bookie price to the exchange price that we are spotting value, but enough value to swing in our favour? I don’t think so. Without the offers like the free bets and BOG I don’t think this would work, worth testing though.

+0

Walter Mitty 0 May 31, 2016 at 10:27 am

Average odds of the stuff I’ve backed is about 8.0 which means my figures are ridiculously profitable at 25% strike rate even before BOG and rule 4 (which from my results add about 10% extra profits). I can’t see how it is a coincidence as regardless of what offer I am doing and at what bookie the same thing happens.

I’m going to do some more investigating later but I think I have been getting the best results from getting on stuff the night before or in the morning rather than just before the race. If people do have inside information on a horse then they are likely to start backing it as soon as the odds are available imo and hammer in the price right until the off.

+0

Sy 3 May 31, 2016 at 10:34 am

I just want to make clear that i’m not in any way encouraging gambling here. I myself will not try these methods due to the fact that i just don’t want to lose the float and the short term risk can be high whatever the long term trend is. I just find the subject interesting.

‘True odds’ is another topic all together IMO. And yes i totally get that freebets will create more funds in my bookie accounts. What i have however is in excess of that.

What i’m getting at here is how to home in on that ‘insider’ activity as a number of bets we place are mimicking normal punter activity. What if such methods could be refined down to increase ones chances. Also it’s important to note that the strategy would be somewhat different if not matchbetting because then it would be about getting the highest possible price as opposed to the closest match. I certainly would not be betting on favourites in this instance. I’d be looking for higher price value. Can the activity observed on the exchange lead one to find diamond opportunities. Much as Mark says about being patient with finding the right opportunity with arbs to win big. The same would apply here.

I know however that i am playing around with a ‘gambling theory’ here and the whole point of this process is to have the assurance that we are guaranteeing a profit. Which might i add, suits me best. What can i say, i like to be sure on things.

Another interesting topic to mention is… How do people decide on their matches? Because personally I will check form on racing post and if i feel the horse is vastly underprice i will avoid it even if the price is a close match… The same applies to higher prices which i feel hold value. I might choose a higher price match over a lower price match even though the losses are the same for instance…

+0

Sy 3 May 31, 2016 at 10:41 am

Walter it’s interesting that your average odds are higher and your making a profit… To me that would add up…

+0
Get regular offer updates, tip and tricks, big offer alerts and more straight to your inbox.

Δ

Email*
Walter Mitty 0 May 31, 2016 at 11:20 am

The other thing that might be of interest is that my profit is much higher on the accounts where I am doing MBS 2nd to fav. On b365 and betfair where you can back the fav as long as it’s above 3/4-1 it is lower. So there might be something in that aswell. Another thing to test.

I am currently backing things completely blind btw, absolutely no study of the form, and I will do pretty much any race even if it is some mug handicap with about 20 runners in.

I was actually thinking of trying this system with the aid of form study/tips to see if that improved the results. If I could find a tipster that had reasonable results and with application of this method (ie not backing anything where there wasn’t a close match) it improved the results then you would know you were definitely on to something. The key is finding a source of tips that is somewhat reliable but not widely followed. If you tried it on pricewise selections for instance then it wouldn’t work as the market gets completely distorted as soon as he tips it.

At the moment you can have a few horses in a race that exhibit this price behaviour, from what I have seen they usually do fairly well in the race, backing blind however means that it is pot luck for which one of them you end up picking, which is why I am wondering whether having a particular one in mind to back might improve the results. But then again, this might add a bias where you have an urge to back the horse even if it isn’t quite showing the exact price characteristics that you would normally go for.

+0

FoG_BLoG 60 May 31, 2016 at 11:22 am

Getting £80 for every £40 invested (25% paying out 8.0) is just way too good to be true. I think Walter you will find that your profits will regress back to the mean!

I understand that there might be something in this, we are hunting value, we are jumping on movements in the market (which could signify that bookie price is way out of whack, or the bookie isn’t reacting quickly to new information or unknown information). These strategies only “might” be giving you an edge on the bookie. But no way its that wide. I’d be thinking that getting a 5% edge on the bookies would be fantastic, but a 100% edge I think it fantasy.

Don’t think that bookies are stupid or that they don’t know what they do. Don’t underestimate them. Its generally speaking very hard to beat the bookie.

That’s my opinion.

Walter you may have struck something, but I’m sceptical. Have you recorded all your bets honestly? Some ppl aren’t as enthusiastic about recording or remembering the bets that they lose. Are you being optimistic about your hit rate and average odds?

Sorry, mostly when things are too good to be true, you have to question it.

+0

MbPunter 24 May 31, 2016 at 11:31 am

Average odds of 8.0 is massively different to 25% strike rate on 8.0 shots.

Could pick 100 horses. Fifty at 2.0 and Fifty at 14.0. Likely strke rate around 30%+.

+0

FoG_BLoG 60 May 31, 2016 at 11:42 am

Good point MBPunter.

+0

Walter Mitty 0 May 31, 2016 at 11:57 am

Well like I said, I am not backing short priced favourites as you can’t do that for any of the offers (which you should be well aware of). The average winner is around 8.0 yes, because those are 95% of the time the only thing you can get a decent match on. I’ve also been adding a decent margin of error to all the offers as if you get multiple rule 4s, or the price gets hammered in below 3/1 SP or it goes off favourite then you don’t qualify for the offer, which also means typically looking to back horses in that price range again.

These are all 100% accurate figures fyi as I simply looked through my account statement on each website. The only thing to add is that I haven’t actually risked any cash on this system yet which I guess might make a difference as I am technically only “paper trading”, and as we know when real cash is on the line it will add another bias.

What do we reckon is a decent sample size to determine whether this actually works or not? 400 bets is probably more than most tipsters put out in a year. 2000? Doubt my accounts will last that long though if this strike rate continues.

+0

FoG_BLoG 60 May 31, 2016 at 2:03 pm

I think that 400 is a decent size – not conclusive but pretty decent. It depends on the odds too. I suppose if there are one or two long shots that have come in and pushed your profit up then you can’t rely on that long term.

I think MBPunter highlighted that it is not good enough to just look at the general hit rate vs the average odds, as it can be misleading.

+0

Sy 3 May 31, 2016 at 3:24 pm

Leicester races has been abandoned due to unsafe ground…. This happens far to often in racing. I had all the races down for the day too. Motherf…………..

+0

Pickle 64 May 31, 2016 at 8:35 pm

Week before last backing horses shortly before the off with one bookmaker I think I had 16 consecutive losers. No minimum odds in fact a couple of larger bets were odds on. I’d prob staked well over £2k on them totally risk free but there’s no way I could sustain not laying them. I believe there’s too many peaks and troughs and there’s no way I’m risking going broke. A 16 horse losing run could very easily turn into a 32 horse losing run at some point. Might not be too bad if you start with a shed load of winners I suppose but dont think its for me. Interesting read though guys.

+0