redarmi
|
 |
« Reply #165 on: October 13, 2011, 01:26:12 PM » |
|
Not really sure how to best answer this but I will give it a go. About five years ago I used to be a big believer in efficient market hypothesis and that the increased flow of money into Betfair, Pinnacle and Asia would lead to 'unbeatable' markets and to a certain degree betting markets have become much more difficult but a couple of things have made me reassess my view towards EMH. Firstly, the financial crisis and whole subprime thing has pretty much proved beyond pretty much all doubt that even financial markets with billions of dollars invested in them can be inefficient so i don't really need to worry about the £500k traded on the 300 at Newton Abbott. Secondly, everything I see with the main market (betfair) suggests that it isn't really that efficient. For sure it becomes more efficient the more liquid it becomes but it still overreacts to hype and doesn't react quickly or sufficiently to a range of factors. Also some of the most successful gamblers of all time have effectively operated in markets where there isn't much market difference. I am thinking of the  racing syndicates, Billy Walters in the States and Tony Bloom in Asia in particular. In terms of all bookies offering the same price I don't ever really see it happening. To a degree it moved that way when Betfair became so important and no bookie wanted to be a bigger price than them. To a degree I think we are starting to move in the opposite direction to that now.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ACE2M
|
 |
« Reply #166 on: October 13, 2011, 01:38:13 PM » |
|
Not really sure how to best answer this but I will give it a go. About five years ago I used to be a big believer in efficient market hypothesis and that the increased flow of money into Betfair, Pinnacle and Asia would lead to 'unbeatable' markets and to a certain degree betting markets have become much more difficult but a couple of things have made me reassess my view towards EMH. Firstly, the financial crisis and whole subprime thing has pretty much proved beyond pretty much all doubt that even financial markets with billions of dollars invested in them can be inefficient so i don't really need to worry about the £500k traded on the 300 at Newton Abbott. Secondly, everything I see with the main market (betfair) suggests that it isn't really that efficient. For sure it becomes more efficient the more liquid it becomes but it still overreacts to hype and doesn't react quickly or sufficiently to a range of factors. Also some of the most successful gamblers of all time have effectively operated in markets where there isn't much market difference. I am thinking of the  racing syndicates, Billy Walters in the States and Tony Bloom in Asia in particular. In terms of all bookies offering the same price I don't ever really see it happening. To a degree it moved that way when Betfair became so important and no bookie wanted to be a bigger price than them. To a degree I think we are starting to move in the opposite direction to that now. it might take a little longer than 10 years but be in no doubt that prices will homogenize over the industry. It will become a war of marketing budgets and technology that delivers the product in time, brand establishment now for the bigger names is all important. Seeing some bookies like blue sq throw away their profile now by a lack of investemnet in marketing is criminal. Trading depts will become a thing of the past.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
redarmi
|
 |
« Reply #167 on: October 13, 2011, 01:46:01 PM » |
|
I don't neccesarily disagree but I am curious as to why you think that it will happen in the next ten years when we have had legal bookmaking in this country for 50 years and longer on course?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
adnmdv
|
 |
« Reply #168 on: October 13, 2011, 02:06:35 PM » |
|
I'd guess the main factor would be technology, information can travel disseminate quicker than before. However, 10 years seems like a pretty short timespan for the whole landscape of bookmaking to change. Prices in the markets I bet in are already getting closer together but will there ever be enough incentive to be completely the same as each other? As ACE2M suggests, it then becomes a shootout of marketing budgets, isn't there then incentive for the less-big firms to outprice the bigger ones? (esp if over-rounds stay fairly high - for prices to be homogenous AND for there to be an incentive to no change there has to be a low over round I'd have thought)
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Dubai
|
 |
« Reply #169 on: October 13, 2011, 02:17:31 PM » |
|
Idea on standard deviation with regards to variance for punting fulltime and different sport- biggest downswings (assume a medium bet= 2buyns, small=1, big=3)
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
typhoon13
|
 |
« Reply #170 on: October 13, 2011, 02:53:51 PM » |
|
Not really sure how to best answer this but I will give it a go. About five years ago I used to be a big believer in efficient market hypothesis and that the increased flow of money into Betfair, Pinnacle and Asia would lead to 'unbeatable' markets and to a certain degree betting markets have become much more difficult but a couple of things have made me reassess my view towards EMH. Firstly, the financial crisis and whole subprime thing has pretty much proved beyond pretty much all doubt that even financial markets with billions of dollars invested in them can be inefficient so i don't really need to worry about the £500k traded on the 300 at Newton Abbott. Secondly, everything I see with the main market (betfair) suggests that it isn't really that efficient. For sure it becomes more efficient the more liquid it becomes but it still overreacts to hype and doesn't react quickly or sufficiently to a range of factors. Also some of the most successful gamblers of all time have effectively operated in markets where there isn't much market difference. I am thinking of the  racing syndicates, Billy Walters in the States and Tony Bloom in Asia in particular. In terms of all bookies offering the same price I don't ever really see it happening. To a degree it moved that way when Betfair became so important and no bookie wanted to be a bigger price than them. To a degree I think we are starting to move in the opposite direction to that now. it might take a little longer than 10 years but be in no doubt that prices will homogenize over the industry. It will become a war of marketing budgets and technology that delivers the product in time, brand establishment now for the bigger names is all important. Seeing some bookies like blue sq throw away their profile now by a lack of investemnet in marketing is criminal. Trading depts will become a thing of the past. I do not think you will get the whole industry on the same prices. Greed will see that it never happens. Majors are fighting big time for market share and if it means giving an extra point here and there they will. Someone will always break ranks for extra share.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
redarmi
|
 |
« Reply #171 on: October 13, 2011, 02:59:27 PM » |
|
Great question. I am not a maths genius by any stretch of the imagination but I have tried to figure this out in the past and this is the best I came up with:
On the basis of 100 bets a week with an expected long term theoretical margin of 5% and reassessing bankroll after every week I would expect to lose 50% of my starting bankroll over a three month period slightly less that 1% of the time (0.75% to be precise). I would expect to lose about 9% of the time over a three month period and would expect to make >25% on my bankroll about 88% of the time. I am not sure of the best way to mathematically express variance but to give you an idea over 1200 bets I would expect to lose half of my bankroll less than 1% of the time and increase it ten fold less than 1% of the time. Obviously compounding has a big impact on the occasions where it runs up and in practise it might be hard to get the bets on and also I think I based this on 2% bank level staking because I am not smart enough to run monte carlo simulations using variable staking but it could have been 5% level staking as the simulations are on an old laptop and obviously makes a fair difference. Because of the compounding effect luck plays a pretty big part and even with a margin between 4% and 5% overall return on investment can range from 100% to 600%.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
redarmi
|
 |
« Reply #172 on: October 13, 2011, 03:02:49 PM » |
|
I do not think you will get the whole industry on the same prices.
Greed will see that it never happens.
Majors are fighting big time for market share and if it means giving an extra point here and there they will.
Someone will always break ranks for extra share.
Yep also we assume perfect knowledge which isn't neccesarily the case. I have it on fairly good authority that some of the big bookies have their IP addresses blocked by Betfair making it hard for them to get an idea where the market is. I knw there are plenty of ways around this but I thought it was very interesting. It may be just a grudge with one of the big bookies but there is some evidence in their prices that they are struggling with it a bit.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
typhoon13
|
 |
« Reply #173 on: October 13, 2011, 03:07:34 PM » |
|
Odds compilers are only humans and it does not matter how smart you think you are errors will always occur
Thats why we have the likes of redarmi
Go for it.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
redarmi
|
 |
« Reply #174 on: October 13, 2011, 03:16:14 PM » |
|
Just an addendum to my answer to Dubais question. That is based on an average price of selection of about 11/10 so obviously with a fair bit of bigger priced bets in my armoury these days the swings would be expected to be bigger.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
redarmi
|
 |
« Reply #175 on: October 13, 2011, 03:30:10 PM » |
|
£10 e/w Golden Jubilee @ 9/2 330 Brighton
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
redarmi
|
 |
« Reply #176 on: October 13, 2011, 03:37:44 PM » |
|
£10  Vitam @ 6.0 betfair 400 Brighton £15 Cheylesmore @ 7.4 430 Brighton
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
redarmi
|
 |
« Reply #177 on: October 13, 2011, 04:18:57 PM » |
|
Not sure I like the betting patterns on this 430.......looks like Veitch may be up to something but I can't quite figure it out. Very weird but I just don't trust the stable.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
millidonk
|
 |
« Reply #178 on: October 13, 2011, 04:20:28 PM » |
|
its Tigers Tale in the 5:50 you wan't to worry about, all sorts of crazy money getting dumped on that one!
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
typhoon13
|
 |
« Reply #179 on: October 13, 2011, 04:23:34 PM » |
|
Not sure I like the betting patterns on this 430.......looks like Veitch may be up to something but I can't quite figure it out. Very weird but I just don't trust the stable.
What a clever lad VEITCH I bet you would like his army of foot soldiers
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|