Tips for Tikay

[tikay]

Correction, 72/1 in 7 overs.

[MereNovice]

Correction, 72/1 in 7 overs.

Mumbai are now favourites after being longer than 2/1 between innings.

[TightEnd]

CSK should be favourites

Ashwin will slow Mumbai down

[redarmi]

I'm just applying logic and what I understand from what I've read in this thread, so if I'm getting any of this wrong, please shout up.

As if you wouldn't

Just to clarify:

Laying a bet to close a position at the right price is correct if both bets are placed on the same exchange where commission is paid.

Also, when using a system such as Kelly it could be correct even if no commission is paid depending on how you calculate your bankroll when you have outstanding bets.
If you determine your bankroll by the amount that you have available to bet, then placing another bet for a percentage of your roll would allow you to place a bigger bet.
This would be the case on Betfair since Betfair returns the stake to your wallet once you have greened out.
If you add a certain amount to your bankroll based on your perceived equity in your outstanding bets this wouldn't necessarily be the case.

Your first point is a very good one.

The second is only valid in a market where we can predict price movements with 100% accuracy and there are no "black swans".  I will give you an example,.  Many years ago before I had sense I placed a very large bet on John Lydon to win celebrity big brother at evens.  A couple of his closest competitors were up for eviction and he was very popular and stook little chance of being evicted and was an overwhelming favourite to win the thing according to the polls.  I expected to be able to lay at 1.8 by the next day and lock in a profit.  There was no downside so I took a much bigger bet than my bankroll strictly allowed.  I loved the bet and though my absolute maximum downside was that he had an argument and I had to lay 2.50 or something the next day.  That night as I slept he decided, sensibly, that CBB was a load of bollocks not befitting a man such as himself and walked out of the house leaving my bet in tatters and effectively a loser and my bankroll taking its worst ever hit in percentage terms all off the back of one bet.  Was he a good bet?  Yes I still firmly believe he was.  Was it worth risking 30% of my bankroll on one bet?  No never because of what Donald Rumsfeld famously called "unknown unknowns".

[MereNovice]

I'm just applying logic and what I understand from what I've read in this thread, so if I'm getting any of this wrong, please shout up.

As if you wouldn't

Just to clarify:

Laying a bet to close a position at the right price is correct if both bets are placed on the same exchange where commission is paid.

Also, when using a system such as Kelly it could be correct even if no commission is paid depending on how you calculate your bankroll when you have outstanding bets.
If you determine your bankroll by the amount that you have available to bet, then placing another bet for a percentage of your roll would allow you to place a bigger bet.
This would be the case on Betfair since Betfair returns the stake to your wallet once you have greened out.
If you add a certain amount to your bankroll based on your perceived equity in your outstanding bets this wouldn't necessarily be the case.

Your first point is a very good one.

The second is only valid in a market where we can predict price movements with 100% accuracy and there are no "black swans".  I will give you an example,.  Many years ago before I had sense I placed a very large bet on John Lydon to win celebrity big brother at evens.  A couple of his closest competitors were up for eviction and he was very popular and stook little chance of being evicted and was an overwhelming favourite to win the thing according to the polls.  I expected to be able to lay at 1.8 by the next day and lock in a profit.  There was no downside so I took a much bigger bet than my bankroll strictly allowed.  I loved the bet and though my absolute maximum downside was that he had an argument and I had to lay 2.50 or something the next day.  That night as I slept he decided, sensibly, that CBB was a load of bollocks not befitting a man such as himself and walked out of the house leaving my bet in tatters and effectively a loser and my bankroll taking its worst ever hit in percentage terms all off the back of one bet.  Was he a good bet?  Yes I still firmly believe he was.  Was it worth risking 30% of my bankroll on one bet?  No never because of what Donald Rumsfeld famously called "unknown unknowns".

I think that I'm being dumb but I don't see how your comment relates to my second point. Sorry! It's a good point nonetheless.

My point was if we had a simplistic betting (size) strategy where we placed each bet for a fixed percentage (say 5%) of our remaining funds then closing out a position increases the amount we have to place on our next (presumably +EV) bet.

If we have a roll of £1000 and place a bet of £50 then we only have £950 left so our next (5%) bet would be for £47.50.

Of course, as I said before, this wouldn't necessarily be valid depending on how we calculate our roll based on the equity of outstanding bets.

[tikay]

I think Neil's main point that people don't grasp is Tighty being a solid judge is way more likely to have an edge and place a +ev selection before the ipl starts rather than after x live games, billions of pounds matched. The market is far more likely to be correct at this point so all you are doing is losing commissions and the 0.9% overlay on bf. Plus there's always be argument that if you have a really strong opinion on a team and that the initial market was wrong, it's rare for the market to ever truly correct itself in line with your opinion, so underrated teams stay underrated but probably not as much as at the start and overrated teams stay overrated but to a lesser extent- which is why i basically never lay off and usually have many urges to press instead. Hence why it's more likely you can make a +ev bet before x number of televised games rather than after everyone has access to more information on something's true price.

Zing!

Even the hard of hearing can grasp that.

[redarmi]

Ha!!!  It doesn't I misread your post.  I thought you were just suggesting that a policy of greening out allowed you to place bigger bets just based on the fact that your total bet amount wasn't at risk but you weren't suggesting that at all now I read it properly!!!!  The point you actually made about freeing up bankroll is a decent one especially for bets that take a long time to run.  By way of example if I knew that tomorrow David Cameron, Nick Ckegg and George Osbourne were going to be exposed as taking huge bribes for government contracts and I expected the Labour price for the next General Election to go from slight odds on to 1-20 overnight then I should of course bet them.  If the price then moved to 1-14 then theoretically I would be taking a -EV bet by laying them at 1/14 but the money I could make in the next two years off that 5% of my bankroll is worth more than having it tied up so taking a small -EV in that spot is the right thing t do.  Of course for all of these things to be correct you have to be a long term winning punter.

[Tal]

I agree with that bankroll point, but that is down to your own methods of managing your punting. Some home truths of a somewhat ice creamy nature follow...

I've never applied Kelly in any meaningful way to a bet

I bet less on something the longer the price almost without fail.

I have happily closed out positions purely because I want the money NOW!



It doesn't change the principle that, if you have a bet on a lovely price and that lovely price swings too far the other way, you should lay.

How much and on what basis you lay is down to you. If you choose Kelly, you can choose (I assume...) to include the money you cash out in closing the bet as part of your bankroll when calculating the lay amount. That then means your bet size is greater than your previous bet, which is the optimal strategy.

This all makes sense in my head but I'd be delighted to hear there's a better way...

[Tal]

I also misunderstood the second bit and now agree with redarmi

[TightEnd]

So Mumbai now play the winners of Hyderabad/Rajastan in the semi final

Chennai are straight through to the final

Revised odds Chennai 8/11 Mumbai 11/4

http://www.oddschecker.com/cricket/indian-premier-league/winner

[youthnkzR]

Tony Pulis next Wolves manager.

Stan James showing 5/1

Skybet showing 16/1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Fits the bill. Got Stoke from L1 to Prem. He doesn't have to move house to go there!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22614097

Story less than an hour old, so they're lagging

This is now 20/1 with skybet. 5/1 with .

[Karabiner]

Ms.Shin in action now offered @ 18/1 by jokes.

Advise Fred to press another £5 or so EW, will give detailed reasoning later.

[tikay]

Ms.Shin in action now offered @ 18/1 by jokes.

Advise Fred to press another £5 or so EW, will give detailed reasoning later.

Ladbrokes seem to be 14/1 now Ralph.

Still press?

[kukushkin88]

Ms.Shin in action now offered @ 18/1 by jokes.

Advise Fred to press another £5 or so EW, will give detailed reasoning later.

Ladbrokes seem to be 14/1 now Ralph.

Still press?

18/1 Coral. I´ve gone in again too.

[Tal]

If she lifts the trophy, will Fred be...quids Shin?