Jacking in dole for maths gambling sysyem

jobeenfitz

I dont know much about systems. I think the most important thing for a gambler is discipline. I aint got as much as I would like. You need to study/watch a lot of racing(or whatever your sport is) and only bet when your as sure as possible. Collect(when you win) and go back to the drawing board. Don't get excited with the money and give it back immediately. We gamblers get a kick from gambling and this makes it hard to be disciplined. If you put in the hours and only back a couple of selections every month I believe you could make money from it. Wish I could take my own advice.

WumBuster

jobeenfitz wrote: »

I dont know much about systems. I think the most important thing for a gambler is discipline. I aint got as much as I would like. You need to study/watch a lot of racing(or whatever your sport is) and only bet when your as sure as possible. Collect(when you win) and go back to the drawing board. Don't get excited with the money and give it back immediately. We gamblers get a kick from gambling and this makes it hard to be disciplined. If you put in the hours and only back a couple of selections every month I believe you could make money from it. Wish I could take my own advice.

I think it could be possible to make money if you are very disciplined(maybe only a few bets a month, which few people could probably do if they tried tbh) and also you need to be good with your gut instinct. The amount of times its happened where i thought to myself ''I knew that was going to happen i shudda backed it!.'' But the reality is you never really know. But as i said if you have the discipline and be able to look around for good value bets and only bet when you feel its a really good bet, you cant go too far wrong.But there's still no guarantees. In reality, the people who make the most money in gambling, like the stock market are those with inside information, or stuff that the bookies dont know, but thats' a debate for another thread.

OP, you need to get alot of horse results history into a database and run your equation on years of data before you even think of gambling your rent and ESB money..
I wouldn't know how to do that but if you've spent this long on the equation, spend another few months working out how to run your equation on a large amount of data.

Also, bankroll management.. The best gamblers in the world run bad but their variance is within their bankroll. The worst gamblers in the world, the other 99% of us don't stick to it so when we hit a perfectly normal bad streak, we lose it all.

gsxr1

I gamble on poker. But never EVER gamble what I cant afford to lose. Only a fool does. The bookie always wins . In the end.

Bankroll.

If it goes up. Roll with it/.:D

CodyJarrett

Thought the fourth word in the thread title was gonna be 'office' - damn, I am now disappoint.

Duggys Housemate

The OP isn't really a gambler. If his system does work then it's maths.

Logical Fallacy

looper333 wrote: »

Ok i expected as much in terms of replies but first of all i would not give away this equation to anybody for any price so forget about that. I also realise systems don't usually work as i have studies many. This though is working in paper trail and you got to admit them results and trend is promising to say the least.

I'd suggest you stop studying maths for a while and start studying English.

holystungun9

OP, if you have any mathematical genius credentials, posting in After Hours of all places, taints my impression of you just a little.

jsd1004

looper333 wrote: »

I explained the Sunday element as having a day off as being important and that study has shown that Sunday betting is slightly different. There was winning Sundays as in results but there are very good reasons not to include Sundays unless in profit after Satuurday racing. I will start with 5 euros per unit from next week. anything smaller would get frustrating.

It gets mighty frustrating when your system starts on a losing streak. I would advise you to start with a sum of money that is insignificant to you and build your empire. I am a semi-professional fx trader for 7 years and this could also be classified as glorified gambling. Believe me every system loses. If your system makes sense and works stick with it even through sustained periods of losses. It is very difficult to be a professional gambler/trader as you have to live through difficult times (emotionally/financially). Never give up the day job/dole and treat any profits as a bonus

looper333

Deleted User wrote: »

OP, you need to get alot of horse results history into a database and run your equation on years of data before you even think of gambling your rent and ESB money..
I wouldn't know how to do that but if you've spent this long on the equation, spend another few months working out how to run your equation on a large amount of data.

Also, bankroll management.. The best gamblers in the world run bad but their variance is within their bankroll. The worst gamblers in the world, the other 99% of us don't stick to it so when we hit a perfectly normal bad streak, we lose it all.

No data is available for archive results on this, it is impossible to gain stats unless finding them daily as i have done last 18 weeks.

Bankroll management is key and this equation caters for that. Anybody playing double up to infinity to get a result is mad, it does not work for anybody , you will always be wiped out eventually.

Discipline is the hardest thing to master and my biggest danger but i never had confidence in an equation like this one and is all my own work and i know nobody will be using exactly the same equation. I will start on Tuesday with 300 banroll, not quite as much as i predict i need for 5 euros per unit but only one 3day period in the entire 18 weeks so far would see me being wiped out straight off if i hit a bad run, 300 actually would just about cover that period if i was unlucky to hit it straight off. I would prefer a little more of a bankroll as i am sure there will be a 4 day bad run at some stage although will be very rare.

I have paid a third of rent arrears so only 165 as it stands, i will not attend meeting to talk about that on Thursday, they will see by then that i am onto it. ESB i have plenty of time and no warnings, i have been much more in arrears before. I will enter into Tuesday with the 300 bankroll which is really not that much. As long as i stick to the equation there is no frustration as if it does blow out in a really unlucky start then i will just keep doing the paper trail stats. If i back anything else at all then i will blow everything, that is a discipline not easy to master but not impossible. It will take major balls to keep my head straight, winning or losing. I just have to look at 18 weeks of results to know the good periods and bad periods and just not to worry as it will all turn out fine in the end. The last 2 weeks before this one were the worst with only 13cprofit in total but it has recovered a little this week. Today is an important day, hit a bad day today and the equation would enter into a rare sunday of in play. It could mean 3 weeks of just about breaking even for 3 weeks and that would not be a disaster overall but could be a sign to take another 3 weeks of paper trail. If it is a good day today then all is well and the little slow fortnight can perhaps be put down to the bad weather ( breaking even is still fine in a bad period) The thinking has never been a weekly profit , it is all about the overall average. Every graph and trend gos up and down so a good day would be a nice sign of going up again. It would be great to see 2 or 3 weeks in good profit again and perhaps one big profit week to balance out the ropey weeks. Only two negative weeks so far remember of 201 and 57.

CiaranC

What are the odds of someone being able to build a unique, complex mathematical model to beat the exchanges but not be able to get a job?

looper333

holystungun9 wrote: »

OP, if you have any mathematical genius credentials, posting in After Hours of all places, taints my impression of you just a little.

Like i said before i am new to these forums but i would rather the type of input i am getting here than that of all gamblers on a gambling forum.

Mr Benevolent

You're falling for the same assumption I made, namely that theory is the same as practice. I lost €14,000 over five months using a system like that. No doubt you'll say that you system is better, you know better etc - it isn't and you don't. Huge numbers of people have thought the same way and were burned, including me.

Spare yourself the pain and spend it on cars or something fun instead. At least then you'll be left with something to enjoy.

looper333

CiaranC wrote: »

What are the odds of someone being able to build a unique, complex mathematical model to beat the exchanges but not be able to get a job?

Higher than that of a sheep type person who settles for a few hundred euros a week doing a meaningless job all day, being told what to do all day by somebody else that they can't stand.

3ndahalfof6

looper333 wrote: »

Like i said before i am new to these forums but i would rather the type of input i am getting here than that of all gamblers on a gambling forum.

makes sense, I need some coal so I will go the laundrette .

looper333

3ndahalfof6 wrote: »

makes sense, I need some coal so I will go the laundrette .

I thought it was all just one forum... I rather get input from people who don't usually gamble or know much about gambling etc as these are different views than that of those who gamble all the time. Also it would also catch the attention of a few who use to gamble etc who don't frequent a gamblers forum but who might frequent this time of forum. It has done that. If you go buy coal in a launderette maybe you are getting it cheaper as they do a sideline in the launderette.

looper333

Confab wrote: »

You're falling for the same assumption I made, namely that theory is the same as practice. I lost €14,000 over five months using a system like that. No doubt you'll say that you system is better, you know better etc - it isn't and you don't. Huge numbers of people have thought the same way and were burned, including me.

Spare yourself the pain and spend it on cars or something fun instead. At least then you'll be left with something to enjoy.

You are falling into the trap of ' i got burned so you will too as you are not as smart as me '. People do succeed in things other don't, i never claimed this will yet, only that it looks very promising and it didn't come straight away but rather took years to develop. It could go 4 weeks bad but it will recover plus more and average out a very healthy profit as it has so far after 18 weeks. The discipline to stick to it is the hardest to master.

3ndahalfof6

looper333 wrote: »

I thought it was all just one forum... I rather get input from people who don't usually gamble or know much about gambling etc as these are different views than that of those who gamble all the time. Also it would also catch the attention of a few who use to gamble etc who don't frequent a gamblers forum but who might frequent this time of forum. It has done that. If you go buy coal in a launderette maybe you are getting it cheaper as they do a sideline in the launderette.

while you make an interesting point in that I could be getting my coal on the black market,

I would of thought this is where you would of got the best feed back, http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=380

looper333

3ndahalfof6 wrote: »

while you make an interesting point in that I could be getting my coal on the black market,

I would of thought this is where you would of got the best feed back, http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=380

They have a lot of forum topics here, all new to me.

Hulk Hands

risteard7 wrote: »

Gambling is for fools. the bookies will allways win and on
the rare occasion you do win your only geeting back a fraction of what you lost
the previous weeks. even in the reccession i would say bookies do better
with all the dole money they get off fellas every week.

ever notice there is three or four windows to place bets in a shop and 1
window to pay out? paddy powers turnover every year is huge

It's this kind of stupid view that 80% of Irish people have and the rest of us have to put up with. People who don't understand that there are things like the exchanges, where there is no bookie, just punter vs punter and if you are smarter than 55% of other punters then you will make a long term profit. Also the traditional bookmakers are so competitive with each other nowadays that you can often create a fair 100% market (bookies make money by having unfair markets) with all their different prices.

But no, no matter how much money I or anyone else makes (proof is always in online accounts), we will still get this stupid prejudiced view that Gambling is for fools. I've given up trying to explain this to people and let my coworkers tell me off for indulging in a 'mugs game', and let them wonder why I generally have more disposable cash than them.

looper333

looper333 wrote: »

No data is available for archive results on this, it is impossible to gain stats unless finding them daily as i have done last 18 weeks.

I actually spent the last 20 mins searching and found a link to a large SQL database of Australian races.

looper333 wrote: »

Higher than that of a sheep type person who settles for a few hundred euros a week doing a meaningless job all day, being told what to do all day by somebody else that they can't stand.

But now you're not getting it.

CiaranC

looper333 wrote: »

Higher than that of a sheep type person who settles for a few hundred euros a week doing a meaningless job all day, being told what to do all day by somebody else that they can't stand.

But you must be approaching genius level, why would you have to work in a menial job? I worked with PHd level risk management guys in the gambling industry who earned six figure salaries who couldnt do what you are claiming to. Why arent you building rockets or designing a cure for cancer?

Mr Benevolent

looper333 wrote: »

You are falling into the trap of ' i got burned so you will too as you are not as smart as me '. People do succeed in things other don't, i never claimed this will yet, only that it looks very promising and it didn't come straight away but rather took years to develop. It could go 4 weeks bad but it will recover plus more and average out a very healthy profit as it has so far after 18 weeks. The discipline to stick to it is the hardest to master.

I knew you'd say that tbh, mainly because I said it too.

looper333

Deleted User wrote: »

I actually spent the last 20 mins searching and found a link to a large SQL database of Australian races.

But now you're not getting it.

The details of this equation mean that any archive no matter how detailed fail to give all the information needed to give accurate stats.

Duggys Housemate

Hulk Hands wrote: »

It's this kind of stupid view that 80% of Irish people have and the rest of us have to put up with. People who don't understand that there are things like the exchanges, where there is no bookie, just punter vs punter and if you are smarter than 55% of other punters then you will make a long term profit. Also the traditional bookmakers are so competitive with each other nowadays that you can often create a fair 100% market (bookies make money by having unfair markets) with all their different prices.

But no, no matter how much money I or anyone else makes (proof is always in online accounts), we will still get this stupid prejudiced view that Gambling is for fools. I've given up trying to explain this to people and let my coworkers tell me off for indulging in a 'mugs game', and let them wonder why I generally have more disposable cash than them.

I gave a system which could make money and nobody has refuted it yet. They would need to work out how many football teams score 3 goals to win a match in the last quarter, and divide by the number of games per season across all leagues, and cups. It's far lower than the odds you get on exchanges.

The fact is you can beat systems.

1) An exchange is just punter->punter. The exchange takes it's cut. Of course punters can beat punters if they are smarter and better - which means better with the odds, like in cards and Poker in particular.
2) If people have biases on exchanges, you can beat them
3) You can also beat a casino with maths - this has been proven. Card counting is the obvious way. That group from MIT a while back. Sure they are all banned, and you can get kicked out, but the casinos are beatable.

I don't gamble at all, and I wouldn't, however, bet against bookies, or casinos. But I can see why you can win with systems on exchanges where it as clear other punters were over-estimating odds for reasons due to congitive biases, or other issues.

So the OP, who is on exchanges, may have a system. There is a fallacy on this thread that "systems" never work, but the exchanges open up gambling removing the "house" advantage.

It's like the old joke about the bull, you dont need to outrun the bull, you need to run faster than the other guy.

WumBuster

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

I gave a system which could make money and nobody has refuted it yet. They would need to work out how many football teams score 3 goals to win a match in the last quarter, and divide by the number of games per season across all leagues, and cups. It's far lower than the odds you get on exchanges.

The fact is you can beat systems.

1) An exchange is just punter->punter. The exchange takes it's cut. Of course punters can beat punters if they are smarter and better - which means better with the odds, like in cards and Poker in particular.
2) If people have biases on exchanges, you can beat them
3) You can also beat a casino with maths - this has been proven. Card counting is the obvious way. That group from MIT a while back. Sure they are all banned, and you can get kicked out, but the casinos are beatable.

I don't gamble at all, and I wouldn't, however, bet against bookies, or casinos. But I can see why you can win with systems on exchanges where it as clear other punters were over-estimating odds for reasons due to congitive biases, or other issues.

So the OP, who is on exchanges, may have a system. There is a fallacy on this thread that "systems" never work, but the exchanges open up gambling removing the "house" advantage.

It's like the old joke about the bull, you dont need to outrun the bull, you need to run faster than the other guy.

Ok I can tell you straight up that system is rubbish, google gambler's fallacy. Outcomes that have happened in the past are no more likely to happen in the future, just because they have happened like that in the past. As for betfair, anyone will tell you including the commission you need to win more than 55% of the time(depending on the commission) to make a profit.Not as easy as it sounds even if there is a lot of mugs on there.

Duggys Housemate

WumBuster wrote: »

Ok I can tell you straight up that system is rubbish, google gambler's fallacy. Outcomes that have happened in the past are no more likely to happen in the future, just because they have happened like that in the past. As for betfair, anyone will tell you including the commission you need to win more than 55% of the time(depending on the commission) to make a profit.Not as easy as it sounds even if there is a lot of mugs on there.

You didn't understand my system one bit. Let me reiterate it as simply as possible. The odds you get for a team 2-0 down to lose on these exchanges is vastly lower than the actual odds. You will win 98.5% of the time. Its clearly easy to simulate this on a computer too.

And you are a gambler, the guy who told me this is a mathematician. He's not a gambler. I dont do it, but it does work. Its mathematically certain, just as the guys who took down the casinos had a mathematical certainty.

Outcomes that have happened in the past are no more likely to happen in the future, just because they have happened like that in the past

Except they are in certain cases - like it will be colder in winter, and warmer in summer.

WumBuster

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

You didn't understand my system one bit. Let me reiterate it as simply as possible. The odds you get for a team 2-0 down to lose on these exchanges is vastly lower than the actual odds. You will win 98.5% of the time. Its clearly easy to simulate this on a computer too.

And you are a gambler, the guy who told me this is a mathematician. He's not a gambler. I dont do it, but it does work. Its mathematically certain, just as the guys who took down the casinos had a mathematical certainty.




Except they are in certain cases - like it will be colder in winter, and warmer in summer.

Mathematicians and gamblers are not always mutually exclusive to each other

The seasons are certain outcomes so thats why bookies or people dont taske bets on it happening, only uncertain outcomes. What i meant there is you need to make at least, on average, a 55%(+5%) return on your money on betfair, just to break even. Obviously when you are constantly betting on something with such short odds you are going to win most of the time.
A system like that, yes could make you money in the short run, but what happens when you get a streak games close together losing, thus you are then cleaned out?

CiaranC

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

I dont do it, but it does work.

You dont do it, of course.

If such a simple thing were a certainty on the exchanges, bots would have sucked the value from it long ago. Do you think the bot writers just overlooked your particular market?

Aodan83

First of all, you did post this in the wrong place. Getting the opinion of different people shouldn't be your main concern, I'm sure your friends and family have given you basically what you have gotten here.

looper333 wrote: »

You are falling into the trap of ' i got burned so you will too as you are not as smart as me '. People do succeed in things other don't, i never claimed this will yet, only that it looks very promising and it didn't come straight away but rather took years to develop. It could go 4 weeks bad but it will recover plus more and average out a very healthy profit as it has so far after 18 weeks. The discipline to stick to it is the hardest to master.

You have claimed it will work, repeatedly, even the end of the post I have quoted claims it will work. You then basically implied Confab didn't have the discipline to see it thorough.

You also say Confab has fallen into a "trap". You completely miss the fact that so have you. You really haven't realised that everyone else who ever had a system and failed said everything you have said! "It could go 4 weeks bad but it will recover plus more". You are so convinced of your genius, that you haven't considered any eventuality other than success. Even the banks had some investments that were pretty solid, and we all know how that went.

looper333

Aodan83 wrote: »

First of all, you did post this in the wrong place. Getting the opinion of different people shouldn't be your main concern, I'm sure your friends and family have given you basically what you have gotten here.


You have claimed it will work, repeatedly, even the end of the post I have quoted claims it will work. You then basically implied Confab didn't have the discipline to see it thorough.

You also say Confab has fallen into a "trap". You completely miss the fact that so have you. You really haven't realised that everyone else who ever had a system and failed said everything you have said! "It could go 4 weeks bad but it will recover plus more". You are so convinced of your genius, that you haven't considered any eventuality other than success. Even the banks had some investments that were pretty solid, and we all know how that went.

Feeling confident it will work is not saying it will 100% work. Put it this way , people fall into traps and give up after failure . I have studied many systems before and at first fell into that trap. I learned not to fall into that trap years ago but i continued to knock numbers around with no expectations. I put a lot of work into it and gradually learned when so many others had already given up. That is just hard work and a very good grasp of numbers, i don't see it as genius. As pointed out by some posters , there are plenty of people who do make money although relatively very small. In any winning equation there will be periods of stagnation . It is the discipline and bank management that become key is consistent;y making profits, these skills i have still to prove to myself but then again i have never been as confident is the methods i have used before , until now.

areyawell

keep us updated on your profits wont you with screenshots. 99% he wont post one in the anytime future. This guy thinks he is a genius and should be working with the government to stop fraud of welfare checks lol

WumBuster

looper333 wrote: »

Feeling confident it will work is not saying it will 100% work. Put it this way , people fall into traps and give up after failure . I have studied many systems before and at first fell into that trap. I learned not to fall into that trap years ago but i continued to knock numbers around with no expectations. I put a lot of work into it and gradually learned when so many others had already given up. That is just hard work and a very good grasp of numbers, i don't see it as genius. As pointed out by some posters , there are plenty of people who do make money although relatively very small. In any winning equation there will be periods of stagnation . It is the discipline and bank management that become key is consistent;y making profits, these skills i have still to prove to myself but then again i have never been as confident is the methods i have used before , until now.

I think if you're gonna do it, you should pay your rent and bills up to date first as you dont want to be out of electricity or on the street. If this system is as foolproof as you think it is whats the rush in starting it right now. It just shows a lack of discipline. And i know how it feels to spend money gambling that was prioritized for essentials. The urge just becomes too great. Thats why i dont touch any form of gambling anymore, even if it is just for a bit of fun, because |i dont trust myself that in the heat of the moment, you could do anything.

looper333

Finished fro day with no more races fitting into equation. Just to point out that only afternoon racing is involved, no evening races touched .

Today profit using same 10 euros pattern as in results was 69 bringing week profit to 239 which is an average of 39.833 profit per day for that unit which lines up nicely to the overall average over 118 days that stands at 39.2

That means another Sunday off although as always i will paper trail it anyway.

looper333

WumBuster wrote: »

I think if you're gonna do it, you should pay your rent and bills up to date first as you dont want to be out of electricity or on the street. If this system is as foolproof as you think it is whats the rush in starting it right now. It just shows a lack of discipline. And i know how it feels to spend money gambling that was prioritized for essentials. The urge just becomes too great. Thats why i dont touch any form of gambling anymore, even if it is just for a bit of fun, because |i dont trust myself that in the heat of the moment, you could do anything.

These are my thoughts over last few days. I could clear the rent completely and get 3 weeks shopping in plus buy a new kettle, stock up on some whey protein. I could then save dole money the following 2 weeks and have my bankroll. It amazes me i have gone this far without really tackling into it, just never could get enough up but the handy accum win is the key. Discipline is my big flaw but something i am working very hard at , like i said i have never been so confident in any method i used before in this context so that can be the changing factor .

WumBuster

looper333 wrote: »

Finished fro day with no more races fitting into equation. Just to point out that only afternoon racing is involved, no evening races touched .

Today profit using same 10 euros pattern as in results was 69 bringing week profit to 239 which is an average of 39.833 profit per day for that unit which lines up nicely to the overall average over 118 days that stands at 39.2

That means another Sunday off although as always i will paper trail it anyway.

Im quite dubious about the fact you say that the patterns are different on Sundays. Its just another day's racing. If they are, surely that would be all priced in anyway.

Duggys Housemate

CiaranC wrote: »

You dont do it, of course.

If such a simple thing were a certainty on the exchanges, bots would have sucked the value from it long ago. Do you think the bot writers just overlooked your particular market?

I'd like a bit less sarcasm and a bit more maths. Disprove the maths, or get out.

Bot are automated bets which you have to direct the betting. That argument is another you can never game the system argument, roundly disproved throughout this thread.

Look I have already given the bloody stats. There are almost no - i.e. 1 in 1 few hundred games, or a thousand - where a team which is 2-0 down in the last Q wins. That would mean the game becomes a 5 goal game at the minimum, statistically unlikely anyway, and that there are 3 goals in the last 20 minutes, statistically unlikely.

Thats all higher than the odds you generally get, normally about 10-1. If punters get wise then the odds will get higher, but at the moment people think that putting a tenner to win 100 is worth it, sure its only 2-0 down, their cognitive bias is that it happens more than it does, because they remember it more.

This is not one I use, in fact I dont use anything, its an example of something which could work. There are better and better ploys. The downside is it takes a lot of time. So I couldnt be assed.

Here is an for example from a smallish sample:

In the world cup of 2010 nobody came back from a 2 goal deficit, which you would expect as there were only 64 games. To check look for a game which ends - at the least - at 3-2. The losers need at least 2 goals. There are three only, and no case did the loser at the three quarter stage get to win. In Uruaguy-Germeny there was never a two goal gap, and in Slovakia-Italy you get what you expect. Slovakia, leading by 2 goals at 73 minutes, wins. You would easily get 10-1 for Italy at 73 minutes, possibly higher given the teams that are in it. Similarly with Uruaguay-Holland, holland ahead by 2 at 73 minutes go on to win.

looper333

WumBuster wrote: »

Im quite dubious about the fact you say that the patterns are different on Sundays. Its just another day's racing. If they are, surely that would be all priced in anyway.

The overall profits for Sunday is about even. It is still a factor i am analyzing with great interest but a factor i thought of very early on. Sunday racing is different in my view for numerous reasons. However the main reason is i would prefer to keep Sundays off and if my thoughts are correct i won't be losing any or an awful lot of profit for doing so. Sundays are included though if not in profit on Saturday , not just because i am looking to get into profit but because the equations say there is an increased chance of profit on that day.

WumBuster

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

I'd like a bit less sarcasm and a bit more maths. Disprove the maths, or get out.

Bot are automated bets which you have to direct the betting. That argument is another you can never game the system argument, roundly disproved throughout this thread.

Look I have already given the bloody stats. There are almost no - i.e. 1 in 1 few hundred games, or a thousand - where a team which is 2-0 down in the last Q wins. That would mean the game becomes a 5 goal game at the minimum, statistically unlikely anyway, and that there are 3 goals in the last 20 minutes, statistically unlikely.

Thats all higher than the odds you generally get, normally about 10-1. If punters get wise then the odds will get higher, but at the moment people think that putting a tenner to win 100 is worth it, sure its only 2-0 down, their cognitive bias is that it happens more than it does, because they remember it more.

This is not one I use, in fact I dont use anything, its an example of something which could work. There are better and better ploys. The downside is it takes a lot of time. So I couldnt be assed.

Here is an for example from a smallish sample:

In the world cup of 2010 nobody came back from a 2 goal deficit, which you would expect as there were only 64 games. To check look for a game which ends - at the least - at 3-2. The losers need at least 2 goals. There are three only, and no case did the loser get to win. In Uruaguy-Germeny there was never a two goal gap, and in Slovakia-Italy you get what you expect. Slovakia, leading by 2 goals at 73 minutes, wins. You would easily get 10-1 for Italy at 73 minutes, possibly higher given the teams that are in it. Similarly with Uruaguay-Holland, holland ahead by 2 at 73 minutes go on to win.

There's nothing dissprove as you havent really proven anything. All you use is words like ''unlikely'' and ''almost''. I dont go betfair, but if you can lay a team 2-0 down with with 15 mins to go at 10-1, those are amazing odds, no doubt about it.

Duggys Housemate

WumBuster wrote: »

There's nothing dissprove as you havent really proven anything. All you use is words like ''unlikely'' and ''almost''. I dont go betfair, but if you can lay a team 2-0 down with with 15 mins to go at 10-1, those are amazing odds, no doubt about it.

No what I pointed out is that in 64 games nobody came back from 2 goals down. I used terms like unlikely, and almost, because that is what we scientists do. Same with the recent European Championship, only two games had a loser with 2 goals minim, and nobody came back from 2 behind to win.

BorneTobyWilde

looper333 wrote: »

The overall profits for Sunday is about even. It is still a factor i am analyzing with great interest but a factor i thought of very early on. Sunday racing is different in my view for numerous reasons. However the main reason is i would prefer to keep Sundays off and if my thoughts are correct i won't be losing any or an awful lot of profit for doing so. Sundays are included though if not in profit on Saturday , not just because i am looking to get into profit but because the equations say there is an increased chance of profit on that day.

Do you back on every race?
Do you stick to certain size fields?
Do you bet on more than one horse in a race
Do you stick to first 5 in market?
Do you back favourites only ?

WumBuster

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

No what I pointed out is that in 64 games nobody came back from 2 goals down. I used terms like unlikely, and almost, because that is what we scientists do. Same with the recent European Championship, only two games had a loser with 2 goals minim, and nobody came back from 2 behind to win.

Well personally there is no way i would consider backing a team 2 down to score 3 goals and win, with 15 mins to go at 10-1. Not even for 100-1 tbh.
There must be some mugs on those exchanges if this is the case

looper333

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Do you back on every race?
Do you stick to certain size fields? NO
Do you bet on more than one horse in a race NO
Do you stick to first 5 in market? YES
Do you back favourites only ?

NO

kowloon

Tried out some fixture trading once, didn't actually put money down, just fed the odds into excel.
Generally, if you spread a bet of, say €100 across different bookies on win, lose and draw for maximum return you will make back only €90, but when there's disagreement between the bookies on the odds you can make a tiny profit.
It's not really worth it for all the trawling through different bookies.

Suppose it might be a good money laundering technique.

looper333

looper333 wrote: »

NO

tHE ONLY yES WAS STICK TO FIRST 5 IN MARKET

BorneTobyWilde

looper333 wrote: »

tHE ONLY yES WAS STICK TO FIRST 5 IN MARKET

I'll get it outa ya but by bit LOL jk!

looper333

Would have been a further profit of 184 today but for a safety tweak introduced in week 5. Tweak has only come into play 3 times in all and actually cost a profit of about 40 over all. All the signs as time goes on a little rare things pop up again is that they even themselves out, a good sign. Tweak does steady any bad trends though but like today slims down big winning rare days.

BorneTobyWilde

I use to make a great profit on paper by backing 3 in a race,
3 next in market after favourite , In races where i would want to lay favourite
few races a day 3 pts per race, 1 pt per each horse
Ie if i get a 5-1 winner i'm - 2 but plus 3
Strike rate was huge, i would win 7 out of 10 races this way,

Never tried it for real, and would pick my races, usual 5-11 fields that have big outsiders ie 14-1 upwards
So i avoid favourite and back next 3. Now unless a huge price wins ie 10-1 upwards, or favourite wins,, I usual win with prices in the range of 3-1 to 8-1
And put a dent into the 2pts i lose on each race by doing it on betfair and getting better sp prices

looper333

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

I use to make a great profit on paper by backing 3 in a race,
3 next in market after favourite , In races where i would want to lay favourite
few races a day 3 pts per race, 1 pt per each horse
Ie if i get a 5-1 winner i'm - 2 but plus 3
Strike rate was huge, i would win 7 out of 10 races this way,

Never tried it for real, and would pick my races, usual 5-11 fields that have big outsiders ie 14-1 upwards
So i avoid favourite and back next 3. Now unless a huge price wins ie 10-1 upwards, or favourite wins,, I usual win with prices in the range of 3-1 to 8-1
And put a dent into the 2pts i lose on each race by doing it on betfair and getting better sp prices

This method you mention was one of my last methods leading up to present one and how i was betting most of previous 2 years. Although this one is very different the thinking you have is on the right lines to uncovering a few more factors but at the same time along way off. I researched the method you mention here and it does work but fluctuates too much which put me off eventually. Once something fluctuates within a few short weeks i write it off.

WumBuster

How much could you lose in a day, realistically if things dont go to plan?