Hi Jeff
Well, Zenyetta's approach is interesting. I cant remember ever having such a trade myself, but that's not to say his approach is wrong. If you have firm belief that there is value is certain odds and those odds increase, then it follows that you should maximise them?? Very debateable I agree, but isnt that the approach Warren Buffet takes?
Scratching - ABSOLUTELY all in fav of that. I scratch many trades. That is one of the most important tools in your kitbag. After placing a bet I always let the mouse hover over the scratch (if I miss it though and I feel I have entered at the correct price I will wait to see if it comes back. If it doesn't then I always hedge just before the suspend
Regards
Peter
Money Management
As long as you don't over-commit yourself relative to your betting bank, and you're sure you know what you're doing, then I agree. But I get the impression that Zenyatta isn't approaching this from a form study perspective, working out the approximate true chances of horses. Rather, I think he views the market as being a bit like a boomerang - it might go strongly in one direction, but sooner or later he thinks it will generally retrace massively. The problem with that theory is that, whilst V shaped markets do happen, I'd say it's far more common for the market to strongly trend in one direction and then stagnate or retrace only slightly.PeterLe wrote:Hi Jeff
Well, Zenyetta's approach is interesting. I cant remember ever having such a trade myself, but that's not to say his approach is wrong. If you have firm belief that there is value is certain odds and those odds increase, then it follows that you should maximise them??
Jeff
I would have no problem letting a trade go 12 ticks against me with one of my stratagies because i have stats showing that i would be worst off in the long run if i did ,
but sure it can ruin the day if you have a few of them
.
I wouldn't do what Zenyatta does though,
not saying it's not possible, but you would be taking some huge huge hits at times
, but as long as the wins cover the losses it works 
.
not sure if you are a profitable trader yet Jeff, but i would strongly suggest you set up excel and collect some data on the markets, try different stop losses / tick offsets etc,
i think alot of us have done this and it really helps you understand how it all works and a break even strategy (which are incredibly easy to find) can with a few tweeks be turned to a winning one.
but sure it can ruin the day if you have a few of them
.I wouldn't do what Zenyatta does though,
not saying it's not possible, but you would be taking some huge huge hits at times
, but as long as the wins cover the losses it works .not sure if you are a profitable trader yet Jeff, but i would strongly suggest you set up excel and collect some data on the markets, try different stop losses / tick offsets etc,
i think alot of us have done this and it really helps you understand how it all works and a break even strategy (which are incredibly easy to find) can with a few tweeks be turned to a winning one.
In fact Jeff, I do put in the form study and try to calulate the odds. Looks like after a couple of years it does seem that I've finally crossed the threshold of profitability.
It was basically money management and lack of confidence that was doing me in, not the wrong selections. I didn't have a big enough bank and was over-staking, and that combined with the lack of confidence (price chasing, stop-lossing) etc. was doing my nuts in. I believe it's money management that's killing most people, not wrong strategy.
My goal was 150 per day, which I believe I've reached. Therefore, I'm off on a round the world trip. This will be the sternest test of my trading skills, since I will be relying solely on trading to cover my travel costs (Betfair will be my primary trading exchange, but I do have BetDaq as a back-up if it all goes pear-shaped at Betfair). Is my trading now good enough to be my sole source of income under travel conditions? I'm about to find out...
It was basically money management and lack of confidence that was doing me in, not the wrong selections. I didn't have a big enough bank and was over-staking, and that combined with the lack of confidence (price chasing, stop-lossing) etc. was doing my nuts in. I believe it's money management that's killing most people, not wrong strategy.
My goal was 150 per day, which I believe I've reached. Therefore, I'm off on a round the world trip. This will be the sternest test of my trading skills, since I will be relying solely on trading to cover my travel costs (Betfair will be my primary trading exchange, but I do have BetDaq as a back-up if it all goes pear-shaped at Betfair). Is my trading now good enough to be my sole source of income under travel conditions? I'm about to find out...
Good luck! 
How would you respond to the argument that the true fundamentals about a horse aren't always known to the public? For example, you see a horse drift to 4.0 from 2.5, when your analysis says that 2.5 was about the right price. That might be a fantastic value betting opportunity, or it might be that the horse picked up a minor injury in training last week, and the true price is much higher than 4.0...
Jeff
How would you respond to the argument that the true fundamentals about a horse aren't always known to the public? For example, you see a horse drift to 4.0 from 2.5, when your analysis says that 2.5 was about the right price. That might be a fantastic value betting opportunity, or it might be that the horse picked up a minor injury in training last week, and the true price is much higher than 4.0...
Jeff
Well, yes, horse racing is notorious for hidden info. But my approach can't do anything about that, I can only take into account the info I know about. So I'm relying on the fact that in at least *some* markets, form fundamentals shine through at least *some* of the time (enough to be profitable). Being selective is the key.Ferru123 wrote:Good luck!
How would you respond to the argument that the true fundamentals about a horse aren't always known to the public? For example, you see a horse drift to 4.0 from 2.5, when your analysis says that 2.5 was about the right price. That might be a fantastic value betting opportunity, or it might be that the horse picked up a minor injury in training last week, and the true price is much higher than 4.0...
Jeff
The trading needs to work for me. I'm from New Zealand and I will be flying out to the other side of the world soon to begin my world tour. So if my trading fails, you can imagine me stuck in say a cubicle in Japan somewhere (one of those internet cafes for the homeless). I don't win I don't eat. It's that simple. The trading had better work man
Zenyatta wrote:A few simple markets where there is likely to be clear price trends.What markets is it (stop loss) useful on?
Unless it's the particular type of market I mentioned above, no, I wouldn't agree.Regardless of whether you offer to the market to close or take the available price, would you not agree that there comes a point in a losing trade where you should say 'This trade has gone far enough against me - it's time to get out'?
As an example for yesterday, I had placed a $400 back bet on 'Trail Blaze' (the 3.25 at Ayr) around 5 minutes before the off. Immediately the market started moving against me and continued moving against me by a huge number of ticks (over 12 ticks in fact, the price of 'Trail Blaze' went from around 3.60 to over 4.00 in the space of a minute).
If I'd "stopped loss" (and my old self would have) I'd have lost a fortune. Instead, here's what I did do: I simply kept putting more and more and more cash on to back as the price kept moving out and out. I think I ended up with an exposure of over $1000 on it before finally getting the big price reversal. The price then proceeded to crash all the way down again, ended with an SP of 3.45 and reaping me huge profits.
That's confidence. Not chasing prices (and stop-loss is really just chasing prices), but backing yourself and confidently betting against the market. That's the secret to real profit.
Adopting an approach of no Stop Losses would have seriously tested your mettle yesterday, Zenyatta. The following races all produced a "run" (fav) of at least 10 ticks where there was no let up before the off. With no retracement and your strategy of adding to your losses, you would have lost your £1000 bank 9 times. I would have cried for you in the 3.40 Uttox where the fall was a 30 ticks loss.
2.15pm 15 ticks 4.5 to 6
2.20pm 10 ticks 3.75 to 4.5
2.30pm 16 ticks 3.3 to 4.2
2.50pm 16 ticks 2.94 to 3.65
3.30pm 12 ticks 3.75 to 4.7
3.40pm 30 ticks 3.9 to 2.76
4.20pm 21 ticks 3.8 to 5.7
4.45pm 16 ticks 5.4 to 8
5.20pm 23 ticks 3.4 to 2.7
Hardly the occasional race and holding a bet against the trend isn't "confidence"; its simply foolhardy.
Hi James,
I'm not sure what time frame you observed these swings (ie was it five minutes out or five hours?)
I just added those up and it amounts to :-
-94 Ticks
+54 Ticks
As the sample rate gets bigger these will ultimately offset each other. For example over the course of the day; week or month, then the difference would be very close I would have thought?
regards
Peter
PS I think this is a great example where there is no one correct answer. If you had a fully automated system, the peaks and troughs even themselves out, but if you are trading selected races having analysed them then a different approach is needed. Both ways could be employed?
I'm not sure what time frame you observed these swings (ie was it five minutes out or five hours?)
I just added those up and it amounts to :-
-94 Ticks
+54 Ticks
As the sample rate gets bigger these will ultimately offset each other. For example over the course of the day; week or month, then the difference would be very close I would have thought?
regards
Peter
PS I think this is a great example where there is no one correct answer. If you had a fully automated system, the peaks and troughs even themselves out, but if you are trading selected races having analysed them then a different approach is needed. Both ways could be employed?
Hi Peter,
All the races were inside the last 10 mins up to the off (in some cases maybe 8 mins). These were only the drifts with NO pullbacks and excluded those < 10 ticks with no retracement. eg the 3.15pm race had an 8 tick drift close to the off. I also didn't count any races where there was a small pullback (that did not reach the base of the run) because most of the races were of that type eg the 4.00pm race fell from 6's to 4.7 and retraced to 5.4.
There are dozens of races every week where a fav has a significant run with no/little retracement and these races are in the majority over those that have a retracement back to or beyond the source odds.
What are the figs -94 and +54 Peter?
Anyone unlucky enough (or foolhardy enough) to have entered (at source) all of the examples I quoted would have lost (without a stop loss) 159 ticks with zero compensation due to the lack of retracement before the off.
IMO it is complete madness to assume or trade in a manner that assumes that every run (trend) will retrace.
All the races were inside the last 10 mins up to the off (in some cases maybe 8 mins). These were only the drifts with NO pullbacks and excluded those < 10 ticks with no retracement. eg the 3.15pm race had an 8 tick drift close to the off. I also didn't count any races where there was a small pullback (that did not reach the base of the run) because most of the races were of that type eg the 4.00pm race fell from 6's to 4.7 and retraced to 5.4.
There are dozens of races every week where a fav has a significant run with no/little retracement and these races are in the majority over those that have a retracement back to or beyond the source odds.
What are the figs -94 and +54 Peter?
Anyone unlucky enough (or foolhardy enough) to have entered (at source) all of the examples I quoted would have lost (without a stop loss) 159 ticks with zero compensation due to the lack of retracement before the off.
IMO it is complete madness to assume or trade in a manner that assumes that every run (trend) will retrace.
Hi JamesJames1st wrote:Hi Peter,
What are the figs -94 and +54 Peter?
I was just adding the the number of ticks you mentioned and assigned either a negative or positive to them i.e.:-
2.15pm 15 ticks 4.5 to 6 (-15)
2.20pm 10 ticks 3.75 to 4.5 (-10)
2.30pm 16 ticks 3.3 to 4.2 (-16)
2.50pm 16 ticks 2.94 to 3.65 (-16)
3.30pm 12 ticks 3.75 to 4.7 (-12)
3.40pm 30 ticks 3.9 to 2.76 (+30)
4.20pm 21 ticks 3.8 to 5.7 (-21)
4.45pm 16 ticks 5.4 to 8 (-16)
5.20pm 23 ticks 3.4 to 2.7 (+23)
Sorry it should have read :-
-106
+53
So if you take Zenyatta as an example; I was trying to say that over a big enough number of samples if he was to place back bets and then never trade out via a stop loss, they would cancel each other out over time. Ie sometimes the market would favour you, others not.
regards
Peter
Hi Peter
That works if Zenyatta lets his profits run as well as his losses. But if we assume, for argument's sake, that he has a modest profit target but lets his losses run, then long-term I'd say he's toast...
All that said, Zenyatta has said that he uses form to find value, so maybe his trading isn't quite as crude as I'm depicting it as being!
Jeff
That works if Zenyatta lets his profits run as well as his losses. But if we assume, for argument's sake, that he has a modest profit target but lets his losses run, then long-term I'd say he's toast...
All that said, Zenyatta has said that he uses form to find value, so maybe his trading isn't quite as crude as I'm depicting it as being!
Jeff
Hi Jeff,
Yes I understand what you mean and I know that James has some very good points too.
I guess that my personal approach (and one that I have tried to adopt right from the word go, be it an automated strategy or manual) was to trade at random initially (with no stop losses), which I know will break even (discounting premium Charge for a moment), and then hone and refine those strategies to see how I could reduce the losses, to move into profit.
This has worked well for me over the years, but I fully accept that it's not the only way to profit
Regards
Peter
Yes I understand what you mean and I know that James has some very good points too.
I guess that my personal approach (and one that I have tried to adopt right from the word go, be it an automated strategy or manual) was to trade at random initially (with no stop losses), which I know will break even (discounting premium Charge for a moment), and then hone and refine those strategies to see how I could reduce the losses, to move into profit.
This has worked well for me over the years, but I fully accept that it's not the only way to profit
Regards
Peter
Ah Peter, totally with you now.
For someone who only ever lays (or only ever backs) then, over time, they should break even because the fav, on average, will drift or steam in roughly equal proportions.
However, I was being more specific and addressing the post to Zenyatta and other newbies who trade both directions and in doing so have the potential to enter every trade on the wrong side. Doing this without using a stop loss, and in Zenyatta's example assuming that every market will retrace, is a recipe for disaster.
Zenyatta, judging from his prior posts, appears to be a "normal" trader who enters trades on both sides of the book and as such is open to extreme losses yet decries the use of a stop loss.
For someone who only ever lays (or only ever backs) then, over time, they should break even because the fav, on average, will drift or steam in roughly equal proportions.
However, I was being more specific and addressing the post to Zenyatta and other newbies who trade both directions and in doing so have the potential to enter every trade on the wrong side. Doing this without using a stop loss, and in Zenyatta's example assuming that every market will retrace, is a recipe for disaster.
Zenyatta, judging from his prior posts, appears to be a "normal" trader who enters trades on both sides of the book and as such is open to extreme losses yet decries the use of a stop loss.
James1st wrote:Zenyatta wrote:A few simple markets where there is likely to be clear price trends.What markets is it (stop loss) useful on?
Unless it's the particular type of market I mentioned above, no, I wouldn't agree.Regardless of whether you offer to the market to close or take the available price, would you not agree that there comes a point in a losing trade where you should say 'This trade has gone far enough against me - it's time to get out'?
As an example for yesterday, I had placed a $400 back bet on 'Trail Blaze' (the 3.25 at Ayr) around 5 minutes before the off. Immediately the market started moving against me and continued moving against me by a huge number of ticks (over 12 ticks in fact, the price of 'Trail Blaze' went from around 3.60 to over 4.00 in the space of a minute).
If I'd "stopped loss" (and my old self would have) I'd have lost a fortune. Instead, here's what I did do: I simply kept putting more and more and more cash on to back as the price kept moving out and out. I think I ended up with an exposure of over $1000 on it before finally getting the big price reversal. The price then proceeded to crash all the way down again, ended with an SP of 3.45 and reaping me huge profits.
That's confidence. Not chasing prices (and stop-loss is really just chasing prices), but backing yourself and confidently betting against the market. That's the secret to real profit.
Adopting an approach of no Stop Losses would have seriously tested your mettle yesterday, Zenyatta. The following races all produced a "run" (fav) of at least 10 ticks where there was no let up before the off. With no retracement and your strategy of adding to your losses, you would have lost your £1000 bank 9 times. I would have cried for you in the 3.40 Uttox where the fall was a 30 ticks loss.
2.15pm 15 ticks 4.5 to 6
2.20pm 10 ticks 3.75 to 4.5
2.30pm 16 ticks 3.3 to 4.2
2.50pm 16 ticks 2.94 to 3.65
3.30pm 12 ticks 3.75 to 4.7
3.40pm 30 ticks 3.9 to 2.76
4.20pm 21 ticks 3.8 to 5.7
4.45pm 16 ticks 5.4 to 8
5.20pm 23 ticks 3.4 to 2.7
Hardly the occasional race and holding a bet against the trend isn't "confidence"; its simply foolhardy.
But surely it depends on what Zenyatta entry points were, two people can have the same money management method but still produce massively varying results.
It's unlikely he would have picked the worst possible entry points for each of the mentioned races.
I think its fairly obvious what Zenyatta's strategy is from his example and his statement "I simply kept putting more and more and more cash on to back as the price kept moving out and out. I think I ended up with an exposure of over $1000 on it before finally getting the big price reversal"
I repeat, waiting for a reversal whilst becoming more and more exposed is foolhardy.
It might never come and I quoted some races from yesterday where it simply didn't.
I repeat, waiting for a reversal whilst becoming more and more exposed is foolhardy.
It might never come and I quoted some races from yesterday where it simply didn't.