How many of you also gamble (deliberately)?

[Kafkaesque]

Anyone got any thoughts on the future of PC?

It's been about 10 years since it was introduced, I was a kid then so didn't have an account.

There are 1000's in that boat.

I have been able to mitigate it, every year more and more PC payers are leaving and being replaced by people who are able to mitigate. Surely it's unsustainable and they'll have to move to a different model. But if they increase base rate that will screw them so whats the option?

I disagree that it's unsustainable. They're trying to create something where the money keeps flowing within the system (for their own benefit, not ours, mind), and people consistently taking large chunks of money out of that money flow system is bad for their business. So they tax those people heavily. If they wanna still stick around, fine. But it's also fine, rather than unsustainable for BF, if they leave. As long as there's no serious competition for them to go to.

The closest comparison I can think of is Pokerstars, who's got nearly as much of a de facto monopoly as BF, and after Amaya bought them up, they also changed rake etc. to heavily tax those draining the money flow.

[napshnap]

Anyone got any thoughts on the future of PC?

It's been about 10 years since it was introduced, I was a kid then so didn't have an account.

There are 1000's in that boat.

I have been able to mitigate it, every year more and more PC payers are leaving and being replaced by people who are able to mitigate. Surely it's unsustainable and they'll have to move to a different model. But if they increase base rate that will screw them so whats the option?

I disagree that it's unsustainable. They're trying to create something where the money keeps flowing within the system (for their own benefit, not ours, mind), and people consistently taking large chunks of money out of that money flow system is bad for their business. So they tax those people heavily. If they wanna still stick around, fine. But it's also fine, rather than unsustainable for BF, if they leave. As long as there's no serious competition for them to go to.

The closest comparison I can think of is Pokerstars, who's got nearly as much of a de facto monopoly as BF, and after Amaya bought them up, they also changed rake etc. to heavily tax those draining the money flow.

How the hell we (traders) are draining the money flow? We support money flaw making it more attractive for average punters by suggesting maximal possible odds (by competing with each other, filling price gaps), we make their gamblestory (successful or not) longer and bf must be interested in it. Of course we (traders) take some money for our services. We are necessary evil.
If bf interested in exchange recreation (especially in light of current possibilities in usa), they should stop parasiting on traders, remove ridiculous dreamkilling 250k 60% tribute, remove their new charge for api developers, reestablish their developer forum which they bashfully and quietly slaughtered, advertise exchange much more, make google search output lead to exchange not sportbook. And more and more and more...

[stueytrader]

The huge drifters that then go on to win/run very well in the race. The hammered favourites or steamers that run awfully in the race.

It's generally accepted that SP is efficient in a large sample. Have you got any stats that say the SP of the big movers isn't? The danger is that these are just memorable rather than statistically significant. The value probably existed before the move but if we knew that we'd all be minted.

I agree about the wider sample, but we don't back or lay the wider sample, so that was my point about fundamentals. In selected cases we know it can be way inefficient. Of course how we 'select' is the issue though....

[brimson25]

Re: How many of you also gamble (deliberately)?

Me (sadly).

Lack of discipline and loss acceptance is the bane of my life (like so many others I'm sure!)...

CS

Spend all your focus on this, your be amazed how quickly anyone can actually achieve this. Practise not looking at your balance and set yourself some rules. See if you can one week without looking at your balance. Than try two . Than try a month.

Take of the figures on your trading ladders, this helped me alot at one stage.

How do you do that?

[stueytrader]

The huge drifters that then go on to win/run very well in the race. The hammered favourites or steamers that run awfully in the race.

It's generally accepted that SP is efficient in a large sample. Have you got any stats that say the SP of the big movers isn't? The danger is that these are just memorable rather than statistically significant. The value probably existed before the move but if we knew that we'd all be minted.

I agree about the wider sample, but we don't back or lay the wider sample, so that was my point about fundamentals. In selected cases we know it can be way inefficient. Of course how we 'select' is the issue though....

Just to add to this point, it's also the case that each selection is never a single static price - it will have traded at often a large range of different prices before it runs. So, that opens an even wider scope for inefficiency at points in the market.

[ShaunWhite]

Fair points stuey but I don't 'do' horse fundamentals. I don't have the time or the interest to have an opinion on what value might be. That means I have to look at the wider sample for generic truths. We're both looking at the same problem but from different directions.

[stueytrader]

Fair points stuey but I don't 'do' horse fundamentals. I don't have the time or the interest to have an opinion on what value might be. That means I have to look at the wider sample for generic truths. We're both looking at the same problem but from different directions.

Yes, I think that's exactly it - horses for courses as it were!

Personally, I am interested in both trading and fundamental value, so I'm always looking at both (though carefully noting which I should be looking at).

[stueytrader]

Maybe the biggest fundamental for all of us is simply the profit/loss figures we record - how we get there is less fundamental!