Can you please explain to me what's happening here?

[Lucacrebbe]

Hello, as you can see it's been a while since I have putting a little bit efforts to understand the weight of money and how the volume of the money matched and waiting to be matched could influence the market.

I have made some screenshot in which there was an unbalanced situation about the money waiting to be matched by one side or another of the back or the lay

It's a personal case of study about how the market react in a situation of UNBALNCED Weight of money


Let's start:

In the first screenshot in the back side of Zang there was MORE money waiting to be matched than Madelovic

Madenlovich has won the first 15', but even if there was MORE money to be matched on the back side than on the lay side, the odds of Zahng don't move downside , because in the second screen you can see clearly that the odds move from a price of 2,74 TO A PRICE of 3,25

This because the first 15' was won by Madlenovic and the layers ''have won'' (in this situation)



In the second example there was MORE MONEY ON THE BACK SIDE for Ashley Bart,

so one could think that the odds of Barty could go up .... Barty wins the first 15' the 30' point, but HER odds don't go up (even if there was more money in the lay side than in the back side)


So my question is: As seen that you understand those patterns better than me, can someone explain to me, or try to explain to me what's going on?

How do you usually behave when you are in situation in which there is a clearly UNBALANCED weight of money?

[Lucacrebbe]

and this one too

[Lucacrebbe]

[Lucacrebbe]

Let's start:

In the first screenshot in the back side of Zang there was MORE money waiting to be matched than Madenlovic

Madenloich has won the first 15', but even if there was MORE money to be matched on the back side than on the lay side, the odds don't move downside , because in the second screen you can see clearly that the odds move from a price of 2,74 TO A PRICE of 3,25

This because the first 15' was won by Madlenovic and the layers ''have won'' (in this situation)



In the second example there was MORE MONEY ON THE BACK SIDE for Ashley Bart, so one could think that the odds of Barty could go up.... Barty wins the first 15' the 30' point, but HER odds don't go up (even if there was more money in the lay side than in the back side)

So my question is: As seen that you understand those patterns better than me, can someone explain to me, or try to explain to me what's going on?

How do you usually behave when you are in front of situation in which there is a clearly UNBALANCED sitation?

[Derek27]

Luca, most of what I said previously about WOM referred to horse racing. In tennis the WOM is irrelevant as trading generally takes place between points and the next point determines which way the price will move.

You also need to bear in mind cross-matching will distort the WOM. For tennis most traders just trade the favourite, as you know, laying the favourite is the same as backing the outsider so you only need to look at one player.

[Euler]

Weight of money only applies to pre-off racing / markets that are driven by pure opinion, it has no effect on an inplay sport as that is reliant on the underlying metrics of that sport. In Tennis, the score line.

[dt888]

Reading this post and others, I think you are getting a bit too focused on WOM. A better idea may be to just get involved in the markets with tiny stakes and notice things that are happening. Why did this work, or why didnt that work. Let it all come naturally and slowly.

Taking each individual thing and trying to study it in great detail then trying to put it all together is probably a tough way to go about it. Probably suits some people, but going about it that way wouldnt be for me

[Lucacrebbe]

Weight of money only applies to pre-off racing / markets that are driven by pure opinion, it has no effect on an inplay sport as that is reliant on the underlying metrics of that sport. In Tennis, the score line.

so WOM only works with pre race horsing?

Not in play tennis or soccer?

[Lucacrebbe]

Luca, most of what I said previously about WOM referred to horse racing. In tennis the WOM is irrelevant as trading generally takes place between points and the next point determines which way the price will move.

You also need to bear in mind cross-matching will distort the WOM. For tennis most traders just trade the favourite, as you know, laying the favourite is the same as backing the outsider so you only need to look at one player.

Yes I have looked at one player, as you can see there is a clearly UN-balanced situation which doesn't move the price

why there is this kind of useless situation about the WOM in tennis, and not in horse race?

[Derek27]

Because the tennis match is in play when you're trading it and opinions are driven by how the players are playing.

[Moniac]

why there is this kind of useless situation about the WOM in tennis, and not in horse race?

This is the answer.

Weight of money only applies to pre-off racing / markets that are driven by pure opinion, it has effect on an inplay sport as that is reliant on the underlying metrics of that sport. In Tennis, the score line.

[Emmson]

WOM is still a consideration in cricket markets that have gone in-play especially test matches.

[Derek27]

why there is this kind of useless situation about the WOM in tennis, and not in horse race?

This is the answer.

Weight of money only applies to pre-off racing / markets that are driven by pure opinion, it has effect on an inplay sport as that is reliant on the underlying metrics of that sport. In Tennis, the score line.

Euler's quote should say "no" effect!