How many of you also gamble (deliberately)?

A place to discuss anything.
Emmson
Posts: 3363
Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:47 pm

Initial backs of Lancs at 1.32 & 1.3 is gambling and everything after that is trading.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfSKRFtE5cQ

Game still going on, hoping Tom Latham can do something to get than Lancs price drifting.
User avatar
ShaunWhite
Posts: 9731
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am

Derek27 wrote:
Sun May 20, 2018 3:13 pm
I think Shaun knows what value is. ;) The question was, and it seems we all agree on the answer, whether you can spot value purely from market movements.
:)
Bottom line is that the true precise value of a horse on the day can never be known. Too many variables.

Ladder stats will give you a pointer and you'll have even more idea if you know the animals involved.

I think any pro gambling operation that heard a cold trader saying they could identify value on a given random horse would piss themselves laughing. I could pull up any BF chart you like and a cold trader wouldn't have a clue which price was the price. Backing 50 of them might return a small edge, but nothing like the sniper-like accuracy of a top racing analyst employed by a betting syndicate.
User avatar
Euler
Posts: 24701
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 1:39 pm
Location: Bet Angel HQ

ShaunWhite wrote:
Sat May 19, 2018 10:28 pm
Euler wrote:
Sat May 19, 2018 1:10 pm
There are some really good betting opportunities you can exploit nowadays as the book overround is so small and volatility so high.
I see how volatility can give rise to value but what has overround got to do with value on an individual selection?
In one word slippage. If you betting into a 150% book you are leaking 50% to the other side of the book. If you bet into a 100% book you leak nothing. Most of my value betting strategies wait for the overround to be at or near to 100%.
User avatar
ShaunWhite
Posts: 9731
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am

Euler wrote:
Sun May 20, 2018 9:39 pm
ShaunWhite wrote:
Sat May 19, 2018 10:28 pm
Euler wrote:
Sat May 19, 2018 1:10 pm
There are some really good betting opportunities you can exploit nowadays as the book overround is so small and volatility so high.
I see how volatility can give rise to value but what has overround got to do with value on an individual selection?
In one word slippage. If you betting into a 150% book you are leaking 50% to the other side of the book. If you bet into a 100% book you leak nothing. Most of my value betting strategies wait for the overround to be at or near to 100%.
I understand slippage, I just don't understand how we can know that individual selection X is a value proposition at any given price, although I totally accept that the maths and mechanics prove that those situations exist in almost every minute of every day.

Are you a) backing selection X at a price the market numbers tell you is probably statistically value, or b) at a price you've determined, through FA, to be better than the true price?

Both are equally clever but I'm hoping it's a) because I'm not trading so that I can do timeform analysis all day. :)
StellaBot
Posts: 818
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2017 11:52 am

I think value might be assessed eg without inside info but by other means.
Doesnt mean picking winners but predicting a movement in price will happen for back or lay betting ,using other means.
Sent pm Shaun
User avatar
wearthefoxhat
Posts: 3205
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2018 9:55 am

stueytrader wrote:
Sat May 19, 2018 12:24 pm
I know we've done to death on here the 'is trading gambling' question.

But, interesting to ask, how many 'traders' on here also deliberately gamble/place bets too?

I do realise a serious trader has to be clear when they are trading (not gambling), but do many here also spot at times those 'bets' they want to place as a position taker too?

Or, are there those that are religious about never placing a bet - a bit like a tea-total version, but in this case 'trade-total'...

I have to admit I've been both across all my acitivites, and it has sometimes caught me out - but in general I can be clear enough about the distinction, and use both to my advantage when needed.
Yes in the place market.

So much value being able to get a place single at often good value odds. The bookies (apart from maybe one or two online) don't want to take place singles, for obvious reasons.
User avatar
brimson25
Posts: 504
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 11:42 am

Most of what I do is gambling, but I lack the heart for it anymore. So I'm trying to transition away from it.
User avatar
SeaHorseRacing
Posts: 2893
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 7:06 pm

stueytrader wrote:
Sat May 19, 2018 12:24 pm
I know we've done to death on here the 'is trading gambling' question.

But, interesting to ask, how many 'traders' on here also deliberately gamble/place bets too?

I do realise a serious trader has to be clear when they are trading (not gambling), but do many here also spot at times those 'bets' they want to place as a position taker too?

Or, are there those that are religious about never placing a bet - a bit like a tea-total version, but in this case 'trade-total'...

I have to admit I've been both across all my acitivites, and it has sometimes caught me out - but in general I can be clear enough about the distinction, and use both to my advantage when needed.
I do a lot...

Well by what I mean a lot.. maybe 1/2 bets a week and a daily accumulator but I don’t mix my betfair account with betting. Trading only.

Unless I am out for the day say racing than only I might use my bf.

I found no betting on my account life changing for my trading. Although I am possibly missing more value, I make most of my money trading. When you have a bad day this stops you destroying balance if your from a gambling background.
LinusP
Posts: 1871
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 10:45 pm

I have moved away from trading in the conventional sense, I take value or what my programs believe to be value. Sometimes this will result in what looks like a 'trade' but most of the time it doesn't, does that mean I gamble? I am not sure.
User avatar
SeaHorseRacing
Posts: 2893
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 7:06 pm

Halliday wrote:
Sun May 20, 2018 11:21 am
ShaunWhite wrote:
Sun May 20, 2018 1:34 am
I'm looking forward to seeing what seehorse says about how you can find value just by looking at the ladders, he makes money on both trading and gambling and keeps good records.
If your betting on horses then “value” is the key to making it successful.looking at ladders etc on Betangel will not help you find “value” during your selection process, as it’s an individual opinion.

If I think a horse priced up at say 6/4 should be an even money chance ( based on form, trainer, course , draw , going class etc or any other factor) then that represents value. Someone else might think based on similar or different criteria that or should be say 2/1 or greater ..and would think it poor value .

No chart or ladder would influence their view as to the value of a particular horses odds .( eg if you think a change in the going has given a big advantage to horses drawn low, and that one of them might represent “value “ because the odds don’t reflect the perceived draw advantage, etc )

Equally if someone thought a horse had a excellent chance of winning but represented poor value, then its highly unlikely that person would back it.
Imo their are many ways to find value and I have to disagree. You can find value purely from looking at the ladders. What happens when 3 horses are fancied in one race? 3 can’t all be gambled which usually results in something drifting. Especially favourites. So often you see 2.0 priced fav drift out to 2.5 just because 2nd and 3rd is. Backed.

There are generally 2 ways to gamble.

1- just taking value. Getting 25s in something which should be priced 10s- (Dave Nevison is this sort of gambler)

2- looking for horses who you genuinely think will win before deciding if the price is value.
Imo- best way to do it. But spending hours through the form book to find that horse... to than say can’t back it at that price is incredibly difficult to do and I think why so many fail.
Number 1 is very boring as your not forming an opinion but using ratings etc to work out a price.

If you have no interest in racing but want to gamble 1. Would be the way to go. If your a mug punter and love to bet number 2 but your already at odds as it is a very difficult skill to learn.

All my selections I post on the forum, excluding some inside info are only listed when I believe they are 100% overlays.

If I tip something at 5/1. (6s) I have priced it 3.0 or less.
I’d say about 60/70% of my opinions don’t even get posted here. No point posting a 6/4 shot when I have priced it 2/1.

As a point to what Halliday says, I have learned the hard way over the years but anyone serious about betting to make some money. No matter who says what.
When considering the draw, odds, going of a horse leave them last.
Find your selections before any of that.
I have mate who will look at a drawbias or the going conditions before looking for a horse. Such the wrong thing to do.
The draw and going should only be used to cosider actually placing the bet.

For example. I like horse 1 because he’s improving, ran nicely at the track last time. Looks a weak race. He only has favourite to beat who I think is week.

Than... ooo he’s drawn 9 from 9 and I am not sure he likes this fast ground.

In this occasion I would only back this with a 200% over lay.

If I think he’s 4/1 I won’t consider it unless he’s 14/1.

If you know the ground is good to firm and their is a draw bias. You will automatically look for well drawn fast ground horses, which automatically put you at odds because your looking for a horse that may actually not be as strong as it should be.
Last edited by SeaHorseRacing on Mon May 21, 2018 11:29 am, edited 2 times in total.
stueytrader
Posts: 863
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2015 6:47 pm

A very interesting range of replies to my initial question, thanks.

I felt intuitively that traders would likely fall into two categories - those that have never directly gambled, and only see trading as their profession (gambling is alien to them). And those that have likely come across from a gambling background, therefore more likely to still retain some of that in their activities.

Also, I can see this has stimulated a related question, of whether 'value' can be found using 'trading' types of methods. Something I have also pondered for a while - I've always had the belief that trading actually stimulates value in some cases, when traders essentially are not interested in fundamentals therefore don't care if they give away 'value' to position takers.
User avatar
LeTiss
Posts: 5386
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:04 pm

Realistically, most trades start off with a bet. The difference between gambling and trading is what you do from that point on.

I'm fairly comfortable about that though, as we gamble all the time in life - whenever you get in a car, or sit on an aeroplane etc.
Kalumpus
Posts: 45
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 12:04 pm

IMO calling yourself a trader doesn't make one a non-gambler, not all traders make a profit. I'm personally a layer, rarely trade. Most would view what I do as gambling but to me its investing, I make a consistent profit. Whether backer, layer, trader its about profit. If you make that consistently then you're an investor. If you not making profits then you likely still gambling however you play it.
User avatar
Kafkaesque
Posts: 886
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 10:20 am

Kalumpus wrote:
Mon May 21, 2018 1:09 pm
IMO calling yourself a trader doesn't make one a non-gambler, not all traders make a profit. I'm personally a layer, rarely trade. Most would view what I do as gambling but to me its investing, I make a consistent profit. Whether backer, layer, trader its about profit. If you make that consistently then you're an investor. If you not making profits then you likely still gambling however you play it.
By that logic, calling yourself an investor doesn't make you a non-gambler.

If you make a profit consistently at gambling, you don't become an investor - even if it does sound better when explaining it to your mom or the girl down the pub ;) It just makes you a good gambler, and among a select group of gamblers/bettors able to dodge all the minefields and sustain +ev.
User avatar
ShaunWhite
Posts: 9731
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am

Kafkaesque wrote:
Mon May 21, 2018 1:51 pm
Kalumpus wrote:
Mon May 21, 2018 1:09 pm
IMO calling yourself a trader doesn't make one a non-gambler, not all traders make a profit.
By that logic, calling yourself an investor doesn't make you a non-gambler.
This debate is all about the negative connotations of the word 'gambling'. You could have exactly the same debate about people who drink alcohol being drug takers.

It seems to come down to how you want to be perceived, or want others to be perceived, rather than what you're actually doing.
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion”