Losing strategies wanted
-
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 9:04 am
And yet another early goal in the arsenal game tonight 1m30s again has to be a losing strategy...
-
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 9:04 am
Yeah I saw that too. Can't help but think backing under 2.5 goals is a lot safer than backing 0-0 or maybe backing over 2.5/3.5 as well as backing 0-0 could provide a little bit of insurance or even a double whammy if you get out of the 0-0 at the right time.
I have a cracking losing strategy
Join Brimardon and back every bet they recommend
You will soon be £5000 down just like i was
Seriously learn from Peter at Betangel, keep it simple use small stakes to start learn how to lose and never trade in running always before the race and you will profit
Join Brimardon and back every bet they recommend
You will soon be £5000 down just like i was
Seriously learn from Peter at Betangel, keep it simple use small stakes to start learn how to lose and never trade in running always before the race and you will profit
- Crazyskier
- Posts: 1167
- Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2016 6:36 pm
Blindly automating the best back price (+1) on the favourite greyhound is resulting consistently in the eventual matched price then shortening. This is 7 minutes prior to the off right upto the point at which the bet is matched.
I have been caught by this SO many times; the lack of liquidity and ability to move prices so radically with just £20 stakes is the issue...
I have been caught by this SO many times; the lack of liquidity and ability to move prices so radically with just £20 stakes is the issue...
-
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 8:26 pm
ive been backing fallen horses now for the past week. yet to win a penny *taps nose*
it is.steven1976 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 16, 2014 1:31 pmTry it on a horse about 10s. Your thinking that as a result of a race it would break even over time. Put a 10 pound back or lay into the market and do nothing else other than sell out when the next move happens either against you or with you for 1 tick. You may be surprised how random, random really is.
- ruthlessimon
- Posts: 2094
- Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2016 3:54 pm
Been working on this throughout April (pre-off lay strat - following trends), decided to fully incorporate all the favourites, & I get this equity curve (400 trades)
Peter if you're interested I'll drop you a message
Peter if you're interested I'll drop you a message
What does it look like if you flip it?ruthlessimon wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 5:13 pmBeen working on this throughout April (pre-off lay strat - following trends), decided to fully incorporate all the favourites, & I get this equity curve (400 trades)
Peter if you're interested I'll drop you a message
- ruthlessimon
- Posts: 2094
- Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2016 3:54 pm
Swap the lay for a back, there aren't stops & targets hence why it's completely inverted - I personally, along with another member have doubts as to whether this is an inherent bias or just the byproduct of randomness
- ruthlessimon
- Posts: 2094
- Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2016 3:54 pm
Just noticed the scale is off, gonna quickly find out why that's the case
But you want to give it away?ruthlessimon wrote: ↑Mon Apr 30, 2018 5:47 pmSwap the lay for a back, there aren't stops & targets hence why it's completely inverted - I personally, along with another member have doubts as to whether this is an inherent bias or just the byproduct of randomness
- ruthlessimon
- Posts: 2094
- Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2016 3:54 pm
I'd bet Peter already knows; & the problem is this pattern is consistent on data where it shouldn't.
Changing the variables don't affect the equity curve. I've got 30 variations of this strategy, all they're all negative (each roughly the same amount) - & the ones I hoped would be zero expectancy aren't.
Hence why I think wtf is going on with this!!
(btw the scaling error was 97, not 397 )
Changing the variables don't affect the equity curve. I've got 30 variations of this strategy, all they're all negative (each roughly the same amount) - & the ones I hoped would be zero expectancy aren't.
Hence why I think wtf is going on with this!!
(btw the scaling error was 97, not 397 )
- ruthlessimon
- Posts: 2094
- Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2016 3:54 pm
For 10 iterations (delayed entry), in a sheer profitability sense, they all fall roughly around -200ticks, hence why there are serious questions - iteration 0 (a blind time-based lay) shouldn't be that negative imo
- ruthlessimon
- Posts: 2094
- Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2016 3:54 pm
Just got today's afternoon data (not used in the above graphs). 5 trades, 3 losers, 2 scratches - 15:40 got marked as a large loser -13ticks
(iteration 8)
(iteration 8)