Do I have a genuine edge or is this just statistical variance?

[pythonic]

Feel free, Shaun!

[ShaunWhite]

Feel free, Shaun!

I'll tuck that away like a Get Out of Jail Free card and perhaps use it sometime. Thanks.

[Euler]

It's actually quite nice to have some deeper discussion on the forum. If you feel we need to create a new area for it, let me know.

[Euler]

Have you read his book? Its hard to recommend due to the underlying feeling that he believes making money from gambling is impossible and anyone who says they are is a liar but then thats why he is probably writing rather than betting..

He has written some good stuff but I think he falls into an intelligence trap where you convince yourself that because you can't do it, nobody can. I've had many meetings or 'discussions' like that in 20 years. But that in itself tells you where an edge is in the market. About three years or so ago somebody really went at me with a similar argument so I invited him to the office, but he seemed to think I was going to beat him up or something so wouldn't come. All I was going to do was show him a couple of things that would have made him think again.

The upshot, I'll give a lot of credit and respect to those that use their intelligence to solve a problem rather than argue a point.

[gazuty]

The upshot, I'll give a lot of credit and respect to those that use their intelligence to solve a problem rather than argue a point.

+1

[gazuty]

If you think have an edge and given your mathematical brain skip over here - https://stattrek.com/online-calculator/binomial.aspx

[Speculator_3]

If you think have an edge and given your mathematical brain skip over here - https://stattrek.com/online-calculator/binomial.aspx

Thanks.

[Speculator_3]

Thought I'd post an update.

Since I wrote this thread back in May, I have made over 2000 bets - with real money, small stakes. This brings up the total of bets I monitored to over 4000. And I'm in profit.

Not as large as I expected from my paper trading experiment earlier, but that's my own fault. There were a number of "bad bets" I made (panicking when missing an opportunity and getting on the market at the wrong time, ending up losing several relatively large stakes), and also many times when I disobeyed my initial trading strategy and did not enter the market at all (again due to psychological fear of losing the profits I'd gained just before). If I did all these things correctly, I estimate my initial bank would have grown 2.5 times, or even more.

One thing I note, is that I changed my strategy somewhat: I enter the market at the same "signal" as before, but instead of leaving the trade open till the end, I usually trade out around a third of my stake (just enough to break even or make a small loss) if a certain next event in the match changes the odds in my favour, and let the rest of the stake run. This tends to minimise the longer losing streaks I'd have otherwise - if I let the initial bet open till the end.

Still puzzled as to why I'm profitable. There seems to be some kind of a consistent pattern to my bets: typically, I make several rare winning bets in a quick succession, which radically increases my bank size. Then this is followed by a long period of straight losses or me just breaking even on my trades. These long periods bring my bank size down....But then these "several rare winning bets" occur and bring my bank up again - to a higher overall amount than it was before. And then the cycle repeats.

[PeterLe]

Just a thought to the maths guys...Why not try automation (if you're not trying it already). I think if you try it you will be hooked and would have thought it would be right up your street.
As long as the logic is sound its relatively easy to set something up and leave it to do its thing.
Its easy to compare and contrast knowing exactly why you entered and why you exited.
next day review/tweek if necessary and repeat
I left four programs running this evening and went playing snooker with a couple of mates. Three programs had very small losses, the other a surprising positive.
Im not saying it is easy per se, but I was never really any good at manual trading and thought Id give the automated strategies a chance, that was 12 years ago and still loving the challenge!
regards
Peter
PS Lost at Snooker

[BrianDee]

There seems to be some kind of a consistent pattern to my bets: typically, I make several rare winning bets in a quick succession, which radically increases my bank size. Then this is followed by a long period of straight losses or me just breaking even on my trades. These long periods bring my bank size down....But then these "several rare winning bets" occur and bring my bank up again - to a higher overall amount than it was before. And then the cycle repeats.

I had one of these strategies last winter - and binned it.
Went back to it and found the additional risk factor to remove and it's doing really well now

[psychoff]

Experimenting a single strategy in over 4000 events and saying that you are in profit means, you have an edge for sure. You may start to pray for it lasts long and smash as harder as you can before it vanishes. Welldone!

[Atho55]

This strategy as paper tested was last mentioned at the time of the Cheltenham festival and fits with the topic of this thread. When runners in the race are either 5,6,10,11,14 or 18 then Back Rank (BSP Fav) 4,5,7,8,10,11 or 16. BSP < 100. Stake is £25

Since 1st Feb when the data collection started it has been a roller coaster of ups and downs but I believe the ups can be predicted.

These are the results I can screen grab...

Strat A.jpg

Of late it seems to have been doing rather well. I think it does better when there is a prestige meeting amongst the cards either by horses that would normally be at the lower meetings being entered at the prestige meeting thus leaving opportunities or being specifically aimed to do well by whatever means at the main event.

This is not a get rich quick scheme by any means despite the bottom line figure being attractive, it had a run of just under -5k at one point hence the emphasis on the entry point to start.

I am looking to agree with the opening post that within the trading options available statistics do look to have a part to play

[LinusP]

Do you think a strategy randomly based on the BSP is going to be profitable long term?

[Anbell]

If you think have an edge and given your mathematical brain skip over here - https://stattrek.com/online-calculator/binomial.aspx

gazuty, you often point people to this link (thanks!) Can I dare ask for a mini-tutorial about how to use it?

For example, I've just plugged in some numbers from one of my bots. I use 100/(median odds) = 0.167 (approx 6.0) over 80 trials, and 22 winning bets (successes)

So, based on market price, I should win 17% of the time, and I've actually won 27.5% of the time. (this is pre-off betting, not trading)

The Binomial probability is 0.00526065831
Cumulative probability (P(X < x)) is 0.98987105591
Cumulative probability: P(X < x) is 0.99513171422

Could you please explain what these numbers mean? (I presume it doesnt mean that there's less than 0.5% chance that those results are edge)

Thanks so much

[gazuty]

If you think have an edge and given your mathematical brain skip over here - https://stattrek.com/online-calculator/binomial.aspx

gazuty, you often point people to this link (thanks!) Can I dare ask for a mini-tutorial about how to use it?

For example, I've just plugged in some numbers from one of my bots. I use 100/(median odds) = 0.167 (approx 6.0) over 80 trials, and 22 winning bets (successes)

So, based on market price, I should win 17% of the time, and I've actually won 27.5% of the time. (this is pre-off betting, not trading)

The Binomial probability is 0.00526065831
Cumulative probability (P(X < x)) is 0.98987105591
Cumulative probability: P(X < x) is 0.99513171422

Could you please explain what these numbers mean? (I presume it doesnt mean that there's less than 0.5% chance that those results are edge)

Thanks so much

So what the results are telling you is that your probability of getting exactly 22 winning results is approximately half a percent or 0.526%.

Your probability of getting 21 or fewer winning results was 98.987%.

Your probability of getting 22 or fewer winning results was 99.5%.

Your probability of getting 23 or more winning results was 0.499%

Your probability of getting 22 or more winning results was 1%.

It looks likely you have an edge. The less likely your result or your result plus more wins the more likely you have an edge. You need to have sufficient trials and a low percentage of just random luck.