Betfair chart / Betfair graph of the day
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
The problem with 3v1 is that you're sat looking at 3 trends that could all be about to end. Easy in hindsight, a different reality when all 3 hit support simultaneously and the full ratcheting effect hits the fav.
Oodles of strategising about how favs move, but if it's the 2nd 3rd or 4th then it seems OK to assume a trend will continue.
If you can quantify that 'easy spot' then I'll write some easy code and put my feet up.
- ruthlessimon
- Posts: 2094
- Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2016 3:54 pm
Absolutely.ShaunWhite wrote: ↑Sun Jul 22, 2018 9:38 pmThe problem with 3v1 is that you're sat looking at 3 trends that could all be about to end. Easy in hindsight, a different reality when all 3 hit support simultaneously and the full ratcheting effect hits the fav.
Oodles of strategising about how favs move, but if it's the 2nd 3rd or 4th then it seems OK to assume a trend will continue.
If you can quantify that 'easy spot' then I'll write some easy code and put my feet up.
I deliberately designed a "forward testing" spready to test it - because it is a fairly straightforward concept (although there's a lot of combinations). I reckon it's actually backwards - but it's certainly not as good as it's touted (in its raw form).
Something I'm also looking at, is designing a spreadsheet, purely in hindsight, just to get an idea of what the most "common" displacement pattern is during a big move (i.e. -8%, +8% or -8%, 2.5%, 2.5%, 2.5% i.e. 3vs1)
Haha. Let's try to quantify it then, shall we?
I'll argue that something is an "easy spot" when you're able to determine backing/laying a selection holds favourable Risk/Reward quicker than on average. Ultimately choosing to put on a trade is a binary output brought about by a series of decisions -- after your analysis of what's going on in the market you can either justify putting the trade on, or you can't (you either think the situation presents an edge, or it doesn't)
e.g. let's say when you're considering a trade, you analyse a few variables and see if they support your initial opinion or not before you put on the trade. Obviously it's a bit more complex than this but for argument's sake let's say you always look at 5 factors, and that they're equally weighted in significance. If the first 3 things you check all support your initial opinion, you can justify the trade quicker, as even if the last 2 opposed your opinion you'd end up putting the trade on anyway -- in the same way as you'd win a penalty shootout with less effort via 3-0 vs 5-3
In the case of the 3v1 (or 1v3) I posted earlier, for me, it went something like this:
<Open market: 5mins out to post>
<Form market opinion: See that favourite has been weak all morning leads to "What supports the idea of this continuing to drift?">
<Analyse market to determine if the trade can be justified> | IF supporting outcomes >= 3 THEN <place trade> ELSE <form new opinion on market>
Variable 1: Other runners? --> 2/3 been supported all morning, and are still currently being supported as they are both boasting ATLs, only other runner just had a big chunk of support but in general seems pretty neutral
SUPPORTS OPINION, justifyTrade = justifyTrade + 1
Variable 2: Activity on the selection you're interested in? --> fav breaks through 2.00, retests crossover, fails to break back below 2.00 4 times before setting an ATH of 2.08
SUPPORTS OPINION, justifyTrade = justifyTrade + 1
Variable 3: How will other market participants react to this? --> now that 2.00 - 2.06 range is broken:
- majority of neutral traders should enter on the lay side at the ATH now the range is broken (plus FOMO on those who weren't sure about laying at 2.00 on 1st/2nd/3rd/4th retests)
- those already on lay side will hold or even add to their position (Decent traders will know the R/R is justified, less competent traders may hold for reasons of GREED)
- those who were on the back side opposing the drift should in theory puke when 2.06 is broken, adding to the lay bets (or freeze and hold their positions = neutral)
SUPPORTS OPINION, justifyTrade = justifyTrade + 1
IF justifyTrade = 3 THEN CALL <Place trade> ELSE
(Variable 4+5 Irrelevant)
<Place trade:
Enter current price: LAY 2.08 or higher
Exit below prev. level: 2.04 (you could even justify below 2nd level at around ~1.98 conisdering the 4x failed breaks of 2.00)
Take profit: Triggered when trend rounds off and reverses (in this case it was ~2.62)
...or just use a trailing stop loss of around 5 ticks if you're a robot>
only having a laugh with this quick post but should still contain something of use for a few
I'll argue that something is an "easy spot" when you're able to determine backing/laying a selection holds favourable Risk/Reward quicker than on average. Ultimately choosing to put on a trade is a binary output brought about by a series of decisions -- after your analysis of what's going on in the market you can either justify putting the trade on, or you can't (you either think the situation presents an edge, or it doesn't)
e.g. let's say when you're considering a trade, you analyse a few variables and see if they support your initial opinion or not before you put on the trade. Obviously it's a bit more complex than this but for argument's sake let's say you always look at 5 factors, and that they're equally weighted in significance. If the first 3 things you check all support your initial opinion, you can justify the trade quicker, as even if the last 2 opposed your opinion you'd end up putting the trade on anyway -- in the same way as you'd win a penalty shootout with less effort via 3-0 vs 5-3
In the case of the 3v1 (or 1v3) I posted earlier, for me, it went something like this:
<Open market: 5mins out to post>
<Form market opinion: See that favourite has been weak all morning leads to "What supports the idea of this continuing to drift?">
<Analyse market to determine if the trade can be justified> | IF supporting outcomes >= 3 THEN <place trade> ELSE <form new opinion on market>
Variable 1: Other runners? --> 2/3 been supported all morning, and are still currently being supported as they are both boasting ATLs, only other runner just had a big chunk of support but in general seems pretty neutral
SUPPORTS OPINION, justifyTrade = justifyTrade + 1
Variable 2: Activity on the selection you're interested in? --> fav breaks through 2.00, retests crossover, fails to break back below 2.00 4 times before setting an ATH of 2.08
SUPPORTS OPINION, justifyTrade = justifyTrade + 1
Variable 3: How will other market participants react to this? --> now that 2.00 - 2.06 range is broken:
- majority of neutral traders should enter on the lay side at the ATH now the range is broken (plus FOMO on those who weren't sure about laying at 2.00 on 1st/2nd/3rd/4th retests)
- those already on lay side will hold or even add to their position (Decent traders will know the R/R is justified, less competent traders may hold for reasons of GREED)
- those who were on the back side opposing the drift should in theory puke when 2.06 is broken, adding to the lay bets (or freeze and hold their positions = neutral)
SUPPORTS OPINION, justifyTrade = justifyTrade + 1
IF justifyTrade = 3 THEN CALL <Place trade> ELSE
(Variable 4+5 Irrelevant)
<Place trade:
Enter current price: LAY 2.08 or higher
Exit below prev. level: 2.04 (you could even justify below 2nd level at around ~1.98 conisdering the 4x failed breaks of 2.00)
Take profit: Triggered when trend rounds off and reverses (in this case it was ~2.62)
...or just use a trailing stop loss of around 5 ticks if you're a robot>
only having a laugh with this quick post but should still contain something of use for a few
[bold type original]
I admire the clarity of your explanations but what I've just quoted is what I misunderstood by the term "easy spot".
- ruthlessimon
- Posts: 2094
- Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2016 3:54 pm
I thought that was a good justification
But, why wait for the range to break on step 3? Having a look just at when the 2.0 drifts through - the ones that get to around 2.06, 2.08, 2.10 are in that "Goldilocks zone" of confirmation, for a further drift. I'd have preempted ya on that one A beautiful parabola (3.5mth sample size of 2.0 drifts)
#data
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am