Tournament betting, examining strategies.

[Datapunter]

Been playing around with some ideas for tournament betting. The idea is to place bets early, then continue placing bets as the matches unfold, and end up with a sure profit by the end of the tournament. Quite a few variations possible so just wondering if anyone has been doing any of these. 1) Lay the favourite in the tournament winner market. Use the possible profit of that to place bets on his match markets. First few matches gives a break even result, but if he lasts long enough, and at the right price, he can be backed for a profit whatever happens. 2) Back an outsider with a decent chance. Use the possible profit to Lay this outsider in his matches. So the opposite of the above. Again, first few matches are break even, if he lasts a bit you can Lay for a profit either way. 3) Either of the above but get out with a profit right after the match. So lay the favourite, use that potential profit to back him in his first match. If he wins the odds on the winner market will go down. If they go down only slightly you can use the profit from the match bet on the winner market and thus create a sure profit. Obviously you could do this with multiple players. Just look at the draw for a tournament, see who meets early and late and use that to select what strategy to use on who. For now i'll just stick with one person at a time. So anyone been doing this kind of thing ? Anyone got some odds, need the winner market odds as the tournament goes on, and the match odds. Its the winner market at different stages thats the problem, anyone got that ?

[Datapunter]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. For example i'm looking at the Embassy Snooker tournament. ( note i'm rounding the numbers so it all reads a bit easier ) First strategy Ronny O'Sullivan can be layed at 2.50, So a liability of 1000 gives a potential profit of 666. His first match, of a possible series of 5, is priced at 1.30 I can back that with a stake of 666. So if he loses his first match, i lose the stake of 666 but win on the tournament winner market, so break even. If he wins his first match, i get a profit of 220, and retain a possible loss on the winner market of -1000, so overall a liability of -800 with 4 matches to go. I can then place a stake of 666+220=886 on his next match. Again if he loses the match, i break even, if he wins i make a profit. Assuming i can get a price of 1.30 on each match then i can guarantee a profit on the 4th match. 1st match: 666 @ 1.30 = 220 -1000 = -780 2nd match: 886 @ 1.30 = 265 -780 = -515 3rd match: 1140 @ 1.30 = 340 - 515 = -175 4th match: 1480 @ 1.30 = 444 - 175 = +269 So using the potential profit from the tournament winner market i get 1269 in profit on the 4 matches, lose 1000 on the winner market and retain 269 in profit, should a match lose before the final i simply break even. second strategy The reverse of the previous one, backing an outsider and then laying him in his matches, i'll look at an example later. third strategy If Ronnie wins his first match the odds on the tournament winner market will drop. But suppose they don't drop all that much, lets say down to 2.20 I can then use the profit from the first match to lock in a sure profit whatever happens : Back 666 @ 2.20 = 800 ( my original profit from the lay ) Back 220 @ 2.20 = 264 ( my profit from the first match ) retain 64 profit on Ronnie winning the tournament or to lock in the profit: Back 165 @ 2.20 = 200 So level the tournament winner market and put 55 of the profit on the first match in our pocket. Obviously it all depends on the available prices. But there is potential here.

[WorkingForTheEnemy]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. Ive tried before with some medium of success. Slight different method again. Just picking someone you think can go a distance but maybe not win it at a good price. Back them and then just lay back when the price shortens enough. Obviously theres the gamble of them going out before you lay back. I guess this problem is kinda solved in your method 3. This is how Ive done it before anyway, Paul Ross' snooker tips are always a good one to give it a go with.

[CJ Mars]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. The problem I've found with Tournament betting on Betfair is that for all but the biggest events it is very difficult to get liquidity except on the top 1 or 2 in the merket. Last year I baked Paulo Suarez for the Ladies French Open at average odds of 240 for a stake of only 25 Euros but when it came to her semi (which she lost versus) Sharapova I couldn't give her away on the outrights at first 9s then 10s then finally 12s. I ended up getting my stake back with a match bet on Sharapova but didn't have the cojones for a monster punt on the Russian at short odds. I'm ashamed to admit this but I've flirted with a bastardised version of a Martingale strategy for some tennis tournamanets where I oppose certain players that I feel are overpriced on the outrights not by laying them but by opposeing them with rising stakes on the outright. I've opposed Tim Henman twice recntly in this way (not in the Nasdaq) and done a lot better then I would have latying him at 15s and 18s which is what you'd have to do to get any action on Betfair when he's available 2-3 points shorter with a spoortsbook.

[Datapunter]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. Nice one guy's, keep em coming, WFTE, so thats a straight Back and Lay to hedge. Risk is if the player does get knocked out in the first round you lose the initial stake. I tried that a while ago, i think also snooker, where i backed every player that was 100-1 and above. The idea being it only takes a few to go the distance to the semi's for the odds to change so a sure profit can be locked in. Danger is if the fav's do their job, and knock out all the underdogs, you end up with no alternative but to chase your losses. CJ, thats some confession there, :lol Could you run the numbers by me so i know i understand you right: first paragraph; You backed Paulo Suares 25 @ 240 then as she got further in the tournament you tried to lay her at 9.00's but there was simply no volume available so you resorted to backing Sharapova. -- Suares wins - lose the stake on Sharapova, win by a drop in the odds on Suares outright, ( and hope for sufficient volume next time round to lay ) -- Suares loses - win on the Sharapova bet, lose the original stake on Suares outright. second paragraph; when you say "players that I feel are overpriced" you mean the odds are lower than what you think they should be ? so odds are 2.50 but you think they should be 3.00, or odds are 15.00 and you think they should be 22.00 So Henman is available at 15.00 and you think he's not going to make it, but you don't lay, you back his opposing players in the matches, increasing the stakes if he keeps winning. The obvious danger being he actually goes the distance and wins the tournament :eek . In other words, by backing his opponants you create a better price than the lay at 15.00. Did i get this right ?

[WorkingForTheEnemy]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. One idea I rerad about was backing Henman for Wimbledon now. At the moment available on Betfair at 17.0. By the time the event comes around all the 2 week tennis fans will have their money on and his odds should have shortened drastically.

[Datapunter]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. nice idea WFTE, should work, i'll have a bit on, just a small bit tho because obviously on the downside, the money is locked in the market for 2,5 months and it can't be used on any other bets.

[staffy]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. Yeah was thinking that myself would be nice to get stuck in. Also would it be worth the risk of laying after the first or second round. Surely he will win the first couple of rounds. By then everyone will go henman mad.

[WorkingForTheEnemy]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. Thats exactly the gameplan Id go for Stafford. Like data says though its all down to how much money you can afford to have tied up for the next 2.5 months.

[staffy]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. Well Ill go for it and have a few quid on it. Lets see how it goes.

[staffy]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. I noticed he is priced up between 12s and 16s everywhere else.

[ian3012]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. interesting thread datapunter....... i've been looking at this too...... at wimbledon,but at laying federer (@1.8 today)......obviously then backing him in every game..... but i haven't done it... cos i reckon i'll only get odds of 1.2 or so, if he's up against a glasgow dustbinman in the first couple of rounds.... any pointers for me? the other thing i wanted to do, was back or lay a few teams in the winners market of the champions league(8 teams left)..... but again, got no confidence in myself cos it's new ground for me.... again, any tips please?

[Datapunter]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. Ian, do like me, paper trail any idea you got, see what gives. I'm setting up some spreadsheets, will be taking notes of prices on a few upcoming tournaments and see how things go. Only had a quick look at Wimbledon cos thats ages away, lots of tournaments before that time to look at. Lets run some numbers, Lay Federer @ 1.8 for a liability of 1000 gives a potential profit of 1250. Assuming odds of 1.16 on his first matches. match 1 : 1250 @ 1.16 = +200 / overall -800 match 2 : 1450 @ 1.16 = +230 / overall -570 match 3 : 1680 @ 1.16 = +270 / overall -300 match 4 : 1950 @ 1.16 = +312 / overall +12 so if he loses one of the first 4 matches we break even, profit after the 4th match. Anyone know off-hand how many rounds Wimbledon is ? now again, a lot will depend on the actual odds available but i do believe this merits some serious investigating. Don't know about the champions league, i think you should have taken a position long ago and worked from that. But again, give it a shot on paper.

[staffy]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. I would imagine he will have very easy first and probably 2nd round. I would imagine that his price would be 1.04 for a win.

[mr onemore]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. Hi Datapunter and friends, I'm afraid that this is just a disguised way of betting badly against the bookies overround :( And to put it simply, you're better off simply backing your selection to win the tournament, rather than hoping to lay off all the way to the final and (falsely) expecting to make a profit against the overround. You don't need lots of past betting data to see this, I hope this example suffices. Imagine last eight of a knockout tournament. Let's assume all teams have sane strengths. They should all br 7-1. Of course our bookie doesn't give these odds, lets say he gives 13-2 on each. That's an overounded book of 107% - if you backed every selection you would of course lose. Your first bet is not a value bet, and in fact in each subsequent round your going to be facing exactly the same problem. It doesn't matter if you're laying or backing, you have to have value on your side. In fact, every bet you make the overround will be compounded - hence the advice to sick to one bet right at the beginning - be it a back or a lay. To make a profit with a system like this - you need value with your initial selection. You're tacitly assuming this if you make your initial bet, at poor value, but 'let it ride' to a later round. Of course at this later round, if you still have a live bet, you can now lay off and guarantee a profit because your bet is now value, and you can make up a book. In the example tournament above, suppose in the round of the last 32 you took a team at 28-1 - again assume all the teams had been 28-1, the book would be 110% - no value there - and let the bet ride. But if it wins through to the last 8, and bookies now offer you 7 teams at 13-2, and you still have the 8th team at 28-1. You can make a book now of 97%, even though the bookies are still offering a rounded book of 107%, you have created a small edge that guarantees a profit, but you did gamble to do this by letting your bet ride. You don''t need to have a lot of past data to check this idea out, and it doesn't matter about the assumotions of each team having an equal chance etc. This is because the bookies always set their odds with an overround, and they inter-relate their books for tournament winner, match winner, in fact just about every bet. At every stage, unless you have reason to believe your initial bet has value - you can't create value without letting your bet ride at some point. It's an enjoyable way of betting though, and of course very common. I took £5 on Senegal to win the last World Cup at 5000-1. This was at the stage when they had already qualified for the finals. I though it was value. Anyway, I let it ride all the way to the quarter final against Turkey. I could have cashed in there and then for around a £300 profit i seem to remember, as by then Senegal were into about 10-1. I let it ride though dreaming of more, and you know the rest of the story. (I had Bulgaria in the 1986 World Cup at 500-1 too, but couldn't 'lay off' in the last 16 against Mexico as the bookies were closed on a Sunday in those days - no internet - sad story:( but lesson learnt...) Ths point is, the initial bet was value in my eyes - and I think you've all realised that in the thread. At some point , to overcome the ever-present overround, you have to gamble and let your bet ride. Might as well simply stick to one bet right at the start and back your valued judgement rather than juggle with overrounded odds.

[ian3012]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. thx data.... but if what staff says is right, and he will be if if he's up against donkeys in the early rounds.... this aint gonna work...is it? perhaps we need to be looking at 4/5 th favourites for the tourney's? but then you'd be laying at around 10's.... expensive... especially if they upset the form book and win the damn thing.:( in light of this example.... maybe the initial position is better being a "back"?

[ian3012]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. :rollin thx mr. o.......you just timed that post nicely to make me look a right numpty.... :eyes anyway... thx....i can see it now for sure. back to the drawing board.

[Datapunter]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. Staff & Ian, Obviously if the opening match is priced at 1.04 you just won't make it. But then an alternative creaps in. What about backing on the Tournament winner market and laying the first match. Especially in a situation where by looking at the draw of the tournament you see that the second match will also be an easy one, on paper that is. Thats why its important to look at the odds AND the tournament draw. So you can make an estimate of the most likely upcoming matches and the prices you are likely to get. I'll do the numbers again, i do like them numbers. Back Federer @ 1.80 outright so risk 1000 for a profit of 800. match 1 lay Federer @ 1.04 with a stake of 1000 for a liability of 40 if he actually loses the first match no harm done, you lose the 1000 on the winner market, you win 1000 on the match if he wins you lose 40 on the match and the odds on the winner market go down so laying can get you the 40 back and hopefully a bit more. Assuming the odds go down sufficiently. But you could continue laying his next matches the same way like backing. I think you got the picture by now. Mr. Onemore Some very good points there. Had to read that a couple of times. First about value. Well you'll get no argument from me. If you see a bet and you think there is value in the odds you should back it and await the outcome. That is at the very core of making a profit at sportsbetting. What i'm doing here is simply some brainstorming, bouncing some idea's, running some numbers. In a way you could say i'm looking at some possible alternative ways of finding value. the market mechanism Now lets see if i understand you right. Basically what you are saying is that the market works in such a way, that at each stage the odds will shift only so much, that no profit can be made, only a loss that equals the bookies overround. So if you look at a market where the odds actually represent the probability of each team/player, and the market is formed with an overround, i fully agree. At least i agree that this is the most plausible, most likely thing to happen. But it is not a perfect world and the bookies are not fallable. So maybe, just maybe there is some sort of bias present. Maybe there is a lot more money being put on the favourite by the end of a tournament than at the start. That may result in higher odds than what they should be because the bookies try to limit their liability on all the outsiders. Maybe the other way around. Maybe there is so much room on the outsiders that the favourites are very poor value at the start of a tournament and the odds come closer to the probability of winning near the end. My point is, it is plausable that the actual market workings are different from the one given by the pure maths. Either way we end up with the same conclusion; value has to be found somehow/somewhere. At this point if someone is thinking: Yeah, but Betfair has 100% books so no overround. FORGET IT the commission of 5% creates a huge overround ! past data no point Where i don't agree is where you think there is no point looking further. I do believe there is some potential here, albeit a potential in finding value. FUN You got that one right. I'm not sure where all this is leading but i'll stick my teeth in and i'll not let go easily :lol I'm having fun already thinking about all this. And if nothing else it will give me new insights in the workings of betting markets. Never hurts. Come on guy's, bounce some more ideas. You can't do worse than make a fool of yourself but at least you'll learn something :rollin

[swooperman]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. Ok, I'm certain to make myself look stupid :lol If you go back to the first post, where you say you're looking to place bets early & then continue to place bets throughout the course of the tournament, thereby trying to guarantee profit by the end of it, I know youre talking about tennis, but isnt that the same as what I'm trying to do with cricket? Granted not doing different matches, but within the same one. And of the examples you gave arent I doing a bastardised mix of 1 & 2.........be kind, & ignore me if I'm talking rubbish, I try to avoid thinking this hard....

[mr onemore]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies.

the market mechanism ... So if you look at a market where the odds actually represent the probability of each team/player, and the market is formed with an overround, i fully agree. At least i agree that this is the most plausible, most likely thing to happen. But it is not a perfect world and the bookies are not fallable. So maybe, just maybe there is some sort of bias present.

Yes - I'll admit that is possible, and to test that you certainly would need back-data. In last years Champions League Tournament betting, I believe Monaco were value for a long-time - because of the effect you mention - no one really believed they'd keep going, so no-one wanted to back them. By the time they got to the final, their odds and the market were biased - the weight of money had been on their opponents, and since their opponents had been knocked out, Monaco were at an attracive price for the last few rounds. The conclusion I have though, is even if there is this bias, why not wait until the final to pick it up?? and take your value there. I would guess, though I have no data to back this up, that when a big favourite gets to the final of a knockout and is playing a rank outsider that the odds on the outsider represent value...because of the betting mechanics leading up to the final. You would need to test a market where the volume of bets had been consistently high throughout the tournament. Would be interesting to test this...

[mr onemore]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies.

Ok, I'm certain to make myself look stupid :lol If you go back to the first post, where you say you're looking to place bets early & then continue to place bets throughout the course of the tournament, thereby trying to guarantee profit by the end of it, I know youre talking about tennis, but isnt that the same as what I'm trying to do with cricket? Granted not doing different matches, but within the same one. And of the examples you gave arent I doing a bastardised mix of 1 & 2.........be kind, & ignore me if I'm talking rubbish, I try to avoid thinking this hard....

Swooperman - the answer is yes:D If you're opening bet is no good - you'll be chasing a bad bet for the rest of the game. If the opening bet is sound - you then have the option of juggling with it and protecting your profit. The attraction of your method though Swoops - is that you do have time to optimise your betting strategy, and leave way outs of a situation - albeit at a cost to your profit margin. It tends to smooth out the losses, but at a cost of maximising your profit. If your taking value bets all the time though, you'll come out on top. But don't think that you're creating value with your method, your just manipulating the market to your own advantage. If you're judgement is sound, and your taking value bets, it'll all work out fine:D You might like to keep your own record of how you would have faired just by lumping all of your bets during an in-running match on your very first opening bet. I can tell you now, that if you're getting your first bet wrong, you'll be in the negative (unless your gambling during the match too, and not just using the potential profit you create from your first bet to use during the match). With a duff first bet, you add to the market overround - you've even more to overcome now. However- if you're getting your first bet right - then you're playing the market to your own advantage and setting up future valued bets - as your overround is less than the market now. The first bet is the big one Swoops - no added pressure there then:loon

[swooperman]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. Yeah - thats what I thought. I'd picked up obviously that my first bet had to be the right one to play the others in as it were, & thats where my supposed 'feel for the game' & intuition is hopefully coming in, by seeing the chances of the situation arising where the turnaround is. My whole principle is that they are to re-active to the match occurences, for example, after day1 of NZ-SL, the away side are 10/1 & I just think thats way too long for what may happewn tomorrow. NZ may win but I just dont think SL are 10/1 shots at the moment. Anyway, I digress.......sorry. Ps after saying all that, if you read what Ive written on there I'm worried that I've got this one wrong by not taking NZ at the outset.

[Datapunter]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. :lol @ swoop, yep, what you are doing is a variation on the theme. And nothing wrong with it. Like Mr. Onemore said, its about finding value each time you make a descision during the match. If you are bad at finding value then with each bet you will get in a worse position and end up taking big risks chasing your losing position to come out break even, let alone with some profit. But if you are good at identifying where the value is throughout the match than each time your position gets better. And i can imagine that during a 5 day match the value can shift from here to there a few times. So from what i've read on your Cricket thread you seem to know the game pretty well. Carry on i'd say :ok

[CJ Mars]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. Hi Data You've nailed my "method" perfectly. The problem is as you point out what happens if the selection wins? I deal with this by createing a stop loss above which I'll stop betting. The stop loss has not been used yet. I've actually done this bet 7 times this year and am up nearly 30% yieldwise. The furthest anyone of my selections to oppose was quarter finals (32 player draw) The absolute profit however has been very small as if you are opposeing a player say at 15s outright in a draw of 32 with a stop loss of 400 then you're not going to make very much if the player s going off at say average odds of around 5/6. There are however a number of players who tend to be overpriced on certain surfaces (Coria on hardcourt for example) that can be opposed in this manner. I think a profitable are for exploration here is actually golf betting. There are a number of players that priced around above 100 that might not win an event but that can definitely be in contention that will contract over the course of an event - for example in the Masters I've backed Howell - 90 KJ Choi - 100 P.Casey - 150 Small stakes but nice interest bets with definite potential for laying off

[ian3012]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. ok then, to keep this thread going......... can i ask CJ what his next tactic is? (becos i've never tried this yet!) so you've backed 3 outsiders.... let's assume they progress a little .... and their prices shorten.... have you already decided how much you want to lay them for? i.e. do you pre-book your lay odds and leave them as unmatched bets at the beginning of the tourney? or.... just wait and see.... knowing that you could possibly miss the best price while you're in bed? i'm just interested in the general concensus of opinion. (sorry if i'm hi-jacking your thread data.)

[Datapunter]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. hi-jack away mate, its a tournament betting think-tank now, no charge to join :lol

[Rob]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. Morning gents, just had a quick read through this, so excuse me if I've missed something obvious. But going back to the Ronnie O'Sulivan example.. If you lay Ronnie at 2.5, so someone stakes £10 you give them £25 back if he wins i.e. a liability of £15. Or, you stand to win £10 if he loses. Now, Ronnie can be backed at 1.3 in his first round match, so you stick £10 on him to win that. This way if he loses you break even, if he wins you make £3. Is it fair to assume that for his following matches he will not be less than 1.3, as he will be playing better opponents? Lets assume so, for the sake of this example. so in the 2nd round you stick the £13 ronnie winning at 1.3, if he loses you break even if he wins your up to £6.90 profit. You do this all the way to the final, and by then you're 27 quid up so if he wins and you lose your £15, your not too bothered. So, if my maths are right (it's still early) you stand to win £12, and at no point are you in any danger of losing money. Obviously, this all hinges on Ronnie never been lower than 1.3, but surley if he's 1.3 vs Maguire, he'll be higher than that against Higgins or Williams or Hendry. Mr Onemore, feel free to destroy my arguement...

[Datapunter]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. emersonthome, spot on mate :ok , thats a possible strategy i think is worth investigating.

surley if he's 1.3 vs Maguire, he'll be higher than that against Higgins or Williams or Hendry

that is the question indeed, now suppose Higgings, Williams, or Hendry get knocked out by an outsider .... and then O' Sullivan meets this outsider, his odds then may very well be under 1.10 :\

[Rob]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. I see your point DP, and I admit the idea is not totally risk free (nothing is). I'm a bit out of touch with snooker thesedays (our lass will watch football, but point blank refuses to sit through a game of snooker), but is this Maguire much cop? I don't know much about him, but I'd suggest he's a big outsider and you can get 1.32 on ronnie at the moment. Maybe this reflects the fact that if Ronnie is going to have one of his "off days" it's more likely to be in the first round, before he's settled in. Also, if some unknown has just nailed hendry in the first round, will ronnie be as low as 1.1? I believe that whoever he plays in the semis or the final, he can't be lower than 1.4-1.45. Now, this suggests that either the outright price is too low or the match prices are too high. I don't know which way round it is, and do not have the patience to exploit a long term advantage on outright prices, so I belive this method is the way forward.

[mr onemore]

Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. :rollin @ emerson

I make it that by your argument you will make a shade over £2 profit, not the £12 you stated, but...

Is it fair to assume that for his following matches he will not be less than 1.3, as he will be playing better opponents? Lets assume so, for the sake of this example.

This is an assumption that would need to be tested.

It's possible you need to deduct commission from your winning bets also - I don't know whether you factored this in. It's important, because by following your type of method I would expect a return of about 98%, a fine line between profit or loss. I'd expect loss though,as at every stage you'd be betting from a rounded book - be it on the match betting or the tournament betting.

I suppose this is an ideal tournament to test out the theory. Collect all the match and tournament odds before each round and then go through them.