Tennis Betting System

[Smiles Tennis]

Hey all, first time here. I have spent a while analysing and testing a method that places an unmatched bet on Betfair on tennis matches. Most of the time it gets matched. It should hopefully produce some profit. 

I will try to post picks here for discussion. Clearly the exact method won't be shared unless it all fails. Then we can all pick at what went wrong and where I was being stupid. 

I will def post results here, as that can be done at any time. As it takes time to make selections, I can't always get them up in time, but can probably post a screenshot of the spreadsheet for picks when completed. 

There are many bets most days. 

Today is the first day using real money.  Just over £1000 bank. Attached are today's picks in my spreadsheet, with two left to play. Commission not accounted for on the spreadsheet.

Back Coria v Lorenzi @ 2.5. Savannah Challenger ATP

Back J.P Smith v Ofner @3.2. Puerto Vallarta Challenger ATP

I have been using 1% stakes apart from the first bet in the spreadsheet where I started with 2% then changed my mind and though 1% would be better. 

Maybe some of you guys will follow along for interest. My missus hates me talking betting and tennis so need somewhere to spout off about it lol. Hence I found this forum. I hope it interests some of you. Also attached is my P&L to show I made these bets genuinely. 

 

 

 

[Smiles Tennis]

Having just read the rules to the Betting Systems thread, I will give a bit more info. I am new here so didn't read it at first as I put my original post in the tennis thread. 

The system basically takes years worth of data for results and compares it to how it should have performed according to what the market predicted (start price). If something is overperforming or underperforming according to historical results, then the player is either a back or their opponent is. 

The bet is then placed roughly 40/50 ticks higher than their current price when I check the data and make the selections, in the hope they will drift that far, be matched, then win. You can watch the match and just bet in play if they reach a higher odds than listed, but I like not having to follow so many matches so I place the bet and leave it. 

I am hoping their SP is value due to the algorithm indicating it is, but with an extra 40/50 ticks, the value will be increased. Time will tell. 

As for the last two bets remaining for the day, Coria is currently a set up and hasn't been matched. Smith has already drifted pre-match and been matched so no need to wait for in play on that one. 

 

[Smiles Tennis]

I have changed the spreadsheet to 1pt stakes from a 100pt bank and to include 5% commission in the profits as I am using Betfair for my bets. 

 

 

[Smiles Tennis]

Three early bets today. 

These bets are placed before the start, unmatched, to hopefully be matched in play and then left to run. 

 

[Sir Puntalot]

 to PL @Tennis Picks   

Feel free to get involved in the weekly tennis threads, but if it's an out and out system then people post them in this forum.  

[Smiles Tennis]

 

 to PL @Tennis Picks   

Feel free to get involved in the weekly tennis threads, but if it's an out and out system then people post them in this forum.  

Thanks. I did post it in a tennis thread originally but it was moved to this thread when it was accepted. 

[Sir Puntalot]

 

Thanks. I did post it in a tennis thread originally but it was moved to this thread when it was accepted. 

Yeah we do that if it's a system.  If your tennis bets have some reasoning etc... then you can get involved in the very active tennis forum, but it if it's all system based, it's better here or in Glory Hunters Forum.  

Good luck.  

[Smiles Tennis]

 

Yeah we do that if it's a system.  If your tennis bets have some reasoning etc... then you can get involved in the very active tennis forum, but it if it's all system based, it's better here or in Glory Hunters Forum.  

Good luck.  

I will post a few bits on there then, but this is a system so I will keep the main posts for that in here. Cheers.

[Smiles Tennis]

Updated picks for todays matches. 

Match/Selection/Odds (leaving unmatched to go in play)/stake

 

[Smiles Tennis]

More picks added for today.

Bets left unmatched at listed odds to run in play.

[Smiles Tennis]

More picks after checking matches up to around 7pm. 

A few more not getting matched today, I might reduce the price I ask for slightly if it continues to just miss some. 

[Smiles Tennis]

Last selections for today's matches. 

Currently about 0.2pts profit from results in, Cilic a set up, Puntitseva at 1-1 and Mladenovic not causing Kvitova any problems at the moment. 

 

[liero1]

Hi. Interesting, so you analysed a players performance versus it’s odds? How many games do you take into account, I assume it’s hard to get both a large enough number to have a clear over/under perform indication and have the data set rather recent so it’s not based on the 90s or something..? 

 

Will definitely follow cheers 

[Smiles Tennis]

5 hours ago, liero1 said:

Hi. Interesting, so you analysed a players performance versus it’s odds? How many games do you take into account, I assume it’s hard to get both a large enough number to have a clear over/under perform indication and have the data set rather recent so it’s not based on the 90s or something..? 

 

Will definitely follow cheers 

I use matches from 2011 to now. Most players only started playing after then and that's a decent number of games. 

[Smiles Tennis]

Just under 5pts profit yesterday. I will do ROI etc at some point, maybe after a week. 

Yesterday's results. 

Gasquet 3.1 and Fritz 3.3 along with Kuzmova 2.68 were the best winners. Mladenovic and Seppi odds are going to lose most of the time so no surprises. Just hope to be on it when a pick that high comes in. 

N/A are the matches where my bet didn't get matched in play.

Edited May 7, 2019 by Tennis Picks

[Smiles Tennis]

Early match starting soon, Busan Challenger, Back Duckhee Lee against Ochi, 1.6 to be matched in play. 

[Smiles Tennis]

This mornings matches. The Lee match was posted above so is already matched, and he's at 1.12 currently. The rest are Madrid matches yet to begin. 

Match - Selection - odds requested to match in play - stake

 

 

[Smiles Tennis]

More picks for this afternoon's matches. 

 

[Smiles Tennis]

Rest of the selections for today's matches. 

 

[Smiles Tennis]

Total for today: +8.02pts

Total since 4th May 2019: +19.02pts

Today's results:

 

[liero1]

16 hours ago, Tennis Picks said:

I use matches from 2011 to now. Most players only started playing after then and that's a decent number of games. 

Ok cool. So you have one big accumulated performance indicator or so you base it on a certain number of more recent games .. don’t totally get it sorry haha!!

can I also ask why u don’t take sp when I think it’s value already. I would just think a 49 ticks is massive and if they go that high they are obv likely to lose? Your results are amazing though so far 

[Smiles Tennis]

Yes, it's one big accumulated performance indicator. The recency of the matches doesn't matter. 

I take extra ticks, (sometimes only 25/30, it's not always 50), because it's extra value. Gasquet 3.1 and Pouille 3.3 both won having drifted that far pre-match. They both won (and in straight sets I think).

Were they actually more likely to lose 30 mins before the start than 3 hours before the match? Maybe, if some injury news came out or quote saying they felt tired etc, but more than likely a favourite had lost a previous match and people were chasing losses by piling into the next fave that's playing. I know Dimitrov lost before one of the matches so maybe that had something to do with it?

But even throughout the match, I know technically they're more likely to lose because the opponent has more points but if a player goes a break down in the first are they actually more likely to lose? or does the match have so many fluctuations that a break doesn't matter? 

Now, if a player breaks at 4-4 in the third set then you will see a massive odds change. They're more likely to win because it's so close to the end. I try to avoid getting too involved in the in-game details. So often I back a player at SP and see them trade higher. Why not grab that extra value? 

A few will not get matched as you can see from the results but I think the amount that gets matched at the higher price more than cover it and with extra on top. 

So in a nutshell, the markets tend to be fairly efficient, long term, with regards to SP and the end result. What happens in between doesn't matter for this. I find matches where there is a small (or hopefully large) discrepancy in their long term results (their career) and what the market thought about their chances. 

It takes time to analyse the form, how tired they are, injuries, their opponents, the conditions etc, and it's all been done for us in the price, it's all included already by everyone who is betting and I trust their judgement (most of the time)

It's how the player performs when the market gives them a certain chance to win which is where I come in. 

For example. Albert Ramos Vinola, when SP is an average of 1.6, he *should* win 62.5% of his matches if the markets are efficient. I can tell you he's only won 58% of those matches. 25% of them when playing on hard courts. 

Serena Williams, when an average of 1.2 should win 83% but has actually won 87%. Take this out to 1.4 and she should win 71.4% of the matches but is at just 63%. Do people give her more chance of winning when they should?

I take that info, mix it with my secret sauce handed down through generations and use it to place my bets. 

 

[Smiles Tennis]

Backing Melzer v Leshem @1.65 with 1.5pts stake in a match starting soon. 

[Smiles Tennis]

And backing Baghdatis v Sela, 2.4 odds, with 1.5pts. 

[Smiles Tennis]

Picks up to the 3pm matches. 

Match - selection - odds (unmatched to be left to match in play on Betfair) - stake. 

 

[liero1]

2 hours ago, Tennis Picks said:

Yes, it's one big accumulated performance indicator. The recency of the matches doesn't matter. 

I take extra ticks, (sometimes only 25/30, it's not always 50), because it's extra value. Gasquet 3.1 and Pouille 3.3 both won having drifted that far pre-match. They both won (and in straight sets I think).

Were they actually more likely to lose 30 mins before the start than 3 hours before the match? Maybe, if some injury news came out or quote saying they felt tired etc, but more than likely a favourite had lost a previous match and people were chasing losses by piling into the next fave that's playing. I know Dimitrov lost before one of the matches so maybe that had something to do with it?

But even throughout the match, I know technically they're more likely to lose because the opponent has more points but if a player goes a break down in the first are they actually more likely to lose? or does the match have so many fluctuations that a break doesn't matter? 

Now, if a player breaks at 4-4 in the third set then you will see a massive odds change. They're more likely to win because it's so close to the end. I try to avoid getting too involved in the in-game details. So often I back a player at SP and see them trade higher. Why not grab that extra value? 

A few will not get matched as you can see from the results but I think the amount that gets matched at the higher price more than cover it and with extra on top. 

So in a nutshell, the markets tend to be fairly efficient, long term, with regards to SP and the end result. What happens in between doesn't matter for this. I find matches where there is a small (or hopefully large) discrepancy in their long term results (their career) and what the market thought about their chances. 

It takes time to analyse the form, how tired they are, injuries, their opponents, the conditions etc, and it's all been done for us in the price, it's all included already by everyone who is betting and I trust their judgement (most of the time)

It's how the player performs when the market gives them a certain chance to win which is where I come in. 

For example. Albert Ramos Vinola, when SP is an average of 1.6, he *should* win 62.5% of his matches if the markets are efficient. I can tell you he's only won 58% of those matches. 25% of them when playing on hard courts. 

Serena Williams, when an average of 1.2 should win 83% but has actually won 87%. Take this out to 1.4 and she should win 71.4% of the matches but is at just 63%. Do people give her more chance of winning when they should?

I take that info, mix it with my secret sauce handed down through generations and use it to place my bets. 

 

thanks much appreciated. just curious because I did test something similar (wanted to message you but god knows how that works). Although I did more of an overall performance indicator, taking an average price into account - thinking about your approach, don't you find that mostly for most players you only get a few matches per odds price? e.g. a player might have been priced at 2.5 three times his career but that is way too low of a statistical number to tell us anything no matter if he won 0 or 3 of those..?

 

[Smiles Tennis]

I take a small spread, rather than just being 2.5. 

[Smiles Tennis]

More picks from the Bencic match down. 

 

[Smiles Tennis]

Last two selections for today. 

0.2pts profit so far today. Bit lower than the last few days but a few matches left. 

 

[Smiles Tennis]

-4.1 pts yesterday. I think it's the law that when you increase stakes you have to lose on the first day lol. 

Since 4th May: +14.86 pts