Too Good To Be True???

[Jonester76]

I encountered a simple system whereby one lays the draw on a game of football and then once the a goal is scored and the odds for a draw increase, you cover yourself by betting on the draw. The only downside i can see is if the game is 0-0, but obviously you attempt to pick games involving free-scoring teams. I'd very much welcome any opinions as it looks too good to be true so i must be overlooking something. Any criticism of this approach would be gratefully received.

[JackJarvis]

Re: Too Good To Be True??? I seen this in a magazine a few years ago. Its not as simple as it sounds. I remember the game had to involve a strongly favoured home team who were favourites to win. If the away team scored first the draw price pretty much remains the same so basically you need the home team to score first.... also 0-0 will happen on more games than you would think.

[froment]

Re: Too Good To Be True??? Yep, it's a widely known system, for its simplicity and relatively low risk; I tried it when started betting on exchanges, it is good, but it not proved itself to be something special (otherwise everyone would build a fortune over it). As you stated, the main downside is 0-0 result; so, to avoid that risk, you need to back correct score 0-0, which decreases your profit when you trade after scoring the goal; moreover, movements of odds sometimes can not be enough to cover back stake for correct score 0-0. The second disadvantage that I faced is question who will score first goal; if one of the teams is favorite (let's say at odds shorter than evens), and if the other team, underdog, scores first goal, odds for draw will not lengthen, but might even shorten; therefore, you have to chose matches where both teams are of similar quality and there is no clear favorite... but in that case, risk of 0-0 result is increased... Unfortunately, I didn't have enough patience to take detailed statistics of my bets when I followed this method, but I noticed that matches when both teams are closer to bottom of the table and odds for both teams are longer than evens, produce more goals and therefore are more suitable for this method. I am waiting for next Premier league to continue trading the draw, because my "improvement" is as follows: I noticed (again not by taking detailed statistics, but just by observing the results) that significant number of matches in Premier league produces more goals in second half; so, I wait until half-time, and if result is still 0-0 (and there is, freely speaking, at least two such a matches in each round), you are easily able to lay the draw at odds lower than 2.50, or sometimes even lower than evens, which, in comparison to initial odds of 3.50 to 4.00, significantly decreases your liability; then you just need a little luck to see the goal in second half (because, in this case, there is no sense to back correct score 0-0 prior to kick-off, and odds for that result after 0-0 at half time are too low, and not worth taking) - in previous season of Premier, 42 matches, or about 11 percents, finished without goals... Naturally, you can try in other leagues, but I had most success in Premier, and liquidity is surely highest there My experience shows that, with careful selection and a bit of luck (some games when only goal was scored in 90 minute or in injury time, so there was neither time nor need to trade after goal, but entire lay stake was profit; but don't forget there are unlucky days, too - I still remember match Aston Villa vs. Stoke, when I decided not to trade after Villa took lead 2-0 in second half, and then Stoke scored in matter of minutes, and match ended 2-2) this can be a profitable system, but nothing special, just as the other ones... Anyway, good luck, and if you come to some new conclusions, bring it back here! :ok

[goalies_are_different]

Re: Too Good To Be True??? Froment, have you considered laying the HT draw? I have been studying this system for a long time and in my opinion backing the 0-0 correct score is not something worth doing. By backing the 0-0 you are saving those 11% of games which actually finish 0-0. It's better to try and maximize the profit on those 89 % of games that see at least one goal. I never lay the draw in a game that involves a favorite shorter than 2.0. I either lay the HT draw (in this case you lay at odds 2.0-2.5 and once a goal is scored you back at odds 4.5 or higher), or I lay the draw in the beginning of the second half. I have noticed that a high scoring league like the norwegian one could be well exploited when laying the HT draw. Since the beginning of the new season in Norway I was unlucky only once in 12 games. :hope Lay the Draw could be a profitable system (but one should never expect huge ROI) only if you keep your head cool. A draw game could have downhearting impact on a punter but profitable betting is a marathon rather than 100 m race.

[Hooloovoo]

Re: Too Good To Be True??? Good points made by above posters. I have been doing this and these are my tips: * Lay the HT draw for much lower draw odds. This way the back odds will be much larger when the goal is scored. * Don't back the 0-0, it will erase your profit * Look for highscoring leagues and teams * Don't lay the 0-0 at HT! If no goals have been scored in 1st half there's a reason. * Don't get greedy. Trade out when the 1st goal in 2nd half is scored, even if it's a late one...! * Think longterm * Keep detailed records of your bets * Analyze your results, but don't be too quick to draw conclusions based on the results. Variance is huge. Good luck if you try it out, post the bets in a thread so others can follow :ok

[froment]

Re: Too Good To Be True??? Hm, I must admit I didn't think about laying half-time draw; might consider it; I was doing the same thing as you said - laying the full-time draw at the very beginning of second half, only if result at HT was 0-0. Now, what I feel inadequate, and don't like in this method, when you first lay, and then back, is high lay odds, and therefore high liability; problem is that for odds up to evens, increment between two legs is 0.01; between evens and 3.00, increment is 0.02, then 0.05, and so on; so, if you lay at high odds, in fast moving market, only several increments can lead you out of greening-up; that's because I prefer "playing" with very low odds; for example, I'll tell you what I just did in Germany u21 vs. England u21; after 15 goalless minutes, I layed under 4.5 goals at odds of 1.06, with stake of 200 EUR, which means that my liability is only 12 EUR; after England scored a goal in the middle of first half, these odds "sky-rocketed" :lol and I backed at odds of 1.11 (in fact, in a moment they were as high as 1.13, but I was not fast enough to catch it, as well as 1.12), again with stake of 200 EUR - as I'm pretty confident there will be no more than 4 goals, I succeded to win 10 EUR (in fact, 9.50 after commission) if game finishes in under 4.5, and break even if, in some miracle, they score 5 or more goals; as further precaution, I was ready to back under 4.5 goals, again with 200 EUR, if it drops to 1.02, which is usually after about 50 minutes without goal; in such a way, I'm risking only 8 EUR to win 9.50 EUR, i.e., my effective odds are about 2.19; therefore, I need strike rate of only 46% to make profit. Strike rate means ratio of games where first goal is scored before 50 minute, as those games show the profit in this method; if the first goal is scored after 50 minute, increase of odds for under 4.5 is too low to make profit, but can nicely further decrease liability, so this is quite handsome system for me; firstly because potential risk is lower than potential winnings. In the meantime, while I was writing this post, first half finished 1-0, and odds for under 4.5 steamed down to 1.07; soon in second half, England scored another goal, and under 4.5 was available to back at 1.13, which means that, instead of writing this post, I had the opportunity to win another dozen of EUR in the same game... ;) Another nice try is laying under 1.5 goals in first half, usually at odds of about 1.35 to 1.40, and if the first goal is scored before 30 minute, it can be easily backed at about 1.60 to 1.65, but effective odds for this case are only about 1.50, so high strike rate is needed. Thanks for suggestion, I'm going to try laying the HT draw! :ok

[froment]

Re: Too Good To Be True??? ...and yes, I know, the question is, if I'm confident that game will finish under 4.5, why should I, the hell, lay it, why don't I simply back it at odds of around 1.10; but, biting the nails after one or two early goals is one thing, and greening-up is greening-up! Fore example, as I'm bit of fan of JTW's under threads, I followed his Finland's pick a couple of days ago, Vaasa PS vs Jyvaskila JK; he recommended under 3.5, I played under 4.5, and... fifth goal was scored in injury time... :sad Hooloovoo's tips are great, and out of them, the most important one is discipline - too many times I was greedy, just to see profit wiped away by an unexpected goal...

[froment]

Re: Too Good To Be True??? Ooooopppps, and England is 4-0 with 5 minutes to go... This is what I was talking about...

[froment]

Re: Too Good To Be True??? ...and finished 4-0; my 9.50 EUR earned in sweat... :lol If I backed under 4.5 goals with stake of 200 EUR at odds of 1.12, which were available this morning, I would win 24 EUR, but last 5 minutes of the game I would be, as G_are_D said, downhearted - my exposure would be 8 times higher than potential profit; and in this way, I won only 9.50 EUR, but virtually without risk, and with exposure/liability similar to potential profit.

[goalies_are_different]

Re: Too Good To Be True??? Well, I managed to make 20 euros by laying the HT draw after 10 scoreless minutes. I was busy on the phone for 15 minutes, when I was back at the TV it was 1:0 and what I did was to hedge only the liability on the lay bet:). But on the Italy-Germany game two days ago I wasn't that lucky when laying the HT draw after 20 minutes at 2.2. Italy were dominating with the woodwork saving zee germans on two occasions but after 45 minutes it was 0:0... I rarely bet on U21 games, for some reason I just don't like the way these youngsters are playing, kinda slow and ugly most of the time... Tonight I layed the Ht draw simply because it was the only game worth betting. I am gonna wait for some baseball action 2 hours from now. There is another question arising when talking about lay-back trading. Do you guys go green on all the outcomes or rather hedge only the initial liability? I prefer doing it this way because games end at level termes less frequently than home or away win (especialy when talking about laying the draw)

[froment]

Re: Too Good To Be True??? Nice to hear we're in profit this evening! :clap While I was betting with regular bookmakers, such an evening was kind of holly day - rare and distant from each other; but since I started trading about a year ago, profitable days are, knock-on-wood, more rule than exception! Neither do I like cup games, friendlies, tournaments, etc., I prefer league games, where you can rely on statistics and consistency, and informations are easier to obtain. As for your question, I touched it in one of my previous posts - depends on my evaluation of outcome; if I believe that one outcome is very probable, as it was case this evening with under 4.5 in England vs Germany, then I only secure initial liability, thus maximizing profit in case of expected result; otherwise, if I'm not sure in final outcome, I'd rather level-up my profit, so to have small winnings whatever result appears. Naturally, there can be other levels between those two extremes; for quick calculations, I use ChromaWeb arbitrage calculator, which is very handy to find out stakes needed to hedge; in the same page, there is a slider below calculator, which helps you to decide between those two extremes I mentioned in paragraph before.

[Sawyer]

Re: Too Good To Be True??? Guys, laying HT draw (and then backing draw) makes the same profit with laying ht score 0:0? Btw, laying draw after 0-0 is a very good tactic imo specially if odds are close. These kind of teams play more balanced in first half and they play more agressive in second half. Mostly, these kind of games end 1-1, 2-2 (if they're scoring teams) so you can back the draw when a goal is scored. Odds for draw will be very satisfying if a goal comes in 70".

[Crouch Potato]

Re: Too Good To Be True??? Haven't read through the whole thread, but you can get done if an equaliser is scored immediately after the go-ahead goal, meaning the market doesn't unsuspend in time for you to green up. Also, there's the possibility the match isn't put in play. With all that said and done though, wouldn't it just be easier to lay 0-0 instead of laying the draw then greening up? You can't green up if it's 0-0 anyway, plus you can't get caught out etc.

[froment]

Re: Too Good To Be True???

... after England scored a goal in the middle of first half' date=' ... [/quote'] As today appeared another thread on the forum related to trading the draw, I returned to this thread, to copy its URL; I went again through the posts, and found one ridiculous statement in my above post: I said England scored a goal; as we all know, it was Germany who scored in that match, but obviously, as I was typing these posts here and trading on that match with small money, only for fun (I think it was only in-play game that evening), I didn't pay much attention to result; obviously, I was wrong in reading the screen. As I traded on over/under market, this misreading didn't impact my bets; but if I was trading on match odds or something similar, I would most probably trade in wrong direction, or, at least, it would take a minute or two to catch what's wrong with odds, which is huge time for in-play games... I suffered similar things several times before, and I believe some of you, too; for example, clicking lay button instead of back, or vice versa; such a situations add another tip to above Hooloovoo's list of tips: one needs a concentration for successful trading! :wall