How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet)

[Jenspm]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet) Assuming you did all scores up to 3-3 and then any unquoted, you have 17 different selections to choose from. If you had these 17 scorelines and chose a random scoreline among these, there is an equal chance that you'll pick any of these 17 selections, agree? Thus, each scoreline has a 5.9% chance of being picked, and thus your "system" says that the chance of a scoreline of 2-1 is equal to the chance of a scoreline of 0-3 - 5.9%. You're system will therefore hit the overpriced scores just as often as the underpriced scores, and seeing as the payback is way under 100% - you will not profit in the long run, and any profit gathered is purely down to luck. ----------- Say you play a simple lottery, where you pick a single number between 1 and 10. If you hit the number, you win. The ticket costs £1.01 and if you win you get £10. You draw the number from a hat, and pick it at random every time. After 2 years, 15% of your numbers have been correct and you are in profit. Does that mean it is a profitable system? NO - because we KNOW that in the end you will end up at a 10% strike rate, in which case you WILL be in negative figures, no matter how much money you made after the first two years. The money you made then is solely due to luck. As for your last point, of course you'll lose money if you wrongly predict the value. That's the entire point... You're not automatically profitable if you think you've found value, you're profitable if you do find value.

[Machine]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet) This is a lot like talking to a politician lots of answers but nothing concrete. Last question .. Will you be putting up a value football thread for this season to show us mere mortals how its done ;) :ok

[Jenspm]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet) Oh - don't get me wrong - I do not claim to be a better punter than you are, I am only claiming that picking value bets is the only way to profit! That is a fact, whether or not I'm able to find these value bets is irrelevant. I've never been a fan of personal threads tbh, though I have posted a couple of glory hunts.. I prefer to post in the league specific threads. I have sporadicly posted picks on sports-punter.com under the same name, but again I stress - my results are irrelevant, as are any other one person's results. The fact of the matter is - the value is there, and you have to find it. "Value punters" can claim to find value where there isn't - I've done it many many times, as have I dismissed bets that do contain value. But, there is no exception, I have never found a long term profitable punter who disregards the odds of his picks. He takes them into consideration, and that, in itself, means he's hunting for value. The point of this thread was not to self-heighten myself as a flawless punter who correctly predicts the probability of every single match - it was purely to raise awareness that there is a connection between the odds you take and the profit you make. Finding profit in betting isn't about a high win ratio, but a high profit, thus it's not about picking winners but about picking over-priced teams/horses/dogs/athletes.

[Gingertipster]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet) Exactly Jenspm. Everything depends on whether a punter is good at evaluating form, ie being able to put an accurate percentage (or price) to every eventuality in each race / game etc. he wants to bet in. Even a punter who knows the percentages off by heart might not be any good at evaluating form. I made a loss the first year. Not knowing how much to allow each runner for the going or distance etc. is difficult for the novice value seeker. But it came with practice, now make a profit most years, and more importantly an overall profit. Sorry, that sounds big headed.:$ Know your subject from back to front in whatever sphere you bet in; and do assure you it is possible to show profit by looking for value.

[Shinigami]

-

[Shinigami]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet) the theory of value is sound & common-sensical except that it can be a false premise to keep talking about the "VALUE IN THE LONG RUN" without demonstrating an attainable time-frame of success. How can one be sure that "value" exists unless he has proven that his betting yield is SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, Time-bound)? When professional gamblers go into a poker or blackjack game, their idea of value is not "long run", but rather, they try to assess what they think they can earn per hour. A poker player's overall win within one hour is the sum of his mathematical expectations in individual plays during that given hour. As suggested in the examples given on this thread, hourly rate is closely related to the concept of value. While it's true that the more plays the poker player makes with a positive expectation, the bigger winner he stands to be, value should be measurable & attainable. And in the case of the poker/blackjack player, it's the hourly rate. Therefore, the "long run" is meaningless in sports betting, unless the punter can back it up with a weekly or monthly rate of overall success. "In the long run, we're all dead" -John Maynard Keynes

[Machine]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet) Ah I get what value punting is You go on a forum tell everyone how its done throw in a few what ifs and in the long runs then tell everyone how you make a profit but never show the results pre bet. Its a bit like a van der whiel thread, where they always have the winner after the race has gone then tell them how they managed to pick it through their vast experience. Some may say a tad aftertiming,but im not that cynical.;) Anyway Ill leave you guys to chat on, Im sure youve plenty of past winners at marvelous prices to talk about. :D Ill stick with the ratings punters , a bit more substance for my liking all this "value" malarky is making me quite dizzy ;)

[Gingertipster]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet) I can't blame anyone being cynical. Does not matter to me MN if you believe me or not. I am far from the best punter out there but.... Delete this if not allowed. Take a look at: win2win "£1000 Mythical Challenge" for past. theracingforum "Daily Lays And Plays" for current. Trouble is, those who don't believe in value, are usually only interested in seeing one or two bets. Which means nothing. ;)

[Jenspm]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet)

Ah I get what value punting is You go on a forum tell everyone how its done throw in a few what ifs and in the long runs then tell everyone how you make a profit but never show the results pre bet. Its a bit like a van der whiel thread, where they always have the winner after the race has gone then tell them how they managed to pick it through their vast experience. Some may say a tad aftertiming,but im not that cynical.;) Anyway Ill leave you guys to chat on, Im sure youve plenty of past winners at marvelous prices to talk about. :D

With all due respect, that comment was way out of line. I've already stressed that this thread has nothing to do with self-glorification, or to prove myself better than you or anyone else. I'm not keeping results from anyone - whenever I have time I post all my picks with full reasoning on this site, and you are free to comment on them as you wish. But again, this isn't about me. But please keep your sarcastic comments to yourself. This is not after-eventing in the slightest, I haven't mentioned a single one of my own picks, and even stressed to Jase that a single game doesn't defy its value - how can I then go back and claim my superiority with a couple of winning bets? It would contradict everything I've said in this thread. I've concentrated to keep this thread as objective as possible, keeping personal records out of it and repeatedly mathematically backing myself up. It's quite frustrating to then be waved off by a simple sarcastic comment, and you leaving with an air of "hah, I got the last word". I'd love to discuss lots of things in this thread, but I expect it to be done in a mutually respectful manner.

[Gingertipster]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet) Appologies, allowed myself to get sucked in to the "prove it" arguement. The theory does not need proving with wins and profit. It is taught in every school. It's simple maths. One quarter = 1/4 (one over four) or 25% or as odds 3/1 (or 4.0). At level stakes: Win 25 out of 100 bets @ 3/1 and you break even. More than 25 and a profit is made. Less than 25 and a loss is made. That's a fact. Why would any punter want to back a selection at 3/1 if he did not believe it had a better than 25% chance? Or, if he had no idea if a selection had a 15%, 20%, 25%, 30% or whatever chance, why would he want to have any bet? If there is another horse / team in the race / game who he believes has a 23% chance he should only back that one if better than 100/30 is available, and so on. Why would anyone who only uses ratings (or whatever) back a selection not knowing what the odds are? Bookmakers can see form as well as punters and make a book. The top rated may or may not be the value (best) bet.

[Datapunter]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet) I think there's 2 distinct subjects being mixed up here. One is the subject of "value" in itself. There is actually very little to discuss. You can explain it and that is it. "Value" is the gravity of sportsbetting. Always present and you can't get around it. The second, and very distinct subject, is the method of determining whether "value" exists. Now here there is room for discussion, loads of it. But i'll split it in 2 groups of methods: betting on the basis of perceived "value" , betting on the basis of perceived "winners". The first group attempts to determine if there is value in the price on offer of each individual bet and disregards whether each individual bet actually wins or not. The success of whatever method is used to determine if value exists can be measured by looking at the profit over time. If there is profit then on average the method finds value more often than not. The second group takes whatever price is available is disregards any assessment of value in the selection process and bases the choice to bet or not solely on the perception of the selection being a winner. Here the strike rate is the focus. But here again the success of the method can only be determined by looking at the profit over time. If profit is showing it merely implies there was value in the selections and prices obtained. After all taking lower prices will reduce the profit, taking higher ones will increase the profit. In critical situations when the result hovers around break even obtaining value prices will be the difference between profit and loss. You can pick 9 out of 10 winners but if the price you get is only 1.05 you're not going to make a profit are you. The initial focus of both groups of methods are totally different however both require the present of value in the prices in order to make a profit. Gravity. You can have a discussion on the merits of a particular method from both groups. But that is a different discussion altogether. If a punter says "i bet because i *think* there's value" then i fully agree the method is a weak one. Human intuition is not exactly reliable nor consistent. It gives you very little control over the overall process and is very hard to maintain over time. Methods applying some mathematics such as as rating systems, neural nets, whatever, can be considered more reliable as they can be reproduced with some accuracy over time. The drawback is they are notoriously difficult to be profitable. They attempt to apply order to a subject which has inherently a degree of chaos to it. The outcome of each sporting event is always to some extent the result of random events. "Value" should be understood by all, but after that each method should be discussed on its own.

[Datapunter]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet)

Why would any punter want to back a selection at 3/1 if he did not believe it had a better than 25% chance? Or, if he had no idea if a selection had a 15%, 20%, 25%, 30% or whatever chance, why would he want to have any bet?

Because he thinks it'll be a winner whatever the % may be. Ginger, seriously you need to get this, you do not need to include "value" in the selection process to have valid betting method or system. Yes, value has to be present to make a profit but you do not need to include it in the selection process. The method of "winners" may not be your cup of tea (understatement of the century here :lol) but that doesn't mean it's not a valid one.

[Gingertipster]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet)

Because he thinks it'll be a winner whatever the % may be. Ginger, seriously you need to get this, you do not need to include "value" in the selection process to have valid betting method or system. Yes, value has to be present to make a profit but you do not need to include it in the selection process. The method of "winners" may not be your cup of tea (understatement of the century here :lol) but that doesn't mean it's not a valid one.

If you don't include value in the selection process, then any profit is "luck". Sometimes a system or method will find value without looking for it, but that in itself is trusting to "luck". If a punter makes a profit in a year's betting by a method/system does NOT mean he got "value", it could be down to "luck". Same goes for any "value" punter. But the value punter's profit is more likely to find true value because he is seeking it. I've always said you need to find value to show a profit. But there are are MORE THAN ONE (valid ways) to find VALUE . So I think we agree DP?:unsure

[Shinigami]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet)

I think there's 2 distinct subjects being mixed up here. One is the subject of "value" in itself. There is actually very little to discuss. You can explain it and that is it. "Value" is the gravity of sportsbetting. Always present and you can't get around it. The second, and very distinct subject, is the method of determining whether "value" exists. Now here there is room for discussion, loads of it. But i'll split it in 2 groups of methods: betting on the basis of perceived "value" , betting on the basis of perceived "winners". The first group attempts to determine if there is value in the price on offer of each individual bet and disregards whether each individual bet actually wins or not. The success of whatever method is used to determine if value exists can be measured by looking at the profit over time. If there is profit then on average the method finds value more often than not. The second group takes whatever price is available is disregards any assessment of value in the selection process and bases the choice to bet or not solely on the perception of the selection being a winner. Here the strike rate is the focus. But here again the success of the method can only be determined by looking at the profit over time. If profit is showing it merely implies there was value in the selections and prices obtained. After all taking lower prices will reduce the profit, taking higher ones will increase the profit. In critical situations when the result hovers around break even obtaining value prices will be the difference between profit and loss. You can pick 9 out of 10 winners but if the price you get is only 1.05 you're not going to make a profit are you. The initial focus of both groups of methods are totally different however both require the present of value in the prices in order to make a profit. Gravity. You can have a discussion on the merits of a particular method from both groups. But that is a different discussion altogether. If a punter says "i bet because i *think* there's value" then i fully agree the method is a weak one. Human intuition is not exactly reliable nor consistent. It gives you very little control over the overall process and is very hard to maintain over time. Methods applying some mathematics such as as rating systems, neural nets, whatever, can be considered more reliable as they can be reproduced with some accuracy over time. The drawback is they are notoriously difficult to be profitable. They attempt to apply order to a subject which has inherently a degree of chaos to it. The outcome of each sporting event is always to some extent the result of random events. "Value" should be understood by all, but after that each method should be discussed on its own.

well said. :clap

[Gingertipster]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet) But it is evident in this thread, not eveyone understands value. :lol

[Datapunter]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet)

If you don't include value in the selection process, then any profit is "luck". Sometimes a system or method will find value without looking for it, but that in itself is trusting to "luck". If a punter makes a profit in a year's betting by a method/system does NOT mean he got "value", it could be down to "luck". Same goes for any "value" punter. But the value punter's profit is more likely to find true value because he is seeking it.

Absolute bollocks. The punter who focussus on strike rate is just as likely or unlikely to find value than the one focussing on value in prices.

But it is evident in this thread, not eveyone understands value.

Not everyone applies it the way you think it should be applied. That does not mean it is not understood.

I've always said you need to find value to show a profit. But there are are MORE THAN ONE (valid ways) to find VALUE . So I think we agree DP?

And yet at the same time you continue to arrogantly and condecendingly(?) (see bold text) dismiss any method from the "winner" group as invalid. That is your opinion and you are entitled to it but i'm afraid that that is all it is, your opinion. So no we do not agree as i am of the opinion that methods focussing on winners can be just as valid and can be just as likely to bring value to the surface. That of course is nothing more than my opinion and I'd like to leave it at that.

[Shinigami]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet)

If a punter makes a profit in a year's betting by a method/system does NOT mean he got "value"' date=' it could be down to "luck". Same goes for any "value" punter. But the value punter's profit is more likely to find true value because he is seeking it[/quote'] value betting, in theory, is perfect of course - you need to find mispriced bets (discrepancy between the odds & it's probability) But, this theoretically sound system has it's problems in practice: making accurate estimations is a very difficult thing to do... And if one's mathematical model fails to turn a profit in a year's betting, is he going to keep on persevering in the name of "LONG RUN VALUE"?.

[Shinigami]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet) to summarize, there are two basic school of thoughts/practices: 1. Keep looking for exceptional winners (be it favorites or underdogs), & "value" will take care of itself. 2. Keep looking for value (mispriced bets), & the "winner" will take care of itself. i think both are valid.

[trips]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet)

value betting' date=' in theory, is perfect of course - you need to find mispriced bets (discrepancy between the odds & it's probability) But, this theoretically sound system has it's problems in practice: making accurate estimations is a very difficult thing to do... And if one's mathematical model fails to turn a profit in a year's betting, is he going to keep on persevering in the name of "LONG RUN VALUE"?.[/quote'] yes i agree,why do Casinos win. they offer lower odds than the true chances of your bet winning.if Casinos offered better odds than the true odds =value, they would go bust in days.

[Jase82]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet)

yes i agree' date='its and obvious question why do Casinos win. they offer lower odds than the true chances of your bet winning.if Casinos offered better odds than the true odds =value, they would go bust in days.[/quote'] Is that really true? :unsure Casinos are in business, same as bookies are, because the majority of gamblers are losing punters. It's not really got anything to do with value imo. I also think the majority of gamblers don't tend to have a long term strategy or thought out method. As discussed on this thread. And again, that just means they'll never go bust.

[Gingertipster]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet)

And yet at the same time you continue to arrogantly and condecendingly(?) (see bold text) dismiss any method from the "winner" group as invalid. That is your opinion and you are entitled to it but i'm afraid that that is all it is, your opinion. So no we do not agree as i am of the opinion that methods focussing on winners can be just as valid and can be just as likely to bring value to the surface. That of course is nothing more than my opinion and I'd like to leave it at that.

Appologies if you find me condecending and arrogant. I DO NOT "dismiss" anything. Anyone using systems or method can get value, but it is far less likely.

[Gingertipster]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet)

Absolute bollocks. The punter who focussus on strike rate is just as likely or unlikely to find value than the one focussing on value in prices. Not everyone applies it the way you think it should be applied. That does not mean it is not understood.

My condecending and arrogance is one thing. Foul language used as abuse is another. And that coming from a "mod". :eyes Often people decend to accusing others of arrogance when they know they are losing an arguement. A punter who "foccusses on strike rates" is likely to back selections who are not value. If a punter has a "good" strike rate, may well be backing 1/3 (odds on shots) purely because it has the best chance of winning and wants to maintain his strike rate. Not caring that he needs a 75% strike rate to make a profit (in the long run) on those 1/3 shots. The same goes (to some degree) for prices at 2/1 or 4/1. Therefore, If the punter has no feeling for value, he is less likely to make a profit than the one that does. Which is my point.

[Datapunter]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet)

I DO NOT "dismiss" anything. Anyone using systems or method can get value, but it is far less likely.

By saying that you ARE dismissing other methods and it is simply not true.

A punter who "foccusses on strike rates" is likely to back selections who are not value.

Yet another statement which is simply not true. He is just as likely or unlikely to find value on each individual bet.

[Datapunter]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet)

they are losing an arguement

btw, you are not bringing any arguments, all you are doing is making statements that you consider to be true, and i'm saying they are not, this could go on forever, you can have the last word as i got nothing to add.

[Gingertipster]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet)

By saying that you ARE dismissing other methods and it is simply not true. Yet another statement which is simply not true. He is just as likely or unlikely to find value on each individual bet.

And I suppose the world is flat? Of course it is true. The average punter who looks for value is more likely to find value than the average non-value seeker. Because the non-value seeker does not care if he gets value. Does not mean there won't be one or two of the latter who do find value. :wall

[Gingertipster]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet) Veitch, Nevison, Potts, Freemantle, Mellish, Noakes, Taylor, Segal, Cunningham.... All "value" men. ;)

[Kanga]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet)

to summarize, there are two basic school of thoughts/practices: 1. Keep looking for exceptional winners (be it favorites or underdogs), & "value" will take care of itself. 2. Keep looking for value (mispriced bets), & the "winner" will take care of itself. i think both are valid.

Well Put :clap ... and i speak as somebody who tries to find miss-prices. At the risk of trying to simplify such an interesting thread into a few words can i try and summarise this all by saying that ........ Finding the best price possible is as important as the selection method itself ..... and vice versa :lol It's my belief that you need both to be profitable.

[jtw1]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet)

I can't blame anyone being cynical. Does not matter to me MN if you believe me or not. I am far from the best punter out there but.... Delete this if not allowed. Take a look at: win2win "£1000 Mythical Challenge" for past. theracingforum "Daily Lays And Plays" for current. Trouble is, those who don't believe in value, are usually only interested in seeing one or two bets. Which means nothing. ;)

Always nice to be selective Ginge but lets have ALL your value selections threads profits/Losses , esp last NH seasons LAYS AND PLAYS ;) , so we all know where you are in 'the long run' .

[Gingertipster]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet) Not selective Jtw, just got behind with the profit / loss count on that NH one, not had time or inclination to do it yet. Will make it up to date, probably in this year's transition period from flat to jumps; when I have fewer bets (possibly late Sept early Oct). :ok The last p/l I did on it was (I believe) a loss. But it did improve dramatically late season. The thread probably either made a small profit, small loss or broke even. ;)

[Shy10ck]

Re: How to beat the bookies – a value betting guide (inc. spreadsheet) Great post :ok Ignoring value is the most costly mistake in sportsbetting. When I read the threads here on punterslounge, it seems that one half (I have not counted) is basing there systems on historic data and is trying to make these historic data reveal secrets about the future. In my opinion historic data is only useful to understand the underlaying mechanisms in the distribution of ex football results and to get a basic understanding of differences in strenghts between ex football clubs. The other half is analyzing each game down to the smallest detail, to estimate probabilities more accurate than the bookies. This is in my opinion, a much to time comsuming exersize, that in worst case risk to overrate details and make value disappear or to appear where there is none. Besides that, the amount of time spend analyzing, could be used to find value in more games, through less time consuming methods. I think the truth is somewhere inbetween these two point of views.