Grex's OVERS; 353 bets; +3.7% yield

[Grex]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) All systems have their "ups and downs". This one started very much on the "up" after the first few weeks... it is now going through a "down", but will hopefully recover. I think it is too early to conclude that there is something "wrong" with the system.

[Grex]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) Sorry.... I made an error in the selections for today.... Aston Villa are, in fact, playing Blackpool, not Blackburn :$

[Bedlam]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) Great stuff mate, looking good!:clap

[Grex]

[Grex]

[jimjohn]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield Hi Grex, congratulations on your continued success, :clap:clap:clap I've been testing an under over system myself, with the overs showing a nice profit but the unders struggling to stay level. I had a quick look to estimate how the overs would of done on the over 3.5 market estimating odds and it looked to come out very similar. I just had a quick look down your list and you look to have a very good strike rate on this market. Is it an easy job to back test your system for the over 3.5 market to see if this is just a phase of results or have you looked at this before. It might be a nice system to run along side your current masterpiece. :notworthy:notworthy:notworthy Thanks for the inspiration, keep up the good work, jimjohn.

[Grex]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield Thanks, Jimjohn, for the kind words. It would be quite easy for me to do a back-test on the over 3.5 system.... BUT, I don't have any data on how to convert over 2.5 odds to over 3.5 odds.... can you help?

[jimjohn]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield I just had a look at present games and came up with this as a rough guide, 2.5 3.5 1.7 2.7 1.8 2.9 1.9 3.2 2.0 3.5 2.1 3.8 2.2 4.1 2.3 4.4 Not quite a scientific analysis but seems near enough for a guide. Your results looked about 50/50 so an average price of 3.0 would give a whopping yield, (would that be 100% I'm not sure how to calculate it?) My figures were 21 wins 7 losses at over 2.5 but turned into 12 wins 16 losses at over 3.5 With average odds about 2.0 @ over2.5 and est. 3.5 @ over 3.5 I looked to make a similar profit but I thought yours might go through the roof, not that it's doing too bad ;) , but if it's consistent then there might be extra to be found in your selections. Hope this helps (a little), thanks again for the great thread, jimjohn.

[Grex]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield OK, Jimjohn.... I calculated a linear equation from your odds matrix to convert >2.5 odds to >3.5 odds.... and applied it to all "over" selections for this season. ..... and the 38 bets produce an incredible yield of :loon 74% :loon (I tried to copy and paste the excel table onto this post, but it is too big and produces an "error"). I will try back-testing the system for the previous 7 seasons that I have data for, and see how it performs :hope

[jimjohn]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield Now that would be impressive if it's not just a positive spike in results. I hope they come back something similar, happy testing, jimjohn.

[Grex]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield

Now that would be impressive if it's not just a positive spike in results. I hope they come back something similar, happy testing, jimjohn.

The results of the back-testing for >2.5 and >3.5 for the previous 7 seasons: EP - 344 selections.... >2.5 13% yield.... >3.5 25% yield :loon EC - 252 selections.... >2.5 17% yield.... >3.5 14% yield :unsure IA - 340 selections.... >2.5 19% yield.... >3.5 28% yield :loon So, with the exception of the EC, the results are very encouraging. What I will do is to run the >3.5 system in parallel with the >2.5 system in order to monitor its performance during the rest of the season.... it will be purely a paper exercise. One of the problems is that the >3.5's for this season are running well above expectations (74% yield), so there is bound to be a down-turn :\ Anyway, Jimjohn, thanks again for the original idea..... let's hope it proves to be a success :ok

[Grex]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield HELP, please.... in preparation for the start of publishing the "over 3.5 goals" system (see above), I have been trying to find a site that publishes the best odds for over 3.5...... Betbrain doesn't cover this, neither does Betexplorer. Can anybody point me in the right direction..... thanks.

[jimjohn]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield It's nice to give a little back Grex, you're the one doing all the hard work. I'm not sure how accurate the >3.5 values are but we'll see in the coming weeks I suppose. I've not backed any of your selections yet :@ , as I'm not very good at keeping records :spank and didn't want to mix things up. But I might just have a go at them on the >3.5 market, hopefully before the 74% yield comes to an end. I'm only a small stake punter so won't lose a fortune if it goes pearshaped. I just had a quick look at the unders on this page for the under 1.5 market, but looks very much a non starter. Maybe an exactly 2 goals bet with 14 out of 27 coming in ;) . Thanks again for your input Grex, jimjohn.

[davidc]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield Hi Grex I've been following your selections for a few weeks now and just wanted to say keep up the good work! :clap For the over 3.5 odds check out this site. GL

[Grex]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield

For the over 3.5 odds check out this site.

Thanks, David....... just what I was looking for :ok

[Grex]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield

It's nice to give a little back Grex, you're the one doing all the hard work. I'm not sure how accurate the >3.5 values are but we'll see in the coming weeks I suppose. I've not backed any of your selections yet :@ , as I'm not very good at keeping records :spank and didn't want to mix things up. But I might just have a go at them on the >3.5 market, hopefully before the 74% yield comes to an end. I'm only a small stake punter so won't lose a fortune if it goes pearshaped. I just had a quick look at the unders on this page for the under 1.5 market, but looks very much a non starter. Maybe an exactly 2 goals bet with 14 out of 27 coming in ;) . Thanks again for your input Grex, jimjohn.

Sorry, Jimjohn... I only just noticed your post. OK... I am doing the "hard work", but I certainly wouldn't have thought of looking at the over 3.5 market without your input. Regarding your intention of putting some money on the over 3.5s, I'm warning you that I think there will only be two "overs" selections this weekend..... both on Sunday, from the Italian Serie A :loon..... and I still don't have a lot of faith in this league.

[Moneydog]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield not sure if you need historical odds or the odds for the upcoming weekend. for the upcoming weekend you should check www.oddsportal.com. they have have odds for the o/u 3.5 of 43 books for the arsenal-tottenham match for example. hope this helps!

[bluemanc]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield Morning Mr G,one question........Do you ever go to bed !!!

[Grex]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield

not sure if you need historical odds or the odds for the upcoming weekend. for the upcoming weekend you should check www.oddsportal.com. they have have odds for the o/u 3.5 of 43 books for the arsenal-tottenham match for example. hope this helps!

Thanks, Moneydog.... another excellent site :ok

Morning Mr G' date='one question........Do you ever go to bed !!![/quote'] Of course I do...... with my laptop and wireless internet connection.... the wife's not too happy, though ;)

[bluemanc]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield Mr G, good shout. I hope you take suitable precautions,the rhythm method doesn`t work too well with laptops !! Good luck for the weekend matey :clap

[Grex]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield

I hope you take suitable precautions' date='the rhythm method doesn`t work too well with laptops !![/quote'] :lol Don't worry... my laptop is so old, it must be post-menopausal.... no precautions necessary :tongue2

[Pepen]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield Hi Grex First of all, congratulations on your succes here :) I'm wondering (like everyone else most likely) how you choose your selections? I'm not asking for the exact formula, I'm just wondering if you have made some variables and parameters using statistical methods, modelling a way of forecasting the likelyhood of under/over -> calculating the "true odds" for either happening, or if you have found some criteria(s) that seems to be working? And by criterias I just mean like in your 'Short Priced Home Favourites" thread have simply chosen teams that match something like *quote* 1.selections will be on Premier League and Serie A matches with home team odds of between 1.2 and 1.6 (published Bet365 odds) */quote* I'm just asking, because I'm very interested in statistics and statistical modelling, and made a model trying to predict home/draw/away wins in the English Premier League with some small succes, and now I want to try and do the same for the over/under markets. Sorry if I'm not making myself very clear, sometimes I just type and forget to see if what I'm typing is making any sense when it's out of my head :)

[Grex]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield Thanks for the interest in the "system", Pepen. Yes, the system is based on "value" or "true odds". I used quite a simple citerion to produce a linear equation for the probability of overs and unders (I can't tell you the criterion.... it's very simple... and people might laugh at me;)). By comparing my probability calculation with published odds, you get the value percentage. Then, by back-testing, I established the value percentage cut-off range to give optimum performance (they differ slightly for each league, but all are above 100% value). I keep it simple, as my statistical analysis is limited to straight-forward Excel functions. By the way, your quotation from the "Short Priced Home Favourites" is a bit out-of-date..... the range was changed to 1.45-1.80 (Bet365) very early on.

[Grex]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield According to "Lawro's Predictions" (BBC) all 3 EP selections will finish "over". Now I am happy :rollin

[Grex]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield

.... I just had a quick look at the unders on this page for the under 1.5 market' date=' but looks very much a non starter. Maybe an exactly 2 goals bet with 14 out of 27 coming in[/quote'] I agree with your analysis of the under 1.5 market. However, regarding the "exactly 2 goals" market, I make it 24 out of 83. The average odds seem to be about 4.0, which would have produced a yield of 16%.... worth keeping an eye on :ok EDIT: having looked more closely at the "exacly 2 goals" market, I think that the average adds are nearer 3.5.... in which case, this season would just about have broken even. A quick back-test on the previous 7 seasons indicates the same sort of results, so perhaps there is no mileage in this option.

[Pepen]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield Yah, i noticed right after I pasted, but as it was only meant as an example, to specify what I meant by criteria ;) I'm glad to hear it can be done simple, my own model ended up with a cutoff and 2 variables, which in my opinion seems to be alittle simple, when used to predict the outcome of a soccergame :) But it seemed to work, had decent ROI over 2 seasons...do you then update your estimates after each game, or just after each season? Sorry for the load of questions, i'm just extremely impressed with your results so far, hoping to do just alittle as good...and my programming skillz are not impressive, so I'm using excel and the built-in functions, no fancysmancy VBA or anything like it. Anyway, thank you for your answers, and good luck with your systems :)

[Grex]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield

..... I'm glad to hear it can be done simple....... ...do you then update your estimates after each game, or just after each season?

I like simple..... that's all my simple brain can handle :tongue2 Regarding "updating your estimate"..... DEFINITELY NOT . For me, once you have found the optimum "formula" during back-testing over a minimum of 6 seasons, you should not adjust it when "going live". I think this is what is referred to as "data farming", and is simply adjusting the system to suit recent trends. All systems are a long-term exercise, with ups and downs, and you shouldn't try to compensate for inevitable fluctuation in fortunes....... here endeth today's sermon.

[Pepen]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield Amen! ;)

[Grex]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield For a Dane, you have a good sense of humour (sorry.... I work with a company based in Copenhagen, and the staff are not exactly famous for their humour) ;)

[jimjohn]

Re: UNDER or OVER (as the actress said to the bishop) 121 bets +16% yield

I agree with your analysis of the under 1.5 market. However' date= regarding the "exactly 2 goals" market, I make it 24 out of 83.

Sorry if you've been doing even more analysis Grex. It was just something I had a quick look at on that page which threw up a lot of 2 goal results. :zzz :zzz bed time for me. Good luck everyone tomorrow. I'm on Doncaster, Norwich, Accrington, Rochdale and Shef.u overs. I see you have Donny as an unders :\ , so good luck in all but that one Grex. jimjohn.