Tennis - U.S Open Trading

[xchangeDollarz]

[raylin]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading Then the favorite goes out in the first round unless you take the 1st 4 favorites dutching your bets and greening up :nana

[xchangeDollarz]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading I have never had that happen. You can do that if you wish. Keep in mind, that option probably will only be available for the Grand Slams. Can't remember seeing the Big 4 market anywhere else.

[xchangeDollarz]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading Anyway, i am gonna post my data and show you how it goes over the next fortnight. Lets hope it doesnt go horribly wrong lol. :hope Federer at 3.35 I'll even do the Big 4 market. Since it is a very good option for the US Open. Big 4 v the field at 1.28 29/08/2010

[Tannus Rankus]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading Hi, I inadvertently stumbled across this strategy during the world cup and it worked out nicely. Backed Germany to win after england game and laid after argentina. Worked very nicely. I imagine it is lower risk with tennis. I will be interested to see at what point you lay.

[clay747]

[clay747]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading

Hi, I inadvertently stumbled across this strategy during the world cup and it worked out nicely. Backed Germany to win after england game and laid after argentina. Worked very nicely. I imagine it is lower risk with tennis. I will be interested to see at what point you lay.

All you did was to back Germany to qualify against Argentina. Did you get a better price this way?

[flower567]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading hi mate, do you concentrate on mens tennis only or are you also trading womens tennis?

[Datapunter]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading

This is a far safer way to trade.

Compared to what ?

[Tannus Rankus]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading Hi Clay, Not sure if I got a better price as I cannot remember what the match odds were. I think you make a good point though. But if you look at tennis I'm sure it is more profitable than betting on individuals as the odds for the big players to win in early rounds are very short - not worth betting on. But if you trade in the manner being discussed here you stand to make more money at a low risk. Football is probably slightly less worth it as the odds for favourates to win are slightly better than in tennis but I imagine it is still worth a punt. I may do some retrospective betting on the world cup odds for Germany and see if it was worth it or not.

[xchangeDollarz]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading

Hi, I inadvertently stumbled across this strategy during the world cup and it worked out nicely. Backed Germany to win after england game and laid after argentina. Worked very nicely. I imagine it is lower risk with tennis. I will be interested to see at what point you lay.

Yea i believe its the best trading strategy if you want a low risk. Right now, my Federer option is sitting on a 3% increase, the Big 4 still isn't into profit yet. I plan to lay into the second week, depending on Federer's opponents.

[xchangeDollarz]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading

How is this any different to just backing Federer to win his first and second round matches?

The fact that Federer's first round match was at 1.01 and 1.02. Even though it will be very unlikely that he will lose these matches you risk your entire bank to win 3%. After the first match, i've already made 3% with the strategy to trade out somewhere around 30%-50% later in the week with very little risk. And it it does go wrong, it will trade out for a loss that doesn't blow out all my money.

[xchangeDollarz]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading

hi mate, do you concentrate on mens tennis only or are you also trading womens tennis?

For the US Open only men. Since ive split my trading bank on Federer and the Big 4. But through-out the year, as much tournaments as possible, I would look at the women also. Its all about picking a decent selection that will go a few rounds in, and gettin out at the right time.

[xchangeDollarz]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading

Compared to what ?

Compared to trading games individually. Each their own they, i'm only giving you an alternative to look at, i didn't point a gun to your head and force you to do this. You are just picking someone you fancy to win the tournament and taking advantage of being able to lay a few matches into the tournament making a win/win situation.

[xchangeDollarz]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading

Hi Clay, Not sure if I got a better price as I cannot remember what the match odds were. I think you make a good point though. But if you look at tennis I'm sure it is more profitable than betting on individuals as the odds for the big players to win in early rounds are very short - not worth betting on. But if you trade in the manner being discussed here you stand to make more money at a low risk. Football is probably slightly less worth it as the odds for favourates to win are slightly better than in tennis but I imagine it is still worth a punt. I may do some retrospective betting on the world cup odds for Germany and see if it was worth it or not.

Thank you for agreeing. Good luck with the tournament.

[salparadise]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading

And it it does go wrong' date=' it will trade out for a loss that doesn't blow out all my money.[/quote'] But if it goes wrong and Federer is beaten by an underdog, wouldn't you still lose all your money? I dont see how you can trade out, unless you do it if he is a few sets down in a particular game.

[Datapunter]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading Comparing this is like saying riding a bycicle is "safer" than riding a car as it doesn't go so fast. It also doesn't get you where you want to go as fast. It's a non-sensicle comparison. You are making the mistake to think there is something like "safe" in betting, there isn't. All there is is a balance of risk versus potential profit. In this case i don't see how you've actually changed the risk. Bet on the match, he wins you win a bit, he loses you lose your stake. Bet on the outright, he wins you can (hopefuly!) lay for a small profit, he loses you ALSO lose your stake. If you take it over a few matches then the amount you can win when you lay off will be very close to the amount you can win when betting each match taking the profit of the previous match on to the stake of the next match. The only way you can make more profit compared to betting the matches is if you perceive the price on the outright market to be value. That you can only do by taking into consideration the other players in the tournament. If the other top 3 win their match easily and Federer struggles in his match then even though he wins his match his odds in the outright market might actually go up rather than down. I have seen that happen on a number of occasions. My point is your perception of "safer" is an illusion.

[Datapunter]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading

The fact that Federer's first round match was at 1.01 and 1.02. Even though it will be very unlikely that he will lose these matches you risk your entire bank to win 3%. After the first match, i've already made 3% with the strategy to trade out somewhere around 30%-50% later in the week with very little risk. And it it does go wrong, it will trade out for a loss that doesn't blow out all my money.

Are you sure you're not simply making a thinking error here, if Federer loses the match you lose the whole stake you placed on him on the outright market, where is the trade opportunity ?

[xchangeDollarz]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading

But if it goes wrong and Federer is beaten by an underdog' date=' wouldn't you still lose all your money? I dont see how you can trade out, unless you do it if he is a few sets down in a particular game.[/quote'] Obviously, you cant finish the trade if he has already lost. Makes no difference. You probably would've bet on Federer to win the match anyway, i prefer to trade it. That's all.

[xchangeDollarz]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading

Are you sure you're not simply making a thinking error here, if Federer loses the match you lose the whole stake you placed on him on the outright market, where is the trade opportunity ?

Okay, you can make that argument, but obviously you do want to trade out. When he is at a risk of a loss, you trade out. Quite simple? What are you not understanding? And good points, you can accumulate all his matches through out the tournament, and you will make the same amount as when you are trading. So if a loss arises, you lose everything. If I get close to a loss, I trade out. So doesn't that defy the fact that there is LESS risk involved? Either way, this is a discussion on strategies. Not a conspiracy theory.

[Datapunter]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading

When he is at a risk of a loss, you trade out

How is that any different from trading out on the match, the decision process is the same, the timing is the same, the odds will move at a near equal rate. What i'm not understanding is where you see a trade out opportunity that is any different from when trading on whatever match he happens to be playing.

So if a loss arises, you lose everything. If I get close to a loss, I trade out.

If a loss arises you lose the whole stake in both cases, seriously where is the difference ?

[xchangeDollarz]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading Set a stop-loss scenario. He goes down 2sets, and you trade out. You wont lose your whole stake.

[Datapunter]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading Fine, got that, so how is that any different from doing that on the match market ?

[xchangeDollarz]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading

How is that any different from trading out on the match, the decision process is the same, the timing is the same, the odds will move at a near equal rate. What i'm not understanding is where you see a trade out opportunity that is any different from when trading on whatever match he happens to be playing. The fact that you backed him at 3.35, is different to backing him at 1.05 in a individual match scenario. So when the odds move, there is a big difference between backing at 3.35 and 1.05? Is there not? I don't understand, do you want every detail of my trades? This was just a simple strategy you could use. Where YOU want to trade out, is up to you. How much matches in the tournament YOU want to go in is up to you. These are decisions you have to make to benefit yourself. Obviously, a trader wants to use larger stakes, since there are numerous ways to minimize the risks.

[Datapunter]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading

I don't understand, do you want every detail of my trades

Actually yes because that is where the whole and only difference is. The only difference between this and trading the match is the difference in odds. You've done nothing to shift the balance between risk / potential profit. It only makes sense if the odds movements on the ouright market allow you to make a bigger profit than on the match market. For that you need to record the exact odds at the moment in time you decide to trade out. (and on a fair number of occasions as well) Remember that you are also introducing additional factors in the overall trade. When trading the match market the only influence on the odds are the 2 players in the match. When trading the outright market all other players also have an influence on the odds movements. If the other 3 for the top 4 win 3-0 and Federer struggles 3-2 his odds will go up, not down. That means on the match you make a profit but on the outright market trade you make a loss. Paper trading for while would be strongly recommended. If you accept the risk is identical then the 2 become an equal alternative. And not as you stated earlier "safer", that's my only point.

[Datapunter]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading I you want a "safe" trade consider this: look at the order of play on any given day, and in the early stages possibly 2 days, estimate the chance of the first top 3 players actually losing, just one of the 3, if you think at least one of the first 3 stands a good chance of losing his match, place a back bet on the outright market on the 4th player. Await the outcome of the first 3 matches, if all 3 won then the price on the 4th will rise a little bit and you can trade out for a small loss, (possibly break even on the top 4 and shift the whole loss on the rest of the field which would be a fair "stop-loss" strategy), if just one of the 3 loses the odds on the 4th should drop a fair amount, 2 and you're laughing. The "safe" factor in this trade is found in the fact that the player you are trading on doesn't actually play during the timeframe of the trade. Apart from a complete withdrawl he cannot suddenly completely be out of the market. You are assured that at least you'll have a trading opportunity (which implies you can put a bigger stake on compared to fast moving markets) and usually you'll have a few hours between the completion of the 3rd match and the 4th starting. It's a decent alternative for those who find the match markets too volatile, odds movement just too fast, or those who don't have the time to trade live.

[xchangeDollarz]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading Okay, so you're sayin that im not proving its safer without statistics and data. Fair enough. I say its safer, when you trade tennis, the main strategies that are used can cause 10%-25% losses in match situations. With this scenario, i think you have more control with cutting your losses if you need to, and a larger gain available as you said. Federer in the 4th round will surely allow you to trade out for a profit. Hasn't he had some huge record of being in SF or better in tournaments for years (apart from an earlier loss, earlier this year)? :cheers

[xchangeDollarz]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading

I you want a "safe" trade consider this: look at the order of play on any given day, and in the early stages possibly 2 days, estimate the chance of the first top 3 players actually losing, just one of the 3, if you think at least one of the first 3 stands a good chance of losing his match, place a back bet on the outright market on the 4th player. Await the outcome of the first 3 matches, if all 3 won then the price on the 4th will rise a little bit and you can trade out for a small loss, (possibly break even on the top 4 and shift the whole loss on the rest of the field which would be a fair "stop-loss" strategy), if just one of the 3 loses the odds on the 4th should drop a fair amount, 2 and you're laughing. The "safe" factor in this trade is found in the fact that the player you are trading on doesn't actually play during the timeframe of the trade. Apart from a complete withdrawl he cannot suddenly completely be out of the market. You are assured that at least you'll have a trading opportunity (which implies you can put a bigger stake on compared to fast moving markets) and usually you'll have a few hours between the completion of the 3rd match and the 4th starting. It's a decent alternative for those who find the match markets too volatile, odds movement just too fast, or those who don't have the time to trade live.

:cheers Great addition to trading strategies for this. Just i expect the big 4 to go far. Possibly/most likely a big4 semi-final showdown. What would the tournament odds will be if Federer, Djokovic, Nadal, Murray squared off? Does one have to play very very bad to leave his odds drastically changed from the start? Or will this final 4 even out to the same odds they started with?

[Datapunter]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading If you expect a player to win his next match you could back him outright and lay after the match. Problem is if he loses you lose your whole stake. Alternative could be to lay the other 3 players, you will always have an opportunity to trade, even if he does lose, the other 3 will still be in the market and you can trade out for a loss recovering most of the stake. Still, not too sure the odds movements are big enough to make it interesting, would need to see a fair number of paper trades before getting in to it. Worth a shot i suppose if you have the time.

[clay747]

Re: Tennis - U.S Open Trading

I you want a "safe" trade consider this: look at the order of play on any given day, and in the early stages possibly 2 days, estimate the chance of the first top 3 players actually losing, just one of the 3, if you think at least one of the first 3 stands a good chance of losing his match, place a back bet on the outright market on the 4th player. Await the outcome of the first 3 matches, if all 3 won then the price on the 4th will rise a little bit and you can trade out for a small loss, (possibly break even on the top 4 and shift the whole loss on the rest of the field which would be a fair "stop-loss" strategy), if just one of the 3 loses the odds on the 4th should drop a fair amount, 2 and you're laughing. The "safe" factor in this trade is found in the fact that the player you are trading on doesn't actually play during the timeframe of the trade. Apart from a complete withdrawl he cannot suddenly completely be out of the market. You are assured that at least you'll have a trading opportunity (which implies you can put a bigger stake on compared to fast moving markets) and usually you'll have a few hours between the completion of the 3rd match and the 4th starting. It's a decent alternative for those who find the match markets too volatile, odds movement just too fast, or those who don't have the time to trade live.

How does this compare to just laying the player you think will lose? How big will your loss be if a player outside the top four wins the tournament after you shift your loss to the rest of the field? does anyone have any data to support these strategies?