Arb betting without the HASSLE!

I don't know if any of you guys have ever spotted this? but there is a loophole in tennis betting. Example, the womens singles final is now in play. Before it started you could get 1.53 on A. Myskina to win, and 2.50 for Dementieva. Now the favourite is leading Dementiava has dropped to 5.00 in the live betting. So if you had bet a £100 on Myskina yesterday, and say £30 on Dementiava today, you've an Arb, where no matter what the outcome you'll make a profit. This isn't a one off, the same thing happenned yesterday with the Henman, Coria match. Before the off Henman was 5.00 and Coria 1.22. When Henman won the first set during live betting Coria dropped to 2.25. Interesting huh? I will be keeping an eye out from now on, because this is Arb betting without the hassle.:hat

[Datapunter]

Sorry Fender,
you are not talking about arbitrage but simply about GAMBLING.

Arbitrage is a situation where you can make a profit betting all possible outcomes of an event AT THE SAME MOMENT IN TIME. In the situation you are describing you need time and events to happen for the odds to change in order to make a profit. So you are GAMBLING on specific events to happen. I.e. you are gambling that the odds will shift in a specific direction. There is no guarantee they actually will, therefore you cannot speak of arbitrage.

That does not mean this is not an interesting betting strategy. You simply need to be able to find value in the odds available on favourites where you think the odds are too low. If you think the odds on the favourite are too low there is a good chance the underdog will go ahead at some point in the match thus creating an opportunity to make a profit.

Making that profit can be done by betting the favourite and then the underdog, simular to arbing. Or you could simply back and then lay the underdog or vice versa, lay and then back the favourite.

Making profit with this strategy does require some hassle, namely to pick the matches where the odds will swing in favour of the underdog.

I'm not having a go at you Fender, just want people to have a good think before they get into this strategy.

Good points Datapunter, I see what you're saying. But my point was more for people who have backed the favourite at an ideal price arround 1.5 with a decent amount of money, to stamp out any chance of the outsider making a comeback and losing all your money, you wait until the odds drop enough on the outsider so you can guarantee profit whatever happens. Myskina was 1.53 before the match, and Dementieva was 2.50. At one point in that match Dementieva dropped to 12.00. This interests me more for multiple betting. where you can have 6 or 7 short priced favourites in an accumulator, and also back the outsiders individually so that you make money if the accumulator wins and get your money back if any of the outsiders win. I have the following in a £10 accumulator at the moment

Gaston Gaudio 2.50 won
Florida Marlins 1.95 won
Anastasia Myskina 1.53 won
Guilermera Coria 1.22 pending
Boston Redsox 1.45 pending
L.A lakers 1.18 pending
France v Ukraine 1.28 pending

I have won the first 3 out of a possible 7, but to ensure I at least get my money back, I will be backing all the outsiders for the remaining bets with just enough stake to get my money back. Boston will be on tonight and their opponents are priced at 2.75, so I am going to put £8 on them and so forth with the remaining bets. If my luck holds up I will get a return of £199.29p or break even. But from here I cannot lose a penny.

This is a very high risk approach to gambling...

It requires the result of the match to swing they way you want it... And this is not certain in any sporting event...

Foolish to call this type of betting arbitrage.

Sorry about the rant...

Good luck Fender.

[Datapunter]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>you wait until the odds drop enough on the outsider so you can guarantee profit whatever happens<hr></blockquote>
This is called hedging, 2 ways to do that.
- One is as you describe, you place a bet on the favourite and wait for the price on the outsider to reach a point where you can bet the outsider and make a profit either way.
- Second is simply to wait for the price on the favourite to drop so you can LAY and make a profit either way. This is know as hedging.
NOTE : it is likely that the odds will go with the favourite, but there is no guarantee !

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>so I am going to put £8 on them and so forth with the remaining bets<hr></blockquote>

how big does the stake become on the last bet, assuming of course that all previous bets where won by the favourite ? ( stake size for ukraine ? )
Could you list all the individual bets, stakes and odds in order, that would make it much more clear.

It didn't matter anyway Data, Gaudio rocked the boat and beat Coria to end my accumulator. France was priced at 1.28, the draw 5.00 and Ukraine 10.00 to win. I will bet just enough to get my money back or a little profit on the outsiders.

[Datapunter]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I have won the first 3 out of a possible 7, but to ensure I at least get my money back, I will be backing all the outsiders for the remaining bets with just enough stake to get my money back<hr></blockquote>
so you did not do this in the end ?



whats the purpose of this post BTW ?

you start on arbitrage that is not arbitrage ?
then you go to covering bets on an accumulator and apparently not go through with that ?

and then we've not even gone into the whole thing that placing bets on an accumulator is one of the most stupid ways of betting,
AND when using an accumulator and then placing covering bets makes using an accumulator even more stupid.


You've posted some interesting stuff in other threads but somehow Fender you really need to start doing some basic maths.

Fender your initial point about there being a loophole in tennis betting is incorrect. Had Corria won the 1st set, his price would've come IN, not out and you would've been in trouble had you backed Henman. You cannot control whether the favourite will start well or not. Sorry!

[Seen2001]

Fender is certainly hard work

True danny, I have simply noticed several occasions where things have swung during the match to present a realtime arb situation. This has happened alot this week. Take the match between the scud and some nobody called Flanagan. The scud was 1.08 to walk that match, and Mr 700 in the world was 9.00 during live betting scud dropped to 3.00. That means if you put a small wager on Flanagan before the off, and waited a point came in the match where no matter who won you couldn't lose. This is happenning more often than people realize. Enough to make it worthwhile watching.

Data I wouldn't dismiss things until you really know the object of the excercise. E.G Most favourites are too short to make any decent money without risking alot of money. I have won 4 accumulaters this week using my aforementioned technique. And I am on the verge of making a killing if Hewitt and Grosjean can win their matches today. I have them with 2 other players who've already won their matches and 4 baseball teams who all won their matches last night, in an 8 bet accumulator. I have covered their opponents, and as I write Grosjean has taken the lead to push his opponent out to 4.00. I didn't cover the previous 6 winners so I stand to make over 300 quid clear profit if Hewitt and Grosjean deliver the goods. All my money back if they don't. OMG Grosjeans opponent has dropped to 26.00 Short of Hewitt being stretchered off the court I am quids in Would I be premature to go off to the pub and celebrate now? Even if his opponent wins I will make 40 quid profit as he's priced a delicious 7.50 even before the off.

[Datapunter]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>occasions where things have swung during the match to present a realtime arb situation<hr></blockquote>Would you please stop saying this,

if you have to wait for odds to swing before an arb opportunity exists then there is NEVER an arbitrage situation. Either you are plainly ignorent about the definition of arbitrage or simply pigheaded.

to talk about ARBITRAGE the opportunity to make profit must exist AT THE SAME MOMENT IN TIME. All the rest involves gambling on the course of events and is not arbitrage.

Sorry Data, it's just becoming too easy for me after this discovery. I'll put it like this, this is the closest you'll ever get to an arb bet then. And betting on players like Rusedski and scud who get favoured too often present wonderful oppurtunities to make a profit.

[Datapunter]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>know the object of the excercise<hr></blockquote>
please explain the advantage of using accumulators compared to simply single bets ?

First , what is an accumulator ? How do you calculate the return of an accumulator ? Just to make sure we are talking about the same thing here ?

[Datapunter]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>this is the closest you'll ever get to an arb bet then<hr></blockquote>
welcome to the wonderfull world of in-running and hedging, enjoy the profits. <img border=0 src="http://www.prosportsbetting.co.uk/gifs/beer_drink.gif" />

Since you are clearly new to this may i suggest you look at hedging. You place a back bet on a player when you suspect his odds will go down (lower) and then when they do you place a lay bet on the same player thus securing a profit either way. Or the reverse : you place a lay bet on a player when you suspect the odds will rise (bigger) and then place a back bet when they have done so securing a profit either way. And note you can do this several times during the same match. Tennis is great for this since the odds can vary many times during a match.

A note of warning ! it is a strategy that can produce very nice profits indeed BUT it can equally lead to serious losses. Discipline is the key. Start with very small amounts until you get the hang of it.

The adavantage is turning short odds into decent ones with worthwhile risk (the size of my stake against the chances of losing) For example the 8 bet accumulator I am in danger of winning turns 8 short prices into a juicy 10/1 when you multiply the odds. Because I have had an excellent week I placed 40 quid on it. If Hewitt wins my return will be 453 quid. I coverd the Grosjean and Hewitt matches once I knew the first 6 had won. 30 quid on Grosjeans opponent at 3.00 and 20 quid on Hewitts opponent at 7.50. Total staked 90 quid. If Hewitt wins I make a nice profit of 363 quid, I will be very happy as that will be the most I have ever won from a single bet. If tragedy strikes and Hewitt loses I will still make 60 quid profit. So I am gonna be really happy or quite happy today. Cheers

[Datapunter]

If it is your intention to place covering bets on the remaining bets in an accumulator once the first bets have won, what is the point of putting all the bets in a single accumulator in the first place ? I really fail to see the logic in this, can you explain ? Or illustrate with a detailled example please ?

[Seen2001]

I'm now convinced that Fender is on the wind-up.

Slick - is it you, ya c*nt?