Lay the underdog-away (specific leagues)

[yrufset]

Hello all
i'm trying a strategy these days and i would like to hear your comments, if you have some:
I did a little research to find the leagues that have more Home wins than the average.
in those leagues, i'm looking for a game between a home-favorite (odds around 1.7 and below) to an away-underdog (odds from 4 and above).
After doing a little more research on the specific game (last 5 games statistics of both teams, position, and general statistics) i then lay the underdog if i think he's not likely to win, for a liability of 10% of my bank.

I know, that's really slow profit. but it's steady.
after backtesting this strategy i found out that a losing bet might come once in a while, but not likely to occur more than once in five games. So i thought: why not go Martingle when i lose? i can chase my loses because they are rare!

Well, that's about it. any thoughts?

[fezoj]

well that sounds a bit risky to me.....a few losers in row and it could be pretty nerve-wrecking,risking too much money:Arragh
but it could work well....dont know,i`d probably go for safer option,it looks like its gonna make u some money:Kerching

[bazbaz]

If you've found value then great, but just use a sensible staking plan, theres no need to martingale if you've found value. How many results have you back tested and what is the ROI? You want a good number of results before deciding that you've found something

[RockyRoulette]

Hello all
i'm trying a strategy these days and i would like to hear your comments, if you have some:
I did a little research to find the leagues that have more Home wins than the average.
in those leagues, i'm looking for a game between a home-favorite (odds around 1.7 and below) to an away-underdog (odds from 4 and above).
After doing a little more research on the specific game (last 5 games statistics of both teams, position, and general statistics) i then lay the underdog if i think he's not likely to win, for a liability of 10% of my bank.

I know, that's really slow profit. but it's steady.
after backtesting this strategy i found out that a losing bet might come once in a while, but not likely to occur more than once in five games. So i thought: why not go Martingle when i lose? i can chase my loses because they are rare!

Well, that's about it. any thoughts?

Your logic Is sound but has to be taken with a long term view using a compound win profit strategy

[jibiko]

Martingale?
Do you know how Martingale died?
He was killed by a losing streak.

Only if you have unlimited wealth.
Not even Bill Gate$ has it, though.
The number stops after some zillions.

:WTF another myth for the mythbusters?

[Portman]

Furthermore if the price is short (1.4, 1.5, 1.6 etcc) the martingale exsposure tends to grow very fast, and God loves rows....

[LuckyYou]

The price that Betfair give for a specific game is really "fair". I.e. if Betfair give price 4.1 for away team to win this actually mean that the real chance the away team to win is 4.1. But if you back or lay this 4.1 mean that with the back/lay itself you are going in so called margin. In the case of Betfair this is the implied % of the other 2 prices + (don't forget) the commission. And belive me if you continue lay 4.1 and the price just before start of the game is still 4.1 in long term nothing can save you! The only way for you to beat that up is: You are laying 4.1 and the price jump, so can make so called arbitrage, but arbitrage which can let you achieve entry out of the margin + commision. It doesn't mean you to close the market - It means that you have advantage by picking good oddds!. If you can do that n times you will be winner. If you can't do that or the price even go bellow 4.1 you will be loser. This odds are not made out of the fingers. And the market move them so they are too too correct!!! But believe me no matter what the championship is - the odds are imported and the probability is deadly right! This is only way to find a value. Any other way is loser way in long term!

[jibiko]

some more thoughts

According to this:

...liability of 10% of my bank...
a losing bet...not likely to occur more than once in five games

you have this:
- 10 chips/stakes.
- strikerate = 80% .

According to the Anticipated Losing Runs.doc
(kindly provided by Sagitario in adrianmassey's forum)

you can have a losing streak of 7 games.
don't underestimate the 1% chance.
it will come at some point, sooner or later.
It seems that you are on the edge already, with your betting system.
Your worst enemy though, imho, is not the losing streak by itself,
but a few losing streaks that can come together
(like 7lose-1win-3lose-1win-5lose).

Imho, your betting system will kill you.
I am 90% sure, if you ask me.

I only feel safe if i use whatever
Sagitario says *4
(Maria, a blonde girl with a beautiful heart,
has suggested that with doubling Sag's figures you are safe.
I would dare to suggest to quadruple what he says.
Just my own experience about it).

You have to do this,
so as to cover the losing streaks that can come close enough
and to have enough chips left to continue betting.
After a bad run, you can be left with 3 chips
and you will have in a busy Saturday
7 matches to bet that start in the same time.
You just can't do it, if you see what i mean.
And you can't choose between them, either.
It is random which one will win or lose.

So 4x7=28 chips.

You need 28 chips, imho, not 10, if you wanna stay alive.
And this has to be your first target.

Please, for your own good, consider seriously, my rumblings.

...and another thought...

(example)

bank=100 eur (stakes=28=3.57 eur each stake).
strikerate=80% (odds=4)

in 100 matches
80 win
20 lose

80 win = 80*3.57 eur = 285 eur
20 lose = 20*(3.57 eur * 3 odd ) = 214 eur

(285-214)eur = 71 eur (clean won money).

I think that you can't expect more than around 100-200 matches per season
(as I can estimate from the process you have described above).

so lets say 200 matches 2*71=142 eur .

you have to use 100 eur to make 142 eur, in a football season.
from here you can estimate,
how much you need to cover your yearly expenses and multiply
to see the capital needed for this.

You have to be dead sure for two things:
A big enough sample of games
(the bigger, the better),
and the strikerate.
The rest is above.

(if someone is following this post,
please check and feel free to correct,
if the calculations are wrong.
My mind chip is burned, as usual ).

[Temujin]

Hello all
i'm trying a strategy these days and i would like to hear your comments, if you have some:
I did a little research to find the leagues that have more Home wins than the average.
in those leagues, i'm looking for a game between a home-favorite (odds around 1.7 and below) to an away-underdog (odds from 4 and above).
After doing a little more research on the specific game (last 5 games statistics of both teams, position, and general statistics) i then lay the underdog if i think he's not likely to win, for a liability of 10% of my bank.

I know, that's really slow profit. but it's steady.
after backtesting this strategy i found out that a losing bet might come once in a while, but not likely to occur more than once in five games. So i thought: why not go Martingle when i lose? i can chase my loses because they are rare!

Well, that's about it. any thoughts?

Bank buster. Simple as that. You are guaranteed 100% to blow your bank.

Have fun doing it though, should be a blast.

Either way, Martingales whole idea was to double up your bets, so your initial chased profit is always reached. He chose 48.85% chances to "double up" on, but convert that for you goes something like this.

Just say the odds are something like 4.33 that you are laying. You say 10% of your bank. Bank, starts 1,000. (10,000/100,1000/1000,000 whatever, this is the theory, not the reality)...

So your initial bet, you are risking 100 dollars, or 10% of your bank, or a $30 lay bet @ 4.33 if you prefer.

Now, this selection wins. It will, 1 time every 4.33.
You are down 100 dollars. You also need to make your initial 30 dollar profit on the next game.
So, your next bet. 130. Odds is irrelevant at this point for working out your bet, because you have stated that you need to get your initial profit goal + your initial loss back, in this bet. That is the Martingale way.

So, odds 4.33 again. 130 lay bet. Risk on this event 432.9.
Oh shit. This one wins too. You are now down 532.9, or 53.29% of your bank.
This will happen to you 1/18.75 times by the way.

Your next bet, here is the good gear where you start getting excited about playing hard (apart from the obvious lack of bankroll to even do it, in your 3rd game).
You now need to make 532.9 + 30 in your next game. Forget the odds, that is now your lay bet. 562.9 @ let's say 4.33 to keep things consistant. 1874.46 dollars liability on this event.

Holy shit. This one wins as well. This WILL happen 1/81 attempts at doing this.

You are now down, in 3 games, $2437.36 out of your $1,000 starting bank. Need me to keep going?
1/351 times, here is what you are risking:
10553.77

1/1522
45827.72

1/6590
198563.95

Your bank WILL bust. Maybe you will last years. Maybe a couple of days. Your ideal scenario, is a couple of days, so you could move on without wasting too much.

If you don't have value, you will not win long term. That is a 100% fact of gambling events. If you DO have value, you WILL win long term. That is the 1 other 100% fact of gambling. Remember those 2, and you are much better off.

[kwikki]

Dutching football

If you dutch the fav and draw in a football you get c. An 85% strike rate. With a loss recovery system for the 15% losses and spreadsheet skills to record these and recover them you can make very consistent profits

[Thomson]

If you dutch the fav and draw in a football you get c. An 85% strike rate. With a loss recovery system for the 15% losses and spreadsheet skills to record these and recover them you can make very consistent profits

1.2.x market, so do the math...The dutch is the same as a lay on the 2nd fav (underdog). Would you recommend a loss recovery on underdog laying?