Arbusers

drhoo wrote: i don't know... inevitably? why don't we make the greatest tipster service ever then?

I m trying.

drhoo wrote: also, do odds ever go above probability for that event? i mean, if coin flip is 50% probable, will odds ever go above 2.0, or exactly 2.0 for that matter? usually, odds <<< probability

But bookies sometimes offer 2.20 for heads and we cover tails in Pinnacle at 1.95.

cristi13 wrote:

drhoo wrote: also, do odds ever go above probability for that event? i mean, if coin flip is 50% probable, will odds ever go above 2.0, or exactly 2.0 for that matter? usually, odds <<< probability

But bookies sometimes offer 2.20 for heads and we cover tails in Pinnacle at 1.95.

If you/me have 10mln euros to invest then dont cover to sharps.... but sharpbetting has lower value then arbing when it comes to small bankroll. Better investing 5k on a 2% arb then betting 100 euros as a value bet. Also arbers usually to let luck to decide their monthly profits so i suppose if you dont have money to go max bet on every soft odds without  hedging to sharps then there is not need to consider valuebetting.

If you/me have 10mln euros to invest then dont cover to sharps.... but sharpbetting has lower value then arbing when it comes to small bankroll. Better investing 5k on a 2% arb then betting 100 euros as a value bet. Also arbers usually to let luck to decide their monthly profits so i suppose if you dont have money to go max bet on every soft odds without  hedging to sharps then there is not need to consider valuebetting.
[/quote]

These are extreme examples. Let me incorporate this into a realistic strategy: if the maximum bet you are able to make on a particular selection is less than 1% of the bankroll, we leave the value side uncovered.

milord wrote: mmmm i have a degree in statistics, what you are saying is totally wrong and you keep insisting, have you ever heard about bias??
just to let u know on 100000 tosses is enough 50250 tails to be in negative
this theory has sense onkly in an infinite period, after 10000000 u have a big big probability to be in positive but it will be never 100%
bigger is the sample bigger is the probability to be in positive
applying this theory on few bets is very dangerous

2.01 was just an example, as an principle.
When you bet value, you wont bet on +0,5% value. Because it is too hard to even determine that there is value at all (talking about real world). Margin is too small.
But if you get 2,1 and real odds are 2, that is more distinctive and apparent and we can call it valuebet.

Definitely is a grind to arb a profit and increasing commission to 6.5% makes the situation even more difficult. It's only charged on winning bets but you still need to factor it into the calculations to guarantee a profit.

I saw some people have suggested Betdaq as an alternative but they are not available to every country. What about WBX as an alternative to Betfair?

I've been using them for a while now and find it to be quite good. They charge 3% commission on winnings for Football markets. There isn’t much money available on crappy leagues but I have no problems getting decent sized bets matched on e.g. the EPL, including in-play.

WBX as an alternative to Betfair is still yet to be proven. I mean right now, I can't see number of users have success with it yet. Until then, I'd hold off.