### Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Pages: [

**1**]1

**Value betting talk / Theoretical measurement of Valuebets**

« **on:**February 08, 2019, 10:06:20 AM »

Hi,

I've got some Excel sheets, and trying to find the theoretical value longterm, which should be a decent measurement if Pinnacle's juice free closing line are close to the truth.

Let's say we got thousand bets. To find value, we should first find value of each bet. My thinking is that we have to find a number, or factor, for each bet. Let's say we got a few bets like these:

* We got 2,20 vs Pinnacle 2,10 (again, juicefree). This would give us 2,20/2,10 = 1,0476

* We got 3,95 vs Pinnacle 4,20 - Gives us 3,95/4,20 = 0,9405

To find total value, we should add these factors and divide on total number of bets. In this example; 1,0476 + 0,9405 = 1,988 / 2 = 0,994

In this example our total value is negative. 99,4% is what we should expect to get from our bets.

Do anyone think this is the wrong way to look at it, our should it work as measurement over large samples?

Any thoughts appreciated,

Shawn

I've got some Excel sheets, and trying to find the theoretical value longterm, which should be a decent measurement if Pinnacle's juice free closing line are close to the truth.

Let's say we got thousand bets. To find value, we should first find value of each bet. My thinking is that we have to find a number, or factor, for each bet. Let's say we got a few bets like these:

* We got 2,20 vs Pinnacle 2,10 (again, juicefree). This would give us 2,20/2,10 = 1,0476

* We got 3,95 vs Pinnacle 4,20 - Gives us 3,95/4,20 = 0,9405

To find total value, we should add these factors and divide on total number of bets. In this example; 1,0476 + 0,9405 = 1,988 / 2 = 0,994

In this example our total value is negative. 99,4% is what we should expect to get from our bets.

Do anyone think this is the wrong way to look at it, our should it work as measurement over large samples?

Any thoughts appreciated,

Shawn

2

**Value betting talk / True line & Pinnacle\Betfair**

« **on:**May 04, 2018, 01:59:57 PM »

Hi

I'm just curious about how people think about this. Pinnacle and Betfair is what most sharps\professionals are using as the "true line". In another topic we discussed the variance of juice between low odds (like 1,20) and high odds (like 7,50). As fair as I know, we can assume Pinnacle lines got higher juice as the odds get higher. If this wasn't true, there would have been a jungle of big valuebets at the exchanges (i.e Huddersfield against Man City sunday 34 @ Betfair vs 26 @ Pinnacle... if 26 just had 2% juice, 34 @ Huddersfield would have been a magnificent bet, at least if we don't care about variance).

So this leads me to some question\thoughts:

1) Some people think that juice is higher on the big favourites, because this is what most people bet...... but how can that be true? Then we would have had plenty of value at the underdogs, which again can't be true?

2) Since Betfair actually have better odds in a lot of spots, is it more correct to use them as the true line, rather then Pinnacle? What I mean is: It seems like the juice is better shared between the diffent outcomes.

3) Can we assume we always have a valuebet, if we can sell at lower odds? (i.e We bet at Brighton @ 5,20 tonight, and could LAY @ 5,00 @ Betfair).

4) I understand a lot of people is valuebetting in the area between 1,50 and 4,00, mostly between 1,80-3,50 (Not 100% sure if I'm right, but it's what I often hear)? Anyway... Since the juice is lowest on low odds, why don't people bet much on the big favourites when they actually find value? The variance should also be better with this?

Thoughts anyone?

I'm just curious about how people think about this. Pinnacle and Betfair is what most sharps\professionals are using as the "true line". In another topic we discussed the variance of juice between low odds (like 1,20) and high odds (like 7,50). As fair as I know, we can assume Pinnacle lines got higher juice as the odds get higher. If this wasn't true, there would have been a jungle of big valuebets at the exchanges (i.e Huddersfield against Man City sunday 34 @ Betfair vs 26 @ Pinnacle... if 26 just had 2% juice, 34 @ Huddersfield would have been a magnificent bet, at least if we don't care about variance).

So this leads me to some question\thoughts:

1) Some people think that juice is higher on the big favourites, because this is what most people bet...... but how can that be true? Then we would have had plenty of value at the underdogs, which again can't be true?

2) Since Betfair actually have better odds in a lot of spots, is it more correct to use them as the true line, rather then Pinnacle? What I mean is: It seems like the juice is better shared between the diffent outcomes.

3) Can we assume we always have a valuebet, if we can sell at lower odds? (i.e We bet at Brighton @ 5,20 tonight, and could LAY @ 5,00 @ Betfair).

4) I understand a lot of people is valuebetting in the area between 1,50 and 4,00, mostly between 1,80-3,50 (Not 100% sure if I'm right, but it's what I often hear)? Anyway... Since the juice is lowest on low odds, why don't people bet much on the big favourites when they actually find value? The variance should also be better with this?

Thoughts anyone?

3

**Value betting talk / Pinnacle vs Exchanges**

« **on:**September 15, 2017, 12:50:35 PM »

Hi. Just curious of a couple of things - Someone got the answer?

1) Why are sometimes, pretty often actually, people willing to buy lower odds on exchanges then Pinnacle offers? This is probably robots, but still... does it makes sense?

2) When there is big differences between Pinnacle\asians and Betfair - Who is most often correct? (On lines with big volumes).

Thanks!

1) Why are sometimes, pretty often actually, people willing to buy lower odds on exchanges then Pinnacle offers? This is probably robots, but still... does it makes sense?

2) When there is big differences between Pinnacle\asians and Betfair - Who is most often correct? (On lines with big volumes).

Thanks!

5

**Bookies discussion / Tempobet**

« **on:**August 29, 2017, 07:04:47 PM »

Hi.

3 questions about Tempobet:

1. How reliable is Tempobet? Payments, quality of site etc.

2. Will they limit players who only bets on the big favourites, where they normally are best at the market?

3. Any other experience?

All answers appreciated.

3 questions about Tempobet:

1. How reliable is Tempobet? Payments, quality of site etc.

2. Will they limit players who only bets on the big favourites, where they normally are best at the market?

3. Any other experience?

All answers appreciated.

6

**Value betting talk / Closing Line \ EV**

« **on:**August 23, 2017, 09:06:58 AM »

Hi,

I know there is some, probably many posts close to this topic, but it's the one most important factor in valuebetting, so I'm taking it up once again.

First of all some facts - Correct me if I'm wrong: Closing line, more specifically Pinnacle's closing line is what most valuebetters look at, to make sure they have positive EV. Over a big volume, if you beat Pinnacle's closing line (including the juice), we should have a positive EV. This should at least work in the bigger leagues and markets.

Let's take an example:

We make a bunch of bets, lets say 1000, where the odds is 4,20. Pinnacle's closing line on all the bets are 4,00, with a RTP (return to player) of 97,5%.

This makes the true closing line close to: 4,00/0,975 = 4,102.

So.. if we've got an average of 4,20 on these 1000 bets, we should have 4,20 / 4,102 = 2,39% positive EV on each bet.

Is all of this correct?

A couple of other questions \ things to discuss:

1) If all of these thousand bets were delivered one hour before the game, and we didn't know the closing line, but Pinnacle's odds at the moment were 4,0 (And we make bets on 4,20) - Should we expect lower, the same or better odds compared to the closing line? From a logical point of view this should flatten out over time, but I have no stats on this.

2) Is there differences in value on Pinnacle closing lines, if the odds is high or low? What I mean is: Burnley to beat Chelsea gives us 12,50 at Pinnacle. Liverpool to beat Chelsea gives us 4,0. Both has 97,5% RTP. Will still 12,50 / 0,975 = 12,82 give us the correct odds, or do we need more if the odds is high? Variance will obviously be the devil if we use odds like 12,50, but is still i.e 13,25 value in this spot?

Any other comments?

I know there is some, probably many posts close to this topic, but it's the one most important factor in valuebetting, so I'm taking it up once again.

First of all some facts - Correct me if I'm wrong: Closing line, more specifically Pinnacle's closing line is what most valuebetters look at, to make sure they have positive EV. Over a big volume, if you beat Pinnacle's closing line (including the juice), we should have a positive EV. This should at least work in the bigger leagues and markets.

Let's take an example:

We make a bunch of bets, lets say 1000, where the odds is 4,20. Pinnacle's closing line on all the bets are 4,00, with a RTP (return to player) of 97,5%.

This makes the true closing line close to: 4,00/0,975 = 4,102.

So.. if we've got an average of 4,20 on these 1000 bets, we should have 4,20 / 4,102 = 2,39% positive EV on each bet.

Is all of this correct?

A couple of other questions \ things to discuss:

1) If all of these thousand bets were delivered one hour before the game, and we didn't know the closing line, but Pinnacle's odds at the moment were 4,0 (And we make bets on 4,20) - Should we expect lower, the same or better odds compared to the closing line? From a logical point of view this should flatten out over time, but I have no stats on this.

2) Is there differences in value on Pinnacle closing lines, if the odds is high or low? What I mean is: Burnley to beat Chelsea gives us 12,50 at Pinnacle. Liverpool to beat Chelsea gives us 4,0. Both has 97,5% RTP. Will still 12,50 / 0,975 = 12,82 give us the correct odds, or do we need more if the odds is high? Variance will obviously be the devil if we use odds like 12,50, but is still i.e 13,25 value in this spot?

Any other comments?

7

**General talk about alert services / Surebet Monitor \ Other services**

« **on:**August 15, 2014, 06:32:11 AM »

Hello everyone,

I have used the free version of Surebet Monitor for some time. This is obviously a limited version, but it works fine for my use. Anyway, these month some of the soft bookies haven't worked properly a lot of times (They simply don't update). This could be a problem lasting for days - Which could be "expensive". Also for example Unibet is not there at all (Not working ever). Seems like Pinnacle & Marathon always works fine.

Thanks for all answers!

Shawn

I have used the free version of Surebet Monitor for some time. This is obviously a limited version, but it works fine for my use. Anyway, these month some of the soft bookies haven't worked properly a lot of times (They simply don't update). This could be a problem lasting for days - Which could be "expensive". Also for example Unibet is not there at all (Not working ever). Seems like Pinnacle & Marathon always works fine.

**Does anyone now why they don't work as often as they should?**Am I stupid that use this service? I know they have a cap at 2% surebets, and also only soccer works in my Surebet Monitor. So it's not perfect in any way.**Have anyone tested Sharpbets? Is that ok?**Or... should I use another program? I only pre-bet. Almost never live.Thanks for all answers!

Shawn

Pages: [

**1**]