Soft vs soft

Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Soft vs soft  (Read 1724 times)
Transat2
Newbie
*

Karma: -1
Posts: 10


View Profile

Transat2

Soft vs soft
« on: November 11, 2017, 11:43:05 PM »

I wonder about a certain situation.

Let's say multiple soft bookmakers offers an odd of 2 for a certain event.

There is not an odd offered by sharp bookmaker yet.

Then you see a single soft bookie offering an odd of 2.2.

Would you consider this as a valuebet, even if there is no sharp book odd?
Logged
dealer wins
Pro
*****

Karma: -5
Posts: 541



View Profile

dealer wins

Re: Soft vs soft
« Reply #1 on: November 12, 2017, 12:02:07 AM »

I would just do both sides and level the profit.  But then I never value bet so I am not the best person to answer your Q really .
Logged

Never trust a goose!!!
Arbusers
Administrator
Pro
*****

Karma: 317
Posts: 2887



View Profile WWW

Arbusers

Re: Soft vs soft
« Reply #2 on: November 12, 2017, 04:48:13 PM »

Unless you have a deep knowledge of the market, you can never be sure where the value is judging by just 2 bookmakers.
If possible, you could see where the other softs are standing and then determine who is out of line. Notice that in such situation a non reliable bookmaker could declare the odds as pulp. In any case, certain asian bookmakers are posting lines very early when we talk about major markets.
Logged
maletaja
Probably a Pro
****

Karma: -25
Posts: 480


View Profile

maletaja

Re: Soft vs soft
« Reply #3 on: November 12, 2017, 05:06:25 PM »

interesting question. When u arb there are not probably diffrence...
Ok u still have serious risk. Bet on soft and other soft is limited you...already
But valuebetting...much harder question. Still i wouldnt bother my head if there isnt at least 3% arb...
Logged
Arbusers
Administrator
Pro
*****

Karma: 317
Posts: 2887



View Profile WWW

Arbusers

Re: Soft vs soft
« Reply #4 on: November 12, 2017, 05:10:46 PM »

After a 2nd thought, maybe the best way to act goes like this:
Place the maximum available bet with 2.2 odds. Then send them an e-mail or contact them via live chat and ask them if the bet stands. Notice that in this situation we have plenty of available time since sharps are not offering lines YET.
If the bet stands, you keep the desired amount as value bet and sell the rest in an exchange or cover it with another sharp.
Of course, you are under the risk of having your account severely limited and/or the bookmaker never replies to your question.
Logged
MisterRodriguez
Newbie
*

Karma: 0
Posts: 31


View Profile

MisterRodriguez

Re: Soft vs soft
« Reply #5 on: November 12, 2017, 10:32:58 PM »

No there is no value for value betting in that specific situation where only softbookmakers offer odds in the market.A lot of innefecient books wont make the price more efficient.
Efficiency is correlated with liquidty,low comission,algoritm profiling.None of those premisses is offered in the soft books generally,thats why they are innefecient.
Now if you ask me will i trust more an opening price of 365 or even betvictor in stead of 1xbet,yes but that wont make the price a value bet,just means that one sucks more than the other
In that scenario just arb it or wait Pinny or other asians to open their odds
Logged
Transat2
Newbie
*

Karma: -1
Posts: 10


View Profile

Transat2

Re: Soft vs soft
« Reply #6 on: November 13, 2017, 12:26:10 AM »

Yes I tried few picks like that and the answer is probably no. There is some bets that have worked and others that did not.

First example was an -1 bet with an odd of 2.37. Other soft bookies had odds around 2.07. An interesting fact is that all bookies had around the same odds for 1x2 market, even the one that mispriced the -1 odd. I saw the inneficiency and obviously took the bet. It was not rejected but the bookie offered later same odd as the others(2.07).

Second example wad an under 2.5 bet with an odd of 2.06. Other soft books offered odd between 1.8 and 1.95. Surprisingly, Pinnacle offered an odd of 2.12 so I did not take the bet. I don't know why soft books did not follow Pinnacle in this situation. Maybe their juice was too big or Pinnacle did release the odd not long ago.

So I guess it depends of the case.

Logged
VidaBlue
Newbie
*

Karma: 2
Posts: 22


View Profile

VidaBlue

Re: Soft vs soft
« Reply #7 on: November 16, 2017, 02:06:38 PM »

I think valuebetting soft vs soft is a great method. Once Pinnacle (or similar) launches opening odds, most bookmakers adjust their odds in minutes. When two soft books do not agree on the correct odds, this can give rise to a value bet or even an arb - and this situation may persist for hours, giving you plenty of time to analyse where to bet your money before any sharps join the game.

So you cannot guess which soft books will end up having the best guess, but if the situation is an arb you're already left with the advantage, that without further knowledge you should have greater chance of winning than losing just by guessing.

However, over time you will discover that there is some sort of hierarchy on how well the bookmakers do on odds setting - both generally, but also specifically depending on which sport it is and what type of bets. For instance, I have noticed that a certain bookmaker consistently deviates from the rest of the crowd, when setting the handicap odds on ice hockey games where one team is a huge favourite. I suppose bookmakers set their odds depending on different models/software and this causes the discrepancy.

My view upon this hierarchy goes as follows:

1. Pinnacle surrounded by exchanges and asians.
2. Bet365.
3. Bookmakers that use odds sources shared by other companies such as EveryMatrix (Jetbull), Kambi (Unibet, 888sport, LeoVegas), etc.
4. The rest, including some offline bookmakers.

Of course this hierarchy does have exceptions. I have seen Pinnacle adjusting their odds according to Bet365 movements, and offline bookies which in the end happened to be right (or lucky). Most of the time however, I believe that this list is true and my strategy is based on this.

You can take your time, observe thousands of odds movements, and build your own assumptions.

Is this good for (limitless) shop betting? Indeed!!!
« Last Edit: November 16, 2017, 10:58:39 PM by VidaBlue » Logged
ilovethisforum
Getting better
***

Karma: 2
Posts: 241


View Profile

ilovethisforum

Re: Soft vs soft
« Reply #8 on: November 16, 2017, 11:21:01 PM »

Thank you VidaBlue for your insight! I will agree with you as i use bet365 many times on live matches as reference point vs other softs that i know where they are weak.I just use them to confirm that a value bet has been created on an other soft because pinnacle or asians doesn't have this match.Bet365 has way to many live matches vs the pinnacle and the asians and so i believe that if someone arbs/value bets only with sharps vs soft,loses many arbs/value betting opportunities.
Logged
TheJog87
Newbie
*

Karma: 2
Posts: 70


View Profile

TheJog87

Re: Soft vs soft
« Reply #9 on: November 16, 2017, 11:43:54 PM »

Can it be that with arbing soft vs soft, you expose even more your accounts  to lose it, with each arb? Arbing of 3 ways that you hit 2 soft lines... While with softs vs sharps, only ones.
Logged
VidaBlue
Newbie
*

Karma: 2
Posts: 22


View Profile

VidaBlue

Re: Soft vs soft
« Reply #10 on: November 17, 2017, 10:13:15 AM »

@ilovethisforum: great suggestion to use bet365 as reference for live value betting. I will look into this for shop betting, as both bet365 and shops indeed have many matches in minor leagues. Thank you!

@TheJog87: If you use soft vs soft for arbing I think your concern can be true. Many of the arbs arise because there is no sharp reference, which is due to the bet being on a minority sport or on a minor league. Even if the odds that are being bet on, are NOT adjusted later on, large stakes on these bets WILL attract some attention. If the bet is on a major league, I think the risk is greatly reduced. So as I mentioned, for instance, I find anonymous betting with high stakes on offline bookmakers (shops) quite efficient and risk-free and easy to implement using soft vs soft method. However, any lucrative betting pattern on soft bookmakers will be stopped eventually I am sure (and that is completely understandable in my opinion), but I think it is much more difficult for bookmakers to identify these patterns, when there's no personal (online) profile associated.
Logged
MisterRodriguez
Newbie
*

Karma: 0
Posts: 31


View Profile

MisterRodriguez

Re: Soft vs soft
« Reply #11 on: November 17, 2017, 05:23:56 PM »

good luck on your experiment buddy using a soft bookmaker as a sharp reference.like i ve said previously just because one soft opening price sucks less than the other doesnt mean you can use those odds as a reference to value bet,in fact if you do that long term you are probably going down with the ship
Logged
Alfa1234
Pro
*****

Karma: 21
Posts: 682


View Profile

Alfa1234

Re: Soft vs soft
« Reply #12 on: November 17, 2017, 06:04:39 PM »

I can't believe this thread actually discusses Bet365 as a base book for sharp odds...just think about it for 30secs and you'll realise it does not make any sense.

Sharp odds are made by the weight of money, that is the basic principle upon which Asians, Pinnacle and all exchanges are based.  By adding the value of all bets (all opinions) together, a correct odd is formed.  Bet365 has nothing that remotely resembles such a system, making them inherently not-sharp.  They cannot, under any circumstances, be used as a base book and doing so can only result in disaster long-term.
Logged
VidaBlue
Newbie
*

Karma: 2
Posts: 22


View Profile

VidaBlue

Re: Soft vs soft
« Reply #13 on: November 17, 2017, 08:36:10 PM »

If anyone sees the posts above as a strict statement that bet365 is a sharp book, I can understand the replies. This was not the intention however.

As I wrote: "You can take your time, observe thousands of odds movements, and build your own assumptions." - the reason being, that people should not take my observation as a statement of the truth, as people have different presets (time before game start, odds range, selection of leagues) in their betting strategy, and this may change how well each sports book is for a reference.

Undoubtedly, Pinnacle and exchanges are sharp and bet365 is not, but there are some soft books which are definitely better than others. I think it would be strange if they were all equal.

For my personal case I base it on the following from my betting history:

1. Over 9000 value bets with bet365 referencing pinnacle odds giving an ROI in the range of 0-2 %
2. An equal amount of value bets with other SOFT BOOKS referencing pinnacle odds with an ROI in the range of 6-8 %

So all bets have been made with reference to pinnacle.

You may have a different bet history, you may have different ROIs - after all there are different ways to bet.

Since bet365 is the soft book where I have placed most of my bets (approx 50%), but also the book that has given me most challenges in terms of profit, I consider this the best reference vs other soft books, IN THE ABSENCE of sharp book references.

I'd be happy to hear about your observations based on your personal betting history if you're willing to share.
Logged
Alfa1234
Pro
*****

Karma: 21
Posts: 682


View Profile

Alfa1234

Re: Soft vs soft
« Reply #14 on: November 17, 2017, 09:00:46 PM »

If anyone sees the posts above as a strict statement that bet365 is a sharp book, I can understand the replies. This was not the intention however.


I really fail to see how the following statements can be interpreted in any other way:

@ilovethisforum: great suggestion to use bet365 as reference for live value betting.


 I have seen Pinnacle adjusting their odds according to Bet365 movements,


The fact that you have 9000 value bets at Bet365 with Pinnacle as a reference and have a 0-2% ROI should tell you it's a soft bookmaker, which is not to be considered "sharp" in any way, shape or form.  The fact that your ROI is slightly higher at other soft bookmakers does not make Bet365 less soft.  You should not be making insinuations that it is, as many people read these forums and could be basing an entire betting strategy upon it.  It could cost them a lot of money.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2
Print