Arbusers

Hi!

I've accumulated about 2000 value bets, and my results so far have sparked a thought that maybe I'm doing something wrong. The bookmaker I play the most has been the worst in terms of performance, and after about 1200 bets placed my yield is -1.4%, on the other hand all the other smaller bookies I use have yielded 4.5% after 800 games. Am I a victim of value traps? Could it be possible, or is it too early to make conclusions? I'd say that indeed it is early, but it could be a sign definetly. The bookmaker in question is in fact is one of the bigger, and I wouldn't be surprised that they use some kind of value traps. I forgot to mention, my EV is about 4%.

How do I avoid value traps? How can I see signs of a potentional trap?

Thanks in advance ))

What are you average odds, cannot judge without that info. If you take evens, 2k bets may not be enough not mentioning higher odds. I used to take 1.3 in average and was down 20 units after 2000 bets. The fact is due to lower pre-ko limits lately odds may shift up and down a lot, closer to kick off, you're less likely to be exposed to such moves.

AlexNotman1 wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 19, 2022 2:59 pm

What are you average odds, cannot judge without that info. If you take evens, 2k bets may not be enough not mentioning higher odds. I used to take 1.3 in average and was down 20 units after 2000 bets. The fact is due to lower pre-ko limits lately odds may shift up and down a lot, closer to kick off, you're less likely to be exposed to such moves.

My average odd in this range is 2.55. I'm also noticing very poor results in odds under 1.5, I want to draw conclusions but I know I can't do that at this stage

marko kostic wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 19, 2022 1:41 pm

Am I a victim of value traps?

In order to get closer to an answer, we would have to look at the proces leading up to your value bets.

I assume many of your bets are found by comparing odds at your soft bookmaker with a sharp reference on a certain outcome in a certain market. When the difference in odds reaches a certain threshold, you believe to have a value bet. But why did this difference in odds occur? Was it:
1. The sharp reference that lowered the odds on the outcome, while the soft didn't?
2. Your soft bookmaker who increased the odds on the outcome, while noone else did?

In the first case, your soft bookmaker cannot be accused of value trapping (unless they are able to manipulate the sharp lines). In the second case it could be. So if your soft bookmaker makes a first sudden change in odds in a market where noone did, you should be aware. Possible reasons:
1. Bookmaker needs to balance his books
2. A system glitch or personal mistake
3. Your bookmaker has exclusive information (value trap)

So depending on how value is occuring in your case (which I do not know) you may be a victim of value traps.

I don't believe my bookmakers balance their books. They do have some glitches though. It happens in very volatile markets where their system which must be programmed to auto-adapt to changing market odds, makes some hopeless adjustments - maybe the system cannot handle the volatility. I usually take the opportunity to place a bet. But if my bookmaker, out of the blue, in a very calm market, do adjustments creating a very lucrative value bet, when noone else does, it is tempting, but when something is to good to be true, it is often the case. I will either avoid the bet or I will bet on the other outcome at another bookmaker.

Value traps, as described above, is not something that keeps me from sleeping. I find them rather rare. What is much more essential each day, is to evaluate whether your sharp line is being backed by sharp bettors or whether it is being manipulated in order to achieve higher odds elsewhere. Many soft bookmaker systems are more or less hard-wired to the sharps, but the volume of stakes they can handle is much more than, say, a 100 euro limit at Pinnacle. Maybe you could be a victim of manipulation instead?

marko kostic wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 19, 2022 4:33 pm

My average odd in this range is 2.55. I'm also noticing very poor results in odds under 1.5, I want to draw conclusions but I know I can't do that at this stage

With odds that high, you will get a lot of variance. 2000 bets is really not that much in this case. See image with simulation of 20 random profits. I assumed you played on +2.5% EV/yield with stake size of 1.5%.

Calculator here: https://sportsbettingcalcs.com/betting- ... _simulator

Great tool it is. It clearly shows that people underestimate number of bets needs to be placed to be sure you're gonna be in profit (considering you are sure you place +EV bets). Drawing any conclusions before few thousands bets are placed (considering evens or higher odds) is pointless.

First of all, it is a great method for your mental health to revisit variance via MC simulations. Agree, great tool.

However, waiting for thousands of bets to speak their language, drawing conclusions only when statistical variance is eliminated by definition, may get you nowhere. Once you draw the conclusions, market conditions may have changed anyways and it could have cost you dearly in the meantime to get there.

The smart bettor should continuously evaluate each bet and the entire history of bets while doing calculated reasoning about the reasons for the odds movements and the outcomes. There are many dead ends, but also some bull's eyes. Variance should always be the major part of the consideration, but it should not be a reason for complacently just waiting. It is not an easy task. There is a thin line between paranoia and careful assumption.

VidaBlue wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 19, 2022 9:18 pm

So if your soft bookmaker makes a first sudden change in odds in a market where noone did, you should be aware. Possible reasons:
1. Bookmaker needs to balance his books
2. A system glitch or personal mistake
3. Your bookmaker has exclusive information (value trap)

One and three are basically the same - there's sharp bettors playing on soft books for what should be obvious reasons. I don't see why you'd ever play when they raise. They obviously have some reason for doing it, and it probably isn't because they're drunk.

VidaBlue wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 19, 2022 9:18 pm

What is much more essential each day, is to evaluate whether your sharp line is being backed by sharp bettors or whether it is being manipulated in order to achieve higher odds elsewhere. Many soft bookmaker systems are more or less hard-wired to the sharps, but the volume of stakes they can handle is much more than, say, a 100 euro limit at Pinnacle. Maybe you could be a victim of manipulation instead?

Do people do this? Is it actually viable?

Mirage wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 24, 2022 7:46 am

Do people do this? Is it actually viable?

If I knew for sure, I would be part of it, and then I wouldn't discuss it in a forum.

So it is just a theory of mine which I believe in. I think my observations back this theory, but it could also just be my mind which tries to verify my own imagination. I consider this when I bet the small leagues.

Last time we had this subject, there were oppositions to whether such observations should even be discussed - but I think this forum is about transparency and sharing of information for those who want to.

Easy enough to test.
Pick a game with a 20-50 dollar limit on PIN.
Move the odds.
Check the bookmakers of your choice.
Close out your position (negative “arb”, you lose about $2 doing this).
Come back here to report your findings.

ex-hft wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 29, 2022 6:23 pm

Easy enough to test.
Pick a game with a 20-50 dollar limit on PIN.
Move the odds.
Check the bookmakers of your choice.
Close out your position (negative “arb”, you lose about $2 doing this).
Come back here to report your findings.

Sure, I did this a couple of times myself. So the mechanics works.

The question is, if this is combined with schemes involving undervalued teams or fixed matches. Say the market sets the small league favorite at odds 1.5. The group/person knowing this is quite high and that it should be 1.3, does the above exercise multiple times raising the odds to 2.0 momentarily, before making much larger bets at other books thereby maximizing profits substantially. Intelligent systems and arbers may complicate things for such a scheme.

As a value bettor, I want to identify such schemes so they can be used to my advantage.

I’m 100% sure that people do that, both because it makes sense and from anecdotal information.


How to take advantage of it is another question. It’s a very interesting time series analysis problem.

It's obvious that people manipulate odds. I think this is a very obvious play. The point is there is no standard guide to it, people who do this are aware that other people try to benefit from the moves. It's more like a very complicated strategy game, the big bookmakers (pinnacle) are also aware of it. If they set a certain line this can be part of their plan too, because they know about their position in the industry. What you call "value trap" here can also be an attempt to get money from a certain direction.

I see it as a strategy game, you need to understand what the other players plan to be ahead.

ex-hft wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 30, 2022 8:26 am

How to take advantage of it is another question. It’s a very interesting time series analysis problem.

@ Ex-Hft,
In my opinion, due to the fact that this type of input data is not an independent variable at all, I do not advise you to work this way in the analysis of time series.

arb12 wrote: @ Ex-Hft,
In my opinion, due to the fact that this type of input data is not an independent variable at all, I do not advise you to work this way in the analysis of time series.

What do you mean not independent? Not independent of the “soccer fundamentals” signal, or something else?

I have some earlier research on this subject, and my team is starting to dig deeper. I think that our approach has some potential, but it’s a little early to tell.

For sure, some events are highly informative. For example, near the kickoff, when the liquidity is already fairly high, if someone smashes the odds, then it’s probably a fixed match, etc.