Forum

General discussion about Bf Bot Manager v3 software for Betfair, Betdaq and Matchbook betting exchanges
By dn6789
#25622
OK here is the thing without getting too specific.

you are trying to frame a race using only one option and you are making the ranges way too wide - it is probably why you get what I am guessing would be a lot of inconsistency.

so to point you in the right direction I would offer the following idea.

485 - 500 m Fav 1 price 2.60-3.10 Box 3 or 4 , Fav 2 4.40-4.60 Box 6,7,8 Fav 3 5.60-6 Box 1/7/8

or in other words you must get alot more specific in your filtering - and build alot of varieties and marry them together.

Simply saying Fav 1 needs to be between 1.50 - 50 in box 1 or 2 is not going to work.

Lastly I think you missed something really important I talked about -- it was framing your strategy according to certain sets of price -- because at certain sets of prices the results match up more closely to what you expect.

then if you said OK I want to focus on F7 - you would do the opposite - look for times where the pricing sets are inconsistent and allows more random results.

this was also mentioned again when someone talked about betting Fav 8 and they had 60 bets a day and it was not profitable -- yet for me I had that day where my filtering had allowed only 8 bets and 2 won.

So in a nutshell - you have to delve into the numbers more and identify smaller sets of data - and look for results that are either consistent for one type of betting or inconsistent for another.

Also using that sort of analysis - you can introduce SQ - so you do not always favor just one runner - but you could used 1-3 runners and randomize it if you want ... SQ can be very good for that.

Anyway those would be my thoughts -- it is the same for Horse really but with bigger fields.

You mentioned about distance and something else I forget now --- every single variable is important and when you focus you data you will see that more.

In South Australia they have GH races with 5 runners where the runners pay between 2.80 - 14/1 -- so that alone given enough filtering would be profitable ... and in saying that I have a very good one in only 8 dog fields

OK well that is enough from me - see how you go and hopefully it will smarten up your systems.
By dn6789
#25623
and if you compare what I am talking about vs what you see on utube - automatically you should see a massive difference.

how could any system that focuses on C + D winners - In barrier position according to course etc -- plus all these other stupid things they try to sell you -- possibly win ?

but if you find your niche and stake it properly and try to get to 40% SR -- then it becomes almost impossible to lose -- that is what they miss.

the other dead giveaway is this -- we saw people saying they buy a system and it loses 30 40 50 bets in a row ?? then we look at printouts from my account - where my maximum losing streak - running 30 - 40 strategies is like 8-12 --- that is a huge difference -- if I had 30 losses in 30 strategies - well that would not be good.

plus what did we talk about --- joining strategies together - having a joint take profit - stop loss - reset -- and using things like step staking - so you get a win - and your bets reset back to step 1 --- all of a sudden you become very hard to beat -- back 50 60 70 dollars - reduce bet to minimum and start over --- this is very effective way of controlling DD

OK all this is in the threads but I know with all my BS talking it can get lost -- good luck
By dn6789
#25624
you take my 10 horse field data from yesterday - I chose this one because it is the most complex one I do at present

sticking to just Fav 1 to Fav 5

profit was +$125 from using Bookie Staking $600 Bank 1% bet -- which is about as low as I can go making sure to stay above $5 minimum bet

you can see from that - that I have filtered the crap out of it - and found the best times to bet --- they do not win every race of course despite that -- but they are designed to work together and deliver a profit

so if you compare that to your existing strategies -- you can see you are going to have to make yours more complex and smarter.
Attachments
h.PNG
h.PNG (75.23 KiB) Viewed 759 times
By woweee
#25625
dn6789 wrote: Sun Oct 10, 2021 1:06 am I downloaded now and will take a look

just in general from what you have written above to what I have there are a few pretty major differences - but I will see that in the strategies let me get back to you shortly
Thanks for the comments. I will take another look.
I have rewritten the descriptions.
By dn6789
#25626
also I just made up those numbers in that other post

but you get the idea - you need to be way more specific in the events you bet - the prices you bet and how the races are structured

if you leave the races wide open - you will end up with inconsistent - high DD results -- and that is the opposite of what I see.
By echelon
#25629
Hi DN,

Great discussion and advice in these threads as ever - many thanks for your continued posts and advice :)

I think your last post has helped me to understand the "granularity" you go down to in your analysis.

I've attached a view from a spreadsheet of September data which I downloaded from:

https://promo.betfair.com/betfairsp/prices

I'm wondering if the analysis I've done here is about at the right level.

Filtering is as follows:

8 runner races
Distance > 400m
Fave 1
Traps 1,2,3,4,6,7
Odds > 2

This filtering would give 20 bets per day with an average profit to £1 stakes of approx. £2.88 / Day.

The SR is 39%

There are a few things that bug me:

1) I don't have a specific tight odds range - though > 2 seems to work better than any others I've looked at. I find it tricky in Excel to easily analyse different odds ranges without using trial and error - do you have any shortcuts for honing down those odds ranges?

2) My trap selection gives the best profitability, though the selection doesn't make too much sense in missing out trap 5 and trap 8. I'm wondering if I'm just "curve fitting" here and will find that next month the traps which are most profitable are completely different. I know for sure that trap bias is all over the place with UK dogs, and believe that traps are more consistent with AU dogs, though to what degree I'm not sure.

3) My SR is a just under the 40% threshold for a decent low favourite strategy - these bets are already filtered a fair bit giving only 20 bets per day, it seems as though it may be tricky to push the strategy through the 40% barrier. Also, the 40% barrier can only apply to the lower favourites - do you use that level on just F1 and F2? The higher favourites don't need such a high SR because when they win, they win at big odds.

4) Do we need to be really specific on distance? I would have thought we either have long distance or sprints and each will have very specific characteristics.
Attachments
Screenshot 2021-10-10 141454.png
Screenshot 2021-10-10 141454.png (48.44 KiB) Viewed 738 times
By dn6789
#25631
echelon wrote: Sun Oct 10, 2021 2:29 pm Hi DN,

Great discussion and advice in these threads as ever - many thanks for your continued posts and advice :)

I think your last post has helped me to understand the "granularity" you go down to in your analysis.

I've attached a view from a spreadsheet of September data which I downloaded from:

https://promo.betfair.com/betfairsp/prices

I'm wondering if the analysis I've done here is about at the right level.

Filtering is as follows:

8 runner races
Distance > 400m
Fave 1
Traps 1,2,3,4,6,7
Odds > 2

This filtering would give 20 bets per day with an average profit to £1 stakes of approx. £2.88 / Day.

The SR is 39%

There are a few things that bug me:

1) I don't have a specific tight odds range - though > 2 seems to work better than any others I've looked at. I find it tricky in Excel to easily analyse different odds ranges without using trial and error - do you have any shortcuts for honing down those odds ranges?

2) My trap selection gives the best profitability, though the selection doesn't make too much sense in missing out trap 5 and trap 8. I'm wondering if I'm just "curve fitting" here and will find that next month the traps which are most profitable are completely different. I know for sure that trap bias is all over the place with UK dogs, and believe that traps are more consistent with AU dogs, though to what degree I'm not sure.

3) My SR is a just under the 40% threshold for a decent low favourite strategy - these bets are already filtered a fair bit giving only 20 bets per day, it seems as though it may be tricky to push the strategy through the 40% barrier. Also, the 40% barrier can only apply to the lower favourites - do you use that level on just F1 and F2? The higher favourites don't need such a high SR because when they win, they win at big odds.

4) Do we need to be really specific on distance? I would have thought we either have long distance or sprints and each will have very specific characteristics.
you can run a bunch of statistical analysis in excel that will give you a table of results and where numbers fall within ranges -- I do not care about results that occur infrequently - I want to find the areas where the most results are and build around those ..... if you give me 36% 38% 40% 42% -- I can stake to win those - despite higher or lower DD compared to average.

as far as boxes go -- we know what is long term and what is short term - we know that if we bias too much to long term our DD will go higher -- so you gotta keep your analysis close enough to what is occurring to reduce this - how much you do depends on your bankroll and tolerance for DD .... also I mentioned before any many people overlook it -- but the way you establish your parameters effects how close the runners perform against historical - remember when I raised my numbers and the reliability of the data dropped -- this is what you need to find in your data -- where does it go from 55% to 40 % at what point does the reliability change.

personally 40% or slightly higher is better - but if you team up strategies together and use other measures it can not be as hard and as fast rule --- I emphasize this so much because I want peoples DD to be low - and you can grow your bankroll faster.

sure betting 50/1 it is open to more variance despite how much you filter - so you gotta have some tolerance for risk in this area.

Just going to make a general comment here -- once you move out to 600 - 720 m in AUST then you find the stronger more well exposed dogs are going to win more often especially as you move up in grade - because these are form rated so much easier -- as to be honest alot of dogs cannot run the distance reliably ... I like to treat these races differently than the shorter races where there are more interference because more runners compete to lead over the shorter distance -- and so box draw is more important and bit more reliable in the numbers

++++ these are just my thoughts based on how I do data -- it does not mean you cannot take your own approach and find the sweet spot in the data and win.
++++ staking matters - we have seen recovery does work but the DD gets out of control sometimes because even within stable data you can get a period of uncertainty.
++++ the main thing for me is how to make your data reliable - how to reduce the races to results that are consistent and run a lot closer to what they should do --- this is done by framing the market a certain way - with parameters that work together to really filter the races down ...... if you leave races wide open - then your going to get inconsistent results -- high DD and low strike rates ..... as I mentioned and we have seen from my results this is not what I am seeing.

If you do all that and things are still slightly off - then introduce SQ and just include 2-3 runners and let the variance be your friend -- SQ can be the missing piece if you just quite cannot get there.

this option of bet after certain losses - I personally cannot make this as effective as these other methods - so while I use it in a small way - I would suggest it not be made a focus point of what your doing.

**** it took me a long time to arrive where I am today -- and you see me still busting my ass working on my excel data and still making changes and trying new strategy to see if it is better/more stable .... also we have asked the admins to pump in more options for us to use so hopefully at some point that happens as well.

good luck
By dn6789
#25632
I have looked at 3-4 strategies built by other people and they are quite a bit different from mine - mine are more complex have more filters and staking - + work together more to keep DD lower.

as I have mentioned sometimes I have 3 runners in the race - it just depends what the data says really in terms of best time to bet.

anyway I think you get the idea -- if you want to head towards my way of betting you need to evolve your strategy to be more advanced ... if you find another way that works better for you - then perhaps just consider some of my ideas on money management because I do believe my ideas are a lot safer than running a standard setup.
By echelon
#25633
Hi DN.

Many thanks for your detailed response containing tons of valuable insights for those of us who are tuned in to your methodology to a degree.

Thanks for the tip on Excel statistical analysis, it's something I'll check out in more depth.

I've started to adopt some of your ideas on money management by looking at linking strategies - though of course, for us to do this successfully, we first need to create individual strategies (and to do that we need to understand how to "filter the crap" out our strategies lol). Regarding setting targets for individual strategies, I had two running today on UK dogs and could have comfortably taken a profit of £20 for each of them and stopped at that, though leaving them to run gave me £5 less. Interestingly had I stopped the strategies at 8pm (1-2 hours before the end of UK racing) then I'd have made an extra £20. Is market timing something you consider?

Favourites in UK horse races tend to win more in earlier races - is this a bias which is seen in AU horse races? I see that the AU and NZ races helpfully have R1, R2 etc. in the market description, so if we wanted to bet on favourites in early races it's straightforward to filter.

Also, you may have noticed that I have in my spreadsheet a view of all the favourites odds. I did this because you mentioned some time earlier that we need to look at the market structure. I thought that formatting the data like that would have made particular market structures jump out - such as F1 and F2 at very close odds, would suggest a clash of the titans and the chance of any other dog getting a look in is minimal. Again I found I was overwhelmed by the data and couldn't see the wood for the trees (if it was there in the first place!).

I totally agree with you on staking being important - from what I've seen, different staking plans are suited to the distribution of winners. One staking plan might do very well with results such as WWWWLWWLLWW, though a completely different one would be more suited to LLLLLWLLLLLWL (where the winning odds are large). What we need to avoid is applying staking to a poor strategy so that it looks good - at some point that will bite us (speaking from experience lol).

Your observations on long distance GH I remember you mentioning some time ago and it surprised me, because I was thinking of UK horse races where favourites typically win flat short distance races whereas the longer jumps introduce all sorts of uncertainty which allows outsiders to win and made the incorrect assumption that distance with dogs and horses would show similar biases.

Ah - the boxes (traps) issue...I've been caught out in the past more times than I would have liked, laying traps which were showing a low % of winners over the year to date. The issue with this is that, typically for a while I would have loads of profits, then suddenly one day everything changed and I had loads of losses which kept mounting up until I had to ditch the strategy. What appeared to be happening here was a simple "regression to mean". I looked back through previous years' trap performance and realised that the win % of each was very similar - this meant that when a particular trap was underperforming, at some point it would need to catch up with the others so that they all end up with the same win % at the end of the year. Having said that, there do seem to be some more consistent trap biases in AU 8 dog races than we're used to seeing in UK 6 dog races - I'm thinking F1 and F2 normally doing well in Traps 1 and 2.

Another filter I've considered using is the venue - though for both UK and AU dogs I've not found anything consistent. UK horses I need to look at next because we even have a saying "horses for courses" which must suggest some sort of bias! I've noticed that AU dogs venues often have unique tracks, in particular the distances - so maybe when you're looking at tight ranges of distance, you're actually looking at similar types of races at a bunch of venues?

Anyway - thanks again for all your help :) Time for more research for me...perhaps tomorrow though as it's getting late now.
By dn6789
#25634
the best answer to all your questions is this :

as a statistics based approach to betting what are we looking to do:

find a spot where the odds of a bet hit our threshold to trigger a bet - based on our analysis -- at that point we may win the bet -- great --- but we may also lose -- this is where our staking plan comes in -- so if we only find this bet twice a day and we lose 7 it may take a few days before we get out money back and show a profit.

so if you have one strategy that bets twice a day - well you are not winning everyday - but it does not matter - you just have to wait for those edges to come into play again.

Now you look at me with a tonne of strategy betting almost every race every day -- I do not feel the loss of any one bet because I may have another strategy who backed the winner - or I only got to wait 6 races for another bet.

You have to dismiss all the background noise and focus your energy into building the highest quality strategy with the best staking to support it possible..... if something goes wrong use a stop loss -- and look through the data and see where you went wrong -- this is easy SR tells the tale everytime.

On one of your points this morning I found a Spot where Fav 1 was steady - but Fav 2 was showing 2 spots that were also favorable - so I enabled both Fav 2 Spots -- because at the strike rate with staking each was showing a profit -- so while the stats say it is working I let them all bet... if my Fav 3 is not showing a profit margin I find a better spot or disable it until I find one that does. What I cannot do is make changes based on something outside of the stats.

There is a lot in this topic really but this is how I look at it --- if something shows it will win - I enable it -- if something shows it cannot I disable it and look for something better -- if I now see 2 options instead of 1 I enable both.

Many Many times if I sit here and watch the races myself I would not have bet the runner or runners I did - but then they win or run 1st 2nd and 3rd -- and you can just see how it all comes together.
By dn6789
#25635
also I would add one thing to this thread

for me personally I can make a lot more money with "BACK" then Lay ... I think it is because Lay there are a lot less bets and when you lose you take a while to recover.

with the "Back" and having multiple strategies running - and picking up some higher odds -- just can generate a lot more money.

but I certainly understand if people prefer "Lay" because figuring out the back side is a lot more complicated and you can lose more money quickly if you get off track.
By dn6789
#25636
something else I thought about today was buying ratings from punting form and incorporating them into the excel spreadsheets and filtering my bets with that

but you know what the market is already doing this for us - so why add more complexity when it does not need it -- I am just going to focus on the shape of the market - the stats of the market and where things best perform

and leave the other part to someone else.
By dn6789
#25641
on the LAY side of things I have decided to only take the highest probability lays and not force a bet for every situation -- I am hoping this will just make it more consistent and day to day profitable.
By dn6789
#25643
if your going for the stats based idea of betting - I do not think there is an alternative to becoming better at excel -- myself I am still watching peoples videos of building models for nfl etc -- not that I am interested in that but to pick up other things that maybe useful and save me time.

I think you were asking me to look at your data - my data is all broken down and I run macros etc to do that -- that way I get right to the more important numbers and the inputs that go into my strategies .. so I have no comment on your data - it is not how I look at mine.

I gotta go out today -- I just feel like at this stage - your either going to experiment and get it - or your not - you will have to just buy strategy and roll with their limitations .. anyway I am out for today cheers.
By dn6789
#25645
this is better lay stats -- just go with the absolute highest rated ones
Attachments
lay.PNG
lay.PNG (208.87 KiB) Viewed 622 times
By dn6789
#25646
I think too what this shows is stats matter -- when I enabled them all and used wider parameters it was much more up and down -- but this shows if you just focus on the best stats for "Lay" that is better result
By dn6789
#25647
much better right

only going with the highest % lays these days instead of leaving it too wide open and the results show that is way better
Attachments
tf.PNG
tf.PNG (215.06 KiB) Viewed 588 times
By dn6789
#25648
all I am doing with this is using the same column of data - including the highest ones for the back options and taking just the lowest one for the lay value - and if the % is too high I am not even enabling it - as you can see in the image some are not enabled.
By echelon
#25649
Hi DN,

By "same column of data", I assume that you're talking about odds in an Excel spreadsheet?

It would make sense to use high odds for backing (to maximise profits) and low odds for laying (to minimise liability).

What really blows my mind about the strategies here is the level of filtering. The most showing in a particular strategy is only 9!

I find that by looking in the data I can filter down to this level by looking at certain odds, grades, distances, traps etc. of recent bets, However as soon as I test this filtering out, the market changes and the filters required are different. This is a real stumbling block for me and I think is the key thing which is preventing me from seeing any sort of consistency in my strategies.
By woweee
#25650
Hi Echelon

I'm in the same boat as you. I can play around with different filters using the BFBotmanger Bets tab. I can either achieve a high profit and low SR. Or the opposite. Soon as I run it live using small stakes the market changes and I make a loss.
By dn6789
#25651
I have about 8 spreadsheets of data split up

and after it is filtered it gives me a column of values and percentages - I am just using the highest and lowest and if the numbers are not far enough apart I am skipping them

yes this is 2 days racing +$100 a day basically for "Lay"

but my filtering of races is by far more advanced than I have seen anyone else use ... especially on back bets

+ if you search the web in BetAngel for instance they are nowhere close to what we are doing here
By dn6789
#25652
you take the back bet filtering

the most bets its made per selection is 25 - and that is running on AUST NZ and UK Racing

so the filtering is very high .. like I said before I am only using highest confidence rated bets -- anything in the middle it out as it adds too much variance

the other thing you guys got to look at it staking -- you cannot use flat stake bets at minimum you got to use step or bookie -- but I get why you do not want to change till your results are better.
Attachments
tw.PNG
tw.PNG (77.21 KiB) Viewed 577 times
By dn6789
#25653
and the thing about the above back 10 horse strategy - is I only care about the net results -- some days favor FV1 other days FV5

so it nets out with staking right.
By dn6789
#25654
also something real interesting - updated my data ran the macros split everything out and you know what -- really day to day the numbers are not changing a whole lot

while they may distribute some - it tends to be the same dominant forces within the stats -- Lay nothing changed - I suppose you can see why - it really only missed 1 or 2 in 2 days

and on the back side the majority of winners tends to follow one path - just depends which value it is.
By dn6789
#25655
I am done for today - got everything ready for tomorrow which is today LOL - anyway I am not sure how much more help I can be

if it is not making sense to this point then maybe you just have to go back to your own ideas and strategy.

I suppose there is a reason that no-one talks about this stuff - because if you find something that is really good - you do not really want to share too much as it does not help you at all.

from my side I cannot really offer coaching or sell those strategies - it just would not make sense ... but I do feel like what I have provided is a huge shortcut compared to what I went through.