Aug 2024 £3000 - ? Bank Challenge
-
@richard-latimer said in The £59.91 - Betfair Premium Charge Challenge:
Laying under 2.5 Louisville
Stayed 2-0. Annoying. I'm looking forward to seeing what @Stuart-Capstick has seen in my data. Honestly sometimes it can be hard to see the wood for the trees.
-
Laying under 2.5 Louisville
Trading Spreadsheet linked below
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/3gnk1vku1krkoyfcq37y6/Trading-Bible.xlsx?rlkey=01eqhp8u73s61iy2s814sqfll&dl=0 -
@stuart-capstick said in The £59.91 - Betfair Premium Charge Challenge:
I'm pretty sure I'm not. I'll send something tomorrow.
If not nobody has offered anything positive on it like you have just now. All I've had is that nobody can really get inside of it.
I really am very interested to see what you are seeing.
-
I'm pretty sure I'm not. I'll send something tomorrow.
-
@stuart-capstick thanks, truly I'm interested. You're the first person who has looked at it. How do you best think I could exploit it?
-
Richard, Eamonn has said it far better than I ever could. What I've posted may seem harsh but it drives me mad to see an obviously intelligent guy, who has something of value (yes, I've looked at your data) just not exploiting it.
I really wish you nothing but success. I hope you find what you are looking for, but really it's staring at you. -
But this is the thing. I feel I am getting somewhere and am just wanting to keep at it for the next month and a half as it is now. If it doesn't work I admit defeat, paper trade and go with a tried and tested. The rest of June and July won't kill me and it's worth it to see if the theory can be turned into physical.
I actually find this very easy to keep track of and implement most of the time.
-
@stuart-capstick said in The £59.91 - Betfair Premium Charge Challenge:
You're missing the point. And what's worse, you seem to be doing it deliberately.
Getting very deep this forum. Yous lost me at butterflies
.Richard These guys are trying to help you but you are being blinded by your data.
I myself was trying different things and trying to complicate things but after some advice from Darri I keep everything stupidly simple now and I feel far better for it. 1. It’s easier to track and input into my spreadsheet. 2. It’s less time consuming. 3. Less stressful and 4 easier managed.
I’ve seen you post many a time now and you don’t seem to be getting anywhere. Don’t take this the wrong way but as someone said the other day, think it might have been Keith but a lot of new guys are well ahead of you in a shorter space of time.
Certainly test what you are doing if you wish but use one of the proven strategies to start to build a bank. Just want to see you progress mate that’s all. -
Only thing I will say is that there are other large chunks of usable data on my spreadsheet I'm sure but so far this would seem to be the best of it. But I keep collecting. It's now up to 1300 fixtures.
-
@stuart-capstick said in The £59.91 - Betfair Premium Charge Challenge:
You're missing the point. And what's worse, you seem to be doing it deliberately.
I'm really not. I'm just trying to go about my plan. I posted the video because it was illuminating and interesting. I quoted from it.
I'm steadfast until the end of July as this is what I'll need to get the trades. After that I'll re-assess whether I can make better gains elsewhere.
On that note. Potentials for tomorrow:
Betfair finally have the USL so may stay awake for a couple of these.
-
You're missing the point. And what's worse, you seem to be doing it deliberately.
-
@stuart-capstick said in The £59.91 - Betfair Premium Charge Challenge:
The point of what you posted was that certain correlations have been found. Correlations between two co-variables. For example, between Nobel Prizes and chocolate production; which are likely caused by the third variable of level of development of the country in question. No need to refer to Chaos Theory.
In your case, to use the statistical analogy, you are trying to carry out a multiple regression rather than a simple correlation. You are trying to carry out multiple correlations without measuring the strength of any individual correlations. You are then trying to use those interactions in your trading within tiny time windows.
I'm not criticising your logic. I'm criticising the fact that it's too unnecessarily complex. I'm sure you have something profitable that is easy to execute. Just look for the simple correlations; they are present in your data.
The video refers to it.
-
The point of what you posted was that certain correlations have been found. Correlations between two co-variables. For example, between Nobel Prizes and chocolate production; which are likely caused by the third variable of level of development of the country in question. No need to refer to Chaos Theory.
In your case, to use the statistical analogy, you are trying to carry out a multiple regression rather than a simple correlation. You are trying to carry out multiple correlations without measuring the strength of any individual correlations. You are then trying to use those interactions in your trading within tiny time windows.
I'm not criticising your logic. I'm criticising the fact that it's too unnecessarily complex. I'm sure you have something profitable that is easy to execute. Just look for the simple correlations; they are present in your data.
-
@stuart-capstick Only reason for any of that was in the video I posted which was illuminating.
It isn't not working. I just haven't had a trade for ages. There's nothing on.
-
If that was the case in what you are doing, you could make that argument. But you don't have millions of lines of data and it doesn't look like it's working.
Besides which, looking at what you do, ultimately you are looking at particular prices with particular scorelines at particular times of the match. The issue isn't with the logic behind that as I could see that immediately and I've no doubt everyone else here could. As you say, goals lead to more goals; nothing mysterious in that. No need to refer to Chaos Theory.
The point people are trying to make, to go back to the tornado analogy, is to use the signs of the huge body of warm, wet air as your variables rather than the butterfly. You'll find life easier and more profitable. -
@darri said in The £59.91 - Betfair Premium Charge Challenge:
@richard-latimer you say touche as banter but actually I give answers back to give people help, but as i say im starting to repeat myself again and its clearly not having an effect. Help is always a message away when you need it mate
It is I assure you. I really can't explain myself anymore than I have done. I appreciate all the help I get on here. Every last bit.
But yes, it was a little bit of banter. Nothing more, nothing less.
-
@richard-latimer you say touche as banter but actually I give answers back to give people help, but as i say im starting to repeat myself again and its clearly not having an effect. Help is always a message away when you need it mate
-
@darri right you are, that#s annoying. Just too early haha!
I'll get matched first in future.
-
@stuart-capstick said in The £59.91 - Betfair Premium Charge Challenge:
Oh Jesus, man......
Of course it does. If you want to predict a tornado and you see a massive body of warm air drifting across to a dry colder area, it is much more likely there will be a tornado than if you see a butterfly meandering from flower to flower.
Yes of course but if someone collected millions of lines of data and found something worked but couldn't explain why.....and they weren't interested why.
How is this wrong?
-
Oh Jesus, man......
Of course it does. If you want to predict a tornado and you see a massive body of warm air drifting across to a dry colder area, it is much more likely there will be a tornado than if you see a butterfly meandering from flower to flower.
