Set & Forget Football Strategies

This thread is for members of the community to work together to build some profitable set and forget football strategies.
THESES ARE NOT TIPS! This is a community project as above.
If following make sure to stick to the rules of the strategy and read this: https://betfairtradingcommunity.com/en/blog/newmartinsrevised7keyrulestradingfootball
How to Download & Upload a Strategy:
Results Sheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qisAtUpuQ0VqddUJ5VypUKHj4J02wHJI4ENtPR1gPNA/edit#gid=27565906
Downloads!
Feel free to test these strategies below, as above they are not tips.
Lay Away 2.0  Lay Away 2.0.txt
Lay Away 3.0  filtersettings (3).txt
Lay Home 2.0  Lay Home 2.0.txt
Back Home 1.0  Back Home 1.0.txt(Lay Away 1.0, Tomasz Lay Under 1.5 and Lay Over 3.5 Goals are already in your software presets)

@JosephHenderson yes end of season as expected has caused a bad month best avoided other than summer leagues now

@JosephHenderson Try taking out the games where one or other (or both) teams have nothing to play for and see if that alters the results much.

How are people getting on with the Lay Away 3.0 filter? Think I may have just started it at a bad time, but I am 17.6pts down for April & May so far (7.2pts in April and 10.4pts in May).
The max drawdown I have recorded is 22.32%  maybe this is just variance or perhaps end of season impact?

@RichardLatimer hope the prints stuff picks up mate.
Seems like your trading is progressing well

@RichardLatimer I thought this was a retirement post at first! This strategy sounds very promising.

@RichardLatimer said in Set & Forget Football Strategies:
@RichardLatimer said in Set & Forget Football Strategies:
0.5 for the away started very badly with 3 successive losses while the next 3 won. It may well right itself but after Saturdays surprise capitulation by Plzen when the away team were 0.4 there is also every possibly chance that 0.5 and under is ruled out. At present 0.4 is the lowest loss but the sheer size of that loss also means nothing under 0.6 is actually profitable anymore as things stand.
And no sooner than I say that but April starts with a 14 pounding in Columbia against a side with just 0.4 ave points. I am going to try and avoid a single change and look at this again for May to see if it justifies removing the low numbers which my feeling at the moment is gravitating towards.
After spending well over a year running in the wrong direction and telling myself that everytime I hit an obstacle all I needed to do was move it of the way I've been able to spot things before they go too far. Rather than carry on until I came to a cliff edge with with a broken rope bridge, a 1000ft drop and the promise of a hungry tiger to greet me should I make it to the other side I turned back early this time.
Although the filters had been less, they didn't alltogether make sense (thanks @Martin) and I could see that the data didn't appear to have legs. So...
Luckily enough I had started to track a similar thing for laying home (I'm working on other stuff as well for a small portfolio but this has a loooooong way to go).
I've just hit 200 selections, I have an 86% s/r, ave lay odds of 4.6 it's 100pts profit. To level stakes of £10 that's obviously £1,000.
I've been tracking since the back end of Feb and I'm almost at the stage where I don't expect to make any/certainly many more changes. I'm happy with my filters, they make sense to me, they are limited to either 1 criteria or a combination of 2 max.
There is no random exclusion of 1.9 points of 2.2 or something similar. Only at the top and the bottom end of the scale. Find the sweet spot!!
Another 100 selections and I'll share my findings.

@GregMitchell yes either this or do it for a while and work out the exact average odds of your selections (average odds in general don't help as your strategy is unlikely to throw up the higher odds games as often as the lower odds ones, therefore skewing the average higher than it really is)

@Martin said in Set & Forget Football Strategies:
@GregMitchell you aren't being thick, the problem is mathematically when you estimate the odds it has to be accurate. So what is probably happening is that on average the 1000 matches had odds below 1.30, therefore it wasn't profitable. Increasing the odds will remove more selections as even more matches would not have been 1.35 or above. so essentially without the odds it's really hard to know if a strategy is any good.
I did a podcast on this recently which is well worth a listen:
https://www.buzzsprout.com/1516057/14785436betfairstrategystrikeratesareuseless.mp3?download=trueDefinitely Food for Thought, so how do you go about first choosing a strategy without the backtesting odds? Say you had a filter that had no odds restrictions, do you monitor/paper trade/small stake it for every selection and then when you have enough results, review the odds to see if its feasible?

@GREGORIOSKARASHIALIS I do both to suit all audiences

@MattWood said in Set & Forget Football Strategies:
@Martin Thanks for the link. Just listened to it and added some claculations into my data which has really thrown up some interesting information and made me think about things a little differently.
Great to hear that, that's what it's all about getting the idea juices flowing!

@GregMitchell you aren't being thick, the problem is mathematically when you estimate the odds it has to be accurate. So what is probably happening is that on average the 1000 matches had odds below 1.30, therefore it wasn't profitable. Increasing the odds will remove more selections as even more matches would not have been 1.35 or above. so essentially without the odds it's really hard to know if a strategy is any good.
I did a podcast on this recently which is well worth a listen:
https://www.buzzsprout.com/1516057/14785436betfairstrategystrikeratesareuseless.mp3?download=true 
@Martin said in Set & Forget Football Strategies:
@GregMitchell were you testing matches where the games had 1.30+ odds? If not the testing is pretty void as lots of games are lower than 1.3 at HT.
Well no, had no odds restriction on the test, and hence my question. If you set the odds at 1.3 for the test selections, the strike rate goes down to 78%, so you then have to set the odds to 1.35, which means the strike rate goes down again, so you adjust the odds and so on an so on.
I may be being thick, it has been known...

@GregMitchell were you testing matches where the games had 1.30+ odds? If not the testing is pretty void as lots of games are lower than 1.3 at HT.

I may be being a bit daft, but here goes...
How does anybody deal with the circular conundrum of any strategy?
So, for example, you have a strategy for SHG, you monitor it for a while, after 1,000 selection it shows a strike rate of 81%. Which means to make any money on it. you need to be betting at odds of 1.3 or above.
So you put it into practice, and don't back anything less than 1.3, so only enter when the odds get to 1.3 anytime in the second half.
Because, there are goals scored before the odds get to 1.3, you miss some of the selections, takes the strike rate down to 78% and consequently it becomes a loss making strategy, so you increase the required odds to 1.35, which knocks out more selections which score before the odds get to 1.35, and so on and so on.