Mugging vs Matching

[Fella]

There are two big factors in favour of mugging small freebies IMO:

- The time factor. It's much quicker to mug than to match. If you are doing tons & tons of small offers (which I tend to to) this becomes a substantial consideration.

- The being bothered factor. I think a lot of people wouldn't bother to do an offer that allowed them to lock-in say £3 but WOULD do it if it gave them a possible £50 from a mugged £5SNR on a 10/1 CS or something. (I am frequently guilty of this even though the EV is basically the same either way).

The above two make it overwhelmingly +EV for me to frequently mug little SNRs. However I like to be doing that in conjunction with matching off anything above the tenner range, so I get a more constant flow of guaranteed profit mixed in with the hit & miss mugged stuff.


(I don't always mug little bets though, it'll depend on other factors. For example, if I've made a few hundred that day/week through other AP I'll more happily mug small SNRs etc. OTOH if I've made nothing all day & then get a couple of £10SNRs I'll probably match them to lockin as much as possible, purely to get some profit on the board. Again, this isn't really logical & certainly has nothing to do with pure EV, it just works for me).

[theshamrock]

This is a very good thread and has made me look at what my profit would have been if I mugged all my bets. I would have made about £1000 more over 4 months since I started.

I seem to win more at the bookie when I am doing a big WR, due to the fact I would rather win at the bookie as I underlay the bet at the exchange.

Looking at this as a whole though, I back and lay the closest match and not what I think what will win and lose. So that's the reason why I rarely mug any bets.

However if I do find a completely surprise free bet in my account, like a few days ago which I haven't had to do a qualifier on. I may look at a big sporting event (e.g Golf Open) and put it on somebody I think the price may come down and then look again at the end of round as to whether to lay it off or let it ride.

[frizzkid]

Hi, I'm a new member of TGT, finding this thread very interesting. Just to express my methods of match betting. I will always ensure an equal profit irrelevant of what I expect the outcome of the bet to be as I see it all as immediate profit and utilizing my opinion will return it to stress inducing gambling which having experienced for a number of years, although potentially more profitable, I am happy to avoid for the mean time!

[HMex]

I don't feel that having float tied up in lays and dutches is anymore inconvenient than being down to variance for, quite possibly, weeks on end. In both scenarios a chunk of your capital is made effectively unusable.

When it comes to arbs, one of your component bets is guaranteed to be good value. The moment you choose not to place one of those bets (whether it be dutch or a lay or whatever) you're making an assumption about which party/bookmaker/exchange punter is offering the best value....something you can't prove reasonably until a time has passed in which you have placed many similar bets.

For me it seems obvious the fewer assumptions you make, the less opportunity there is to lose your advantage...

[blowingbubbles]

I don't feel that having float tied up in lays and dutches is anymore inconvenient than being down to variance for, quite possibly, weeks on end. In both scenarios a chunk of your capital is made effectively unusable.

It would be more inconvenient IMO, in a perfect world of matching half your float will be for the arbs/ freebets etc and the other half matching your bets off with non value bets to reduce variance. However if you mug all your bets your float is now effectively doubled, you can now place double the amount of value bets and take more +EV in a shorter space of time.

When it comes to arbs, one of your component bets is guaranteed to be good value. The moment you choose not to place one of those bets (whether it be dutch or a lay or whatever) you're making an assumption about which party/bookmaker/exchange punter is offering the best value....

Proving where the value is difficult without maybe many years of records! Part of the reason to start this thread was to get a joint record of bets and maybe get a better picture, however this thread faded away before we even got anywhere!

something you can't prove reasonably until a time has passed in which you have placed many similar bets.

Nope I can't prove it because I'm a lousy record keeper however I have placed many 1000s of similar bets and I know from experience where the value is without making assumptions, I don't need the records and data to know I'm winning at bookmakers, its very rare for me to have an account at a bookmaker I haven't beat long term. To just assume people who are mugging their value bets are making assumptions is plain naive IMO

[Andy]

I will always ensure an equal profit irrelevant of what I expect

Maybe I dont always bet for equal return where I "expect" to win, I often dont have a clue, but it is a good idea to factor in WHERE you will win and therefore value each £ differently in terms of its utility value.

If somebody said to me "Im going to give you £8 into your Betfair account or £10 into your BetPortugal account which do you want?" I would say "£8 to Betfair please". I value £8 in Betfair more highly even though in absolute terms its lower. In that example its because I think there is a higher chance of me seeing it from Betfair so the Bookmakers risk has been taken into account. Its very obvious with that example but I would always factor it in a bit regardless of the site, they all have different risks/stability.

Other reasons to "Underlay" which are not just to make more initial profits form the EV are that it will be quicker to win at an exchange, you dont have to withdraw and/or play E-mail tennis. If im having to withdraw from anywhere ever that involves remembering where and checking it was paid and chasing if its not etc etc and I want a fiver for having to do that so I factor that into my lay amount.

Its possible (not 100%) that an account is more likely to be closed if it is a "winning" account, so its best to make the most profit from it whilst the Sun shines. The win that gets the account closed you dont want to have made the same regardless if it won or not since it got your account closed you want a fat profit. If it lost well its a smaller profit yes but guess what, you can bet another Arb tomorrow still, so the cumulative value is higher.

If you have a rollover to complete, underlaying it to bust the first bet is just obvious there is no need to explain that one. How much is down to personal preference, the number of x rollover, and what have you, as a rule of thumb 30% works well.

If a site does reloads on -ve accounts, underlay your first bets there is a no brainer for a mixture of the no rollover argumant and a bit of the being able to do it again tomorrow argument.

Everyone is different, in every way and personal factors come in. Are you going to the game? because if you are then you would hedge it to ensure you had an interest more than if you are not even watching. Is it a team you support, well hedge for a lower profit if they win then you will be just as happy with £15 and they won as you will with they lost but wahey £120 profit so I dont mind that much. That would make sense to back/lay differently. Keeping a balanced happiness is more important than a balanced monetary return.

Attitude to risk plays a part I would not be comfortable having over £1k in some places if that is possible I make damn sure I have layed it to make £100+ compared to just £10 if it goes the other way thats fine, the thought of £22 or £22 regardless and ending up having £1k somewhere to make £22 is not compensating me enough.

There is more reasons but im going on now...

There is no logical reason, none at all, (Except a spreadsheet can tell you that amount), to back and lay a result for equal returns. To do so assumes a lot of things which are simply not true in the real World.

I would be interested to hear the reasons why it is a good idea to back and lay for equal amounts? There is no right or wrong way, dont think I am saying you are wrong. If you are happy doing that then you are right and go for it. I just honestly dont understand (and never have) why you would do it though? It is a genuine question?

[Landprofits]

Proving where the value is difficult without maybe many years of records! Part of the reason to start this thread was to get a joint record of bets and maybe get a better picture, however this thread faded away before we even got anywhere!

Yeah it's an interesting thread and a shame it kind of fizzled out. Your original intention for the joint record of bets was a good one but I just don't think anyone has "them" kind of records. I keep decent records but to produce that I think would be a major 6 week long headache, so I am afraid I am going to have to wimp out on that one.

Nope I can't prove it because I'm a lousy record keeper however I have placed many 1000s of similar bets and I know from experience where the value is without making assumptions, I don't need the records and data to know I'm winning at bookmakers, its very rare for me to have an account at a bookmaker I haven't beat long term. To just assume people who are mugging their value bets are making assumptions is plain naive IMO

I am gonna take a step back and concede that the value does appear to be where you say it is, as without looking back and checking I think my earlier posts may have come accross as being direct opposition to this and would like to try and clarify my debate. I do think you're right about this, however you can't know where the value is on every single bet, the market movement may be wrong - sentiment is not always right whether it's in the sports markets or financial markets, and like I said before the markets will often over react to news even though stats would reveal a different matter (such as a team winning as often without their star player, but the market making a big move because of injury).

You're obviously aware that mugging all your bets would incur variance, but what I think would compound "natural" variance even more is the fact that some of your bets would actually be non value bets. Not sure if that makes sense?

However if you mug all your bets your float is now effectively doubled, you can now place double the amount of value bets and take more +EV in a shorter space of time.

Hmm yeah good point, variance would dictate that you would need a bigger float though, but don't know how you would weigh that up.

The other thing I think people sometimes forget when discussing EV and variance, is that although an increased EV bet with a higher variance works out correct mathematically, when you hit that run of bad variance you are effectively taking that float out of play, and it's difficult to account for that.

I think Lotte makes a good point though;

There was a discussion on mse about this subject not so long ago. A fair few of the lets say "legends" of the forum insisted that it was more profitable to mug everything. However when I challenged them and basically asked, do you have the courage of your convictions? not one of them came back and said yes they will/do mug.

Spot on Lotte, though I did mug a balance + deposit in 770, for the very reason Bubbles says in this thread. I did not want to lose money out of betfair/pinnies and bleed it into 770.

"Legends" eh? I think I might know who you mean. More like Leg ends.

[bboy12]

my issue is do you blindly follow percieved value and go against your own gut instinct or knowledge.
It would be hard to back something you really thought would not win but
i have no doubt that if you blindly took value you would make more but if you arb and are able to still hit decent stakes at places would you really want to make a 1k bet and let it ride? More likely you would change stakes sizes so for example your even money shot now has a £100 of your own money and if it wins you win £100 but tying up 2k approx on an arb can yield £100 profit anyway if said bet wins

for me i dont need to make a decision on what i should do yet but i know the day is coming where i either continue to watch the well dry up or take the chance

another point is that balances at slower moving books etc will always likely seem to get bigger cos of stake sizes, that 9/4 winner at £500 means you have to lose 2 more £500 bets and your still be up

i worked a balance up to 12k somewhere once and within weeks had lost the lot and had to re deposit, i was very pleased i lost all those bets. mind this was in the days when bookies didnt want to shut you down after 1 or 2 decent sized bets

[blowingbubbles]

my issue is do you blindly follow percieved value and go against your own gut instinct or knowledge.
It would be hard to back something you really thought would not win but
i have no doubt that if you blindly took value you would make more but if you arb and are able to still hit decent stakes at places would you really want to make a 1k bet and let it ride?

This is a major hurdle for me anyway - the psychological one. I can handle losing mugging value bets say up to £200 and losing free bets, but the bigger bets of say £1k+ I would probably not be able to handle losing a few of those! Going against your instinct is difficult too initially but something I've personally learnt to put to one side, I've tried to be a tipster before and I'm not a very good one!

[dulence]

It would be hard to back something you really thought would not win but
i have no doubt that if you blindly took value you would make more but if you arb and are able to still hit decent stakes at places would you really want to make a 1k bet and let it ride? More likely you would change stakes sizes so for example your even money shot now has a £100 of your own money and if it wins you win £100 but tying up 2k approx on an arb can yield £100 profit anyway if said bet wins

Why not do both? Take an arb for as much as you can, but leave a 100 (or whatever) liability on the supposedly value side?

In reply to others that have been mentioning variance as an issue - employ proper bankroll management and it won't be an issue. Do no more than 0.5% of you total bankroll per bet for example. Also, most of the odds you'll be taking on footy will be in the range of 2.0 (i.e. in the range of 50% chance) so the variance on those bets should be quite small (in comparison with, say, going for long shot horses).

Oh, and whoever claims to have enough of a bankroll to comfortly cover all the arbs he can find and still have some left then that person is either rich (and I mean enough-money-to-retire rich) or not arbing properly.