[poker_dummy101]

I finally put money in Matchbook (I never had money there because I'm more quarters, halves, and props) but I finally did and messed around with the live betting. Since everyone was on the niagara/siena game I decided to try to arb it throughout the game with small amts of money on live betting. Obv. this game was back and forth which turned out ideal for live betting. It got me thinking if I could do this profitably.

So my questions are:
1. Is this profitable? I assume if it is, it is small amounts?
2. The numbers are on and off the board so quick, how can you arb it to a number you're happy with? Just practice knowing which numbers match up? I know there are arb calculators but to be so quick with the number/bet...
3. I don't expect anyone to lay it all out, but do you have any good articles I can read up on it? I have googled it, but wanted to see if someone could point me in the right direction and/or experience on the subject

Thanks for any and everything

[Justin7]

You can make a fortune on live betting...

However, "arbing" in and out based on score changes is probably -EV. You might have placed a series of -EV bets that won, but the real question is what was the equity on each individual bet? If you want to win at in-game betting, you need to determine the odds of any team winning on the fly. If a team scores 2 points, that will substantially change the odds in a close game.

[poker_dummy101]

Ahhhh ok. Thank you. I had never tried it before and realize I must've just gotten lucky last night with how the game shifted so much. Good to know I am going about it wrong though and focus in on another way.

[Peep]

What was the spread on the game you were betting on pokerdummy101? 40 cent -120/-120? Or ???

[007Fatty]

You also gotta have patience and be smart with live betting.
wen i first started i won twice wat i had in there because i played smart
but than i figured it was too easy
and lostalot doing it.
but yes it is very profitable if you do it smart.

[poker_dummy101]

What was the spread on the game you were betting on pokerdummy101? 40 cent -120/-120? Or ???

Sad to say, but I have no clue what it was. Its whatever Matchbook has them at. This is my first time ever having funds in Matchbook as I usually bet halves, quarters, and props so I was completely new.

I missed betting the Niagara/Siena game so I figured hey I'll just live bet it small to see how it works. I had planned on betting Niagara but after they got out to the big early lead, I got Siena -3.5 +180, then Niagara +3.5 -(whatever number) and from there it was just back and forth until I finally had a small profit of like $28 if Siena won, $38 if Niagara won. If I didn't go quick enough, the number was off the board and I would miss it, so:
a. I have no idea what lines they were at
b. It was so quick, I felt like I was just guessing how I could "arb" it to show a profit without worrying about maximizing opportunities.

Good thing it was a small amount since it appears I was making multiple -EV bets which happened to get lucky.

[Peep]

Sad to say, but I have no clue what it was.

LOL. I HATE it when someone asks me questions like that, and I can't answer them, feel like I SHOULD be able to answer them. Get caught up in the heat of the moment as it were.

In any case, a win is a win, congrats!

Still, good to know that number, lets you know what sort of margins they are working with. I keep wanting to try live betting too, haven't gotten around to it, which is why I am curious.

[THEGREAT30]

Live-In-Game Betting seems to be like the ultimate no-no for chasers and most gamblers chase at some point. I doubt if I could ever get with the concept. Good luck though.

[u21c3f6]

I finally put money in Matchbook (I never had money there because I'm more quarters, halves, and props) but I finally did and messed around with the live betting. Since everyone was on the niagara/siena game I decided to try to arb it throughout the game with small amts of money on live betting. Obv. this game was back and forth which turned out ideal for live betting. It got me thinking if I could do this profitably.

So my questions are:
1. Is this profitable? I assume if it is, it is small amounts?
2. The numbers are on and off the board so quick, how can you arb it to a number you're happy with? Just practice knowing which numbers match up? I know there are arb calculators but to be so quick with the number/bet...
3. I don't expect anyone to lay it all out, but do you have any good articles I can read up on it? I have googled it, but wanted to see if someone could point me in the right direction and/or experience on the subject

Thanks for any and everything

To answer your questions:
1. Yes, this can be very profitable and no, not just for small amounts.
2. There are different ways to go about it. One way is for you to put up the offer instead of trying to accept an "acceptable" offer. (Matchbook is changing its commission schedule and making the offer will become more advantageous than accepting an offer.) As Justin pointed out, you need to figure out what represents a +EV arb. Sometimes you have to and need to learn how to accept a loss when you arb. It is actually very similar to options trading.
3. I am not aware of any good articles but let me try to point you in a direction. First watch the live action and notice how the lines shift based on what is happening during the game. Also notice the increased volatility of the line shifts the closer you get to the end of the game. Once you get the "feel" of what is happening, then add other considerations such as point spread, home dog, amount of lead compared to spread etc and record the results. If you do this or something similar, from this data you should be able to "know" what the line should be during a game given the circumstances you are witnessing to allow you to place +EV wagers.

Look at it this way, what line has the greater chance of being off, the one right before the game starts or one that is created on the fly during the heat of battle?

Bonus: There is usually a time during the game (almost always the last half and usually around the last quarter) where the line suddenly wakes up. It happens with great frequency that you should be able to witness. What this means is that there is a point in the game when a team has a decent lead taking the point spread into account where they may be at -400 and then all of sudden they become -700 and the other side is +650. Taking the -400 in these situations has a small possible downside where you might have to arb at +350 to be safe but that happens less frequently than you being able to arb at +650. In this scenario, the way I look at it, you are essentially risking $1 to win $3 (this may require additional explanation).

Arbing is an excellent way to go IMO, just be sure to account for the changes in the Matchbook commission schedule. The most significant change for me is that under the old commission schedule if I set-up an arb that will have a net loss, there was no commission to pay. Under the new commission schedule, there will be additional dollars of loss (commission) added to the losing arb.

My personal experience with this style of wagering has been very profitable. I won't say how profitable because that doesn't help anyone and most would not believe it because they don't do what I do. Also, I have no way of proving it since I can't post my "picks" because my "picks" are situational. Even if I tried to post my "picks" in real time, by the time it was posted, those lines would no longer exist. The good news is that I don't have to prove it to you. Just do something similar to what I posted above and you will prove it to yourself. I would like to be able to read a post where you have actually proven it to yourself.

One other note, one thing to guard against is over "trading". You may become cocky and think you are infallible and then you will get bitten. Guard against over "trading" and use good money management and you will be able to multiply your bankroll at an incredible rate.

Joe.

[poker_dummy101]

Wow, thank you VERY much for that post. I wasn't expecting to see anything else about it on here.

[hhsilver]

I agree. wow. thank you for that helpful post, Joe.

[DeluxeLiner]

To answer your questions:
1. Yes, this can be very profitable and no, not just for small amounts.
2. There are different ways to go about it. One way is for you to put up the offer instead of trying to accept an "acceptable" offer. (Matchbook is changing its commission schedule and making the offer will become more advantageous than accepting an offer.) As Justin pointed out, you need to figure out what represents a +EV arb. Sometimes you have to and need to learn how to accept a loss when you arb. It is actually very similar to options trading.
3. I am not aware of any good articles but let me try to point you in a direction. First watch the live action and notice how the lines shift based on what is happening during the game. Also notice the increased volatility of the line shifts the closer you get to the end of the game. Once you get the "feel" of what is happening, then add other considerations such as point spread, home dog, amount of lead compared to spread etc and record the results. If you do this or something similar, from this data you should be able to "know" what the line should be during a game given the circumstances you are witnessing to allow you to place +EV wagers.

Look at it this way, what line has the greater chance of being off, the one right before the game starts or one that is created on the fly during the heat of battle?

Bonus: There is usually a time during the game (almost always the last half and usually around the last quarter) where the line suddenly wakes up. It happens with great frequency that you should be able to witness. What this means is that there is a point in the game when a team has a decent lead taking the point spread into account where they may be at -400 and then all of sudden they become -700 and the other side is +650. Taking the -400 in these situations has a small possible downside where you might have to arb at +350 to be safe but that happens less frequently than you being able to arb at +650. In this scenario, the way I look at it, you are essentially risking $1 to win $3 (this may require additional explanation).

Arbing is an excellent way to go IMO, just be sure to account for the changes in the Matchbook commission schedule. The most significant change for me is that under the old commission schedule if I set-up an arb that will have a net loss, there was no commission to pay. Under the new commission schedule, there will be additional dollars of loss (commission) added to the losing arb.

My personal experience with this style of wagering has been very profitable. I won't say how profitable because that doesn't help anyone and most would not believe it because they don't do what I do. Also, I have no way of proving it since I can't post my "picks" because my "picks" are situational. Even if I tried to post my "picks" in real time, by the time it was posted, those lines would no longer exist. The good news is that I don't have to prove it to you. Just do something similar to what I posted above and you will prove it to yourself. I would like to be able to read a post where you have actually proven it to yourself.

One other note, one thing to guard against is over "trading". You may become cocky and think you are infallible and then you will get bitten. Guard against over "trading" and use good money management and you will be able to multiply your bankroll at an incredible rate.

Joe.

Good post Joe. I have dabbled in live betting and have done well but still am trying to figure it out. It seems like suckers and chasers are the ones taking my +ev action (obviously -ev for them)

[Arilou]

Live is a very high-skill exercise. The people who don't know what they are doing get destroyed, and the people who are on top of things do very well. That's true both at Matchbook and for live betting with books. There are a lot of different skills involved. You need to know the math and you also need to know how to watch sports.

[ssanders82]

Quick question to experienced live bettors - I realize this is a very open-ended question, but from what I can tell, live bettors tend to over-favor the winning team; have you seen this? For example, I've got a database of MLB data that includes scores by inning, so during the playoffs last year I could do a sql query to find out what are the historical chances of the home team winning if they are up 5-3 after 6 innings. (I added other factors such as pregame odds as well, but let's keep it simple.)

What I usually found is that if the visitors had, say, a 33% chance of winning (+200 odds), the live bettors would be offering +250 odds at that point (and about -280 for home). Live bettors seemingly overemphasize the winning team and downplay the chance of comebacks.

Anyway I was wondering if others had reached the same conclusion.

[u21c3f6]

I have also found that there are times when the comeback is overemphasized, especially later in the game. In both of these cases it is important to factor in, as you wrote, the pregame odds. If the team that is winning was a big favorite, then it may seem like the odds are overemphasizing the winning team. Just like if a big favorite falls behind early it may seem like the odds are overemphasizing the comeback but that is what is expected (and happens quite frequently) when a big favorite falls behind early. Your point is still well taken. There is usually a point in the game where the odds have not given up hope of a comeback as well as a point where the comeback is dismissed too early where you can find huge odds discrepancies between offered and statistical odds. As I wrote in a different post, which line has the greater chance of being off, the line right before the game starts or a line created during the heat of battle?
Joe.

[Lets_Get_Money]

What I usually found is that if the visitors had, say, a 33% chance of winning (+200 odds), the live bettors would be offering +250 odds at that point (and about -280 for home). Live bettors seemingly overemphasize the winning team and downplay the chance of comebacks.

Anyway I was wondering if others had reached the same conclusion.

Goddamn superbowl my friend, Santonio Holmes

[Peep]

I spent tonight messing with live betting at 12bet .com. Pretty fast action, but I have to learn decimal, and they keep a running total from the start of the game. I got confused lol.

[carefreechris]

interesting..

[sportscash]

i deposited $300 into betfair and got to $4000 within a week i thought it was the easiest thing until i lost the lot in one day.so it can be very profitable but becareful as mentioned above not to get cocky like i did.ive smartened up since then but im still rebuilding a bankroll.i prefer to just back a team at a beter price then the starting price if i were going to bet that team anyway.good luck to all that try it.

[Stumpage]

I spent tonight messing with live betting at 12bet .com. Pretty fast action, but I have to learn decimal, and they keep a running total from the start of the game. I got confused lol.

Peep, the decimal thing will come around eventually. After a while you'll just automatically know what the number is when converting to American odds, if you do it enough of course. Obviously a massive development if you're trading off between 2 sites without similar odds displays.

*Now seeing that your post is over a month old, I'm guessing this is exactly what has happened.

[vincent vega]

Some great things in this thread. Most of my betting happens in-play, you need to know your numbers because if your a little weak someone on the other end of your bet will take your Value.

One thing you need to look out for is when your betting as you watch on tv, you need to know how fast your pictures are. if someone has picture a few seconds quicker your done for. What can seem like a good bet can be a killer as the situations in most sports can change in the space of a few seconds.

I don't know what Matchbook is like but on Betfair the amount of money that's matched in play is massive. Big money is to be had if you have a 5 or 6 second head start over the rest of the regular punters at home watching on tv.

At events like a live English Premiership Soccer game don't surprised to find that people are sat in the executive boxes with notebook's open and wi fi connected. These guys will be beating the average punter at home. The best policy i think is to wait until a break in play comes, like an injury and then consider entering the market. At least then the time advantage won't really be of a factor.

[Stumpage]

One thing you need to look out for is when your betting as you watch on tv, you need to know how fast your pictures are. if someone has picture a few seconds quicker your done for. What can seem like a good bet can be a killer as the situations in most sports can change in the space of a few seconds.

This is a very, very good point. Seems like such a basic thing, but knowing how much of a delay is in play is a massive strategical must. Through experience I've found that radio broadcast is often more up to date. It may just be 2 or 3 seconds, but as far as securing a timely profit is concerned, this may as well be an eternity.

[Arilou]

The delay issue to me is a strong reason to bet only during commercial breaks or at least breaks in the action. The adverse selection issues involved in being even a little behind can be catastrophic, and it can make it hard to actually watch the game properly if you're constantly trying to place or worse offer wagers.

[Stumpage]

Well noted Arilou. I completely agree.

[Peep]

I have for the time being settled on Pinnacle for the NBA playoffs.

So far, so good.

[vincent vega]

In an NFL game when I bet in play I work to the basis that my pictures are at least 10 seconds behind a lot of the other players in the market. I think the best time to get in is just after a score, I'll enter a back and lay price that I'm happy to accept (obviously with enough margin to be perceived value). I'll cancel my unmatched bets just before the restart. The last thing I want is for someone with quicker eyes and fingers reacting to an incident just after the restart.

[Stumpage]

Excellent stuff in here. I definitely agree that breaks in play absolutely is the best (and safest) way to go about Live betting...But I tell ya, if I was a braver soul, any time I heard an NBA commentator blurt out that "The (trailing) team still has plenty of time left in this game", or "There's no reason to panic" or "Lots of basketball still to be played here", etc., I would blindly back the team that was winning with everthing I got. I mean I would lump on the neighbour's $$ if they would let me.

There is no greater Kiss of Death than these "gotta keep the faith" statements. Basically, they might as well just say, "Well folks, this game's over but hopefully we can keep you glued to this channel with talk of miracle comebacks form years gone by. Don't touch that dial....."

[Kindred]

I believe Matchbook has a built in delay for matching live bets to compensate for the delay of your TV picture.

[JohnAnthony]

Excellent stuff in here. I definitely agree that breaks in play absolutely is the best (and safest) way to go about Live betting...But I tell ya, if I was a braver soul, any time I heard an NBA commentator blurt out that "The (trailing) team still has plenty of time left in this game", or "There's no reason to panic" or "Lots of basketball still to be played here", etc., I would blindly back the team that was winning with everthing I got. I mean I would lump on the neighbour's $$ if they would let me.

There is no greater Kiss of Death than these "gotta keep the faith" statements. Basically, they might as well just say, "Well folks, this game's over but hopefully we can keep you glued to this channel with talk of miracle comebacks form years gone by. Don't touch that dial....."

This. Is gold.

[Data]

Excellent stuff in here. I definitely agree that breaks in play absolutely is the best (and safest) way to go about Live betting...But I tell ya, if I was a braver soul, any time I heard an NBA commentator blurt out that "The (trailing) team still has plenty of time left in this game", or "There's no reason to panic" or "Lots of basketball still to be played here", etc., I would blindly back the team that was winning with everthing I got. I mean I would lump on the neighbour's $$ if they would let me.

There is no greater Kiss of Death than these "gotta keep the faith" statements. Basically, they might as well just say, "Well folks, this game's over but hopefully we can keep you glued to this channel with talk of miracle comebacks form years gone by. Don't touch that dial....."

Please keep "Kiss of Death" type of nonsense to PT. And BTW, you should be glad you are not "a braver soul" because you would go broke otherwise doing what you said above.

[Stumpage]

Relax Data...Just jokin' around a little my serious android fellow Forumite.

[Pokerjoe]

In-game betting is a battle first between people with programs and those without, and secondly a battle between those with excellent programs and those with weaker ones.

I think making in-game bets by instinct is about as pointless as playing blackjack by instinct. In-game betting is a series of math/database questions, and if you aren't approaching the challenge that way, you have no chance.

I know this isn't what some people want to hear (I'm reminded of the folk song "John Henry"), but I think it's true. So I'd advise people not to be the sucker trying to guess his way to profits at this. If you can't play the game right (that is, if you don't have a first class database, properly programmed), don't play at all.

[Peep]

In-game betting is a battle first between people with programs and those without, and secondly a battle between those with excellent programs and those with weaker ones.

I think making in-game bets by instinct is about as pointless as playing blackjack by instinct. In-game betting is a series of math/database questions, and if you aren't approaching the challenge that way, you have no chance.

I know this isn't what some people want to hear (I'm reminded of the folk song "John Henry"), but I think it's true. So I'd advise people not to be the sucker trying to guess his way to profits at this. If you can't play the game right (that is, if you don't have a first class database, properly programmed), don't play at all.

OK, but ah, the other variables are enticing as well.

1) Foul situation in hoops
2) Time left/how does that relate to your database, which presumably has historic data by quarters
3) Baseball--starting pitcher out, what does you database do now? Opening odds were determined by pitcher. How do you tie that into a database inning by inning score.

Not disagreeing, just sayin'......

[u21c3f6]

In-game betting is a battle first between people with programs and those without, and secondly a battle between those with excellent programs and those with weaker ones.

I have no idea if this is true but you can put me in the group that does not have a program.

I think making in-game bets by instinct is about as pointless as playing blackjack by instinct. In-game betting is a series of math/database questions, and if you aren't approaching the challenge that way, you have no chance.

Depends on your definition of "instinct".

I know this isn't what some people want to hear (I'm reminded of the folk song "John Henry"), but I think it's true. So I'd advise people not to be the sucker trying to guess his way to profits at this. If you can't play the game right (that is, if you don't have a first class database, properly programmed), don't play at all.

I would agree with you that if your objective is to make profits, then you should not "guess" your way. However, I respectfully disagree that you need a first-class database. You need to "know" something and that's where we need to define "instinct". The past is the past and I do not back-test anything, I only go forward. Once I find a "concept/situation" that gives me an edge, I play it as long as it is profitable.

The true test is whether you win more on your winners than you lose on your losers, database(s) or not.

Joe.

[Data]

You need to "know" something and that's where we need to define "instinct". The past is the past and I do not back-test anything, I only go forward. Once I find a "concept/situation" that gives me an edge, I play it as long as it is profitable.

Apparently, "know" means "have faith in" here. There should be something more besides faith, don't you think?

The true test is whether you win more on your winners than you lose on your losers, database(s) or not.

That is neither a true test nor even a good one.You are greatly underestimating the variance in results also known as the luck.