I will try to make myself understood by giving a few examples and I know that this is all about value betting but that’s why I’m writing this maybe someone can tell me why this would not work in the long run. (other than not taking value)
Today I have Barito Putera vs Persija Jakarta a football match from Indonesia Liga 1. The software suggested me yesterday to place a bet on Jakarta to win with 1.91odds and with a 10% value for this bet.
Jakarta scored today a goal in min69’ and probably they will win so I am going to win this bet but I am thinking what if we can select a few value bets with WIN market or O/U market and wait a few minutes for the match to start and then place the same bet so we can get it with higher odds because the idea is…what if JAKARTA would not have scored?? I would have lost the money anyway, right??? So what if I would have placed the same bet at half time today when the score was 0-0, I would have had better odds like 2.25 for the same bet. Does that make sense to anyone? GUYS I REALLY HOPE SOMEONE WILL UNDERSTAND ME.
So for example lets just hypothetically say that the software will suggest for us another football match where we get a bet like : Celta Vigo vs Elche under 2.5 goals with 1.95 odds and 4.5% value. Lets say you have placed this bet yesterday and the match started today at noon and in min9’ we already have a goal, but now there is nothing that you can do because the bet has been placed yesterday and you can only hope that no more than 2 goals will be scored for this match. But now if I want to place the same bet live with under 2.5 goals and with a goal that has been scored since min9, probably my odds would be now something like 2.10. So in the end I know that we will not take value betting like this, but the idea is that you still need the exact same result in order for you to win. So other than the odds, NOTHING HAS CHANGED…you getting better odds for the same bet if we just wait a little longer and place the bet live. What do you think guys ?
well thats not valuebetting.
And in under match when time goes by the odds are dropping so u’ll never get it at 2.1 but less than 1.95.
if in min 1’ the score is 0-0 and the odds are 1.95 for under 2.5goals. How can the odds be lower than 1.95 in min 9’ when a goal has been scored ?? The odds will go higher, not lower. The odds will start to drop later in the game if the score is still 1-0. But if you want an extreme example: Let’s say is min 38’ and the score is 2-0 do you think that under 2.5goals is still at odds of 1.95 at this point ? I don’t think so…
AND I KNOW THAT WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT VALUE BETTING ANYMORE HERE BUT I’VE SAID THIS IN MY POST
and now i have live NK Primorje 0 v 1 NK Roltek Dob with Primorje to win at odds of 2.15 but now it’s half time and the score is 1-0 for NK Roltek and i’ve placed this bet few hours hours ago. Now there is nothing that I can do but to hope that Primorje will turn around this match and will win. If I want right now to place THE SAME BET i will get odds of 4.55…do you understand me now?? @xtc69
It’s the time and effort involved that is the issue as far as i can see. I understand your point, and have had similar thoughts myself with regard to using exchanges and setting back bets at value odds to see if they drop.
For me, the system works because i have a few pockets of time that i can get my head down and bang a few bets on, then wait for the outcome.
There is also a danger that you may start getting emotional. Lets say your target teams go down early in the next 4 matches and all go on to win at better odds. You mat start to convince yourself that it’s a pattern and so make decisions to chase bigger mug-bets rather than building value over a blended strategy and as such lose the next 20 matches. That, for me, is the bigger problem. You start to chase big wins rather than strategic growth.
I understand your point. I was just thinking about this because sometimes I have a value bet where says under 3.5 goals with 1.85 odds and at the half time we have already 3 goals scored. Now if you would place the same bet at half time (live) that the match will finish under 3.5 goals then you will get higher odds for sure. I am thinking that i just left money on the table. But the idea is that you have to wait to see if the match will go in a direction where you can get higher odds for the same bet that you would have placed it earlier…and this will not happen all the time for sure. But I realized that this can be a way to make more money to be honest, you just need to be there and keep an eye on all live matches so that you can see if an opportunity will be there.
You see… you’re already over thinking it! 
I hope it goes well for you, let us know when you’ve run it a few times to see if it pays off for you.
I think this is an interesting angle worth further studying/experimenting. More often than not, in-play betting could offer higher odds which may not reflect true probability. One way is to compare Pinnacle in-play odds and calculate no-vig true odds on Pinnacle in-play betting and compare that to your other book makers to find +EV in-play betting odds. Another way is to have a good study of the basics and market odds pre-match, and watch live matches closely; when you find the odds offered (including Pinnacle) are longer than the probability you perceived, you can place value bets there. And I also think this is the next step after soft bookie limitation. I hope any experienced bettors can further offer their experience and some data here.
I thought of trying this in tennis. If the other player start with serve its likely he’ll win the first game, yet the odds might jump above the odds from the start for the player youre planning to bet on, even if it doesnt make any difference really what the end outcome will be.
Interesting observation, but there are a couple of things you should consider: the true probability of the prematch odds vs. the true probability of the inplay odds…both probabilities would almost never be the same. And because they would vary, then the expected values (EV) would vary (+/-). And because the expected values would differ, placing during inplay COULD be a -EV or a +EV.
You SHOULD NOT assume that since the inplay odds had a +EV during prematch, then it still has a +EV. What you need is a sensible metric for determining the EV of your in-play odds. There are a couple of them, but the widely used one is “Pinnacle”.
You should research how Pinnacle is used in the above-mentioned.
Hi Nick, I suggest you to go back to the top and read again my post and then come back and replay if you have a different opinion. We can not talk about value here, I understand what you say, but you did don understand me. The fact that you placed the bet or not, the outcome of the game will not be different then that one that was in the first place…just think about that for a sec. Thanks
The problem with this method is that you are only considering the positive case. The first mistake is when you say “what if we can select a few value bets”. If you are going to apply this method, you have to apply it to all bets within a certain rule. What I mean is that you can select for example all soccer bets. But it has to be ALL soccer bets. Or you can select all bets from the 1X2 market, but it has to be ALL 1X2 market bets.
That said, let’s take an example of a soccer match, team A vs team B. Let’s say the odd for team A to win is 1.8 and for team B it is 4.0, 4 hours before the match starts, and the software suggested placing a bet on team A to win win with 1.8 odd and 4% value. Until the match starts, it is expected that the odd of 1.8 will drop to 1.7 for example, because it is a value bet. Now that the game has started, let’s analyze what might have happened to the game with 20 minutes played for example. There are 3 possible cases:
(Case 1): The match is still a draw, odd for team A to win is 1.85 (higher than the original odd of 1.8)
(Case 2): Team B is winning, odd for team A to win is 3.4
(Case 3): Team A is winning, odd for team A to win is 1.2
Let’s now analyze how each case would affect your profit over time if you placed a live bet on Team A to win, when compared to the traditional value betting.
(Case 1) You would make a slightly higher profit over time on these bets.
(Case 2) You would make a considerably higher profit over time on these bets.
(Case 3) You would have a considerable loss on these bets.
In short: you really would have a gain in your profit over time considering only cases 1 and 2. However, case 3 can also happen and would mean a loss. That’s why I said that at the beginning that you have to apply the method over all bets: you can’t magically select matches where only case 1 and 2 happen, case 3 will also happen eventually.
However, we can go further: once you are betting on live matches, this is no longer value betting. This would mean, not only a lower profit, but a negative yield over time. But remember: although the bet was initially suggested as a value bet, what will cause and explain the negative yield will be case 3.