Don't Lay The Draw at Fancy Prices !

[nigelbleddfa]

This is the scoreline in a hypothetical game played by the very strong team known as "A" playing a competent but not so strong team, team "B".

12 minutes " A" 0 - 1 "B"

18 minutes 1 - 1

23 minutes 2 - 1

45 minutes 2 - 2

59 minutes 3 - 2

63 minutes 3 - 3

Final Score 3 - 3

The draw was available to lay at 3.5 and a hypothetical bet of £ 100 was placed giving a liability of £250.

12 minutes - the underdog scores first. Tiny variation in odds as market expects favourite to recover.

18 minutes - tiny movement in odds because long way still to go and current result is a draw.

23 minutes - favourite recovers further but price scarcely moves as still a long way to go

45 minutes - disaster, the underdog equalises and half the game has passed by. No profits to be taken.

59 minutes - favourite fights back but still over thirty minutes remaining so still no scope for profit

63 minutes - total disaster, the "dog" scores with only one third of the game remaining , no profit available.

No further score and liability of £ 250 is realised.

I hope this illustrates sound reasons for not laying the draw at a big price.

Some of you will be thinking that I have provided the worst possible scenario relating to the timing of scores in this game and may question the likelihood of such a game occurring. So, in view of this I now confess that this game actually took place on 12 December 2009 and was played between Chelsea and Everton.

[jimmy]

When the fav went 3/2 up with half an hour to go there would have been a decent profit compared to stake.

[ron]

This is the scoreline in a hypothetical game played by the very strong team known as "A" playing a competent but not so strong team, team "B".

12 minutes " A" 0 - 1 "B"

18 minutes 1 - 1

23 minutes 2 - 1

45 minutes 2 - 2

59 minutes 3 - 2

63 minutes 3 - 3

Final Score 3 - 3

The draw was available to lay at 3.5 and a hypothetical bet of £ 100 was placed giving a liability of £250.

12 minutes - the underdog scores first. Tiny variation in odds as market expects favourite to recover.

18 minutes - tiny movement in odds because long way still to go and current result is a draw.

23 minutes - favourite recovers further but price scarcely moves as still a long way to go

45 minutes - disaster, the underdog equalises and half the game has passed by. No profits to be taken.

59 minutes - favourite fights back but still over thirty minutes remaining so still no scope for profit

63 minutes - total disaster, the "dog" scores with only one third of the game remaining , no profit available.

No further score and liability of £ 250 is realised.

I hope this illustrates sound reasons for not laying the draw at a big price.

Some of you will be thinking that I have provided the worst possible scenario relating to the timing of scores in this game and may question the likelihood of such a game occurring. So, in view of this I now confess that this game actually took place on 12 December 2009 and was played between Chelsea and Everton.


I used to love trading football but i rarely do now, in the above case i would have gotten out at either a small profit at 10 minutes (as i hate letting trades run for long) or if i had to out at 2-1 after 30 or so minutes again for a small profit/loss/even.

[nigelbleddfa]

When the fav went 3/2 up with half an hour to go there would have been a decent profit compared to stake.

The theory says there should have been a profit, the reality says there was no profit. That's why those who placed the initial bet found themselves well and truly stuffed. True story, with many fingers burned beyond Germolene :)

[nigelbleddfa]

I used to love trading football but i rarely do now, in the above case i would have gotten out at either a small profit at 10 minutes (as i hate letting trades run for long) or if i had to out at 2-1 after 30 or so minutes again for a small profit/loss/even.

Those who placed the initial bet could not trade out at a profit after ten minutes as the draw price had shortened. The draw price had scarcely moved at 2 - 1 and they allowed the bet to run in the hope that Chelsea would score again and so give some sort of profit.
The bet was doomed from the outset.

[jimmy]

I would be very surprised if the draw odds where still around 3.5 with the fav home team leading with half an hour to go but I could be wrong.

[Wednesday 13]

Errrm, I'm not the one who likes to trade this method, but I think that disciplined trader would not miss two critical moments in this game:

45 minute, 2-2: at this moment, I suppose that odds for a draw were around 2.40 to 2.50, but let me be pesimistic and suppose it was as ridiculously low as evens; going out at this moment would produce red screen of 75 units and feeling of freedom to move onto next match. (With, more realistically, odds of 2.50, loss would amount to only 40 units - recoverable in only one or two next matches!)

59 minute, 3-2: If our trader got nerves of steel, so didn't want to red up his screen at half time, I believe, just like Jimmy, that odds in this moment must have been sufficient for at least small profit; if no, at least small loss, but if I was trader in question, I would immediately exit the market in this moment. The downside is that this window was open only for three or four minutes, so one had to be quick, not to wait too long for market to find its balance.

[nigelbleddfa]

I would be very surprised if the draw odds where still around 3.5 with the fav home team leading with half an hour to go but I could be wrong.

Unfortunately, you are wrong. The home side led for only four minutes, barely enough time for the market to reform and settle.

[jimmy]

I personaly would never take that price.

[Temujin]

I would have been out at 12 minutes regardless. Can say what you like about not laying the draw, but the simple fact is, you are suggesting this only to people that will let a trade ride until they have reached a particular profit margin, regardless of what that is.

For others, like myself, I would have layed the draw, doubled up on it at 10 minutes, then traded out on the first goal and moved onto the next game.
Most likely take a hit on this game, as I would suspect the odds at 10 minutes would be very similar to game open, maybe 3.35-3.4, and after the goal at 12 minutes, would really depend on the odds of the teams playing, but at 3.5 open I would expect a pretty even match odds for both teams. That being said, I would think a small profit would be made.
If not, and was a clear fav, at worst, the odds would have come in to 3 or so, meaning a small loss of about 8 ticks, 3 units.

I hope this illustrates sound reasons for not laying the draw at a big price.
Not really. It does illustrate a good reason to have a plan that isn't simply only trade out at a certain profit margin.

[nigelbleddfa]

Errrm, I'm not the one who likes to trade this method, but I think that disciplined trader would not miss two critical moments in this game:.

Here is another game for you : Lay Draw 5.1

Fulham 1 ( 24 mins ) Liverpool 1 ( 36 mins )

Dog scored first, draw price barely moved, favourite scored, then, downhill all the way !

Or, this one : Lay Draw 3.8

Sheffield Utd 1 (45 mins ) QPR ( 39 mins )

Dog scored first, quick equaliser , then,similarly downhill all the way !

The disciplined trader is, unfortunately, not blessed with psychic powers. As the two new games above illustrate, the draw price shortens as the game progresses. By laying a draw at high prices one opens oneself to the possibility of large losses.
In the three games mentioned, there was never an opportunity to make a significant profit. Yes, I agree that losses could have been minimised but it is easy to say this, much more difficult to actually "bite the bullet" and trade out.
It should be noted that in the Chelsea game no goal was scored in the last 30 odd minutes of the game. In the two games above, no goals were scored in the second half.
I feel it could have been reasonably argued that another goal would be scored in all three games given the time available. Presumably, this is why the trader in question allowed the bets to run and incur a loss.
I hope that these games illustrate why people should "not lay the draw at a fancy price" as things can, and do, go seriously wrong.

[Wednesday 13]

Here is another game for you :

Lay Draw 5.1

Fulham 1 ( 24 mins ) Liverpool 1 ( 36 mins )

Dog scored first, draw price barely moved, favourite scored, then, downhill all the way !

Or, this one : Lay Draw 3.8

Sheffield Utd 1 (45 mins ) QPR ( 39 mins )

Dog scored first, quick equaliser , then,similarly downhill all the way !

Well, you have just intrigued my thoughts, so I really tried to see how would I behave in these cases. :cool: In first game, odds are far too high for LTD, so I probably wouldn't get involved in that; though, "disciplined trader" would go out after first goal, for a small loss or profit, nevertheless; odds in second game are just on the acceptable limit (for my taste, it's 4.00), and H2H stats point out to a close game, as Sheff Utd has 8 wins, QPR 4 wins, 6 draws, goals scored/conceded 28-22, which means that teams are well balanced, which, in turn, means run away out of this game as soon as first goal is scored, either for a small profit either for a small loss!


Yes, I agree that losses could have been minimised but it is easy to say this, much more difficult to actually "bite the bullet" and trade out.

Indeed, it's the hardest thing in trading to accept red screen, and I have not mastered it yet myself! Though, it's the thing that separates trader from gambler - trader realizes that things don't go his way, so he saves what can be saved and travels further; gambler hopes that thing will somehow turn as he wants... but hope is not a good companion when it comes to money...

When I accept red screen, I don't look at it as loss - I look at it as I saved myself from bigger loss! But it's all upon current situation and mood, it's never the same... that's why it was easy for me to defend LTD for above games - now, after they have finished and there is no my money in the market! ;) Anyway, I said before that I very rarely lay the draw - I don't like strategies where odds run away from me and I need to wait for a goal; I feel more comfortable with some kind of scalping, when odds move in my favour, and I go out as soon as I'm satisfied with the amount of green... if goal doesn't drop in before I exit... :D

[The Joker]

Here is another game for you : Lay Draw 5.1

Fulham 1 ( 24 mins ) Liverpool 1 ( 36 mins )

Dog scored first, draw price barely moved, favourite scored, then, downhill all the way !

Or, this one : Lay Draw 3.8

Sheffield Utd 1 (45 mins ) QPR ( 39 mins )

Dog scored first, quick equaliser , then,similarly downhill all the way !

The disciplined trader is, unfortunately, not blessed with psychic powers. As the two new games above illustrate, the draw price shortens as the game progresses. By laying a draw at high prices one opens oneself to the possibility of large losses.
In the three games mentioned, there was never an opportunity to make a significant profit. Yes, I agree that losses could have been minimised but it is easy to say this, much more difficult to actually "bite the bullet" and trade out.
It should be noted that in the Chelsea game no goal was scored in the last 30 odd minutes of the game. In the two games above, no goals were scored in the second half.
I feel it could have been reasonably argued that another goal would be scored in all three games given the time available. Presumably, this is why the trader in question allowed the bets to run and incur a loss.
I hope that these games illustrate why people should "not lay the draw at a fancy price" as things can, and do, go seriously wrong.

Nigel I have to say nice thread but I think it serves to illustrate the importance of discipline and cutting your losses while you still can! If the dog scores first get out re-assess the game and markets and look at other markets overs unders etc. the reduce the red or break even:)

But a good point made for not letting it ride!

[The Joker]

YUuFVVG0q-4:D:D

[nigelbleddfa]

Nigel I have to say nice thread but I think it serves to illustrate the importance of discipline and cutting your losses while you still can! If the dog scores first get out re-assess the game and markets and look at other markets overs unders etc. the reduce the red or break even:)

But a good point made for not letting it ride!

I wasn't the trader in question but I have some sympathy for him. The problems he faced were all the same ones. He had reasonable expectations of goals in all three games but they didn't come. Over thirty minutes in one game, the entire second half in the other two. The available time would have made a reasonable man think that a goal would have been scored.
What would I have done ? After much soul searching I have to admit that I would have allowed the bets to ride. This doesn't mean I am undisciplined. It means that I am not psychic. My answer is never to contemplate laying the draw at a big price and so I never have such problems.:)

[The Joker]

I wasn't the trader in question but I have some sympathy for him. The problems he faced were all the same ones. He had reasonable expectations of goals in all three games but they didn't come. Over thirty minutes in one game, the entire second half in the other two. The available time would have made a reasonable man think that a goal would have been scored.
What would I have done ? After much soul searching I have to admit that I would have allowed the bets to ride. This doesn't mean I am undisciplined. It means that I am not psychic. My answer is never to contemplate laying the draw at a big price and so I never have such problems.:)

Sorry mate I wasn't suggesting you were the trader in question, and I the point your making is sound though I wouldn't say the odds stated were fanciful, personally if the dog had scored first I would have accepted teh small hedged out loss, then watched the game to see the state of play maybe tried a value lay at value odds in the closing stages on the CS if the teams were pushing on for a win:rolleyes: maybe able to scalp out and cover the red if either got close!

[nigelbleddfa]

Sorry mate I wasn't suggesting you were the trader in question, and I the point your making is sound though I wouldn't say the odds stated were fanciful, personally if the dog had scored first I would have accepted teh small hedged out loss, then watched the game to see the state of play maybe tried a value lay at value odds in the closing stages on the CS if the teams were pushing on for a win:rolleyes:

I didn't think for one moment that you thought I would have been daft enough to lay the draw at such prices. :) Liabilities are high and they could even take away much of the bank available initially. It may have been, if the whole of the bank had been committed to the lay bet, that the options for entering other markets were limited by virtue of lack of funds. As we say in South Wales, " if you do not have socks, you cannot pull them up". :)

[The Joker]

I didn't think for one moment that you thought I would have been daft enough to lay the draw at such prices. :) Liabilities are high and they could even take away much of the bank available initially. It may have been, if the whole of the bank had been committed to the lay bet, that the options for entering other markets were limited by virtue of lack of funds. As we say in South Wales, " if you do not have socks, you cannot pull them up". :)

How's about a new saying then !!??

If you want to keep ur socks hedge out ! Even for a loss!!;)

that way hedging out will free up funds for other options even on whole bank trades !:D

come on kr stick it in tradepedia!!

[Temujin]

Here is another game for you : Lay Draw 5.1

Fulham 1 ( 24 mins ) Liverpool 1 ( 36 mins )

Dog scored first, draw price barely moved, favourite scored, then, downhill all the way !

Or, this one : Lay Draw 3.8

Sheffield Utd 1 (45 mins ) QPR ( 39 mins )

Dog scored first, quick equaliser , then,similarly downhill all the way !

The disciplined trader is, unfortunately, not blessed with psychic powers. As the two new games above illustrate, the draw price shortens as the game progresses. By laying a draw at high prices one opens oneself to the possibility of large losses.
In the three games mentioned, there was never an opportunity to make a significant profit. Yes, I agree that losses could have been minimised but it is easy to say this, much more difficult to actually "bite the bullet" and trade out.
It should be noted that in the Chelsea game no goal was scored in the last 30 odd minutes of the game. In the two games above, no goals were scored in the second half.
I feel it could have been reasonably argued that another goal would be scored in all three games given the time available. Presumably, this is why the trader in question allowed the bets to run and incur a loss.
I hope that these games illustrate why people should "not lay the draw at a fancy price" as things can, and do, go seriously wrong.

When you say draw price barely moved, do you mean same as open, or after the score?
Either way, game 1, would have doubled lay at 10 minutes, double again at 20, trade out at 24 for whatever.
Game 2, have 3 double ups, and trade out at 39. Not ideal 1 minute before the next double up, but happens. Take best odds after the goal, move on.

In the three games mentioned, there was never an opportunity to make a significant profit. Yes, I agree that losses could have been minimised but it is easy to say this, much more difficult to actually "bite the bullet" and trade out.
How is it difficult if that is your strategy? Much more difficult keeping a straight face saying you are a trader, and sit there hoping like **** that things go your way.


The disciplined trader is, unfortunately, not blessed with psychic powers.
The disciplined trader does not need psychic powers. They have the ability to analyse profitable scenarios, and probabilities, and the ability to stick to their plan which will show long term profits. The disciplined trader knows from the start that losses will happen.

I feel it could have been reasonably argued that another goal would be scored in all three games given the time available. Presumably, this is why the trader in question allowed the bets to run and incur a loss.
At which point? You can't just pick the last goal and use that as the defining moment of the game. But if it is so reasonable to assume another goal being scored, then how much so? Value to lay the draw at that point?

I hope that these games illustrate why people should "not lay the draw at a fancy price" as things can, and do, go seriously wrong.
NO. It doesn't at all illustrate that. You have chosen 3 games, where the result was a draw after the underdog scored first. That is all you have done.




I once backed a horse at 5, and couldn't trade off until it got to 7. Should I start a thread telling everybody not to ever back a horse first to trade because it won't work because it didn't work once?

Or what about this for logic. Your substantial data representation of those games is so illustrative of why you should never lay the draw first because of that. Then surely they are just as illustrative that you should ALWAYS back the draw first?


Once again, all you have shown, is that if you have no plan, and are blindly laying the draw in a 100% market, that sometimes you will lose your stake.

[nigelbleddfa]

Once again, all you have shown, is that if you have no plan, and are blindly laying the draw in a 100% market, that sometimes you will lose your stake.

You seem to have misunderstood. I was not the trader. He lost and I can easily see why he did. He would have lost much less if he had not backed against the draw with such a high liability. So, unless you are very experienced, and this particular guy was, you should not lay at high prices.
Trading is gambling regardless of any plans, and things can go badly wrong as they did with the critical timings of goals in the three games referred to above.

[Temujin]

But there are many games where you never get in a profitable situation. Quite simply, you can't always be right, and while there are some games you can't do anything wrong, there are others where you can never do anything right.

Point is, if that is the way he trades, then clearly he has accepted that these games will happen, and trusts in his strategy to profit long term.

I can pull out 3 games too and make a point on what not to do as well if you like. Traded 3 games over 3 consecutive days. Always get a game now and again where you will do your stake (well I do and accept that it will happen due to how I trade them (talking cricket and tennis here) every now and again). I copped 3 in a row. 4400, 3500, 3500 were the loss figures of each of those games.
Now I can easily post those games, and suggest not to trade how I do, because look what happened. The truth is though, I just copped 3 in a row, which is extremely rare, and I am still way in front with my trading style. In fact, 3 absolute freak games and I still ended the week in profit, albeit a very small one. (Definately not a typical week for me by the way, that week saw me using big similar stakes, and have 5 of my biggest + and - games since I started)....


My point is, all you have done is shown 3 extreme examples, and stated "facts" showing why it was a bad idea to trade them. I am actually yet to see any reason not to.
Fancy prices? What does that even mean? Each market is a 100% market, and the odds are typically very close to true odds.
Laying a 5.00 shot that has true odds of 5.00 makes a hell of a lot more sense to me than laying a 2.50 shot at 3.00. Yet here you are suggesting that you are happy to lay at 3.00 because it is not a "fancy" price?

Now maybe if you instead show us EVERY game at certain odds, and show us how much money has in fact been lost, then it will have some validity. Until then, I can only assume since you are using the term "trader", that this guy is actually profitable. And if he is indeed a profitable trader, then his methods must indeed be sound.

[nigelbleddfa]

My point is, all you have done is shown 3 extreme examples, and stated "facts" showing why it was a bad idea to trade them. I am actually yet to see any reason not to.
Fancy prices? What does that even mean? Each market is a 100% market, and the odds are typically very close to true odds.
Laying a 5.00 shot that has true odds of 5.00 makes a hell of a lot more sense to me than laying a 2.50 shot at 3.00. Yet here you are suggesting that you are happy to lay at 3.00 because it is not a "fancy" price?

Now maybe if you instead show us EVERY game at certain odds, and show us how much money has in fact been lost, then it will have some validity. Until then, I can only assume since you are using the term "trader", that this guy is actually profitable. And if he is indeed a profitable trader, then his methods must indeed be sound.

My aim was to alert new traders to the possibilty of losses by laying at high odds. I have not advocated the laying of anything simply because the odds are not high. Personally, I disregard any lay bets over 1.75, other than in a "greening" process, and that works for me. I am not suggesting that others should follow me.
The three games illustrate how things can go hopelessly wrong for even the best of traders. I think that your assumption, that because someone is described as a "trader" that he is a profitable trader, is wrong but in the case of this particular trader I can have no views as I have too little information about his other trades.

[wagonmastergeneral]

Great discussion guys - I'm reading with interest as last night was my first foray into 'laying the draw' territory.

I know for you guys this is old hat but I'm a noob and trying to get my maths/luck right. I laid the draw on the 2 champions league games, 4 championship games and a solitary league 2 encounter (didn't check to see if that one was going in-play so thank **** for late winners) all at under 3.5. I was relatively surprised at the lack of movement after goals had gone in, as it happened I ended letting the Lyon/Madrid bet ride as the odds were still 5.6 on the draw in the 87th minute! Perhaps unsurprisingly i lumped on at that point and hope Lyon held out.

Would you gents be kind enough to share what you would do in these (true) scenarios. I used £2 stakes therefore roughly £4.90 average exp.

Blackpool 1-0 in 30th minute (40p all green offered)

Milan 1-0 in 2nd minute (17p all green)

Swansea 1-0 in 46th minute (30p all green)

Cardiff 1-0 West Brom (no immediate change - 17p offered just before west brom equalised on stroke of half time)

Bristol City Vs Leicester I hedged out all red -£1.94 at 70 mins (as I read in the soccer trading for noobs post it is vital to do.)

At times I was floundering last night as the profit offered (including the 2 CL games) didn't even get close to the potential losses should I have hedged out all red - I'm assuming because I screwed up.

I ended up letting the CL bets ride until united went 3-1 up (£1.93) and quadrupling up on laying the draw as mentioned in the lyon game due to the bizarre odds. No chance to scalp as back & lay offers were several ticks apart.

As I could quite easily be nige's trader mate any wisdom on offer?

[nigelbleddfa]

I was relatively surprised at the lack of movement after goals had gone in,

That "surprise" has taught you a great deal ! Just because a goal has been scored doesn't mean to say that the price for the draw is bound to change appreciably so as to guarantee significant profits.
Goals were scored in the three games mentioned above but there was never an opportunity for meaningful profit in any.

I recommend that you do not trade on as many as seven games at a time, too many I think. It's good to be able to see a game so as to form your own opinions about how it is going.
I am never going to lay draws at big prices as I see no future in it. If others want to do it, that's fine by me. The only time I contemplate laying the draw is in the last few minutes of a match where the scores are even and the lay price is low. That way, if a late goal is scored, I get a big return for a small investment. I don't like small returns from bets which have high liabilities.
We are all different and see things in different ways.:)

[wagonmastergeneral]

I am never going to lay draws at big prices as I see no future in it. If others want to do it, that's fine by me.

Derby Vs Preston had draw odds of 5.2 when i checked:eek: I know there were 8 goals so turned out to be a bargain but really!

After this experience I feel maybe 1 or 2 games only and scalp in between.