~30k for 30 seconds' work?

[rphi6876]

If you seriously believe the people out there that can beat the clock on large volume events like soccer can't afford to move the market more than 3-4 ticks, then you need to have a serious think. That ability is like the ability to print money. Betting on the outcome of an event that you already know has happened, wouldn't take too many markets to build your bank to the point where you could move the market to wherever you like.

Again, you miss the point and have not closely followed my post. I really don't want to get into another argument with you. The individual I mentioned certainly has the ability to push prices all the way to 1 or 1000. Do they want to NO. For several reasons.

1) They would not put 100% of the bank into the trade. Why? the data feed they have might have been wrong. ie. some fool sending the data feed pressed the goal button for the wrong team - or perhaps the goal was then not allowed because the player was offside!

2) They would not pay through 20 (or whatever) tick levels as they are uncertain as to where the fair value should be given the new information- they only know the direction. If a team is all ready up 5-0 is another goal going to move the prices more? What about if the market is currently at 2 and a goal is scored- where should the market move to- sure this can be modeled by a poisson process- but you will find that the lamda (expected goal arrival rate) for the two teams is not stable through time and accordingly, is pretty difficult to work out what the market consensus would be as to where the market will settle

3) They are not going to send orders at prices of 1 (backs) and 1000 (lays) because they have complete uncertainty about the prices they will get. Say the market is currently at 2 and a goal will move the market into 1.5. I get a feed saying a goal has been scored and send my order to back at a price of 1 because I will take any price, unfortunately my feed was slow that day and everybody else followed this logic and beat me to the market, by the time my order reaches the market, all the prices down to 1.2 have been cleared out and accordingly my back gets filled at a price of 1.2 which gives it a negative expected value.

4) Even if I knew that for a particular game that the a goal will move prices exactly 20 ticks so I clear out the order book for those 20 ticks. I suspect your chances of greening up will be close to zero, as closing the huge position you have accumulated with no impact will be impossible. I could leave the position open, but then according to your post http://www.geekstoy.com/forum/showth...t=6542&page=11 this opens you up to volatility which gives a good probability of bust.

I agree that prices will quickly reflect any news arrival- and hoovers will take as much as their utility allows them too. However I do not accept they have an unlimited appetite to make the bet -nor the ability to know what the new fair value will be. I certainly do not accept the notion that one individual will move the prices to the new fair value instantaneously courtesy of the market frictions mentioned above.

[nevermind]

Tem, the day you can accept an argument which is not yours I will open a good bottle!

Actually you have the knowledge and potential to write very interesting stuff, ...but the way you do is utterly annoying. Ridiculous hair-splitting blabbering. Conversation zero. Opinion leadership at all costs. Disgusting!

You need to have a serious think.

[WhyAlwaysMe]

But what about this fred?

http://www.geekstoy.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1143

To me the spreadsheet numbers Temujin posted up looked entirely consistant with his trading/gambling approach.

[1/4 of a millionaire fund]

You've misquoted me.

I wouldn't worry about it he'll either misquote or ignore relevant points to prove his points. Think the only time I've seen him disappear from an argument was when someone asked him to prove his profits on one of the charity threads :Kerching couldn't get his running shoes on fast enough then

[d70ejk]

You can back a goal before BF suspends it and you don't make much money out of it?

You are doing it wrong. It is printing money.

You've misquoted me.

[Temujin]

You can back a goal before BF suspends it and you don't make much money out of it?

You are doing it wrong. It is printing money.

[d70ejk]

Sometimes I can beat the market, sometimes I can't. But I certainly don't have enough money to take out 3-4 ticks, I don't even have enough to take out 1 tick.

[Temujin]

I know of one professional syndicate/person whom I have mentioned in previous posts who run a strategy which explain this behavior.

On speaking to one of the employees they mentioned they get some live feeds (just info - not audio or video) on soccer games which are apparently faster than any video/ radio stream. He claimed they could send orders which were filled before betfair suspended the markets (on occasion not always). As such it is pretty easy to set up a bot to throw in orders and hope they fill before the market is suspended. Furthermore, the reaction of a computer is a few milliseconds (faster than any human- even Bruce Lee) so depending on how low the latency is on the live feeds there is a good chance this will beat most manual traders which are hoovering.

The orders sent are obviously not for 1 billion dollars and at prices of 1 (for backs) and 1000 (for lays) and accordingly are not big enough or aggressive enough to punch out many layers of the book.

Nobody would code a bot to send orders to get filled no matter what as the filled prices are completely unknown. Rather if the bot wants an urgent fill on a back it might send in a back bet at a price several ticks below the current best bid.

Furthermore, the times I have looked at a soccer match it has been pretty liquid and I thought million dollar bets would be needed to be pushing prices by many ticks.

So I think the truth lies half way between what Temujin and 1/4 MF said. I believe if everybody had balances of 1 million dollars, everybody had feeds quicker than when betfair suspends markets, and everybody knew the true fair value when a goal is scored (so they could send there agressive orders to pay through to that price as any orders getting filled at a better price are value) then prices would move like you suggest Temujin. In reality the above assumptions are invalid. Perhaps only a few people are quick enough to get there orders filled- they dont have unlimited funds to pay through twenty levels and they are uncertain about where fair value will go (only know the price will go down- but uncertain by how much) so are not prepared to push prices to much.

But in reality this is nothing but opinion and empirical proofs one way or another will never be made.

If you seriously believe the people out there that can beat the clock on large volume events like soccer can't afford to move the market more than 3-4 ticks, then you need to have a serious think. That ability is like the ability to print money. Betting on the outcome of an event that you already know has happened, wouldn't take too many markets to build your bank to the point where you could move the market to wherever you like.

[Temujin]

Maybe you could directly quote where people have said or even suggested hooverers will not take more 3-4 ticks , I've mentioned no ones is going to do the 30-40 ticks you suggested because not only would it alert people to clock beating but also put you at risk of disallowed goals/offsides etc. shadowninja said the market moved 3-4 ticks I don't think he'd suggested that was an agreed hooverers union limit. You seem to have based your whole argument on this assumption we all think 3-4 tick movements in soccer don't occur naturally which I haven't seen any argue for.

You do however seem to be trying to enlighten us with your vast trading knowledge on all markets based on some ridiculous assumption hooverers will take a market down 30-40 ticks on the off chance a goal may stand

On the off chance? You have people in here saying they watch the market shift that match on the goal.
But I would love to hear your stats on this "off chance a goal may stand".

Off chance suggests that more often than not, a goal scored will not be allowed. So you are prepared to point me to the stats that show >50% of scored goals are disallowed due to offsides etc?

[rphi6876]

I know of one professional syndicate/person whom I have mentioned in previous posts who run a strategy which explain this behavior.

On speaking to one of the employees they mentioned they get some live feeds (just info - not audio or video) on soccer games which are apparently faster than any video/ radio stream. He claimed they could send orders which were filled before betfair suspended the markets (on occasion not always). As such it is pretty easy to set up a bot to throw in orders and hope they fill before the market is suspended. Furthermore, the reaction of a computer is a few milliseconds (faster than any human- even Bruce Lee) so depending on how low the latency is on the live feeds there is a good chance this will beat most manual traders which are hoovering.

The orders sent are obviously not for 1 billion dollars and at prices of 1 (for backs) and 1000 (for lays) and accordingly are not big enough or aggressive enough to punch out many layers of the book.

Nobody would code a bot to send orders to get filled no matter what as the filled prices are completely unknown. Rather if the bot wants an urgent fill on a back it might send in a back bet at a price several ticks below the current best bid.

Furthermore, the times I have looked at a soccer match it has been pretty liquid and I thought million dollar bets would be needed to be pushing prices by many ticks.

So I think the truth lies half way between what Temujin and 1/4 MF said. I believe if everybody had balances of 1 million dollars, everybody had feeds quicker than when betfair suspends markets, and everybody knew the true fair value when a goal is scored (so they could send there agressive orders to pay through to that price as any orders getting filled at a better price are value) then prices would move like you suggest Temujin. In reality the above assumptions are invalid. Perhaps only a few people are quick enough to get there orders filled- they dont have unlimited funds to pay through twenty levels and they are uncertain about where fair value will go (only know the price will go down- but uncertain by how much) so are not prepared to push prices to much.

But in reality this is nothing but opinion and empirical proofs one way or another will never be made.

[shadowninja]

Shadowninja did you see the goal? Perhaps the backer did it on the award of an early free kick and was ahead of the pictures for that rather than the goal itself, or there was a possession turnover in a dangerous spot. Or perhaps the game had infact been going some seconds before the suspend occurred and Valencia had good possession?

I'd like to think it was something a little more artful than a 'hoover'. But I don't have any knowledge atall about hoovering.

I didn't. I am just assuming it was a trading god.

[WhyAlwaysMe]

Just after the Valencia game kicked off (I mean red suspend, then go), someone backed Valencia with 49k taking all orders down 3-4 ticks.

About 30 seconds later they score.

That's god-like work right there. :Brilliant

'Course, if they held, 5 minutes later, they scored again. SP 1.78, 1-0 saw 1.3, 2-0 seeing 1.09.





Bastid.

Shadowninja did you see the goal? Perhaps the backer did it on the award of an early free kick and was ahead of the pictures for that rather than the goal itself, or there was a possession turnover in a dangerous spot. Or perhaps the game had infact been going some seconds before the suspend occurred and Valencia had good possession?

I'd like to think it was something a little more artful than a 'hoover'. But I don't have any knowledge atall about hoovering.

[1/4 of a millionaire fund]

The Secret Life of Walter Mitty

Recently there was a La Liga game where BF did not suspend the market and the odds for the favorite ( I guess it was Valencia) went up to 2.50 from 1.40 when the opposition scored the goal.. I couldn`t hoover since the big money were too enthusiastic to get match...

Yes, and nobody is denying there are. The point here, is emkay is suggesting that the said hooverers, would not take more than 3-4 ticks to avoid detection, because he listens to the football traders, even though you are suggesting you are one that suggests that markets will move from 1.40-2.50 before a suspend.

A hell of a lot different than saying they are not prepared to move more than 4 ticks to avoid detection.

As I suspected, they will take whatever is on offer, knowing that the opportunity will not last forever.

Maybe you could directly quote where people have said or even suggested hooverers will not take more 3-4 ticks , I've mentioned no ones is going to do the 30-40 ticks you suggested because not only would it alert people to clock beating but also put you at risk of disallowed goals/offsides etc. shadowninja said the market moved 3-4 ticks I don't think he'd suggested that was an agreed hooverers union limit. You seem to have based your whole argument on this assumption we all think 3-4 tick movements in soccer don't occur naturally which I haven't seen any argue for.

You do however seem to be trying to enlighten us with your vast trading knowledge on all markets based on some ridiculous assumption hooverers will take a market down 30-40 ticks on the off chance a goal may stand

But either way, if this was the result of a goal being scored, the price would have moved more like 30-40 ticks before suspend rather than 3-4.

Please note, I don't trade, watch, like, soccer in any way. I have however watched markets, and you watch them and know that there is opportunities and markets moving too quick that need to be corrected.

[Temujin]

So where are these people, even 1 person, to show me up?

[shadowninja]

Seems like easy money if you can do it. Certainly, I would.