Talk:Arbitrage betting
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I think I've corrected the issues below. I've changed the example and changed the math. I hope the idea makes sence now?
I've added another section describing a related system, sports bonus arbitraging as well, but I have some issues with it I need help with:
1) It's probably the same thing mentioned in matched betting which I saw later. So should the articles be merged, reference to each other or should what I've added be moved over there and meregd?
2) I've tried to add a link to a site describing sport bonus arbitraging, but its been removed a couple of times because it was suspected to be spamming. So I'd like your opinion on if the link is relevant or not?
Starkodder 23:36, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
There's something wrong with the formulae.
shouldn't return be:
r1 = s1o1 - (s1 + s2);
r2 = s2o2 - (s1 + s2);
Contents |
[edit] Math
As they stand, the figures here don't seem to make any sense to me. Surely the math looks like this, right?
outlay: $130 ( $100 stake to b1, $30 to b2 )
outcome 1: b1 pays $130, b2 pays $0 ( break even )
outcome 2: b1 pays $0, b2 pays $90 ( $40 _loss_ )
Has someone been dicking with the numbers?
- 219.165.164.126 06:06, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Sports Arbitrage
I think there are several errors with the explanation
Firstly the point of the Sports Arbitrage is to find games where the Bookies odds for all the outcomes add up to less than 1 (a certainty). This discrepency is where the money is made. If the sum of all the outcomes i.e. win, lose, or draw is less than one then that must mean that there is a probability for another type of outcome - the arbitrage. Of course this probability has no physical meaning it is the result of incorrect odds being applied to the game.
If in the example given
| Bookmaker1 | Bookmaker2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Outcome1 | 1.3 | 1.5 |
| Outcome2 | 4.3 | 3 |
The probabilities for a Bookmaker B of Outcome O are given by
For (Bookmaker 1, Outcome 1) and (Bookmaker 2, Outcome 2) which is the example given in the text
So there is no arbitrage for the example given!
There is however an arbitrage for (Bookmaker 1, Outcome2) and (Bookmaker 2, Outcome 1)
For the punter there are 2 possible outcomes and each outcome gives a return R for a stake S. We want to know what stakes are required to generate the same return on each outcome - a no loss situation!
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
multiply out and simplifying we get
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
For a Stake = £100, put £74.14 on Outcome 1 with Bookmaker 2 and put £25.86 on Outcome 2 with Bookmaker 1.
If Outcome 1 occurs:
Return = (1.5 - 1)*74.14 - 25.86
= £11.20
If Outcome 2 occurs: Return = (4.3 - 1)*25.86 - 74.14
= £11.20
[edit] Scalpulator
Did anyone like my Arbitrage Calculator that has been linked from here for about 6 months. It was recently deleted, and I'm not sure why. Maybe because it has ads on the site?
Anyway, if you want to check it out, it is at www.scalpulator.com.
[edit] Q. does this topic seem to be a little negative
It's just a question, but having read this topic it seems to take a negative stance towards Arbitrage Betting. I have used sports arbitrages for over a year and succesfully found enough sports arbitrages to make a decent continued profit.
One the risk front, I know that odds can change but you learn to work around this by lining up your bets all at once. With regards to Bookmakers not paying, I've never had this problem but I'd like to hear from anyone who has as this is serious.
The other point is how much money needed to make a decent return. This comes down to two points, firstly the return of each arbitrage. I usually play arbs that yeild 4% or more. I find at least one daily. I also use a stake of £2000. I don't play over the weekend unless a really good arb comes up. Over the course of one month I double my stake, which I think it pretty healthy and gives a solid annual income.
I do accept that there is risk, mostly from human error, but by the same tolken I think there is merit in arbitrage betting and this should be expressed in the editorial tone.
While I don't exactly want to encourage people to try arbitrage betting I also don't think that putting people off is a good thind either. Wiki should be a little more balanced.
Its just my opinion but what does everyone think?
Update: Jan 2nd, 10:31 GMT: I did make an update with two external links containing free Sports Arbitrage calculator which after edit seemed inappropriate for the article page. They are BetRiskFree and Sports-Arbitrage-Calculator I use both often due to the fact that it is good practise to check all odds even if you use an email alert service too.
Alexone234 11:36, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
- Please stop adding links to these calculators. Lots of them exist, and the article mentions that fact. 2005 11:40, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. I just though they were pertinent. As I explained, I find the editorial tone of this topic negative when it need not be. It should be precautionary but not negative. Alexone234 17:36, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
