ende

How we made £20k in 214 days with the Winter League HDAFU Tables


Following up the successful 2016 Summer League Campaign, here is our complete report on the 2016-17 Winter League Campaign, based on 18 different top flight leagues.

We will try to avoid repeating what was said in the summer league article so that it is all new information for you here, but for the sake of completeness, you should still read and digest both reports for a full idea of our strategies and thought processes.

And you will find the current stock of available HDAFU tables via this link.

Sadly, the length of time it has taken us to put together this article and the accompanying spreadsheet means that we are not able to offer it for free.

Indeed, the information contained in the following spreadsheet is far, far more extensive than the Summer League free download, and is a betting education in itself.

And we are sure that you will feel the nominal £6 charge is worth every penny: It will double as an ideal template for your own portfolio structuring and monitoring processes.

The size of this .XLSX Excel file is 553KB:

>>> 2016-17 winter league campaign <<<


 

Features:

  • The spreadsheet details every bet in every system used and is totally customizable, including a stake toggle (Chrono tab cell N1838) to allow you to see the effects of different levels of flat staking.
  • Includes a separate tab for each of the 22 systems used, detailing the systems themselves and the individual bet results.
  • The Chrono tab brings the 22 systems together in one tab for collective detailed analysis.
  • The Inflection Points graph tab shows the profit curve’s adventures based on the full range of odds bought. (This is a static table relevant only to this portfolio).
  • The most important addition is the Stake Ratchet and Stop-loss simulation (an example of a medium-aggressive progressive staking plan: Chrono tab), which will provide you with the ideas and tools to manage your money professionally and make it work at optimum levels in order to maximise profits.

 

2016-17 Campaign Report

Measures of Risk

Before beginning to plan any portfolio or placing bets, you will need to review your analyses and rank the systems you have found according to risk exposure based on the values of the upper inflection point odds.

This will allow you to compile a portfolio with a healthy balance of risk, which is essential to the success of any investment plan.

Here is our rough guide:

  • Low Risk (Probability 45.00% or more; upper inflection point maximum odds of 2.22)
  • Low-medium Risk (Probability 44.99%-35.00%; upper inflection point maximum odds of 2.85)
  • Medium Risk (Probability 34.99%-22.50%; upper inflection point maximum odds of 4.44)
  • Medium-high Risk (Probability 22.99%-16.00%; upper inflection point maximum odds of 6.25)
  • High Risk (Probability 15.99% or less; upper inflection point odds above 6.25)

Discretion is used if a system does not fit these parameters or crosses two or more classifications – In these cases, the harmonic mean odds of all the games in the set is used as the benchmark to guage risk. The Excel formula for a range of odds in cells A1 to A100 would be: =HARMEAN(A1:A100)

Measures of Success

You will also need a definitive framework to be able to judge the final results.

For us, the final results of any league fall into four distinct categories:

  • Systems that achieve a six-season-high (i.e. profits larger than any of the previous five seasons). (Over-Achievers).
  • Those that make a profit over and above the size of the initial stake (£100 in our case), but fall short of six-season-high results. (Achievers).
  • Strategies that break-even or, record a tiny profit or loss up to the size of the initial stake (£100 in our case). (Zero-Sum).
  • Leagues that make a loss over and above the size of the initial stake. (Losers).

You can already see that two of these outcomes are favourable, one is neutral, and only one is detrimental.


Last Update: 2 August 2017

Categories:1x2 Betting Betting Advice Betting Systems Case Studies



99 Responses to “How we made £20k in 214 days with the Winter League HDAFU Tables”

  1. Simon Brooker
    25 June 2017 at 2:46 pm #

    Hi Soccerwidow,

    At first glance, the results of your 2016-17 campaign are fantastic. I’m going to go through your campaign in detail and learn what I can about how and why you put it together, and then hopefully go some way towards achieving what you guys did in that season.

    One other thing I wanted to say about what you offer at Soccerwidow….the material – free and paid for – is so valuable and really does teach people what they need to know in order to understand the betting market and what is profitable and what is not, the pitfalls and the best way forward.

    I’m very much like you in that I don’t see the value in blindly following another person’s picks, but when someone doesn’t know the betting market or how to go about it themselves, blind faith is what a lot of people gravitate towards.

    With your products they really do teach people and empower them to be able to make their own decisions and do things the right way. I feel I have learned a tremendous amount since I found your website and am very much looking forward to putting it into practice in this upcoming football season.

    Great job on what you guys do at Soccerwidow!

    Simon.

    • Right Winger
      25 June 2017 at 3:58 pm #

      Thanks for your very kind words, Simon.

      Yes, the results were good, even with a below par set of results in many of the leagues.

      We think the achievement is further glossed by the fact that the stakes used were all relatively small. Replicating our success should therefore be within the financial reach of many people.

      Keep in touch and let us know how you get on with your own campaigns!

      All the best for now.

  2. acepoint
    25 June 2017 at 6:23 pm #

    Hi again,

    first of all thx a lot for your valuable insights. Today I have studied the article and the excel sheet a little bit, and two or three questions/remarks are nagging at me:

    1) I would have expected more 1A/1B splits in the winter league, especially for leagues with a true winter break like Switzerland and Poland.

    2) You also offer Scotland and Croatia in your HDAFU panel, but I’m missing them in the 2011-16 example. On the other side you don’t offer Countries/leagues like Israel, Northern Ireland and Wales or some East European leagues (maybe there is a reason for excluding the latter, but I don’t see any for the first three).

    3) Regarding the ratchet/stop-loss scenario: Is there a direct (maybe negative) correlation between the steps (here 1000 units and 5%) and the longest expected win or loss series?

    Tanks in advance and keep on your excellent work!

  3. Right Winger
    25 June 2017 at 6:46 pm #

    Hello Acepoint,

    Thanks for your questions.

    1) It was all just a question of time in preparing the analysis – we were so short on time. The Summer League campaign was already in full flow, there was so much work to do on the website, and in the end, we had to go with the whole season analyses in many of the leagues. Indeed, the current stock of Summer and Winter League tables is the first we have offered for sale with the A/B splits.

    2) Scotland and Croatia are newcomers to the fold, so the tables for these weren’t in existence at the start of the 2016-17 seasons. A few seasons ago, we offered Wales and Northern Ireland, but not a single person bought one. What we offer now is simply based on the question of demand and supply.

    We try and use the larger, more popular leagues, which tend to be less under-priced than a lot of the fringe leagues.

    Remember, the less popular a league is in terms of money wagered by punters, the harder it is for the bookmakers to balance their books, hence their need to under-price far more in, say Wales, than they would in the EPL.

    Also, the eastern-European leagues are dogged by match-fixing problems, either criminally, or by mutual consent of the teams involved. You can see this to less of an extent in leagues like Greece or Italy Serie B, where the last few rounds of a season always create strange prices. For example, when a draw is good for both teams, it suddenly becomes the shortest of the 1×2 prices because the bookies know that both teams are likely to play for the draw. Turkey’s last scandal was in 2011.

    Hungary, Bulgaria and Serbia may make future appearances in the complement of tables, but Ukraine is in a mess, and personally I wouldn’t wager a penny on the Romanian Liga 1, as sources there tell me it is corrupt to the core, but then again, that’s pretty much public knowledge…

    3) No. There didn’t need to be. We knew the portfolio was going to make money, so we have simulated a sensible approach to the staking plan purely as an example to expand readers’ thinking in this direction.

    I hope this helps!

    Best regards.

  4. Gabriel
    27 June 2017 at 2:55 pm #

    Hi! I am just writing to congratulate you on the excellent analysis on both summer and winter leagues. These material in soccerwidow is mandatory for any serious ante-post bettor. Being a statistician, I value these posts in a way you cannot imagine. Thanks again!

    Best regards and profits to us all!

    Gabriel

    • Right Winger
      27 June 2017 at 3:28 pm #

      Blush!

      Thanks for your kind words, Gabriel!

      We shall continue to remain humble servants to our valued readers! 🙂

  5. jo
    27 June 2017 at 5:53 pm #

    hi Right Winger,

    1. how did you calculate starting bank? I used your free excel sheet “winning losing streaks” to calculate starting bank based on your forecast number of 1838 bets and hit rate of 38.87%. With hit rate rounded to 40%, risk coefficient of 3 and 100 units stakes starting bank should be 4500 units. Yours was only 2000 units. Of course, it depends on chosen risk coefficient, but if to take each strategy separately to calculate its starting bank just 3 strategies could easily require larger starting bank than 4500 units. And starting bank for those 22 systems would require quite an amount of money. I’m confused?
    2. Why Stake Ratchet & Stop-loss Mechanism was used for the whole portfolio instead of using it for each league separately? This type of approach mean stakes are also increased or reduced for systems that are performing well or failing.

  6. Right Winger
    27 June 2017 at 7:45 pm #

    Hello again Jo,

    I did mention at the end of the ratchet and stop-loss section on page 4 of this article that the staking plan example was a simulation only.

    The vast majority of punters don’t even know what a staking plan is or how to calculate a starting bank, let alone deal with a portfolio of multiple systems all running parallel, or calculate the systems in the first place.

    I have therefore kept this section of the article as simple as possible just to switch the majority of people on to thinking about proper money management.

    Yes, I remember saying in the Summer League Campaign report that we would apply the ratchet and stop-loss simulation separately to each league and show the results, but I just did not have the time to do this – I had not allowed for the early start to some of the 2017-18 leagues this year (due to the World Cup next year), which only became apparent when putting together the Winter League Tables for sale. It was therefore more important to give people as much time to analyse the tables by getting them published as early as possible.

    I’m sorry if you’re disappointed, but my advice is to concentrate on the big picture. Sometimes the small details are just not consequential enough to worry about.

    If you want to simulate the ratchet and stop-loss applied to each league individually, then I would be happy to publish your findings on the blog. I am sure this approach would have produced even higher profits, but in practise, it is very complicated to manage and more time-consuming to perform. Probably better to stick to the overall approach mentioned, especially as each system is part of a team anyway.

    And you must remember that a portfolio approach is all about synergy. The longest losing streak of any one system is always going to be absorbed by the other systems around it. In the case of our portfolio, the EPL suggested the longest individual streak at 31 losses. As it panned out, the portfolio produced a longest run of just 12 consecutive losses.

    Don’t worry, it is a good thing to be curious and to want to form your own opinions of things. Nothing is gospel and there is certainly no bible about betting in existence. We write about our own experiences based on our own level of statistical knowledge and maths. Perhaps there are others out there with even higher standards than us, but this is the only website I am aware of prepared to help people increase their levels of knowledge and understanding.

    And at the end of the day, we can teach, but we can’t make decisions or place bets on your behalf.

    For the sake of good order, I will add a link to the winning and losing streaks article on page 4, and thank you once again for your valuable contribution.

  7. Gabriel
    27 June 2017 at 11:12 pm #

    Hi again, RW!

    Are HDAFU tables and methods to build a system also appliable to group stage competitions, such as Libertadores, Champions League and Europa League? Or even to Europe or South América World Cup Qualifiers?

    I understand that playoffs are off the table, but I see these competitions mentioned above as a middle ground between the regular legues and the playoffs.

    What do you think about this?

    • Right Winger
      28 June 2017 at 12:06 am #

      Hello again Gabriel,

      The competitions you mention do have group stages (i.e. a mini league format), but there are simply not enough of those games to form any level of statistical significance over a relevant period of time (say five seasons).

      All qualifying-round and knock-out-stage games in those competitions would effectively be cup games, and therefore off the agenda as being too volatile to predict.

      In the Champions League, for example, I think there are only 96 group-stage games per season. The smallest league we analyse for the HDAFU tables is Iceland with 132 games per season.

      Also, league-games-only is a far more predictable science as each season contains a similar number of the same teams. In other words, over five seasons, the turnover of different teams is likely to be a lot lower in a league than it is in the Champions League.

      A lower turnover of teams means a lot more games between the same teams in five seasons and therefore a more standardised data set. You might have some of the same teams represented in the Champions League, such as Real Madrid, Man Utd, Juventus, etc., but they might not ever play each other in five seasons of group games (more statistical noise created).

      Keep it simple – stick to top-flight leagues – there are plenty of matches to bet on there!

      I hope this helps your thinking and thanks again for writing!

  8. Daniel
    28 June 2017 at 12:39 pm #

    Hi Right Winger,

    As always, excellent job, and congratulations on the results achieved!
    I noticed two systems in the portfolio with high expected losing streak, England Premier League (31), and Netherlands Eredivisie (29). Both surpasses your previous recommendations of trying to stay below 20, by far. I know in the end it’s all a matter of personal preference and attitude toward risk, i’m just curious to know your thought process that led to the selection of this two particular systems. What made you close an eye on the losing streak figure?

    Thanks!

    • Right Winger
      28 June 2017 at 3:04 pm #

      Hello again Daniel,

      I’m afraid to say that the decisions made on those two leagues were not scientific.

      You will see in a couple of my replies above (see 25/06/17 to Acepoint), that we were simply rushed for time and I was faced with a “take it or leave it” decision.

      But with the EPL and Eredivisie being two of the top six most popular leagues, I couldn’t really leave them out of the campaign, even with their 31 and 29 estimated streaks respectively.

      This time last year was such a hectic period that I couldn’t finish the analyses in time – some of the leagues did receive the benefit of all three analyses (whole season basis, 1st half season, 2nd half season), whilst with others, I was only able to carry out one analysis (the whole season).

      Ordinarily I would say to everyone to stick with the maximum of 20 losing streak as a rule of thumb, with perhaps a little leeway.

      At the time, and with my experience of running these campaigns, I didn’t think it would make a huge difference to the results. Perhaps things could have been improved in the EPL, but I was more than happy with the Eredivisie outcome.

      Again, I think it shows the power of a portfolio approach based on inflection points that a healthy profit can be made, even if the most optimal systems are not chosen, although I would always recommend taking the time to perform the job properly.

      If I had had time to do a perfect job on the analysis, results may have been even better, but ultimately, there was no spilt milk to cry over.

      Thanks for your question – it was a good point to bring up.

  9. Gabriel
    29 June 2017 at 4:23 pm #

    Hi, about splitting system into 1st and 2nd half, what would you do if a smooth rising line would show up in a whole season analysis but by splitting them it would show more profit?

    For example: analysing a whole season, the inflection points I decided to use were from 3.1 to 3.9. But, if I split it in 2 half seasons, I would have better results by using 2.9 to 3.4 in 1st half and 3.2 to 3.9 in 2nd half.

    Resuming: what is the main variable to be analysed in cases (there are many) like this? The stability? The bigger profit? The clear half cut in the season during winter, for example?

    Thanks!

    • Right Winger
      29 June 2017 at 5:09 pm #

      Hello again Gabriel,

      The main decision-making factor has to be a combination of personal choice and risk acceptance.

      Although I was pressed for time in making the analyses for the article above, I made sure, from the results I had at my disposal, to compile a portfolio containing an even balance of low, medium and high risk.

      So, yes, find the systems with the highest profit and incorporate them into a team of systems.

      Once you have your best team of systems planned out on paper, you may have to do some rearranging (i.e. substituting a split analysis in one league, for the whole season analysis instead, or vice versa), to ensure the portfolio is balanced from a risk perspective.

      It’s stability in the whole portfolio you are looking for, not necessarily within individual leagues, but if your inflection points show odds clusters above the zero odds in each system (remember page 3 of the User Guide), you will certainly make money in the long run.

      Thanks again for your question!

  10. jo
    30 June 2017 at 11:47 am #

    hi Right Winger,

    my current portfolio with 30 strategies has uneven balance of risk. 40% low risk, 16% low-medium risk, 33% medium risk and 10% medium-hight risk strategies. Majority, 67% of them, have no losing season out of 5 and substituting them to balance the risk more evenly would mean to incorporate strategies that have 1 losing season out of 5 instead of none and (or) less balanced hit rate and (or) less balanced number of matches and (or) lower profits over 5 seasons. Of course, you won’t see exact numbers to judge, but in order to balance the risk more evenly, would it be a better trade in your eyes?
    And what is better to you: a strategy that has zero odds below first infection point, but 1 losing season over 5 years, or zero odds above first inflection point, but profit in all 5 previous seasons?

    • Right Winger
      30 June 2017 at 1:45 pm #

      Hi Jo,

      The portfolio you have suggested is a little bottom heavy. In other words, you are going to see a larger percentage of games at lower odds, which will tend to produce a more jagged profit curve (you may not see your portfolio constantly in profit from the start).

      The main purpose of the lower odds games is to fill-in the gaps between the losing bets at higher odds. If you remember the inflection point graph in the 2016 Summer League Campaign spreadsheet, it was a zero-sum game up to odds of around 2.28. Because you have a higher proportion of lower risk strategies, you may see this figure pushed upwards (e.g. a zero sum game up to odds of 2.50?).

      Your profit curve will look more like the Summer League Campaign than the more efficient Winter League strategy. Your profits will be lower because you are playing a lower risk strategy. It will also be harder to recover losses if your wins are relatively small at that end of the spectrum. You might find it frustrating as the going will be slow – three steps forwards and two back. If it were me, I would find a better balance.

      It is always better to have the zero odds below the lower inflection point as every bet you make will be a value bet, which is a strategy that will guarantee long-term profits. If you start surrendering value, you will hamstring yourself. I would rather have value on my side than an analysis with all five seasons in profit.

      I hope this assists!

      • acepoint
        1 July 2017 at 10:42 am #

        An additional question: Isn’t the number of (possible) games in each league also important for the risk strategy? I would assume that for judging the portfolio’s risk you have to weight the risk in each league.

        A simple example:

        Two leagues, one with a low risk strategy (e.g. home wins between 1.8 – 2.2 and 200 games), combined with a medium-high to high risk strategy in another league (e.g. underdog wins between 4.5 and 7.5 and 30 games).

        • Right Winger
          2 July 2017 at 2:16 pm #

          Hello again Acepoint,

          Your example is a good one, dealing with two opposite strategies in two different leagues.

          With a lower risk strategy, you will always be faced with a higher number of bets than with a higher risk strategy, and vice versa.

          In other words, with lower odds, you need a higher number of winning bets to create the profit, and vice versa with higher odds.

          The risk of each strategy never changes – every bet within the inflection points chosen carries the implied probabilities of those odds. It is not affected by what happens in a different strategy bearing different implied probabilities.

          Combining the strategies or weighting them in accordance with each other to obtain some sort of overall measure of risk is therefore going to distort the picture.

          Therefore, what we don’t want to do is dilute the extremes of our risk spectrum (i.e. the lowest and highest ends). We therefore take each system in each league on its own merits and line them up alongside each other.

          I hope I have understood your question correctly.

  11. Gabriel
    30 June 2017 at 11:57 pm #

    Hi again, RW. I am very excited to the upcoming season in applying all the knowledge learned here in the last few months.

    A couple more questions:

    1) I found very healthy inflection points in 2nd divison leagues of England, Italy, France and Germany. You held to France only. Is there a specific reason? Also, these other 3 have very good liquidity. Why not them? Aren’t they better and more liquid than Croatian, for example?

    2) About odds movement: would it be correct to collect data from footballdata (friday 18h) and oddsportal (closing odds) to compares odds movement per league and per bet type (HDAFU) to try to antecipate betting movements? That would help, in my point of view, to place bets before the one hour ante post. Does that make any sense or it is impossible to antecipate those movements due to news about the teams at the last hour or so? Does this enormous effort compensate? Also, oddsportal collects opening odds x closing odds. Now, that would be enormous work because one cant copy paste these data. Please, some kind words about this topic.

    Best regards!

    • Right Winger
      2 July 2017 at 2:38 pm #

      Hi Gabriel,

      Your question is worthy of a series of articles, so I will try and be brief!

      We tend to look at only the top-tier leagues in each country because they are far more stable in their composition than any of the leagues below (and therefore give more reliable results).

      For example, in France Ligue 1, 65% of teams have been ‘ever-present’ in the five seasons from 2012-17 (and also in the five seasons from 2011-16). Compare this with Ligue 2, and you will see that the latter has only a 35% rate of ever-present teams during those same periods.

      The fact that the composition of lower leagues is so greatly affected by teams leaving/joining as a result of relegation/promotion creates a good deal of statistical noise. Results just aren’t as reliable because there are fewer games involving the same ‘established’ teams each season.

      Ligue 2 is the only second tier we look at purely because of the prevalance of one particular bet type, which is almost unique to this league.

      In reply to point 2, unfortunately, Football-data.co.uk collects its data at two separate times during a week. Fridays for weekend games and Mondays (I believe) for midweek games, which is why we need a more reliable benchmark for odds.

      Oddsportal includes time stamps for when the odds were recorded and also red/green arrows indicating which way the odds have moved (from the opening odds of each bookmaker to the odds currently displayed).

      If you study Oddsportal from the opening of the market in any particular round of games not yet played and watch/record the odds as they change during the ante post period, then you will have a good idea of how the market moves. I can say that with a lot of experience watching odds movements, the trends are fairly predictable, and help us judge when we can place bets at optimum prices.

      This also helps us avoid congestion on days where we can see there may be a glut of bets all needing to be placed within a short space of time – we can place them further in advance and still get prices within the inflection points, sometimes a lot better than the closing odds.

      Therefore, there is no need to collect data from more than one point during the ante post period for the inflection points analysis.

      I hope this helps.

  12. Simon
    4 July 2017 at 11:06 pm #

    I won’t mention the particular league this question relates to so as not to give away any specific content, but was wondering if I could get an opinion on something please.

    It’s a first half workbook, and of particular interest to me is the draw bet type, which gives a reasonably profitable medium risk (I think) system. The profit curve increases smoothly from odds of 3.22 up until 3.38 and then levels off briefly before dropping off and then increasing again smoothly.

    So it seems there is sweet spot in the lower odds range, followed by a brief period of statistical noise and then another decent profit increase. So I looked at 3 things in detail here; the first rising portion of the curve, the second rising portion, and then the entire curve.

    I found the following:

    Odds 3.22 – 3.38: Profit 5072, zero odds 2.43, hit rate 41.13%, yield 35.97, 28 total bets, losing streak 8.

    Odds 3.5 – 3.68: Profit 4659, zero odds 2.73, hit rate 36.6%, yield 30.45, 31 total bets, losing streak 9

    Both of those sets of odds ranges were in profit 4 out of 5 seasons. The gap between the 2 systems is the statistical noise you mentioned in the article.

    Then I looked at Odds 3.22 – 3.68 to see what effect the statistical noise had on the outcome, and found this….Profit 7536, zero odds 2.93, hit rate 34.17, yield 17.28, 87 total bets, losing streak 9. Interestingly it was in profit 5 out of 5 seasons.

    My first option would be simply to go with the system with inflection points 3.22 -3.68, which to me looks good. I could also go with the entire odds range of 3.22 – 3.68 to access the higher profit at the expense of hit rate, yield, and having to place more bets.

    Then I thought to myself, well why not just run both systems for the first half? They don’t conflict with each other, they are the same bet type in the same league, all I’m doing is cutting out an unprofitable section between 2 very steady portions of the curve. And by doing so I would increase the 5 season profit by 4659 and only need to place 30 extra bets, taking the total estimated bets for this first half system to 59.

    Does this sound feasible to you given the figures I have found? Or would I be better served here by just going with the 3.22 – 3.38 system?

    Thanks.

    • Right Winger
      5 July 2017 at 12:31 pm #

      Hi Simon,

      For us, the decision is not to run split systems in the same league.

      As mentioned in Page 1 of the User Guide, we have found that the synergy effect gained of running only the best single system from a league is detrimentally affected if you begin running competing systems in the same league.

      Therefore, we would suggest choosing just one of the three options you have outlined. Either go with the longer 3.22-3.68 cluster (more bets but higher potential profit), or choose one of the two segments within this cluster, i.e. the 3.22-3.38 or 3.50-3.68.

      Of the two smaller segments, the first is better (higher profit, fewer bets).

      Ultimately, the choice is yours and is probably easier to make once you have a rough idea what the risk profile of your portfolio is after you have highlighted the best systems in each league.

      Remember, try to keep the portfolio as a whole as balanced as you can. Choose whichever system adds or maintains balance to the portfolio as a whole.

      I hope this is clear!

  13. simon
    5 July 2017 at 1:25 pm #

    Thanks for the reply, that makes sense. Focus on the best only.

    At present the 3.22 – 3.68 odds cluster is the one I had chosen for that league for the 1st half, and would be one of the medium risk systems. Then for the 2nd half in that league there is a solid favourite system that I had chosen as a low risk.

    I think I’m almost there really when it comes to the portfolio – but am just tinkering to see where I can make things better, if that’s possible.

    There are 20 systems I have assembled in total; 4 low risk, 5 low-medium risk, 6 medium risk and 5 medium-high/High risks. In fairness I have modelled it in large part on the successful one you illustrated, to get a similar balance.

    I’m not a high risk type of person though, preferring moderate risk with a tinge of something higher risk included. Some of the underdog systems I have analysed with big profits but come with between 20-30 game losing streaks are something I’d rather stear clear of! With what I have now, 6 of the systems have double figure losing streaks, but all under 20. That’s palatable for me especially as the lower risk systems balance that out with the longer winning streaks.

    I know I won’t make the portfolio perfect (doubt that is possible anyway) since this is my first attempt, but overall I’m happy with the way it looks so far. All that remains is to see how it fares in a couple of weeks when the first games start.

    • Right Winger
      5 July 2017 at 1:51 pm #

      Hello again Simon,

      Don’t worry, there is no such thing as the ‘perfect portfolio’ but I’m afraid you will need to get used to the ‘high risk’ element as it is a vital constituent of the whole mix, especially if you are going to achieve profits worthy of the time you’ll need to run the operation.

      Bookmakers rely to a certain extent on the psychology of the majority of punters to make their profits. People tend to back lower priced favourites (usually under-priced) because they think they are more likely to win, and also because they are scared of backing a rank outsider.

      Running a mixed risk portfolio allows you to gamble on the higher prices (and reap the higher rewards), because the lower priced bets provide a safety net.

      It sounds like you have a good understanding of the concepts we have outlined, so, good luck – hope it all goes well for you!

  14. jo
    6 July 2017 at 12:56 am #

    Hi Right Winger,

    can you explain more in detail how do you compile Inflection Points graph? Odds are ranked from 1 to 200 in both summer and winter leagues campaigns. In Summer league campaign every number is repeated 4 times 7 times in a row, and every 8th number is repeated 5 times in a row (8, 16, 24 and so on). As I understand it’s because you get round cluster size number for odds rank no. 8 – 33.000, then for 16 – 66.000 and so on. Or, whenever you get closest to round number, for instance in winter league it’s odds rank 7 and cluster size of 63.980. Regarding my own portfolio, to make my own inflection points graph with data taken from HDAFU tables of the 2016-2017 winter leagues season, there are 1452 bets. 1452 divided by 200 equals 7.26. I tried to calculate the right sequence how to spread and repeat odds rank numbers evenly across those 200 and it didn’t work out. I finally finished with 202. But numbers of odds rank in some cases are repeated for 7 times and every 8th number for 8 times and then I have intervals where same odds rank numbers are repeated for 7 times 15 times in a row. A bit chaotic, but just to finish “ranking” around 200 because I struggle to calculate the right sequence. It was not the easiest thing to explain, but I hope you understand what I mean.

    • Right Winger
      6 July 2017 at 1:44 am #

      Hello Jo,

      Yes, I know exactly what you mean and I think you have described it rather eloquently.

      And I’m afraid my answer is going to disappoint you.

      I’m sorry but this is one of our ‘trade secrets’, and we are not prepared to divulge or give away for free this part of our intellectual property.

      The clustering sequence is just a small part of the HDAFU table compilation process. There are other bits of the jigsaw you haven’t mentioned, which are also essential to know and get right when putting the tables together.

      And some of the formulas needed to calculate vital areas of the tables will not be found in the actual tables themselves.

      Of course, from a personal perspective, I am 100% proficient in putting the tables together. I’m very fast as I know exactly what I’m doing, and even have the raw data set-out in an optimum design to copy and paste nicely into the template.

      But even at a lightning pace, it still takes me at least 20 minutes to put a single table together (more than an hour for one league), and then more time to review that everything is okay and cross-checking nicely.

      Today’s product is the culmination of several years of work. We allow people to buy the tables but I’m afraid we will never reveal the recipe for making them.

      And I would strongly advise against anyone trying to copy them as, if you don’t have the various formulas for certain parts of the table, you will not even know if the information you receive from your end product is correct or not.

      The probable knock-on effect would then be reliance on a totally false picture, which will only lead to disappointment (at the very least) when it comes to investing money on it.

      This is therefore our health warning – put together your own tables at your own peril!

      There are over 100 steps involved, many of them requiring to be performed in a certain order – cracking the exact code and sequence is probably akin to the old statistical theory of countless monkeys on countless typewriters. (The Infinite Monkey Theorem). Good luck to anyone who can do it!

      Sorry again Jo!

      • jo
        6 July 2017 at 6:28 pm #

        No problem Right Winger, I understand.

        Regarding my portfolio, after your previous comment I made a lot of changes and now instead of low risk strategies, medium risk strategies makes it unbalanced: 19% low risk, 25% low-medium risk, 51% medium risk and 3% medium-high risk strategies. 31 strategy in total. I checked everything thoroughly and making any better balance would mean to exclude some strategies or leagues from betting. What can you say about portfolio when higher risk strategies, in this case medium risk, are dominant over the others? Is it a good idea to exclude some of them to make the portfolio more evenly balanced? Just two of all strategies have zero odds higher than first inflection point, but no more than 0.04.

        • Right Winger
          6 July 2017 at 8:56 pm #

          Hi Jo,

          I think I would be a little uncomfortable with a portfolio biased towards medium risk strategies.

          You have a fair enough representation of low/low-medium risk systems, but the higher end, in other words, medium-high and high risk strategies is hardly represented at all.

          With the portfolio you have suggested I imagine that you may see a profit, but it won’t come close to the type of figures we achieved in the 2016-17 Winter League Campaign.

          You need the higher odds bets to make the money. The smaller odds bets create the safety net to allow you to speculate on the higher risk bets. This is a key element of the portfolio approach.

          The old adage ‘speculate to accumulate’ applies to any form of investment – life is one big gamble in general. If you don’t include room to speculate in your portfolio, then I imagine you will perform a lot of work placing many bets, with perhaps a less than satisfactory outcome at the end.

          You could be looking at a yield far less than 10%. Too many small odds bets will make it harder to recover losses. See also my answer to Simon from yesterday at 1.51pm.

          In summary, I think your suggestion has the potential to make money, but you’ll have to have an exceptional season to see a profit size that will make all the work worthwhile. If your season is as bad as the reality check on page 5 of this article, you may even lose money.

          But if you’re looking for an introduction to gain a little experience running a multi-risk portfolio, then go with it. If it is going to lose, I think it will lose slowly, giving you the option to cut and run if you get fed up with it.

          I hope this is useful.

  15. Daniele
    7 July 2017 at 2:59 pm #

    Hello Right Winger,

    i am in the final stages of the analysis and i wanted to ask you for an opinion about the spread of risk of my portfolio. I have just selected the best systems (as far as i can tell) from each Championship, 39 systems in total. I have selected 4 low risk, 8 low-medium, 11 medium, 3 medium-high and 13 high risk systems. The ratio in % is: low 10%, low-medium 21%, medium 28%, medium-high 8% and high 33%. Looking at the spread on your campaigns i notice that i have slightly more systems at the upper and lower end and less in the medium range. So i want an opinion from you.. what do you think about my spread? Do you find it balanced or should i fine tune it to balance it more?

    Thanks, i’m really looking forward to the beginning of this season (in a week or so for the early championships)!

    • Right Winger
      7 July 2017 at 3:08 pm #

      Hello Daniele,

      I would be happier with a more even spread across the board.

      With fewer bets at the lower odds range, your portfolio will find it difficult to make-up for the losing streaks at the higher odds range.

      Whilst Jo’s portfolio (see 6th July above), has a chance of making money (as it is biased towards lower risk), I think your current arrangement will struggle more.

      Increase the low risk and medium-high risk bets and reduce the high risk bets for a better balance.

      Good luck!

      • Daniele
        8 July 2017 at 5:38 am #

        Thanks for your answer.

        I noticed though that in this article you stated that you chose a spread of 4 low, 6 low-medium, 6 medium and 6 high-medium/high, for a total of 22 systems. Looking at the spreadsheet of the campaign I see that the inflection points guidance as per Page 1 of this article does not exactly match what is stated above, and if we analyze the maximum inflection points of each system we count 3 low (max inflection point of 2.22), 2 low-medium (max inflection point of 2.85), 8 medium (max inflection point of 4.44), and 9 medium-high/high systems. Could you please clarify on this matter?

        For example, a system in your campaign have odds from 2.13 to 7.40. Don’t you classify it as high risk system? Or another system has odds from 4.25 to 5.25. Don’t you classify this as a medium-high system?

        I understand that the first system spread across all 5 categories, and the second have a spread between medium and medium-high. So how do we decide in which category they should fit in?

        Thanks!

  16. Right Winger
    8 July 2017 at 10:41 am #

    Hi Daniel,

    As mentioned in the article, the odds splits for the risk analysis are a ‘rough guide’ to get readers thinking about the composition of their portfolios, and to encourage people to balance their portfolios with an even spread of risk.

    The classifications stated for our 2016-17 portfolio are based to some degree on discretion (also mentioned as an adjustment factor above), and you will see from the 2016-17 Campaign workbook that some of our systems did indeed cross the thresholds of several odds’ bands.

    When this happens, we can never be truly exact but we can say from the start that the majority of the bets will fall into one or another of the odds brackets.

    Using the example you mentioned, in a system covering a range as wide as Greece between odds of 2.13-7.40, we know from the outset that there will be more bets at the lower end because it is a home win system. Indeed, the analysis showed the harmonic mean odds for the matches between these inflection points as 2.97, which further validated our decision to classify this system with low-medium status.

    The harmonic mean for the 110 bets placed was just over 3.00.

    As a reminder, the harmonic mean formula in Excel is =harmean(a1:a10), if the range of odds you are looking at encompasses cells A1 to A10.

    Perhaps our readers will come up with better ways of gauging the risk content of their portfolios, but the overarching message we are putting across in this article is that a healthy balance should always be sought.

    It’s not an exact science, maths never is, but hopefully we have guided you in the right direction.

    Another great question – thanks again!

    • Simon
      10 July 2017 at 12:32 pm #

      RW,

      I think you did a great job with explaining how you gauge the risk of the system within the context of a portfolio of systems.

      When getting the balance in mine as even as I could I relied to an extent on the workbook of your previous campaign to see how you yourself classified a system, taking into account things like the odds range, hit rates, yield, number of bets e.t.c. So it was interesting to see based on these things how you rated your own systems. I then looked at my own systems to see how they looked in terms of risk.

      I found the low risk and low-medium risk the easy ones to classify. I look for those systems to have a good length of winning streaks, low length of losing streaks, 50-60%+ hit rates, and of course meeting the 4 of 5 seasons in profit and 10%+ yield. Most of these systems have relatively small odds ranges.

      The ones I found a little more difficult to classify were those that had odds range more spread out, like the Greek example you gave. So applying the harmonic mean to it, gives that extra view point that I found helpful to see how risky a system is based on odds the majority of bets placed will be at.

      What I had done was analyse each league to identify the systems and then make a spreadsheet that listed each system for whole, 1st half, 2nd half, and show each of the systems features i.e hit rate, zero odds, yield e.t.c

      From that I selected those that I felt gave a balance and listed them in order from low risk to high. Applying the harmonic mean odds to each system then showed that the odds increased from low to high, which I think validated that I have my systems in the right sections of the risk profile and have a decent balance.

      That’s something I found useful in getting something I was finally happy with.

      Now, very much looking forward to the weekend to take things “live”.

      Good luck everyone and I wish you all the best for the upcoming season!

  17. Scott
    9 July 2017 at 7:05 am #

    Hi RW – sorry, but I’ve got a question you’ve probably been asked a million times about placement of bets.

    I’m currently sorting out getting some money onto Vodds in preparation for the winter season starting, and obviously anticipate being able to access the upper end of the odds range as a result.

    My questions are:

    1. In terms of bet selection, should I only be placing the bet if the max odds on oddsportal are within my strategy range? I’ve got a summer league campaign running at the minute and I tend to use the upper range as a guide but I always check if the top price looks anomalous – if it does, and if I can access odds within my range, I’ll place the bet. However, I’m never sure if I’m “breaking protocol” here and should be using the top price as the decision point, anomalous or not….I’m conscious there might not be a right answer to this but could you please expand a bit on how you weight your decision on selection.

    2. TIming is the other question. I’ve tended to look at the odds an hour or so before K-O and made my decision at that point. However, on occasion I’ll have a cheeky look just before K-O and can sometimes see that the odds have shifted markedly and I’m now in a position where I should be placing a bet. Should I ignore this and not place the bet, or is this now deemed an appropriate selection based on the late odds movement?

    Thanks again!

    • Right Winger
      10 July 2017 at 11:52 am #

      Hello Scott,

      To answer your questions seriatim:

      1) Yes, place the bet in accordance with the highest odds shown in Oddsportal, and yes, it is always a good thing to check for and preclude anomalous odds that haven’t updated for a while.

      As previously mentioned, we try and iron out the anomalous odds when putting together the analyses, and for the sake of good order, you should try and do the same when judging whether to place the bet if it is close to the outliers of your odds range.

      2) The HDAFU analyses are based on odds as close to the end of the ante post market as we can get them. If towards kick-off you realise that the odds have shifted a bet to within your inflection points then, yes, it is a valid bet to place.

      I hope this clarifies.

      • Scott
        21 July 2017 at 2:37 pm #

        Hi – thanks for your reply, and apologies for my delayed response to it. All makes perfect sense, thanks again for taking the time and for your excellent website.

  18. Michael
    10 July 2017 at 10:01 am #

    Hi Soccerwidow

    Please could you explain why you went with a system in Denmark despite the 2016/2017 season being the first season after major structural changes?

    I would have thought that that was risky in the sense that historical data is now not directly comparable to the new format.

    Asking because there’s other leagues with the same problem for the upcoming season, eg Bulgaria / Ukraine.

    Been having some good success with a summer leagues system thanks to your work, with roughly £1,200 profit since March.

    Thanks

  19. Right Winger
    10 July 2017 at 11:46 am #

    Hi Michael,

    I think I have answered this one before to some degree. (Page 2 of this article I believe?).

    We were aware that the Danish league format was changing in the second half of the season, hence why we chose to include just a first half season system.

    The new first half up to the winter break included straight-forward league matches, just as any other season before. The only difference likely was that there would be more matches encapsulated by our inflection points.

    Therefore, for all intents and purposes, the league was no different up to the break than before – just league games during the same part of the year in accordance with the analysis.

    Thanks for sharing your Summer League success story – keep in touch and let us know where you end up!

    All the best.

    • jo
      10 July 2017 at 1:41 pm #

      Hi Right Winger,

      since Danish league had only 1 season in new format, would it be better to skip the 2nd/whole season strategies from betting in the upcoming season?

  20. Right Winger
    10 July 2017 at 3:51 pm #

    Hi Jo,

    Personally, I don’t think it matters a great deal.

    The only important thing with the new format in Denmark is not to include any Relegation or Europa League play-off games in your strategy.

    Also, expect fewer numbers of games entering your inflection points in the second half of the season as there are fewer ‘league’ games after the winter break now.

    Check out our Summer & Winter League Calendar for a full summary of what to include and what not to bet on in each league.

  21. jo
    10 July 2017 at 5:17 pm #

    What can you say about my new portfolio, I have 28 strategies left, numbers and percentages are:

    5 or 17% low, 5 or 17% low-medium, 5 or 17% medium risk, 8 or 28% medium-high risk and 5 or 17% high risk strategies.

    • Right Winger
      10 July 2017 at 6:15 pm #

      Hi Jo,

      Looks like a much better balance than your initial effort.

      On face value, I would be happy with these numbers.

      Happy hunting!

  22. jo
    16 July 2017 at 11:39 pm #

    Hi Right Winger,

    regarding Ratchet & Stop-loss Simulation I don’t completely understand how ratchet system works. The first trigger +5% is when profits are 1947.00 (cell K1850). The second trigger is +15%, from 105% to 120% at cell I1854 although the profit increase from the last trigger is just 2631.3 units (4578.3-1947). And the next increase at cell I1855 is 15% although profit increase from the last trigger is just 2619 units. As far as I understand in these both cases increase should’ve been 10%, so why it’s 15%?

    • Right Winger
      17 July 2017 at 8:55 pm #

      Hello Jo,

      Sorry for the delay in replying – we are currently on holiday for the first time in over four years 🙂

      As per the article, the 5% increments are based on whole 000’s profit. There are four whole 000’s in 4,578.30, hence why it is 4 x 5% = 20% increment.

      The ratchet triggers are when the profit figure exceeds by at least 1,000 the previous highest profit point.

      The first trigger was at 1,947 (containing one whole thousand = +5% increment on original stake). The next trigger was activated at 4,578, the first time 1,947 was exceeded by 1,000 or more. (4,578 contains four whole thousands = +20% increment on original stake).

      I hope this is now clear!

  23. Andrei
    28 July 2017 at 7:23 am #

    Hello Soccerwidow!

    Firstly, I’d like to thank you sincere for the great job you are making. All the forecasting is really based on fundamental thinking and statistics, and not on enthusiasm, which gives us (the punters) the opportunity to earn money for the long term. I’ve managed to understand the logic base of your system and I would say it’s a quite impressive job.

    In the same manner, I would like to ask you some questions regarding the odds that you use for statistics and betting:

    1. What odds do you use for historical statistics? Example: football-data.co.uk there is a paragraph that offers statistical information for several leagues. They have odds as: averages of the bookmakers, for different bookmakers apart and closing odds of Pinnacle. What are the best odds to use for identifying the inflection points? Personally I chose the average odds, as I intend to make the bet 1 day before the matches (Please correct me if I’m wrong 🙂 ).

    2. When is the best time to place the bets? As I said, for me is optimal to place bets one day before the match starts. But as you know, the odds are moving and sometimes some matches that has been picked up (the odds are in the established range) can go out of the range till the start of the match. In result what is the best time to place the bet and what historical odds should be the base for identifying the inflection points?

    As I understand these to elements should have some correlation between them.

    Thank you for your support and the great job you are making!!! It really is something interesting and totally different from the information existing on the web.

    • Right Winger
      28 July 2017 at 9:49 pm #

      Hi Andrei,

      We do not use football-data.co.uk for odds in connection with the HDAFU system betting tables.

      The odds they use are taken at different points in time and do not provide a reliable benchmark (Joseph at Football-data.co.uk has advised me that odds are collected around 6pm on a Friday in advance of weekend/Monday games, and around the same time on a Tuesday for midweek games).

      To state what is actually said on their site: “Fixtures and betting odds for upcoming games are made available, collected Friday afternoons for weekend fixtures, and on Tuesday afternoons for midweek games”.

      We use the highest odds as near to the close of the ante post market as we can find, and Oddsportal is the only site currently providing this.

      Many people have asked the same question on the best time to place bets. To save myself from repeating anything, please read the comments above, and also the comments on the Summer League summary. You should find all the answers you are looking for.

      Thank you for your kind words and best wishes.

  24. Scott
    31 July 2017 at 9:28 am #

    Hi again

    Just something that occurred to me when placing bets over the weekend, and I wondered if it was something you had ever looked into…

    When using a back the draw system, I feel much more comfortable backing the draw when the two teams are relatively well matched than I do when there is a strong favourite at home. Even though both matches might fall into the odds range, it would seem likely that the former would have more chance of actually ending in a draw than the latter – I often wonder if the odds for the draw aren’t just a balancing figure?

    Anyway, this led me to wondering whether you had ever given any consideration to HO/AO quotients when considering systems that back the draw? Its something I was thinking about looking into with my current systems to see if there’s anything in it…

    • Right Winger
      31 July 2017 at 10:58 am #

      Hello Scott,

      Bookmakers rely to a huge extent on the psychology of punters who (wrongly) believe that lower priced favourites have a better chance of winning all the time. As a result, favourites are usually under-priced because the majority of punters want to bet on them. People are by very nature risk-averse. Give someone the choice of a 1.20 favourite or an underdog at 8.00, and nine-out-of-ten punters will opt for the favourite.

      The weight of money therefore received by the bookmakers on big favourites drives their prices (odds) even further down as they attempt to balance their books. You must therefore appreciate that in order to achieve as much parity as possible, the bookmakers will reduce prices on the favourites to manage/control the extent of risk (liability), and raise prices on the draw and/or the underdog to attract money on these outcomes. Only by performing this juggling act can they achieve as close a balance as possible between the three outcomes. And of course, heavy favourites do not always win. In fact, they win less often than their (often under-priced) odds imply. This is how bookmakers make their margins.

      All I can say is don’t fall into the trap of this false-belief system about a shorter price having a better chance than a longer one. Odds prices are purely a measurement of the popularity of the event (odds are driven by public opinion), and often bear no resemblance to the probabilities of the outcomes.

      Just about the only time when prices are set according to historical results and statistics, plus some anticipation of what the public will think, is at the very start of the market when bookmakers publish their initial prices.

      Stand back and look at the situation from a distance. There are three outcomes: home win, draw, away win. The prize is behind one of these doors. Which door are you going to open? The chance is a basic one-in-three before you begin to take into consideration any extraneous factors affecting the fixture in question.

      In answer to your question, both the draw odds and the underdog prices are balancing factors. The economics of the situation in response to human nature says that they have to be. But think again. The home odds are also a balancing factor. Only one of the three outcomes can happen – the money riding on the other two needs to offset the payout on the winning outcome, and hopefully provide a small margin of profit at the same time. The bookmakers can never achieve this on every single match, which is why they employ a huge portfolio of games to bet on each week. An overround of 5% on their entire book of matches per week is enough to create handsome profits during the course of a season, even if they don’t make a profit every week.

      The profits to be made from gambling, from either side of the fence (bookie or punter), are a pure numbers game. The larger the portfolio of bets with overround/value on your side, the more exponential the profits are.

      Regarding Home Odds/Away Odds quotients, this is something we explain in great detail in our Odds Calculation Course (using the Over/Under ‘X’ Goals market as the example).

      There are many ways to skin a cat. Using inflection points and using quotients are just two of them. My advice is to get used to one system and stick with it until you master it. Don’t try and become a ‘Jack of all trades’.

      Believe me, the time it takes to try and juggle too many different approaches and get them all finely-tuned at the same time is not worth the effort.

      I hope this helps and thanks for the interesting questions!

  25. Tony
    5 August 2017 at 1:15 am #

    First of all,well done!
    And I know you are now expecting a but.
    But I’m going to be slightly negative.
    Isn’t it quite unlikely that most people would be able to bet £100 stakes 1000 times a year without either not getting the price on betfair or getting restricted or even banned by bookies?
    I dont know if that’s the case because I dont bet on 90 minute markets but going by what I’ve read online I suspect that it isn’t easy to make £20,000 from betting such markets without problems.
    Also,may I ask whether you had Frej to draw or win at Sirius in late October 2016?

  26. Right Winger
    5 August 2017 at 2:36 am #

    Hello again Tony,

    Well, we had no problem flying under the radar at stakes of this level, and none of the bets were placed with Betfair.

    We are fans of multi-bookmaker platforms such as Vodds, which give access to Pinnacle, SBOBET, and other sharp Asian bookies, where turnover is appreciated and accounts are never closed or limited. We also utilise individual accounts with 5Dimes, BetVictor, Bet365, Smarkets, and a few others.

    The hit rate is usually around 35% on the mixed portfolios we employ, so the bookmakers do see the benefit from us of a lot of losing bets during the course of the year. And not all of the profits get booked against any single account – the final tally is spread around nicely, with the minimum of withdrawals (if any) made from the bookmaker accounts.

    The exchange and the multi-platforms are where the withdrawals happen.

    No, we didn’t get involved in the match you mention, but then again, the only second division league we cover is France 2. Too much statistical noise in the lower divisions with higher turnovers of teams.

    Hope all is well with you and thanks once again for your contribution.

    • Simon
      8 August 2017 at 12:36 pm #

      RW,

      In preparation for the winter leagues campaign I set myself up with accounts at places like smarkets and vodds, in addition to other existing accounts I had already.

      One thing I certainly don’t want to happen is to be restricted at the traditional bookmakers if winnings build up. As if that happens, it puts a spanner in the works so to speak.

      So I’m very interested to learn a little about the movement of money from a traditional book to the exchange for withdrawal purposes.

      In your opinion what would be the most effective/efficient way to move the money?

      I get the principle that you just want to look like a casual punter to the bookmaker and thus fly under the radar. I’m not experienced at all with “matched betting” and would hate to lose hard earned winnings by making a mistake!

      Are there any simple methods you use to get your winnings from bookmaker to exchange that you could share please?

      Thanks in advance.

      • Right Winger
        8 August 2017 at 2:50 pm #

        Hi Simon,

        Firstly, as you have Smarkets and Vodds, I would imagine the majority of your bets are likely to be with these accounts, with less activity on your other accounts.

        Sadly, the only effective and realistic way of transferring money from bookmaker to exchange/multi-platform is via matched betting. It’s a fairly easy procedure once you get your head around it, but like everything worthwhile having, it is a skill that needs to be learned.

        I appreciate your apprehension, but can only say that you should never be afraid of learning new skills. There are plenty of sites on the Net which teach this skill. As ever, paper test it until you thoroughly understand the concept.

        With matched betting, the trick is to understand how the market moves and to be able to anticipate odds movements. The aim is to make enough of an arbitrage to cover the exchange commission rate, so that no money is lost in the transaction. If using a multi-bookmaker platform such as Vodds, this is not an issue.

        Of course, if you’re not fussy, or don’t have the time for precision, you can always decide to surrender a little profit, whichever side of the bet comes in.

        Look for bets that have uneven chances – e.g. 40% (2.50 odds) – 60% (1.67 odds) and aim to place the smaller percentage bet with the bookmaker. Of course, not every bet will go your way – some back bets will ultimately win, and therefore increase your bookmaker balance rather than reducing it. But if you always aim to back the smaller percentage bet (not the smaller odds) with the bookie, then in the long-run you will end up transferring your balances.

        If you aim to make arbitrage on every transaction through shrewd use of odds movements, then this pays for your time in performing the transactions.

        For me, it’s a nice challenge – I enjoy doing it because at the end of the day it is purely a housekeeping exercise, which I receive a reward (the arbs) for performing. The frustration of seeing bookmaker balances build-up unintentionally is tempered by the fact that the bottom line is still increasing.

        Do your matched betting in small chunks. Choose even-figured stakes with the bookie (i.e. a flat figure of say £100, rather than say £101.23). Do it only on the premier leagues in different countries. If you start using obscure fixtures for this exercise, you’ll get picked up quicker.

        Lastly, try and get both sides of the bet placed before the event goes live. You really don’t want to be exposed in-play waiting for a price to drop before you place the second bet – Sod’s law always seems to operate when the game goes against you, and the price you are looking for slides further and further out of reach.

        My advice is to attend to the matched betting side of the book-keeping once your campaign has finished. You’ll then hopefully have sufficient funds in exchange or multi-platform accounts to lever out the bookmaker account money. You don’t want to leave yourself short of funds during the campaign with money tied-up in non-portfolio bets.

        I hope this all helps!

        • simon
          9 August 2017 at 12:26 pm #

          RW,

          Thanks for the reply and advice.

          Interestingly enough, although I do find Pinnacles odds to be streets ahead of most other bookmakers, they only seem to be bettered by one book – that’s Marathonbet when underdogs are concerned. So I find myself with most of my winnings now sitting in marathonbet, with vodds a close 2nd.

          I think I will paper test the matched betting side of things and perhaps try and get a little bit out of marathon bet and into smarkets/vodds as I go along.

          • Right Winger
            9 August 2017 at 1:53 pm #

            Hello again Simon,

            I am assuming that you are accessing Pinnacle through Vodds?

            Yes, both Pinnacle and Marathonbet are low margin bookmakers. In other words, they carry less overround than most bookies, a consequence of which, is higher prices to the customer (and higher popularity).

            Their idea is to increase turnover in this fashion, which offsets the fact that their profit margins are smaller than most bookies.

            Because they have to work harder for their money, their prices adjust far more often than other, higher overround bookies. The juggling act they have to perform to maintain a balanced portfolio is therefore more precise than others – it has to be.

            But their strategy has to cap the prices on the underdogs – because of the reduced overround they don’t want a huge influx of money on the favourites. This is why you will often see Pinnacle and Marathonbet offering better prices than most on the underdog and the draw – they effectively lead with these prices and then dip in and out of the market with occasional best price on the favourites to maintain balance.

            Good luck with the matched betting. I remember my first ever effort years ago. Instead of making a profit out of a free bet, I ended up with no profit at all on either side of the bet – a zero sum game! Sometimes, you have to learn the hard way! 🙂

  27. timmyp
    5 August 2017 at 5:07 pm #

    hi RW

    how are you doing at the start of this winter league? I’m struggling with results so far, and was just wondering if its the same for you.

  28. Right Winger
    5 August 2017 at 10:54 pm #

    Hello again Tim,

    Yes, sometimes the start of a campaign is a little slow going until all the leagues have commenced and the number of bets per week rises, especially if you are starting off your first campaign and don’t yet have the optimum level of synergy to benefit from.

    But I would say that it is way too early to make a judgment on the Winter Leagues yet bearing in mind that most of them haven’t started. If you are worried at this stage of the season, I would suggest cutting back your stakes with a stop loss mechanism (as explained in this article) until things pick up again.

    Or stopping altogether until all the big leagues join in next week. Paper test in the meantime.

    I can’t comment on your personal situation as I am sure no two portfolios are alike, but from our perspective, we are running a large portfolio containing concurrent Summer and Winter Leagues, which is doing fine.

    As I have said so many times before, portfolio betting is a numbers game – the larger your number of value bets in a round, the better the performance will be.

    Tim, I hope this gives you the reassurance you were looking for. Keep reading all of the HDAFU Tables articles until you are totally sure you are doing the right thing. Keep an eye especially on the comments sections as these contain a lot of detail and tips not necessarily included in the articles.

    Fingers crossed for you.

  29. Simon
    5 August 2017 at 11:38 pm #

    TimmyP,

    Just wanted to reply to you and give you a snipped of the experience I had had with the portfolio style of betting. Perhaps like yourself, this is my first time running this kind of thing, but so far results have been good for.

    The first thing I would say is that I modelled my portfolio closely on the one that the article/workbook on this website described – as i wanted to get the balance right.

    Of all the systems that I had selected, betting began with just 2 systems to begin with, Russian premier league (favorite) and Poland Ekstraklasa (Underdog). Then in the last 2 weeks Belgium, France ligue 1/2, Czech Liga and Portugal Primeira liga have joined in. There will be more systems coming live for me in the next 2 weeks also.

    Out of respect for RW and soccer widow I won’t say exactly what the systems are so as to not give away content of the tables, but results for me have been positive. I’m only betting £50 per game since this my first time doing this.

    In total since betting commenced I have placed 44 bets; 21 wins and 23 losses, 47.73% hit rate and £839.60 in profit. Yield is 38.16%

    So for me, I feel I have done better than expected and things may slow down for me sometime soon.

    For you, TimmyP, I hope things pick up as more leagues come in to play. I don’t suppose any of our portfolios will be the same, so it’s hard to directly compare results at any stage.

    Anyway the point of this reply is to say that it seems possible to emulate RW and Soccerwidow’s very successful campaigns. Keep faith in your method and all the very best to you for the rest of the football season.

    • Right Winger
      5 August 2017 at 11:49 pm #

      Simon,

      That’s very kind of you to make the effort and spend your time encouraging Tim and others like him, no doubt.

      Glad to hear things are going well for you. Don’t forget to put the brakes on with a stop loss when you hit the doldrums, and accelerate with a ratchet when you have a following wind!

      All the best for now.

  30. Dennis
    10 August 2017 at 4:00 pm #

    You had a 2000 € bankroll at a bet size of 100 playing 18 leagues/systems? So 5% stake per bet? Isn’t that to optimistic?

    • Right Winger
      10 August 2017 at 5:07 pm #

      Hello Dennis,

      I think the 2,000 unit starting bank figure you are referring to is from the staking plan simulation, which is part of the Winter League Campaign spreadsheet.

      Please note that this part of the spreadsheet is only a simulation, and the 2,000 unit starting bank shown there is an arbitrary figure just to demonstrate the ratchet and stop-loss trigger points, and to introduce people to the subject of managing effective staking plans.

      But, in any case, with our experience of running these systems and seeing losing streaks tempered by the ‘portfolio effect’, 5% is not an unreasonable sum, especially if you are prepared to reduce it or manage it with a stop loss mechanism if things do not go well initially.

      If you do implement a stop loss strategy, then you must also use a ratchet when things are going well.

      Our actual bank balance was in fact different to the simulation (it was whatever we had in our accounts at the time), but we would still use a virtual figure, in this case 2,000 units, on which to base our triggers. In other words, a benchmark for performance going forwards.

      I hope this makes sense and thanks for your question.

  31. Alex
    10 August 2017 at 5:11 pm #

    Hi,

    Firstly I just want to say congratulations and thank you on publishing such great work! I’ve just started looking through my chosen leagues and have a few questions:

    1. First things first – I don’t have the funds to purchase a significant amount of your workbooks just yet but from the few I have purchased I’ve chosen systems with either 4/5 or 5/5 profitable seasons. Until I can afford more how many systems would you say is the minimum to create a balanced portfolio?

    2. In one of my systems (I won’t name which one) I’ve done some analysis and found a system that almost seems too good to be true. It’s a Back the Draw system in the first half of the season, and according to the Inflection Points graph the best system looks to be backing a draw in literally every single game in that league. Now, there is a little statistical noise in the middle but the profit at either end of that breakeven stretch looks to outweigh that small negative. Is backing the same result in every single match actually a viable strategy or should I try to hone it down (reducing the amount of bets but almost certainly reducing profitability?)

    • Right Winger
      10 August 2017 at 6:44 pm #

      Hello Alex,

      Yes, we have certainly used systems in the past that have employed all matches in a league during a season, but I would suggest analysing both halves of your profitable inflection points curve separately to find out if one is substantially better than the other.

      Look separately at the five seasons’ results for both profitable portions of your curve. You may find one section is supported by an anomalous season, or is perhaps not in profit in a couple of seasons? Maybe both portions combine to give a good overall result, but with more depth to your analysis, you may see that one is actually supporting the other.

      If there still isn’t much difference between the two after filtering our the statistical noice in-between, then perhaps it is worth going with all games.

      But, we are looking for the synergy of the best individual systems we can find in each league rather than having competing systems in the same league. Taking all games will certainly cost you more time (to place the bets) and will ultimately reduce yield (as the final profit on the portfolio will be spread thinner over more bets). Pay attention to the estimated yield of your entire portfolio when making this decision. How is this figure affected by taking one of the profitable systems and not the other?

      Your losing streaks may also be stretched a little in the wrong direction with more bets.

      My advice would be to take the best portion of the curve only. It’s like saying in general that we like eating chicken, but instead of trying to eat a whole one and giving yourself indigestion, stick to the bit you enjoy most (the breast in my case, the legs in Soccerwidow’s case!).

      Our usual advice applies to the size of portfolio: you’ll need one large enough to project an estimated minimum of 500 bets during the duration of your campaign. (The law of large numbers). But don’t use this as an excuse to extend a system to a whole league; you’ll get better results across the board by playing only the best portion of the curve in each league you run.

      I hope this helps your thinking and thanks for the good questions!

      • Alex
        10 August 2017 at 10:46 pm #

        Thank you for the detailed answer. I’ll definitely delve into that further tonight and come up with hopefully the best system.

        Just one more quick question – Do you use the Backing By Team section to further refine your system? Sticking with my “Backing the Draw” example from above I can see that if I bet on a draw in every game over the last five seasons I’d be massively in profit, but delving into the team section I can see that certain teams aren’t profitable.

        For example, let’s call them “Team A”. If we had backed a draw in every match in which Team A were the visiting side we would have lost over £1,000, with only one of the five seasons resulting in a profit. Do you further increase the ROI of your systems by excluding these proven unprofitable teams from the system?

        • Alex
          11 August 2017 at 12:53 am #

          And one more question (sorry)

          I remember you mentioning about clearly unprofitable systems representing good lay opportunities which obviously makes sense. My question is how you construct these Lay systems?

          For example if you’re laying an outcome between inflection points of 1.45 and 1.68 do you alter your lay stake so that your liability is always constant. So a higher stake would be used on 1.45 odds than 1.68 to keep the liability constant?

          • Right Winger
            11 August 2017 at 1:10 am #

            Alex,

            Firstly, we don’t like ante post lay systems purely because with exchanges, the lay odds have to be above the back odds, and of course exchanges also charge commission.

            Both of these elements combine to remove a lot of the value or ‘edge’ and make lay systems rather painful exercises.

            You must also realise that laying is the bookmaker model when they offer back bets for sale.

            When you understand that overrounds (the bookmakers’ profit margins) are relatively small (perhaps just 2% with the sharpest books such as Pinnacle), you will then realise that the profits to be had from ante post laying also have to be relative to these small percentages.

            In our experience, ante post lay betting is only beneficial from an arbitrage perspective where profits are again very small, or to take advantage of bigger odds movements in-play.

            We have tried many ante post lay systems over the years and it is soul-destroying when you hit a losing patch. It then takes many more winning bets to recover and get back into a stride. It’s usually a case of three steps forward and then two and-three-quarters back, sometimes more.

            Matching the way the backing stakes are placed by having fixed-win/liability lay bets is a guarantee of a roller-coaster ride. It is also a real pain trying to apply ratchets and stop loss mechanisms to lay systems.

            However, if this still hasn’t dissuaded you from looking at lay opportunities then just read the HDAFU tables’ results in reverse. Follow the instructions in the Notes Tab to set Odds Toggle and Commission Rate figures, and then look at the largest negative figures (treating them in your mind as positive ones). Reverse in your mind the winning and losing streaks too.

            You may be able to find something too good to miss out on, but personally speaking, we stick to backing as it’s a far more consistent profit curve. Lay curves are more jagged with more pronounced statistical noise.

            We’ve long battled with ourselves as to whether to show lay betting in the tables (we once did include them), but we have finally decided that if we’re not comfortable with it ourselves, then we won’t actively promote it to our customers.

            I hope this explains.

        • Right Winger
          11 August 2017 at 12:55 am #

          Hello again Alex,

          The ‘Backing by Team’ tab is an old favourite of many people and we keep it in the tables for those who want to investigate portfolios of teams, rather than betting solely on odds.

          But for the purposes of this article, yes, we do sometimes filter the data tab by teams (home and away) to see if there are any ‘usual suspects’ that constantly let the system down.

          This is more likely in leagues that are dominated by just one or two teams, season in, season out.

          Just filter out the teams and hide the relevant rows, before re-sorting back into chronological order and amending the formulas (as per the User Guide).

          Another good point! You’re on the right track.

          • Alex
            11 August 2017 at 1:46 am #

            Hi Right Winger,

            Thanks for that, I’ll take your laying advice on board and stick to back bets for now at least!

            Good idea on the filtering out teams on the Data tab, I was just thinking of using the Team tab and excluding those teams out of my bets but your way means I can directly compare the Yield and ROI for systems with and without said teams. Seems I’ve got a lot of research to do tomorrow!

            By the way, regarding my earlier post about the system betting on every match – You were right. I filtered and compared the two sides of the statistical noise and found one system that smashes the other out of the water! A yield of almost 50% (compared to 30% for the system before the noise and 25% for backing a draw in all games.) Not to mention the fact that 5/5 seasons are profitable. Overall, the system I have chosen to go for yields an average £3000 profit per season in just 61 average bets, compared to £3900 profit on average over 156 bets if betting on every game!

  32. AM0751
    12 August 2017 at 9:35 am #

    Hi Right Winger,

    I have been reading the comments earlier in these threads about applying ratchet/stop-loss systems to individual systems in the portfolio.

    Of course, the same numbers can’t be applied as for the whole portfolio when it comes to trigger points, as the numbers will be effectively split in

    Is there any way to determine an individual ratchet/stop-loss system for each system in the portfolio, or could you give me some suggestions?

    Maybe a relation with LLS, or average expected bets per round?

    I am very keen to hear your thoughts on this.

    • Right Winger
      13 August 2017 at 10:19 am #

      Hello AM0751,

      Of course it is possible to run each system separately within the portfolio, but our leaning now is probably towards ratchet and stop-loss triggers applied to the portfolio as a whole. (Contrary to my thoughts in the comment above to Jo on 27th June, 7.45pm).

      The synergy of the whole is what makes things happen, and this is what you should trade on to maximise profits.

      It starts to become quite complicated managing each system according to its own merits; it will certainly cost more time calculating what the situation is after each round of matches, and also when having to think about and place bets with different stakes.

      If the money is already in the bank, then increase stakes across the board. Micro-managing interferes with the synergy of the portfolio approach.

      Looking more in-depth at the 2016 and 2016-17 campaigns, expanding upon the calculations, and thinking the thing through, we have decided that keeping it simple is the better approach. Manage the portfolio as a whole. The detrimental effect of losing rounds (stop loss incidence) will be tempered more by the benefits of greater leaps forward if ratchet triggers are based on total profits.

      I hope this is clear and thanks for your valuable contribution.

  33. Corner
    17 August 2017 at 9:10 pm #

    Hello Right Winger,

    i did a lot of research and paper trading to get familiar with the HDAFU Tables.
    My biggest problem at the moment is to identify false odds at oddsportal.
    If you have a big gap between the upper and lower inflection point there is no problem.

    But if there is a small gap, two things can happen.

    You bet on the wrong games or you miss the right ones.

    I give you two examples:

    Russian Premier League:
    09.08.2017 FK Rostov – Dynamo Moscow 1:0

    Highest odds for home win: 2.2 (Tipico). The payout is 104 %. The timestamp shows (opening odds)

    If the upper inflection point would be at 2.16 you don´t bet on the game when you trust oddsportal. The majority of all bookmakers are under 2.0 for the home win.
    My interpretation: False odds.The right decision is to bet on the game. Pinnacle is at 1.98. It was a winner.

    Czech 1.Liga:
    13. August 2017 16:00 Teplice – Jablonec 1:1
    Highest odds for a draw: 3.75 (bet365). The payout is 100,8%. The majority of all bookmakers are under 3.6 for a draw.

    If your lower inflection point is above 3.65 you would bet on this game. I use a multibookmaker platform like vodds. The highest odds for a draw at kickoff was 3.59.

    My interpretation: False odds. I guess i was wrong here. The Payout is 100,8 %, looks Ok and the time stamp from bet365 shows the last change 15 minutes before the kick off. The price was not available on my multibookmaker platform with Pinnacle and Betfair. I thought this game has false odds. I missed a game which was a winner ?

    You wrote an article “How to find false odds at oddsportal”. The examples are very obivious. A Game with a payout above 140 % payout.
    I bought the the english premier league HDAFU Table. I found no payout above 101 %.
    When i check the odds at oddsportal i find games with higher payout for the english premier league. It must take you hours to correct all the odds above 101 % payout.

    My questions:
    Is a game with more than 101 % payout a game with potential false odds?
    Can Betfair without commission be an indicator to check if the highest oddsportal odds are Ok ?
    Can you give me some hints what you do to check if the game has false odds when it´s not so obvious?

    Thanks for your tremendous work

    • Right Winger
      21 August 2017 at 5:13 pm #

      Hi Corner,

      Wow! Just a few questions there – you’ll have to forgive me if my answers are short and sweet…

      1) Yes, it does take hours to manually correct odds in connection with our products. We have to do it simply because there is no reliable benchmark source of odds available (free or paid) anywhere in the Net.

      2) You will find it difficult to find arbitrage on any 1X2 set of odds (i.e. payout above 100%) in the final few minutes before kick-off, but don’t confuse positive payout (underround) with overround – they are exact opposites.

      3) The vast majority of games in the final moments before kick-off will therefore have a payout less than 100%. You should check anything with 100% payout or over before committing to the bet. This should be quite obvious on Oddsportal by looking at the time stamps of the offending prices.

      4) Don’t forget that the vast majority of your bets will probably be safely inside the inflection points. It is probably better not to worry about boderline decisions as they will only cost you time.

      If you are still unsure then make a rule for yourself. If it’s a favourite or a home win and the price is questionable (i.e. is it in or outside the lower inflection point), make a decision to treat all such imposters in the same fashion. In other words, include them all, or exclude them all. It won’t make much difference to your bottom line. It’s only when you include some and exclude others that you create an imbalance not only in the possible results, but also in your own mind as to whether you are doing the right thing or not.

      If it’s a draw, an underdog or an away win, I would probably err on the side of caution and decide not to include them if they are on the upper inflection point.

      5) Regarding small gaps between the inflection points, I’m not sure how small the gaps are you are referring to, but have a look at the Summer and Winter League campaign workbooks to see the gaps we had in each system we chose.

      6) Don’t forget that the results of both campaigns, although pretty good, were not always based on best price in the market at the time of bet placement. In fact, the majority of bets were placed at prices below the peak price, simply because we didn’t have access to the best price.

      If you are in further doubt, use the best price available to you as the benchmark. Again, in the majority of cases, it will fall comfortably between your two inflection points. Just make a rule and stick to it for the borderline cases. Concentrate on the big picture first, and attend to the details if you have the time.

      7) In your Oddsportal account settings, you can set a commission rate for Betfair and also choose whether or not to show Betfair odds net of the commission payable. This may provide you with the indicator you are looking for. Otherwise, it’s a case of checking the bookmaker odds for accuracy.

      I hope this answers your questions and thanks for your contribution.

  34. Alex
    18 August 2017 at 12:39 pm #

    Hi again Right Winger,

    Just a question regarding the timing of bets. Obviously it’s important to wait until the hour before kickoff for those bets that are close to the inflection points, but how important is it to keep this timing for the bets that are obviously going to land between our points. For example, if I have inflection points of 1.6-2.5 and there’s a bet tomorrow priced at 2.1 is it okay to place your bets early on that?

    Thanks!

    • Right Winger
      21 August 2017 at 5:21 pm #

      Hi Alex,

      We regularly do place some bets well in advance if we have an inkling that the price is going to drop the nearer to kick-off it gets (usually favourites or home wins).

      However, if the price drifts beyond the lower inflection point, we will lay it back for an arbitrage profit.

      As I’ve said to others before in these comments sections, start looking at odds movements in Oddsportal from the opening of the market right up until the close (check the time stamps). You will then hopefully get a good idea how the market operates (leagues differ according to their popularity/liquidity), and identify the different strategies employed by the bookmakers to obtain their share of the market on an event.

      Once you have that knowledge, you can anticipate with a deal of accuracy how the market is going to move, and make your bet decision based on the best/most profitable times to place bets.

      Remember, the HDAFU tables provide a benchmark for the close of the ante post market. You only need this one reliable benchmark during ante post to make the most profitable bet placement decisions if you can afford to put the work/time in observing and teaching yourself about the market dynamics.

      I hope this helps.

  35. Michael
    21 August 2017 at 8:36 am #

    Are Belgian draws killing anyone else?

    • Corner
      22 August 2017 at 11:39 pm #

      The loosing streak is painful indeed. Only 15,6 % draws so far. 24,6% was the average in the last five years.

  36. AM0751
    21 August 2017 at 10:47 am #

    Hi right winger,

    I still have a couple of questions, I hope you can shed some light on them.

    1. I started some first half seasons when they were already in play. I left some profit on the table (I calculated back), but I also calculated the projected profit and there was enough still on the table to make it worth my while. So I went ahead and started placing bets on these leagues. Was this a mistake?

    2. Reason I am asking this is because well, I am executing operation nosedive over the last two weekends. Don’ get me wrong,this is all 100% my own choice, so I am not having a dig, but maybe you could acknowledge the last two weekends were not the greatest? I have reason to believe I am not far off the systems that you yourself use. Any perceptive person could reach this conclusion, and I am sure you know what I mean by that comment. It would help me to have my soul a bit less destroyed maybe. And if you have a totally different experience, well, that would mean I am doing something completely wrong.

    3. Now to something more concrete. I have read and appplied your comments about the two russian bookies. However, I had a situation yesterday where the Roma away game was between my two inflection points with every bookie except one, Tempobet.
    I checked their website and indeed Odds Portal was showing the right info. So I didn;t play this game due to the fact that one bookie offered this game outside my inflecton points. Was I right in doing that?

    I hope you can take the time to address this post, I would very much appreciate it!

    • Right Winger
      21 August 2017 at 5:34 pm #

      Hello again AM0751,

      I think I’ve gone some way to answering your questions in mine below (21/08/2017 3.58pm) and above (21/08/2017 5.13pm and 5.21pm).

      Tempobet is a funny one. Difficult to get an account with and sometimes offering odds well above anyone else. Sometimes, you find the odds shown on Oddsportal are available, and sometimes they most definitely are not. The API connection Oddsportal has with Tempobet is definitely unreliable.

      We do not have an account with Tempobet and tend to discard their results from our thinking. From what you have said, I think the answer from our perspective would have been to ignore Tempobet and place the bet.

      As I have said before in reply to other contributors, if in doubt, go with the majority viewpoint. Outlier prices are usually offered to gain market share and don’t necessarily reflect what is going on with the market in general.

  37. Simon
    21 August 2017 at 1:47 pm #

    AM0571

    I am happy to share my feedback and experience of how the last 6 Gameweeks have gone for me.

    To simplify things, whatever I bet per game I will call 1 unit. My unit amount is £50. So after 4 Gameweeks, with 8 systems in flow at that point, things were going great, with 23.72 units of profit/£1186 in the bank. Weeks 5 and 6 have been awful for me, losing approx. 6 units in week 5 and approx. 12 units in week 5. I’m now sitting back at 6 units of profit/£300.

    The systems I started out with initially, Poland Underdog, Russian Favourite, French Ligue 1 favourite, French Ligue 2 Draw, Czech republic Draw, Portugal Underdog, all started out winning. Last weekend Netherlands Draw joined the fray and has been poor performing on both weeks 5 and 6. Turkey Favourite started poorly on week 5. Both Spain and Germany started out poorly this weekend, as did Italy Favourite. Some other systems have suffered small losses or breaking even.

    So, the latest systems joining the action all have started poorly and thus combined to bring down the profits gained by the other systems.

    It certainly was a humbling experience to see such a big profit reduction so quickly. So I can relate to your experience to a degree. On the plus side I haven’t lost money yet, but can confirm that the last 2 weeks have not been great for me personally. However, I’m looking at things from the point of view that these slow starting systems can recover, and that will lead to a spike in the profits.

    I never thought that all the systems would have performed brilliantly right off the bat – that would be unrealistice. I was hoping that after getting up to just under 24 units of profit there would be a period of consolidation where I was breaking even, but I had a good period immediately followed by a bad one. None of us know how the results will line up or what the future holds. So for me it is a case of trusting the data, trusting my analysis of it, and hoping in the long run, with sound money management and patience profits will build up again!

    • Right Winger
      21 August 2017 at 3:58 pm #

      In response to Michael, AM0751 and Simon (all 21/08/2017 above),

      Firstly, because we (Soccerwidow.com) are running Summer and Winter League portfolios concurrently, our overall results have not been hugely curtailed by the start to the 2017-18 Winter League seasons, although I agree with some of the detrimental experiences you have highlighted above.

      I think the ‘new starters’ dilemma can be summed up with an analogy. The football betting calendar year is like a fast-moving conveyor belt. Once you are on it, you are swept away until you decide you’ve had enough. Getting off is easy enough – you just stop betting.

      But like anything continuously in motion, if you’ve never been on the ride before (i.e. portfolio betting), it is likely that you will stumble getting on it at first. You have to get on somewhere, but there are no hints with statistics to tell you when the best moment arrives.

      Calculating winning streaks and losing streaks is all good and well, but there is no way of knowing when they will arrive. If you get on the conveyor in the middle of a losing streak, then I’m afraid it is hard lines, but if your portfolio is large enough and has a balanced risk profile, you will recover over time and begin to pick up.

      The unpredictable starts to some seasons is a subject already covered in the blog. You may wish to refresh your memories for a little reassurance that things will settle down and follow statistical patterns eventually. Read also the Goal Distribution article, if you haven’t already done so.

      The key to portfolio betting is to keep the rhythm going – try and bet all year round so that there is no time gap in your portfolio. The numbers will eventually support themselves as you begin to mix Summer and Winter Leagues in the same round of matches.

      A larger portfolio will also provide you with better financial control – Employ the ratchet and stop loss mechanisms to the portfolio as a whole.

      Alternatively, get on the conveyor belt with a set target in mind. Stop betting when you have achieved it. Start afresh when you are ready. Treat every new target as a separate ‘campaign’, but expect the possibility of stumbling at the beginning of each. Building anything up from nothing is never plain sailing at the start. (I can’t begin to tell you how hard it was for me to build-up an insurance brokerage from scratch, single-handedly in the 1990’s).

      And don’t worry about a rocky ride to the start of a season in some leagues. The statistics will even themselves out. As per the Winter League Campaign article above, the final result should resemble a Poisson distribution curve – the two extremities of the curve will contain a few systems which fail (at the negative end), some that will surpass expectations (at the positive end), whilst the rest (the majority) will be in the big bulge in the middle.

      Both patience and nerve are virtues in gambling. If you have ‘value’ on your side (i.e. betting above the zero odds every time), then you will make money in the long run. It’s obvious.

  38. AM0751
    21 August 2017 at 4:33 pm #

    Hi right winger, Michael and Simon,

    Thank you for your feedback, your words acknowledge that I am indeed not crazy, I am just experiencing a dip. I iwll keep plugging away.

    Right winger, just adding, because I think you missed point 3 in my previous post, did I handle this case correctly>

    Cheers!

  39. Timmyp
    25 August 2017 at 9:21 pm #

    @simon

    I am doing the same as you as well as other leagues too. I was up 3 points in week 1 and it has been downhill since. Up until tonight I was about 7 points down on a rollercoaster and tonight has been terrible with another 7 points lost. I started with a 30 point bank and could go below 50% with a bad day tomorrow.
    The graphs look good with the inflection points chosen and I am wondering if anyone is actually up so far in what seems a horrible start to the winter leagues.

    • Right Winger
      25 August 2017 at 10:19 pm #

      AM0751 & Timmyp,

      I hope you are both employing a stop loss mechanism suitable to your levels of stakes as per the explanation on page 4 of this article?

      Remember, you must protect what you have when the troughs arrive.

      Just a thought.

    • Daniel
      26 August 2017 at 2:34 pm #

      Hello Timmy,

      just want to share with you my results so far.

      I started with a 11000 euro bank and 300 stakes. I am 9685 euro in profit at the end of week 6 with week 7 in progress as we speak.

      Week 1: 9 bets, 15 euro profit
      Week 2: 21 bets, 2865 euro profit
      Week 3: 23 bets, 3579 euro profit
      Week 4: 36 bets, 3571 euro profit
      Week 5: 50 bets, 2491 euro profit
      Week 6: 68 bets, -2836 euro loss

      Week 6 was a very bad and unlucky week with many games lost in the final minutes, but that is part of the game so no complains so far for a system that is giving me huge profits in little more than a month.

      I am also using the stop-loss strategy explained by Right Winger and my current bet size is 330 euro for Week 7.

      Good luck with your system!

      And a big thanks to Right Winger and Soccerwidow for the invaluable knowledge they have taught me through this website.

  40. AM0751
    27 August 2017 at 8:41 am #

    Hi right winger,
    ;-
    I am indeed employing a stop loss. And I guess I am learning as I go along, hence the following:

    I have been reading all articles and your comments to find if my question was already asked, but it does not seem so.

    My question is as follows: you have mentioned several times that there are some problematic bookies, namely Marathonbet, 1XBET and Tempobet.

    You mentioned that as they are high turnover, low margin bookies, and that their odds tend to change fast. But this goes for more bookies, like Island Casino or 5Dimes (or Pinnacle of course!), yet you never mentioned you excluded these from your analysis when collecting highest odds.

    Can you explain to me what the difference is?

    Reason I am asking is in your winter campaign spreadsheet, I see sometimes you *do* include Marathonbet pricing (with both winning and losing games, so this is not some thinly veiled accusation, just an observation).

    Is it purely a timestamp issue that makes you adjust for the highest odds in your HDAFU tables?

    • Right Winger
      27 August 2017 at 1:39 pm #

      Hi AM0751,

      Thanks for your comment.

      Yes, Oddsportal’s API’s are unreliable and/or slow in updating where Marathonbet, 1xbet and Tempobet are concerned.

      Tempobet, for example, will show best odds on many occasions, usually on the home team, but these odds will sometimes be days old; occasionally they are as little as 45 minutes old, but never close to being ante post market closing odds.

      Consequently, being so far above the rest of the market, these odds stick out like a sore thumb and are an unreliable benchmark. If they were true, everyone would be betting on them (especially traders and arbitrageurs), and they would have a hard job balancing their accounts. I’ve checked Tempobet’s sites (they have several in different languages) against Oddsportal’s odds prior to kick-off, and there are sometimes marked differences between the different Tempobet sites at the same moment in time.

      So, in answer to your question, it is most definitely a time stamp issue, which is why you will sometimes find Marathonbet’s odds included in the analyses. Their odds are sometimes best in the market (just slightly ahead of their rivals and obtainable), within a minute or so of kick-off.

      As I’ve mentioned before, use the majority opinion (i.e. what the rest of the bookmakers indicate), rather than the guidance of one or two outliers, in order to form your bet placement decisions.

      I agree that the process may seem a little awkward at first, and it would certainly not be an issue if we could select/deselect bookmakers from Oddsportal’s compulsory list, but with time you will get used to it.

    • simon
      27 August 2017 at 1:41 pm #

      AM0751,

      I may be able to answer your question. It was my understanding at the time, and have since seen this consistently myself at odds portal, that with Marathonbet, they are in nearly all cases, especially with underdog bets, offering considerably higher odds than the rest of the market. On that note I remember RW saying for that reason, Marathonbet odds had been discarded/downgraded. That would then give a set of highest odds that were reflective of the market.

      So this in turn has a bearing on the actual bet placement itself. For example if you have inflection points of 3.5 and 4.5 and every single book maker is within that range apart from marathon bet, then it is a valid selection, since the market agrees. So place the bet. Of course, for the purposes of taking the best odds, the bet can be placed with marathon bet. That would explain why you see marathon bet prices in the winter campaign sheet.

      On the other hand, again with inflection point of 3.5 and 4.5, if all the bookmakers are say at 3.3 or lower and marathon bet is at 3.6, this is not a valid selection and should not be bet on.

      Thats how I understand it with marathon bet specifically – its an issue with there odds being higher in lots of cases than the general market and so not a reflection of that market. I didn’t think it to be due to an issue with time stamps for marathon bet.

      I have seen many instances, however, where books on odds portal have odds that seem very high in relation to the market average. And when I check these odds for accuracy at the bookmaker website itself, I find the odds do not exist anymore. I find this to be the case a LOT with Tempobet. Other books I have seen this happen with are Betolimp. There are other cases with other bookmakers but less frequently so.

      What I do in these cases, where the odds seem so out to step from the rest of the market is check the website itself to see what the current odds are. I would suspect, and RW could confirm this, those odds that are out of step with reality, such as Templet odds, are the ones corrected by looking at timestamps. With Marathon bet, I’m sure thats not a timestamp issue.

      Hope thats helpful. And RW will correct me if I’m wrong!

    • Daniel
      28 August 2017 at 8:12 pm #

      Hi AM0751,

      i will share with you my experiences with Oddsportal and the APIs so far.

      I have encountered many times unreliable odds in my selections (old timestamps). Usually what i do is open the website and check the real odds for that particular event. If i cannot do so (because of geographic or IP restrictions) i generally tend to discard them from the analysis and move to the second best, as long as they are reliable. I don’t discard any bookmaker solely based on the name. For example, i never ignore Marathonbet odds if the timestamp is recent and the odds are accurate. Honestly it is a very simple and straight forward process for me. If the top odds fit in, and are authentic, i bet. If not, i don’t. Regardless of which bookmakers are they from (from the list of bookmakers shared by Right Winger), if the timestamp is recent and the odd is accurate i use that value. I also never place a bet more than 15 minutes before kick off, except if i notice that a particular odd is falling constantly but still in the range by far.

      Hope this helps!

  41. timmyp
    28 August 2017 at 2:07 pm #

    hi

    Points H/R % Exp H/R %
    Austria -1.55 21.43% 27.08%
    Belgium -0.56 40.00% 53.05%
    Czech -2.50 20.00% 32.79%
    Denmark -7.64 18.75% 38.95%
    England -6.00 0.00% 17.83%
    France 1 5.36 57.14% 49.01%
    France 2 -10.82 15.00% 37.00%
    Germany 4.85 36.36% 27.02%
    Greece -2.24 40.00% 62.53%
    Italy -3.00 0.00% 51.40%
    Netherlands -4.40 11.11% 28.35%
    Poland 4.00 21.05% 27.32%
    Russia 0.33 55.56% 61.88%
    Scotland 2.71 58.33% 53.10%
    Spain 3.25 40.00% 32.84%
    Switzerland -4.00 33.33% 53.17%
    Turkey 1.29 50.00% 48.48%

    (H/R=Hit rate)

    As shown above, Denmark, England and France 2 are letting me down badly which account for just over 24 points down.Only 7 out of 17 in credit at the moment and I’m 21 points down in total. Most systems are just 1 or 2 results away from being in profit in these early days.

    I know everyone will have different inflection points but I would imagine the systems chosen will be mostly similar. Anyone having similar issues with a some of their choices?

    • Daniel
      28 August 2017 at 7:58 pm #

      Hi timmyp,

      the last two weeks have been quite disappointing in almost everything, with most of the best looking systems having long series of losses. Ligue 2 was very bad with draws (only one draw in two weeks), same as Netherlands, a very promising system with a very bad start that hopefully will recover on the way. Austria, same story, very promising yet disappointing so far. Poland, started with huge profits, now facing a very long negative streak. England bad start as well, with my underdogs struggling greatly, with 1 on 12 bets won. Bad first week in Italy as well, with many favourites losing their games. Slightly recovered on the last week. So far i have been on a loss for this and the last week, losing a chunk of the profits i made previously. On the 18th of August my profits touched the 14,000 euro mark. I am now sitting on little more than 9,000 profit after this very bad betting weeks. Thanks to the stop loss strategy i saved a portion of my profit and i could still endure more weeks of bad “luck” (i hope it will not be the case though). Yesterday 7 out of 10 of my last bets won, showing maybe an end to this catastrophic negative period.
      My confidence in the system i chose never wavered not even for one second, even on the thoughest losing streaks. I did my homeworks before investing the money, i fully understood the concept behind it and i am now fully prepared to enjoy the final outcome tham i am sure will be worth all the emotional rollercoaster. I am sure that if you chose the right system with the right balance, and invested a sufficient amount of money in the strategy, nothing can go wrong. In the long run, the math will take over, so don’t worry.
      By the way, my current hit rate is 31.79% versus a forecasted hit rate of 38.48%. Not amazing, but the sinergy is doing a perfect job on keep the system strong.
      Stay positive and confident, and good luck for your season!

  42. Simon
    10 September 2017 at 10:35 pm #

    Hi All,

    Some feedback on my experience thus far. My portfolio consists of 22 systems; 4 of which are who season, and 18 1st half/2nd half. This means I have 13 systems currently in play.

    The campaign started well enough and after 4 complete game weeks my profit sat at 23.72 points. Since then it has declined such that it now sits at 3.22 points. There may be another couple of games to bet tomorrow, so that figure may change slightly up or down.

    Looking at the systems:

    Whole Season: Expected/Actual Hit rate (%) Profit/Loss (points)

    Belgium – Home win: 54.97/42.86 -0.46
    France Ligue 2: Draw: 39.42/29.43 -5.51
    Portugal – Underdog 28.85/42.86 +2.68
    Turkey – Favourite: 49.16/35.29 -3.91

    1st Half:

    England – Draw: 41.13/33.33 +0.55
    Czech Republic – Draw: 39.57/30 +1.49
    France Ligue 1 – Favourite: 53.46/48 +1.325
    Germany – Underdog: 30.71/35 +10.59
    Italy – Favourite: 61.67/63.64 +1.66
    Netherlands – Draw: 27.51/5.56 -13.45
    Poland – Underdog: 29.35/25 +10.35
    Russia – Favourite: 61.9/54.55 +0.375
    Spain – Underdog: 27.66/20 -2.47

    Well, as you can see from the above I have some good performers, some break even performers, small and medium losers (France Ligue 2, Turkey)….and then…..one system that is single handedly wrecking the joint….Netherlands draw system, clicking at just over 5.5% and making a monumental dent in my profits. Part of me wants to just drop that system and move on, but….it’s early days and I’m telling myself, “Surely it must recover from such a low hit rate?!”. In other words, I will trust the analysis and hope for a recovery from that system in the coming weeks. It seems like the top 6-8 teams in the Eridivisie have come out on fire to start the season and are winning every game resulting in very few draws in my odds range.

    The expected hit rate for the portfolio as a whole is 44.17%, while the actual hit rate is 34.75%. So 9% under expectations. The last 4 weeks has seen a hit rate of just 30.42%. So really I feel like being in a slump at the moment.

    I have flat bet everything for 1 point to date. But also have run the same results through the ratchet/stop loss comparison, and the difference between the profit and loss figures is very small – so wouldn’t have helped me out much. Although next week I may actually lower stakes in line with the comparison just in case another bad week is ahead!

    So overall, I am disappointed to have seen my profits pretty much set back to zero, but, after such a poor 4 weeks (which have been pretty horrendous), and to still not have lost any of my initial bankroll, I like to feel that an upturn is not far away and things shall improve….optimism…..we shall see.

    Good luck everyone!

  43. jo
    11 September 2017 at 1:04 am #

    Hi Simon,

    if you bought winter league campaign you can see that the last 4 weeks were losing weeks. And they can happen at any time, right from the start. Nothing uncommon with your campaign:). In Eredivisie I won 1 bet out of 18 and have similar results to yours. But a high odds win is just a matter of time, just make sure not to miss any bet.
    To me it’s also sad, since sometimes I found myself thinking, these 8 and now 9 weeks were waste of time because profits dropped to almost 0, but there is not much we can do. Just keep going and as Right Winger said, statistics will not line up in a nice pattern.
    In my Summer league campaign I decided to quit betting 1st half of one league since the strategy also performed poorly – 27% actual hit rate vs 59% predicted average and unpleasantly negative balance after 22 bets. I read about it here that you must continue to the end, however, I decided to quit. I kept simulation betting from 23rd bet and I had a winning streak of 6 bets right after that! I didn’t like to see the strategy failing with real money and then I was getting increasingly frustrated with each winning simulation bet! In the end, the system failed anyway, with a little bit smaller loss than I stopped, so, I didn’t care, but I don’t think I will ever quit any strategy before its finish date. It was a good lesson and emotional roller-coaster.

  44. Simon
    11 September 2017 at 1:08 pm #

    Jo,

    Thanks for the response.

    You are right with your comments. It is a shame to see profits dwindle away, but for me its just 230 bets approx. into a 1300 projected bets campaign. So plenty of time for results to swing my way.

    I had a look at how the picture would be different if just a couple of draws in the Netherlands system had hit, and the picture is so much better. If an extra win in each of the other underperforming systems had hit, things would be looking very healthy indeed.

    So after 4 weeks of poor results, I’m hoping this week sees a change in the pattern and some good results come in and things really start to take off.

    I noticed through reading the £20k campaign of RW/SW that they got off to a flying start and then from halfway through to the end, it was a lot of treading water. By halfway through their campaign they had made more than £20k.

    So perhaps for us we will have a volatile start that gets better in the middle phase of the campaign. Time will tell.

    But for me, it really is a test of patience and nerve, and trust the stats for the long term!

  45. Olly
    11 September 2017 at 1:30 pm #

    Hi all,

    I arrived a little late to the party and have just completed my third week. The first 2 weeks were tough – 5 points lost in the first week and then 10 points lost in the second. Week 3 has seen me claw back 8 points so feeling more optimistic. For me Ligue 2 has been a disaster thus far. Just 2 wins from 17 bets and 10 points down. Germany and Italy have both given me 6 points profit and are the stand out performers so far.

    This is my first season doing this and the whole concept appears sound and I’m enjoying the ride, despite a difficult start. Onwards and Upwards (I hope!).

  46. AM0751
    11 September 2017 at 6:58 pm #

    Hi guys,

    Musing here. In the dutch draw system, you might want to have a look at the individual results for some teams the last 5 seasons.

    Check out Feyenoord playing at home and AZ and Vitesse playing away.

    Cheers.

    • Alex
      14 September 2017 at 3:11 pm #

      I have done this with all my systems, although have only excluded the single most unprofitable team in any given system. Feyenoord at home are an absolute no-go for me, and I’ve also taken Bayern Munich out of my Bundesliga system and Bordeaux away from my Ligue 1.

  47. jo
    11 September 2017 at 8:20 pm #

    Hi AM075111,

    I think Ajax is also the “wrong” team to bet on draw when Ajax is home team. However, once I found it out, I had both teams 3 bets already lost in total. I don’t know again, is it a good idea to quit betting them if I already started. I’m like thinking what if they draw suddenly?
    AZ playing away is almost zero sum game, Vitesse is really worth consideration, but again, both teams have little data set as away teams in my opinion. My strategy is 1 half.
    Maybe Right Winger has some advice?

  48. AM0751
    11 September 2017 at 10:33 pm #

    Jo,

    Check out the conveyor belt comment from rightwinger: http://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/betting-advice/20k-in-214-days-winter-league-hdafu-tables/#comment-18844

  49. Gabriel
    17 September 2017 at 9:00 pm #

    Hi.

    Simples question about the Stake Ratchet & Stop-loss Mechanisms: it is suggested that if you are winning, you should increase +5% after 1000 units won. And if you are loosing, you should decrease -5%, but right after 500 units lost. Is that just to have a more conservative approach towards bankroll management?

    Here in soccerwidow, there is another article that indicates a different approach: http://www.soccerwidow.com/football-gambling/betting-knowledge/betting-advice/money-management/how-to-calculate-losing-streaks-optimal-bankroll-sport-betting/

    Thanks!

    • Right Winger
      17 September 2017 at 10:20 pm #

      Hello Gabriel,

      The staking plans we suggest are not set in stone – they are merely examples of the direction you should be thinking in when understanding the importance of having a double-ended (front and back) system.

      The ratchet is there to take advantage of runs of accumulated profits and also acts to increase the value of your bets further, assuming you have value on your side in the first instance.

      But the more important consideration is protecting what you have, which is why the stop-loss is suggested at a lower threshold (i.e. 500 instead of 1,000 units) than the ratchet.

      Therefore, I wouldn’t say this approach is conservative – we described the staking plan in this article as medium-aggressive – we are not acting totally gung-ho when increasing the stakes, nor are we crying over a little spilt milk when bad runs happen.

      The reality is that the stop-loss in this example first activated once a loss of five times the initial 100 unit stake affected results. For the ratchet, the stakes were increased when ten times the initial stake had been won.

      Ultimately, the decision is yours as to how ‘conservative’ or adventurous you wish to be with the staking plan, but whatever combination you choose, bear in mind that once profits are in the bank, the first thing is to get what is effectively ‘free money’ working as hard as possible for you.

      If you are going to ratchet the stakes, you must also operate a stop-loss at the same time – never trade on one without the other.

      I hope this is of some assistance and thanks for your question.

Leave a Reply / Comment