2017 so far + pre-mail/recorded/closing odds

2017 has definitely been an excellent year so far - the best since at least 2013.

2017 SO FAR (recorded odds):

41 picks

108.5 points staked

25-2-14

+24.755 points profit

22.8% ROI

42.4% ROC

Here are the 2017 results based on pre-mail (those available just before I send the pick, so at 10:29 AM UK time on Saturday), recorded (those recorded with a sixty-second delay) and closing (those available just before the kick-off) odds, either with Pinnacle, SBO or Dafabet:

2017 SO FAR:

41 picks

108.5 points staked

2017 SO FAR (pre-mail odds):

+30.745 points profit

28.3% ROI

2017 SO FAR (recorded odds):

+24.755 points profit

22.8% ROI

2017 SO FAR (closing odds):

+25.76 points profit

23.7% ROI

There's a couple of blog posts on the topic of my pre-mail/recorded/closing odds here and here.

I've also updated the results based on pre-mail/recorded/closing odds since the beginning of the 2010/11 season (which is when I started archiving all of the pre-mail/recorded/closing odds):

SINCE 2010/11:

650 picks

2016.5 points staked

SINCE 2010/11 (pre-mail odds):

+237.34 points profit

11.8% ROI

SINCE 2010/11 (recorded odds):

+182.6 points profit

9.1% ROI

SINCE 2010/11 (closing odds):

+165.23 points profit

8.2% ROI

All of these picks have obviously been proofed to third parties - to Secret Betting Club (since March 2008, so all of them), to Joseph Buchdahl's SportsTipsters (from August 2012 until it's closure in June 2015) and to BetRush (since October 2016).

Vorp and the primitive source of an edge

I've been meaning to comment on a couple of Cassini's blog posts since I've read them four weeks ago, but August is unfortunately quite a lot to handle as National League teams will have played as many as seven games in 24 days and I obviously need to spend a bit more time analyzing a 1st round game than, for example, a 28th round game. I've also traditionally implemented a few new elements into my match analysis and, as always, I'm wondering how on earth have I managed to stay ahead of the industry for so many years without those elements. I may have just been lucky for the past eleven years.

Anyway, in the first of the two posts over at Green All Over, Cassini wrote:

Miguel referenced an old post of mine from almost 18 months ago, which highlighted the challenges of finding an edge in the top leagues where you are competing with the likes of Starlizard... As it's the eve of a new season, and most readers will forget this as soon as they've read it, I thought I might share a thought I had regarding the lower leagues. Back in May I mentioned that: "If you go too far down the football pyramid, you run into problems not only of liquidity, but also the problem where the VORP (Value Over Replacement Player) of certain key players becomes critical". Many of you will be familiar with Skeeve, who has been profitable in the National League since forever. How does he do it? By studying the teams in great detail. See this post for an example. Since there are so few people studying this league to the extent that Skeeve does, he gets himself an edge. Most of us don't have the time for this level of research and analysis however. 

I wouldn't say that VORP (it kind of sounds like a name for a baby dragon - look at little Vorp burning those daisies; I may have analyzed a few games too many today) is the only thing that gives me an edge, but it's surely an important element. As far as the time for this level of research and analysis is concerned, well it's what I do for a living.

Miguel Rodrigues commented:

Skeeve example is the perfect example for the ones with a exclusively mathematical based approach who look at subjective analysis as a primitive source of an edge. I agree that the likelihood (and I experienced this myself in the early phase of my betting journey in La Liga) for that type of approach (subjective) working in the main European Leagues in the long haul is slim to none (insane market competition and know-how, better resources employed by the bookies in the opening lines, less average deviation between openers and closers, etc.) However, if you understand the sport, the league and teams, particular characteristics and most importantly are willing to work harder researching for more information than anyone or the majority, you can be one of the market leaders and earners in a medium / lower level league. You just have to ensure that: a) you have information that is not included in the line and / or b) you process the current information available and recognise market over /under reactions better than anyone else. Football teams are "stock prices" and although the odds efficiency in the main leagues is so strong that is difficult for the experienced bettor to see if the price is currently 5% off with subjective analysis, that is very doable in lower level leagues and I can not emphasise the example of Skeeve too much. In betting there will always exist spots for the guy who is willing to outwork and out-learn the competition, at least in the next 5 years. The problem with subjective analysis is it's usually a low volume approach and difficult to use great staking methods like Kelly, but should not be viewed as a primitive source of an edge. I will end this long comment with a quote from Joseph Buchdal: "There is no right or wrong approach to seeking a betting edge. Ultimately, the best one is the one that works for you, one that returns a profit. However, what each approach has in common is a shared aim of finding "value" in the odds, where the true chance of a win is greater than that estimated by the bookmaker".

I can only agree with Miguel - very well put, sir. Personally, I need to see a price that's at least 10% off to get involved nowadays and I obviously think it's possible to stay ahead for a bit longer than five years (have I ever mentioned my eleven consecutive... I have?), but still - an excellent comment.

In the second of the two blog posts, Cassini added:

Unfortunately I have little to disagree with Miguel about regarding his thoughts. One thing I would say is that regarding the line "football teams are 'stock prices'", I think Miguel means that publicly traded companies are like football clubs (some clubs are indeed publicly traded companies) while stock prices are like betting prices in that they are the opinion of the market based on all "relevant" information. Relevant here is a combination of past public information, breaking new public information, and private (insider) information. Knowing along with everyone else that City beat United 2:0 three years ago isn't a lot of use to you. Knowing that a star player for Barrow (assuming they have one) slipped in the shower this morning, suffered a concussion and will miss tomorrow's game is useful. Installing hidden cameras in the bathrooms of non-league stars is not practical, or legal, but plenty of people have contacts who can provide information before it becomes public.

"Assuming they have one"?! After all that Byron Harrison's been through with his ankle in the last seven months, jokes about him slipping in the shower and suffering concussion in addition to a recent surgery seem particularly cruel. Sorry Byron. As for Cassini, shame on you, mate. Shame on you.

the "outstanding contribution to tipping" award + Pinnacle on their way back to the UK market

I'm proud to announce that I've just won the SBC "outstanding contribution to tipping" award, which is a "lifetime achievement honour chosen by the SBC team" (along with being voted the third best sports tipster in 2016 by the SBC members, but now I'm just bragging). To quote the SBC team,

"the SBC ‘Lifetime Achievement’ honour is designed to recognize those who have provided outstanding services to punters through tipping and is chosen by the Secret Betting Club team. This year’s very worthy award recipient is the football tipster, Skeeve, who since 2006 has been posting his lower-league football tips to great acclaim. Making a profit over the course of 1 football season is difficult enough but to do it over 10 consecutive seasons as Skeeve has done is a phenomenal achievement. Over the lifetime of his service, Skeeve has posted just under 1500 tips and made 674 points profit at 12.2% Return on Investment. It is not just his profit but the quality of customer service and his odds-settlement policy that also deserves merit as Skeeve has always played extremely fair by his members. Ensuring that you can often match, if not beat the advised profits he records on his website – a huge deal when you consider today’s betting markets and how they react to sharp money. Skeeve is well on course to enjoy his 11th consecutive profitable season and we can’t think of a worthier recipient for this honour. Here is to another decade of profit!"

2017 RESULTS SO FAR:

17 picks

44 points staked

+5.11 points profit

11.6% ROI

8.5% ROC

2016 RESULTS:

49 picks

121 points staked

+19.49 points profit

16.1% ROI

32.4% ROC

LAST THREE YEARS (MARCH 2014 - FEBRUARY 2017):

172 picks

511 points staked

+66.37 points profit

12.9% ROI

97.7% ROC

Anonymous posted a comment about Pinnacle and their continued absence from the UK market. I hope he's satisfied with my answer and I also hope Joseph Buchdahl isn't wrong about Pinnacle returning to the UK market as soon as next month!

Last but not least, congrats to Cassini - one of, if not THE, best bloggers around - on his 2259th blog post. It's not a typo - that's 2259 (update: 2261) blog posts.

closing/kick-off odds (part one)

I'm horrible, I know - I've promised an article on closing/kick-off odds more than a month ago and now I'm going to split it into more than one part? Unbelievable. Unfortunately, as always at this time of year, there's plenty of something I like to call the "actual work", which means I have to try and keep the blog alive (among other things) in my so-called spare time - and you can't buy spare time.

Anyway, for starters, here's what Joseph Buchdahl wrote about the closing odds in one of his educational articles for Pinnacle:

Closing odds reflect the largest amount of information about matches, and the maximum number of opinions being expressed through wagering on that information, and hence are most likely to be the most efficient.

I don't think there's many, if any, who'd say that beating the closing odds at Pinnacle in the long run isn't an obvious sign of a good tipster - possibly not the only sign, but a well obvious sign. In that light, I've decided to take a closer look at the closing/kick-off odds for my official picks in the last six campaigns (starting with the 2010/11 season, which is when I've started to record all odds with a significant delay in the official stats and compare the pre-mail odds, recorded odds and the closing odds, and ending with the 2015/16 season - I'll write more about the current season as soon as it ends in May), along with the so-called "pre-mail" odds (those available before I send the pick, but at an extremely fixed moment in time, which I'll write more about in the next article, and days after those juicy opening odds which would - in all fairness - return the biggest theoretical profit by far, but at severe limits and odds movements in practice) and the so-called "recorded" odds (those recorded with a fair delay, when they're usually at their worst - I've experimented with various delays, never shorter than sixty seconds, in recording the odds since the 2010/11 season until I've settled with a sixty-second delay at the beginning of last season, which ensures that everyone who can take the bet straight away, at an extremely fixed moment in time, is able to beat the so-called "official" results).

2010/11 - 2015/16 (PRE-MAIL ODDS): +206.35 points profit (11.0% ROI)
2010/11 - 2015/16 (RECORDED ODDS): +157.93 points profit (8.4% ROI)
2010/11 - 2015/16 (CLOSING ODDS): +138.52 points profit (7.4% ROI)

I'll go into more detail in the next article (consider this an intro article to this very interesting topic), but beating the closing odds at Pinnacle in the long run? Check. However, my results based on closing/kick-off odds are now outperforming the results based on recorded odds for the fourth consecutive season (not by far, but still), which is a fairly interesting phenomenon (and another sub-topic I'll write more on in the next article). As I really do record the odds when they're at their worst, it probably isn't as bizarre as it may seem at the first glance, and - as I wrote in the 2016 review - "both the results based on pre-mail odds and the results based on kick-off/closing odds have outperformed the official results in 2016 - in most cases, recorded odds will be a bit shorter than the pre-mail odds and the kick-off/closing odds will be either a bit shorter or a bit longer than the recorded odds (for example, 1.79 - 1.75 - 1.72, which was the case with the (-0.25) Torquay bet on March 5, or 1.72 - 1.65 - 1.69, which was the case with the (0) Cheltenham bet on April 1), but it only takes a few bets to make things more interesting". There were eight cases of significant (10% or more) odds movement between recorded and closing/kick-off odds in 2016. The odds drifted out (at least 10%) in seven of these eight cases and five of those seven bets landed (+4.67 points profit at a 32.2% ROI based on recorded odds; +7.12 points profit at a 49.1% ROI based on closing odds). The only odds-shortening (10% or more) bet landed for a +1.76 point profit based on recorded odds and a +1.2 point profit based on closing odds respectively.

the good guys

One of my all-time favorite bloggers Cassini is back after a short break.

I hope there were many of us who took the bet on Dag & Red to be promoted when they were @6.00 with Marathon and @5.50 with Bet365. To quote Cassini, "the best available now is 4.0 with Betway or BetVictor who may let you have 50p on if you're lucky".

Although according to some sources, well maybe one source, I run a global betting empire and am behind multiple web sites, I actually have no business relationship with Skeeve so when I say that he has a stellar record over ten years, and that I have no concerns about his integrity, that is my unbiased and honest assessment. 

If you're somehow not familiar with Cassini, you're probably not interested in betting or trading, but you should know that he's one of the good guys in this chaotic betting world, along with the likes of Joseph Buchdahl, Peter Ling, Rowan Day, Greg Gordon and Stewboss, to mention some of the very few. As you can see, he also has a fine sense of humor, which is probably much more important to yours truly than to your average gambler, but I'm not your average gambler - and neither is Cassini if I may try and observe. Anyway, thanks for the mention, Cassini, and welcome back from the Granddad duty!

Speaking of Joseph Buchdahl, I've recently stumbled upon a horrifying Betting Advice forum thread dedicated to a certain (so-called) verification service which was exposed thanks to Joseph and a few other guys. If you ask me, there's definitely a need for a trusted, publicly available verification service (you have to be subscribed to the SBC to receive their profit reports and other publications) since Joseph decided to hang up his boots, but those who I trust the most are already busy with other projects, so I guess we'll have to do with the good old SBC for now and possibly the likes of BetRush who I plan to take a closer look at in the next few days.

Btw I've noticed significantly less mistakes in the PA data reports lately (even though I'm yet to analyze most of this weekend's games). Long may it continue.

Last but not least, there were no unofficial picks last week, but we'll most probably have one (or more) later this week, so stay tuned.

the Press Association and the National League

 

I suppose some of you know that the Press Association stopped providing shots on/off target data for the National League (Conference). As Joseph Buchdahl recently quoted on twitter, "PA has amended its collection agreement with the National League this season to a live goals, cards, corners and subs service. We are not collecting other match stats". In Joseph's one words, "Opta don't collect the data so that's the end of the match stats from the National League".

To those who don't know what Opta is, you can always check them out on Wikipedia, Google or whatever you use these days to check something out and go from there. In a few words, they analyze, store and distribute live sports data - for over 60,000 fixtures across 30 sports in 70 countries according to Wikipedia. Opta appointed the Press Association as the sole UK re-seller of rights to official soccer data from the English and Scottish leagues back in 2013 and, now that the original three-year agreement has come to an end, even though a new deal has been signed as soon as last summer, the things have obviously changed as far as non-league football is concerned.

Anyway, many clients have asked if the whole thing affects my work in any way. The truth is that it doesn't - as I'm focused on the National League only, I'm manually analyzing every single game myself. I've got nothing against publicly available numbers if they're the right ones, but I strongly believe that my edge comes from the data not visible at the first glance. A weak shot on target which would never in a million years fool the keeper simply can't be as important as a wonderful shot that goes inches away from the post, let alone more important.

I've noticed many mistakes in the PA National League data over the last few years and, even though they aren't providing shots on/off target data anymore, they're still making plenty of mistakes with their other National League data. The beginning of the season proved to be particularly challenging as there were mistakes in at least six of the twelve opening round data reports and, even though there were match days with a bit less mistakes, there's still way too many. Let's take match day six game between Macclesfield and Lincoln, for example. Macclesfield centre-back Byrne replaced fellow defender McCombe at half-time. Not mentioned in the PA report. There were actually three yellow cards for Macclesfield players and two for Lincoln players. Not a single yellow card according to the PA report. That happens from time to time unfortunately - the PA data report simply ignoring all yellow cards. Sometimes, though, it ignores some of the yellow cards and reports others, like in match day seven game between Wrexham and York. The PA reported no Wrexham cards and two yellow cards for York players. In reality, there were as many as six yellow cards - two for Wrexham players and four for York players - and one substitution has been ignored as well (McDonagh for Harrad in 86th minute).

If you're still looking for the shots on/off target data for the National League, you can always try and trust The Non-League Paper (which you'd have to subscribe to or buy to access the data), but I've noticed plenty of wrong numbers there as well - and they don't cover the midweek games as far as shots on/off target data is concerned, so you're back where you've started if you're looking for a consistent data source and not just an occasional one, for weekend games only. Also, there are some teams for which you can find shots on/off target data on a regular basis, midweek games included, but if you can get all the numbers for York and only some, recorded by The Non-League Paper reporter, for Braintree, you're once again right back where you've started - forced to either drop the National League from your betting/trading portfolio or quit your job(s) and focus on the National League only.