ok, maybe I did misunderstand you?
BUT, as for the original setup, in the constants section, I HAD the following:
perc_RTBG = 0.0085. As you know, this will be the equivalent of an 0.85% multiplicand if used in a calculation.
perc_RTBG_liab = 0.05, which again, if used as a multiplicand, is the equivalent of 5%, as per the liability bet
in the RTBG 24.01 - 45.00 trigger, the beginning of Amount calculation formula is given as bank_RTBG * perc_RTBG_liab, which, when the actual numbers are put in, will give 100.00 * 0.05, producing a result of 5. If we continue, arbitrarily, with a lay price of 11, then the whole result, should be calculated as per my formula construct, as (100 * 0.05) / (11 - 1), which will produce a final result of 0.5, or, in staking terms, £0.50, or 50p. At no point, was perc_RTBG used?
as per your comment on never using the '_' separator, this is simply a preference. I ALWAYS define a private variable, beginning with an underscore, such as _xyz, and then define a public property using xyz, because that is my preference (most developers will use this approach), we are all different, and using it this way suits me. It does not mean it is incorrect, or even bad practice. Unless there are some rules inside MFP that will not allow '_', there is nothing wrong in my constant naming, its just simply not your preference.
I really cannot see how you have observed that my formula has produced '0.0085_liab'
I will of course apologise if I have made a stupid mistake, but I have gone through the original mft file you sent me back, and I cannot see any mistake that will produce this.
I have defined a number of constants, one of them is called perc_RTBG_liab, which has a value of 0.05, another, perc_RTBG, has a value of 0.0085. There is nowhere in ANY part of ANY of these triggers, where I have ADDED perc_RTBG_liab to perc_RTBG, and even if there was, by adding perc_RTBG_liab to perc_RTBG, this would simply produce 0.0585, because 0.05 + 0.0085 = 0.0585, and definitely NOT '0.0085_liab'
Could you please show me how you have come to the conclusion that '0.0085_liab' has been produced?
I appreciate this is not constructive work, but I am being informed that I have made a mistake, and I cannot see how this mistake you have observed, is actually happening.
I have attached an annotated image, which looks fine to me....
I have no problem admitting my faults, and yes, I have made some really stupid mistakes in my development history, but I honestly cannot see the mistake that will produce this value, which you have noted as incorrect. Please show me, and then I will stop this mithering...
Thanks
Mark.