Setting a delay

Hi,

Is there a way to set a delay before a bet is triggered?

I have a number of triggers/conditions, and when the criteria have been met, a bet is placed. Standard stuff.

Now, I developed a trigger yesterday, and it is one that places a lay bet once a goal has been scored. It works fine, and I did around 5 bets yesterday, but while I was watching, I noticed that AFTER the bet had been placed, the lay price went down further.

I am aware that I can use r_tick(lay_price, -X), but I want to look at using a delay, say around 30 seconds (configurable), so that once the criteria is satisfied, delay for 30 seconds and then place the bet.

Is this possible?

Thanks

Mark.

Hi
http://marketfeederpro.com/learn/triggers/waiting-after-trigger/

in addition to checking the gap between best back and lay prices, you can also look for a book % closer to 100

Thanks MarkV,

I decided to use the timer2 variable and set it once after a goal has been scored, and then the other triggers will reference that and fire after wait_time.

I will also look at your other suggestion, book % closer to 100 - I am struggling to find an example - can you point me to one?

Thanks

Mark.

Hi
The book percentage gives an idea of the value of the prices on offer. 100% book is a perfectly priced market. Of course anything below 100% for the back book, or above 100% for the lay book Betfair will nab. Book % works best in higher volume markets, for example:
and markets back book % is less than 102

There is a newish condition that is probably simpler than using the timer trigger in soccer markets:
and markets minutes since last goal is greater than x

Hi MarkV,

Thanks for the response.

My triggers work based on the first goal being scored, and before a maximum 30 minutes into the match, I then look to lay a market, AOHW or AOAW, where the odds are less than a set value.

My trigger works as per above, but, once the bet is placed, I am disappointed to see that the lay price drops further down, so I have missed out on some value, because the next trigger will then look to hedge out. My hedge works on a set odds value...

So, if I lay at odds = 10, and look to hedge out at odds = 20, then I have made the tick difference between 10 and 20, BUT, if I am able to lay at 8, then I will make more, because my initial lay stake is based on liability as in risk/(lay_price - 1)

After watching this in action last night, I could see the price drop after the lay bet had been placed, and I am assuming this is because the prices are all over the place until the market settles, after the first goal is scored, and of course the price of the market will settle down, and it is at this point that I should place my lay bet.

Of course, I don't know what this settle time should be, and I can only experiment to see what looks to be the best time period.

So, I set my timer2, which has a value of now_time, and this variable is set once there has been a goal, and it can be referenced by the actual bet trigger.

I can't really think of a better way of doing it than this, but always happy to get suggestions?

Thanks again

Mark.

Hi
yes you are right, the market needs to re-form after the first goal
you are welcome to use the timer trigger, though minutes since last goal would be more efficient because the timer is built in.
so for example your basic conditions are:
selections trigger expression market_score1+market_score2 is equal to 1
and markets minutes since the last goal is greater than 0.75

and then you can add condition blocks to handle liquidity etc. e.g.

selections trigger expression market_score1+market_score2 is equal to 1
and markets minutes since the last goal is greater than 0.75
AND
   OR
     markets matched volume is greater than 5000
     and markets back book% is less than 102
   OR
     markets matched volume is between 10 and 5000
     and markets minutes since the last goal is greater than 2.00

so in the above example:
the trigger starts looking to bet 45 seconds after the first goal
and if the volume is greater than 5000 it looks to gain value from the book%
but if the volume is lower, it extends the delay to re-form the market to 2 minutes, but without book%
etc....

Hi MarkV,

Thanks for the response.

I am in a bit of a quandary here about doing this, and not sure what the best way to approach it is.

I can see, watching the correct score markets, that odds below 20, seem to have a gap between lay and back of around 2 ticks, and less frequently, the gap can go to 3 ticks, and at quite low odds < 10, the gap is 1 tick

So, given this info, I am wondering, once a goal has been scored, and the market has been given some time to settle back down, if it would be a 'better' course of action to then use the following condition....

Selections lay_price is equal or less than r_ticks(back_price, 3)
Which, as you know, in simple terms, is asking for a lay price at a maximum of 3 ticks above the back price....

It could possibly be too ambitious to ask for lower than that?

I did a match last night, and the liquidity was terrible, there was £132 matched on CS, and so the gap between back and lay was a fair bit bigger, which is probably what I can expect from lower liquidity matches...

Of course, I have only just started looking at it from this angle, so could be completely wrong..

Any advice is appreciated

Thanks

Mark.

Hi
If you stick with say; selections lay_price is equal or less than r_ticks(back_price, 3) then you are not likely to have many markets traded, but those that you do trade in will be good value bets. In this case you do not need the time delay, because it will only bet as and when the price is right.
I don't think it would be too ambitious to ask for lower than r_ticks(back_price, 3) in appropriate markets, e.g. high profile games, or when the scoreline is approaching AOHW etc. and hence the volume on those selections increases.

The only other thing I can suggest in low volume markets is to be the market maker and offer your own slightly better prices than the current ones. If you get matched they will be value bets.


I think it would be better if your trigger conditions could handle multiple scenarios as mentioned a little earlier.

Hi Markv,

Thanks for all your help. I am very happy with the updated trigger after following the suggested advice.

I will look to tweak it further with your latest post, especially the better value / market maker, and using multiple scenarios,

Thanks again

Mark.