Triggers in Action — a new high-scale, transparent strategy-testing project

Hi again,

The time difference makes it difficult to have an immediate conversation.

I downloaded your trigger "as is" on 26 March. The only change I have made was to disable the "distribute loss" at 80 mins.

Trigger "back 1" does not show a minimum price for the first bet; in fact, the condition reads: "and selections back price is between 1.01 and max_05_price". In the constants, max_05_price is shown as 1.12.

If there has been a revised trigger since 26 March, then I have not upgraded, so my records are based on no minimum price on the first bet.

I ran the trigger last night (my time), and it showed a loss of $83.47. I stopped it just prior to 24 hours as I have a few other tasks to do this morning (my time - Australia).

75 games for 67 wins (89.3%).

Average price on winning games was $1.075.

Please don't misunderstand my comments. I am really keen to see these tests being made by you, as your triggers are an eye-opener for rank amateurs like me. I am 70yo, and I have been constructing my own basic triggers for over 12 years, but I am not very literate on programming.

I encourage you to keep doing these examples, so we can all see different theories, different triggers, and your testing. I am certainly enjoying them.

My comments were simply to suggest that the 05 trigger as described will probably not be successful long term, but with some adjusting, it may be OK. I personally like the theory behind it.

By contrast, I also ran your greyhound trigger last night, and it was totally successful, reaching the maximum profit of 15% of bank quite early in the day, but it had a couple of scary moments through the loss recovery process.

Happy to discuss further,

bobh

That's interesting: thanks for sharing your experience with those triggers.

Can you also try them with the loss distribution trigger? How many games did you lose that day?

This idea came to me after I had been trying to figure out what was common among the favourites which were losing in horse races. I just compared all the main qualities such as price, age, weight and then I looked at their form (the silks form, the list of the places they took in the previous races). This strategy is the result of my experiments with the form.

Laying on the favourite horse based on the form of the first 3 favs

The triggers will work in horse races where the Silks data are available (such as the jockey’s name, age/weight and form of each horse).

You need to pick a race where the forms of the first three favourites satisfy the following criteria:

- The form is not empty;
- The last three symbols of the favourite’s form do not include 1, 2 or 3;
- The last three symbols of the second favourite’s and third favourite’s forms do not include 1.

You then lay the first favourite, with a loss recovery in 3 steps.

Tested for 7 days, from 15/03/2019 to 21/03/2019.

Hi Oxa, 

Testing the layform trigger, does it not stop betting after it’s made 10% profit? I found it keeps going example starting bank 1049 , bank is now 1079 but it’s still betting why is this?

hi
trigger constant

Maximum profit (% of bank) after which the triggers stop betting

so 1049 + 10%(104.90) = 1153.90 
the trigger will bet until the bank is about 1153.90

mcbee 

Tested Laying on the favourite horse based on the form of the first 3 favs trigger with a few changes and found after about 3 weeks it does make money very slowly. What it needs is some type of protection system against 3 favorites winning in a row.

Also i found a weird anomaly when ever a FAV would win quite often the next triggered LAY bet would also lose. This happened very frequently.

I designed a trigger to back this bet to win and actually made some money lolol

I have found the trigger does not make enough bets to make the system as it is viable, it will bore you to death with the continual chase back of lost money.

Good try OXA but no cigar with this one, needs major changes, using form like using horses barriers does not have the impact on future results as many think they do.

Chaos theory gets the same or better results...

Bonecrusher

Good try OXA but no cigar with this one

I simply test the strategies I come across, without actually promoting them. 

Our long-time user and a valuable member of community, BobH, offers some thoughts on the strategy "Backing on Over 0.5 Goals at increasing prices".

He has tested the triggers between April 5th and 8th (400+ games on each plan) and given us an impressive feedback on what worked for him and what had not.

Read his review in the updated article above!

I give you my report of backing on Over 1.5 goals in football, with profit accumulator and loss recovery.

Backing on Over 1.5 with a profit accumulator and a loss recovery plan

The final edition of my triggers do the following:

1. Choose football matches with at least £500 matched. The pre-off price of Over 1.5 Goals must not be higher than the value you’ll specify.

2. Wait until the price of Over 1.5 goals raises to 1.8, then back a fixed percentage of bank.

3. If the bet lost, multiply the bet size by 1.1 and back in the next qualifying match.

4. If the bet won, provided that there is no outstanding loss to recoup, multiply the profit by 2.5 and place a back bet with the resulting value in the next qualifying football match. If there is still loss waiting to be recovered, follow the loss recovery plan in point 3.

Tested for 9 days.
Period of testing: 27/05/2019 to 04/06/2019.

This strategy is very similar to Laying against 0 – 3 or 3 – 0 in Correct Score in favour of the underdog, except that is even more straightforward: you lay against 0 – 1, period.

I was intrigued by a member of a betting forum to test this strategy as they claimed that statistically this outcome (0 – 1) happens less often than, say, 1 – 0.

Without adding further complications to this strategy, except for a plain loss recovery, I set to this task. See my results in the article.

Laying against 0 - 1 in Correct Score (football)

Tested for 8 days.
Period of testing: 09/07/2019 to 16/07/2019.

I came up with this idea after watching a number of tennis matches where the obvious favourite of the match (pre-off) often lost the first set, only to regain his/her control in the subsequent sets and eventually win.

To be precise, I was looking for this scenario:

  The pre-match favourite player starts their first set by losing a couple of games to the underdog. Their price reacts to this by growing high above the initial value.

  After the end of the first set and somewhere in the middle of the second set, the favourite hits back and starts leading again, their price returning to the initial value or even dropping further.

Read the report below and download the triggers I created based on this scenario:

Backing and greening up on a pre-match favourite in Tennis

I came up with this idea after watching a number of tennis matches where the obvious favourite of the match (pre-off) often lost the first set, only to regain his/her control in the subsequent sets and eventually win.

To be precise, I was looking for this scenario:

  The pre-match favourite player starts their first set by losing a couple of games to the underdog. Their price reacts to this by growing high above the initial value.

  After the end of the first set and somewhere in the middle of the second set, the favourite hits back and starts leading again, their price returning to the initial value or even dropping further.

Read the report below and download the triggers I created based on this scenario:

Backing and greening up on a pre-match favourite in Tennis

Just bought the software and this strategy seemed a good place to start and understand how to setup, as I want to trade tennis using triggers
Have a question re trading out in the 2nd set. You are using tennis_current_game > 6. I understand why you are using that as you need to take account of a 5-1 score. However, it will also trade out at 3-3, not giving the fav time to come back. Seems to me it would be good to change the trigger to fire if either player had scored 5 games in the set. Just trying to work out how that could be achieved and wondering if you could point me in the right direction please ?

I came up with this idea after watching a number of tennis matches where the obvious favourite of the match (pre-off) often lost the first set, only to regain his/her control in the subsequent sets and eventually win.

To be precise, I was looking for this scenario:

  The pre-match favourite player starts their first set by losing a couple of games to the underdog. Their price reacts to this by growing high above the initial value.

  After the end of the first set and somewhere in the middle of the second set, the favourite hits back and starts leading again, their price returning to the initial value or even dropping further.

Read the report below and download the triggers I created based on this scenario:

Backing and greening up on a pre-match favourite in Tennis

Just bought the software and this strategy seemed a good place to start and understand how to setup, as I want to trade tennis using triggers
Have a question re trading out in the 2nd set. You are using tennis_current_game > 6. I understand why you are using that as you need to take account of a 5-1 score. However, it will also trade out at 3-3, not giving the fav time to come back. Seems to me it would be good to change the trigger to fire if either player had scored 5 games in the set. Just trying to work out how that could be achieved and wondering if you could point me in the right direction please ?

Think I have it. Have an Or block using tennis_player2_games_won =>5 or tennis_player1_games_won =>5

The idea of this set of triggers was prompted by a post by betfair winner: he referred to a staking plan at The Staking Machine that suggested measuring your strike rate at fixed intervals and then adjusting the size of your bet if the strike rate is below (or above) the target value.

I played with this idea for a month or so, trying different sports and types of bets, and here is what I’ve come with, which I believe is the optimal result of my efforts.

1. Lay on the 2nd favourite in a Greyhound race.

2. Measure your strike rates over the last 10, 20, 30 and 50 bets.

3. If they are below the target rate of 73% (i.e. if you win less than in 73 cases out of 100), then add a certain fraction to your bet liability for each measurement that falls short (see the constants for concrete numbers). If all four are below the target, then add all four fractions to your liability: 0.15% + 0.1% + 0.075% + 0.05%.

Look at the scheme below to quickly grasp the idea:


I have tested these triggers for 10 days, from January 16 to January 25, 2020.

Take a look at my results and thoughts on this staking plan:

Laying on Greyhounds with a staking plan based on the strike rate

1. At 10 minutes before the beginning of a horse race (I tested the strategy in UK & IRE races) start monitoring the prices.

2. Record all horses whose price has dropped by at least 5 ticks over the time left till the off. More than half the field must have their prices dropped — that’s one of the main conditions of the bet.

3. At 30 seconds before the off lay on the lowest priced horse whose odds have NOT dropped till then.

4. Later on green up for 15 ticks of profit or stop loss at 20 ticks of loss.

The point is to observe the horses that shorten their positions (potential winners) and lay the other one, a possible loser, in a hope to green up later.

Tested for 17 days, from 06/02/2020 to 23/02/2020.

This is another green-up strategy with low risks (and low profits, unfortunately).

See the full report below:

Laying on the horse whose price never dropped, and trading it out at In-Play