PP: : How do bookies distribute the overround in a book?
Gerry: Good question. You might assume that the over-round would be spread evenly amongst all outcomes, but for most markets, the extra % is taken out of the outsiders. For example, in a three outcome event, if I believe ‘A’ has an 89% chance, ‘B’ a 7.5% and ‘C’, a 3.5%, (a 1/8 12/1 28/1 book), I’d probably offer up a book of 1/10 7/1 11/1.
"You might assume that the over-round would be spread evenly amongst all outcomes, but for most markets, the extra % is taken out of the outsiders."
PP: A demonstration of the favourite long-shot bias?
Gerry: Indeed.
PP: That's to do with liability management?
Gerry: That's right - mainly because traditionally, the outsiders are often punted heavily.
"Punters are optimists by nature, they believe that every live match will be a 5 goal thriller."
PP: What do you think are the most common mistakes punters make then?
Gerry: Not looking for value. If you back the big 3 in a treble each week, you’ll definitely have a few winners, but throughout the course of the season, you’ll have spectacularly done your conkers.
PP: Yep. I think betting on the over for total goals on a game they're going to watch on Sky is another. It's difficult to bet on a game you're going to watch end up 0-0 or 1-0.
Gerry: Definitely, it's a rarity for us to see a 0-0 bet in a match. Punters are optimists by nature, they believe that every live match will be a 5 goal thriller, a 0-0 draw is always a fantastic result for the layers.
PP: What are the common mistakes compilers make? And how common are they?
Gerry: With the possible exception of myself, odds compilers are human beings and mistakes are made. It’s the novelty markets where companies haven’t got the luxury of other firms prices as a guideline where an error can be made. One online bookie offered 10/1 about a goal being disallowed in a match, that was a real clanger. Unortunately, ricks of that calibre are few and far between.
PP: So what markets are likely to offer the best value?
Gerry: In football, the lower down the ladder you go, the less well informed the compilers are. If your best mate is a striker for Brigg Town and gives you a little info, you probably know more than the market makers.
"If your best mate is a striker for Brigg Town, and gives you a little info, you probably know more than the market makers."
PP: Very true. I think a lot of people don't seem to know about Asian handicaps also. I noticed a Spanish game with Victor Chandler recently. The home win on the 1X2 was 1.72 yet just a few markets away on the Asian Handicap -0.5 it was 1.91.
Gerry: Bloody hell, that surprises me, the VC guys are normally spot on
PP: You rate VC then? Which bookies have the best soccer odds compilers? Which ones do you really respect?
Gerry: VC as I say, they're normally on the mark. The boys at Boylesports know their onions also, they’re happy to take an opinion on a game, and hold the price.
"I admire companies that take a stand such as Boylesports or have a massive range of markets such as Bet365 and Stan James."
PP: What about Ladbrokes, Hills and Corals?
Gerry: The big 3 are all good at what they do, their prices are always in line. But I admire companies that take a stand such as Boylesports or have a massive range of markets such as Bet365 and Stan James.
PP: Yeah, I'm always wary when Ladbrokes have the stand-out price in a market.
Gerry: This is from a footballing viewpoint by the way, for horses, Laddies are the top boys
PP: Right. Do you think fewer bookies are willing to take a position on a particular team like Boylesports these days?
Gerry: There are a few companies that try to hold their prices when they're top price, but the explosion of the exchanges definitely limits the amount of stands that the layers can make
PP: Why's that?
Gerry: Step too far out of line from the Betfair market and the arbers will devour you.
PP: One of my questions was' How have exchanges changed things'? What else have Betfair and co changed?
Gerry: As I say, price changes are a far more frequent occurence due to the exchanges, although it benefits the layers as they can lay rags (outsiders) in the book, which was a struggle pre Betfair.
For example, we layed Sunderland, West Ham, Wigan and West Brom at the start of the season to win the Premiership
PP: I think there may be a reverse favourite long-shot bias on the exchanges. Newbie layers seem to have a 'that's never gonna happen' mentality and offer odds a bookie wouldn't dream of.
Gerry: You may be right there, i've heard the story of the 999/1 winners on the horses, a very painful lay.
PP: I think there's something psychological going on where people are happy to lay at 10-1 when they would never back at 1/10. it doesn't seem to quite sink in that they're doing the same thing.
"Every bookmaker I know wears a fur coat and drives a sports car"
Gerry: I don't know about that, anyone who's clued up enough to work a PC and bet via the exchanges should know the basics. Saying that though, every bookmaker I know wears a fur coat and drives a sports car, so maybe you're right.
PP: I do it myself. I know on some level that it's the same thing but I'm psychologically more comfortable laying at 10-1.
Gerry: Interesting, I suppose it may have something to do with the 'better to be a layer than a player' adage. Although, as you say, with a 100% book, you're simply backing at 1/10
PP: Aye. Do you bet in running at all? It's an interesting challenge for bookie and punter alike.
Gerry: I do, I take an interest in the match betting and total goals markets mainly.
PP: Do you work to a system or go on instinct?
Gerry: A bit of both. I have stats for the last 10 years that give me a great guide for many of the markets, including total goals etc, but a lot of the guys out there have the same info, so touches are rare. I still prefer to look at how a game's going, and use my judgment.
PP: Interesting. I suppose the feeling in general is that people are under greater time constraints so more mistakes are made. The herd mentality is also stronger so you're often predicting the behaviour of the crowd and the price movement rather than the fundamentals of the game.
Gerry: Excellent point. A team's name can also make a difference to match odds. When Nottm Forest were relegated to League 1, they were always a shorter price than their true probability of winning a match would suggest, simply because they were Nottm Forest in League 1. The opposite applies with the likes of Bolton, because they're unfashionable, their odds against the bigger teams can be inflated.
"With the likes of Bolton, because they're unfashionable, their odds against the bigger teams can be inflated."
PP: Definitely. I think myths persist about certain teams. I spent some time laying 110% books on Betfair under/over markets. Manchester United were winning every home game 1-0 at the time, tight in defence and really struggling to score. But they were still regarded as a great overs team. I could lay them often between 1.5 and 1.6 for the overs early in the week before the shrewd money came and pushed the price out
"You may think a team will win the match, but if you take any price, you're never going to win money."
Gerry: Nice touch and i agree completely, I think I'll start trying to do the same myself.
PP: I notice some guys have an excellent instinctive ability to read a football game but don't understand the concept of value and make fundamental probability errors.
Gerry: Value is rule no 1, 2 & 3. It's the fundamental of gambling, every poker player knows that if they offer a player 2/1 about an opponent on a flush draw that's a 5/2 shot, they've got him by the nuts. The same applies with punting, you may think a team will win the match, but if you take any price, you're never going to win money.
PP: Yep. A lot of people still think value=long-shot and say "I don't back value - I back winners"
Gerry: Yeah, the 'you can't eat value' argument, a great line, but an awful concept.
Join us next time for more chat on arbers, accumulators and the future of betting.
BBC
