For me, an important part of deciding on a strategy to employ before a match starts are the facts and opinions available to me. I might look at, amongst others, www.soccerstats.com or the bbc, and I might consult one of the many on line forums. But I also rely quite heavily on the odds being offered on Betfair and traditional bookmakers. As a sense check for other sources of information you can rely quite well on the collective informed opinion that causes markets to be priced as they are.
But what about when the game turns in play and the real trading begins?
I have said before that I seldom watch or listen to a game that I'm trading. The reason is that my opinion (i.e. conclusions made in my head) is far too easily influenced by what I can see and hear. Many is the time that I've lumped on high scores in a game that finishes 0-0 or exited a trade at half time because the match has been slow and boring only for there to be four or five second half goals. I find it suits me much better to rely on what I know - ie. the current score and the current time elapsed / remaining. It is, afterall, these two factors that drive the prices in all markets.
Some of the people I trade with on line put a lot of store in the stats available on sites such as flashscores, using things like shots on target to decide if a particular course of action is viable or not. This approach doesn't suit me, so I take no notice of it usually, but tonight it came up again and I got wondering who decides what a 'Shot on Target' actually is? Are headers included, for example? What about a shot destined for row Z that flies off an outstretched boot into the goal? If it ended up in the net, it must have been 'on target' in one sense! Or a scuffed shot right heading right for the far corner but at such a pace that even I would stand a half sensible chance of keeping it out?
I know the guys you use these stats are generally speaking successful with their trade - and I'm in no way knocking or mocking it! I just wondered, that's all! Answers on a postcard, please!
No comments:
Post a Comment