.. had a nasty attack of Blogger's Cramp. I'm finding it difficult, at the moment, to come up with anything to write about that is new, different and potentially of interest to anyone.
Elsewhere in blogland there are some interesting debates going on... about multi-monitor trading set ups, tipping services that might not present the reasoning behind their tips in a meaningful manner, and to top it off a debate about how 'moral' sports trading is!
This last one got me thinking. If you haven't a clue what I'm talking about, head over to Sultan's place and have a read for yourself.
'Speedwave' seems to have a bit of an issue with the possibility of wiping someone's bank out by taking their money in one fell swoop. He goes even further, painting the at once quite alarming and somewhat comical picture of some poor sap who'd put his life savings on a 1.05 shot hanging himself! Hmm.. makes me wonder if Speedwave has suffered a big loss backing a short odds 'certainty'. 1.01 he has!
Is there a moral issue here? Not in my book. The person who wants to back something at 1.05 for £1,000 essentially wants the £50 I'm willing to lay it for. Conversely, I want his grand! If 'fair exchange is no robbery' essentially the questions would be backers and layers need to ask themselves are as follows...
1) Am I entering a valid trade?
2) Can I afford to lose the sum of money that I'm investing if it goes wrong?
3) Can I live with the outcome, whichever way it goes?
If the answer to all three is 'yes' - then do it - if not, then don't! It's your decision, your bank and your judgement. No-one else's!
Years ago I was returning home on the last train after a night on the sauce in London. The carriage compartments in those days each had a chain to be pulled in the event of an emergency to stop the train. Underneath the chain was a notice warning of a £50 fine for improper use.
Maybe not quite in the same class as Shakespeare, Milton or Wilfred Owen, but some wannabee Bard had scrawled underneath the warning the following:
If to £50 you have a claim,Much the same with a short odds trade, I'd say!
Be a lad, and pull the chain!
If £50 you do not own,
Leave the f*****g thing alone!
Gun - I return here each day hoping for a new post. Have learnt a lot, so even if you may not have anything unique or revolutionary to post, it doesn't mean there is a lack of substance or value in what you do post!
ReplyDeleteWith regards to morality in sports trading, I can't say I really have an opinion on it, because I've never found myself grinning like a Cheshire cat at the prospect of taking someone's money having laid at 1.04 or whatever. I am winning against a faceless system so the emotions are only to do with winning or losing - certainly not the schadenfreude created through winning.
With that said, I do find myself laying far more than backing. I understand where 'value' traders are coming from, but for me the dynamics are simpler in laying. I risk losing £10 to win £1000 if laying at 1.01. Ok, statistically the likelihood is that we probably don't win. But for a very small downsize, I have a massive upside waiting for me.
And that makes me think - does that make us punters in the same way we might play the lottery? I buy a £2 ticket and could win £1M even though the odds are against me. A value backer deems there to be value in his selection and backs on that basis alone - presumably they don't play the lottery because they don't believe there is value in spending £2.
I may have strayed here from the original point about morality, but I would always be happier losing £10 laying at 1.01 than £1000 by backing it. Where does 'value' come into all of that? Not sure it does and like your little poem sums up both the layers and backers at those prices perhaps.
Thanks for your encouragement, IP!
DeleteOf course there isn't a moral issue. Speedwave or Rodini or Crossing or which ever name he's using this week is always looking for villains in trading. He has his own agenda. He is happy to use my Guide, chatroom and forum yet thinks I am in some way dis-honest as I sell my Guide ( rather than giving it away perhaps?). I am some sort of con artist yet he is happy to take my advice in the chatroom. I wonder how his high moral values reconcile that?
ReplyDeleteDo I think about the person who took the opposite position to me in a trade? Not for a second. Even in Speedwaves childish scenario about hearing that someone who bet on the same match as me killed themselves when they lost and would I feel bad? No I wouldn't.
People need to take responsibility for their own actions whether it be in trading or in general life. There will always be Speedwaves bleating about how unfair life is but his negative take on everything says a lot more about himself than the ethical rights and wrongs of trading sports. ( I tend to rant when I'm bored! )- Paul (TradeShark)
TS - I suppose that many people in the virtual world have their own agenda, negative or positive!
DeleteWhat caught my attention was that it was simply something that had never occurred to me before - as IP says above any winnings that come my way are from a 'facless system' - and any losses that I suffer are recycled into that same faceless system.
I trust that you are bored due to the effective end of the tennis season rather than because of what you read on here :-)
Haha, No its not your blog enducing my boredom! Nor is the tennis season over with many weeks remaining. I'm just waiting for a match to start at quarter past midnight :-)
DeleteTS
That's a relief!
DeleteSitting here myself debating whether to stay up to trade the Botofogo match at 1 am, but I think the faltering eyelids are answering my question for me!
Good luck with your tennis match!
Never looked upon it as a person who I'm betting against before, even though I know it is, but the fact remains that we are all responsible for our own actions, and luckily I suppose we will never find out if someone who opposed one of our positions hung themselves for losing their grand, I say luckily, because I would have a conscience about it.
ReplyDelete