Anyone interested in trading the in-play soccer markets could do a lot worse than take a look at a post by The Sultan. I'm not going to repeat any of it here, you can read it for yourself, but the gist of the post is that our preconceptions sometimes colour our judgement when it comes to trading certain leagues in certain countries. Regular readers will know that I favour French football for my particular strategy - yet if you asked most traders who don't operate in these markets I'd offer odds on that they'd say something along the lines of 'boring, few goals, lots of 0-0's'. Hmm - have a look, guys!
Another point that comes across from Sultan's musings is that a fast (or, by implication, a slow) start to a football match does not necessarily mean the game will continue in that vein. By way of illustration consider two games this week that I got involved with - one a pleasure the other little short of a nightmare!
Both matches took place in what I will refer to as the League Cup. This competition is a bit of a strange one in that it seems to be approached by some managers with little serious intent, by others as a 'blooding ground' for rising young talent and by yet others as the only realistic chance of silverware this season. It is, therefore, potentially both a trader's paradise and nemesis. Checking the teamsheets is no sure fire way of judging a match as lots of players are going to be relatively unknown... in short it's a bit of a lottery.
On Tuesday Chelsea took on Wolves at the Bridge. They were, unsurprisingly, heavy odds on favourites and fielded a strong team. My experience of Chelsea is that they are usually slow starters and I was therefore happy to take them on with a lay in the Half Time market where they were priced at 1.65. This is a trade I quite often do with strong favourites who are odds on in that market, the intention being to trade out at about the fifteen to twenty minute mark for a decent profit. A goal to the favourites is the obvious danger, one to the underdogs is a 'Brucie Bonus'! For those unfamiliar with the half time market it works in exactly the same way as the full time market, except, of course, that the effect of time decay is more marked as there is less time and usually very little 'injury' time. Of course, the Blues came swiftly out of the blocks and were two nil up in the blink of an eye leaving me with a large red right at the start of the evening. The addition of a third (after I'd laid Any Unquoted - believing it would all settle down for a few minutes :-( ) killed the trade stone dead. I was in a fairly uncomfortable position with a hefty three figure loss staring me in the face. I laid the AU again for an unseemly amount of money and sat and waited to be steamrollered. Fortunately it somehow stayed 3-0 until half time at which point I decided that discretion was the better part of valour and took a small red overall and gracefully withdrew.
On Wednesday evening there was an interesting match in prospect between QPR and Reading, both strong contenders for relegation from the Premiership this year. It's hard to imagine either manager relishing a potentially long League Cup campaign distracting his side from what will possibly (probably?) be a season long fight for survival, yet I would think that both would see the psychological importance of a morale boosting win against a team in a similar position. My trading decision revolved around two possible outcomes - no goals - or loads of goals. I sided with the the latter, placing £10 on 1-1, £5 on 2-2 and £2 on 3-3.
At 1-1 after 16 minutes I was sitting reasonably pretty. With large chunks of money on 2-2 and 3-3 I felt able to lay Over 2.5 at 1.11, a trade I stayed with until half time. Sure enough the game settled down, and at one point I wondered if 1-1 would likely be the full time result. I drip laid 1-1 from the start of the second half, and waited with a growing sense of anticipation as QPR took a 2-1 lead, Reading equalised (green out of 2-2!) and then took a 2-3 lead. At this point with a handsome green figure on the 2.5 market and a three figure sum on all scores bar 3-3, which had a boatload more, I took the decision to leave the trade as it was - a QPR equaliser would have been a definite 'cake icer'. Unfortunately it wasn't to be.
Should I have traded out of 3-3 at 2-3? With the benefit of 20:20 hindsight, absolutely! But I think sometimes when you've already landed a nice profit it pays to be a little bit greedy and hold out for the jackpot.
Two different fast start outcomes there - and between them they embody, to me anyway, the challenge and thrill of in-play soccer trading. But I wouldn't like one every night... a nice, easy, straightforward 1-1 in France or Argentina normally suits me just fine!
Here's a stat for you Gun, as I've been digging through the French Ligue 2 data for last season today.
ReplyDeleteLast season there were 83 matches that had 2 goals in them at HT. Now obviously the time at which these were scored, by whom, and what the match up was will determine the o2.5 price at HT. But can we say an average price of 1.25 is about fair? Most likely it would be lower, but I don't have this average figure to hand.
If so, of those 83 games with two goals in the first half, 22 saw no further goals in the second half. The other 61 did.
If at HT you had laid o2.5 for £100, leaving £35 liability your profit / loss would have looked like this over the season:
22*£100 = £2200 profit
61*£25 = £1525 loss
Total = £675
This would just be straight betting obviously. Naturally, as traders we would look to trade out, this limiting the potential loss. But it gives food for thought all the same. I know you're a big fan of covering liabilities in one market by laying low in another and these stats, at least for this league, last season, reinforce that it is a viable, and perhaps, value trade? Though of course, that argument may fall to pieces based on the average o2.5 price at HT for this league, which as I said, I don't have.