Topic: The paradox of arbitrage betting (and how to make money on it) - page 2. (Read 447 times)

I think that the existing identification capabilities (not to mention the KYC, which is quite common for many bookmakers) allow you to very effectively determine the relationship of accounts. In the situation of bookmakers against an arbitrage better, it is obvious that the bookmakers are in an allied position and are interested in establishing a channel for transmitting information between themselves.
As for the opportunities to make such bets, yes, they are not simple, but not so difficult either, because, for example, in live betting, the odds change very often and quickly.

I also don't know how they do it but it's certainly possible as i've seen a couple of cases before even with different nicknames it won't be enough to hide their actions since if they have some suspicions they can easily look for every account that placed similar bets or on the opposite side.

There are websites that offer arbitrage opportunities like Bitodds for example they have alerts that mention which sportsbooks to bet on. I agree with the large bankroll part, to make your effort worthwhile you really need a huge bankroll since the profits you get aren't that much and it could only take a couple of bets before the bookies catch on with your betting activities.

That's a terrible way of looking at it and you're just exposing yourself to an extra 1.74% margin on the bookmaker's side. It would only ever make sense if there was some sort of promotion for placing a 3 leg multibet that would make it worthwhile, and chances are the bookmaker might see it as promotion abuse in the case.

If you place the multibet with 1 mBTC on each side, you have a chance at either 2.9 mBTC profit or 1.58 mBTC profit. You can also bet 2 mBTC on your "locks" and end up with 2.2 mBTC in profit (4.2 mBTC payout) guaranteed. However, if you'd prefer to have a chance at more profit, you could play a dice roll at 1% house edge and bet 0.62 mBTC on a 2.13x bet (for 0.7 mBTC profit). Thus, you have a 46.48% chance of ending up with 2.9 mBTC, and 53.52% chance of ending up with 1.58 mBTC.

If we assume that the market for your "arbitrage" leg was efficient, the implied vig-removed probability of each outcome is 57.82% (1.70) and 42.18% (2.33). Thus, by placing a dice roll instead of "arbitrage", you have a 4% higher chance of ending up with the larger sum of money. You could argue that you believe the 2.33 fighter has a greater chance of winning than the odds implied, but then we would be getting into value betting territory and you'd be purposely taking a stupid -EV bet on the 1.70 fighter for no reason.

You are right, casinos pay attention to all profitable players and eventually get rid of them (I wrote about this earlier), but this is mainly for fiat bookmakers. With the advent of crypto bookmakers and various services where you can bet directly against another better, this problem becomes less acute.

I also doubt they are going to share data about who are those users trying to game the system by trying to implement this arbitrage betting. But I think it's based on the amount of money you bet on a match which they will identify that a user is doing the arbitrage betting. He will need to calculate how much he'd bet on the other side on one platform and to the other.

It's because regardless of the outcome of the game, the bettor will always win and bookmakers don't like it when you keep winning even if it's just a small amount of money every time. It accumulates.

How would a bookmaker be able to exchange information with another about a particular player?
Only if that player uses the same nickname in both houses or has KYC in both houses as well.
And even then, I think it's unlikely that they talk to each other about players.

However... It's very difficult to see totally opposite winning possibilities in both houses, the best bookmakers use good algorithms to predict the favorite and they adjust it all the time.

This is essentially the principles of +EV betting.

It comes with risks and you need to make sure that you still manage your bankroll correctly, because bad beats can happen even if you are doing everything right.

And don't think that this is the magic thing that will ensure you never get caught. If you bet and win consistently and show that you have an edge, most casinos/sportsbooks are still going to catch on as a matter of time regardless of how well you conceal your activities.

The problem is that bookmakers (at least in my country) fight successful bettors not only on formal grounds (prohibition of arbitrage bets, multi-accounts for receiving bonuses, etc.) but also simply because such bettors are profitable. It can be called differently, like a ban on "value betting", but basically, for no reason, successful bettors have their betting limit reduced and they are practically deprived of the opportunity to bet at least some significant amounts.

Betting had a very simple statics.It may be any kind of betting. Occurring a wide set of tactics is essential in betting.You need to learn huge amount of betting idea, only by the tactics.Arbitrage trading was an enough one to get a good profit. Betting is a part of risk. One side, it will gives you a enough chance of winning.On the other hand, their is a chance of losing in the gambling. Losing is not only in gambling and same was their in trading too.

What is the real advantage of this kind of bet?
I miss this part ... betting in only one side what type of advantage should bring to the player? You have just placed a bet with odds higher then 2.00 that's all. You don't need an arbitrage bet but just an event with one of the side above 2.00.
If you are searching an arbitrage bet you need to use a scanner enable to find for you these options.
Scanners are not free. Create a scanner or check bookmakers requires a lot of time...

From my experience: you need a LARGE bankroll in both sites you're using for arbitrage (but there are dozens of bookmakers that could have an opportunity for an arbitrage bet so it's become a LARGE bank roll "no limits funds" in all available site).
Higher odds are available (generally) in exchange markets but there is not enough liquidity for a large bets...
At the ends there are just few real options suitable and even if you are able to found the real advantage is just a little percentage.
Time and efforts doesn't justify the work for such bets.

You can avoid some betting limits because if you bet in FIAT, you can use meanwhile CRYPTO bookmakers.
For certain amounts it's close to impossible some one will note, but the amount available for "real cashout" is a little percentage, few dollars unless you're playing with 5-digit amount but at this point I don't know if it is really worth as idea.

Hey Boris, I remember you

Statistically, I agree with the idea that betting on same probability outcomes but with higher than expected returns is profitable in the long run, but I think the strategy you suggest can't be in any way labelled as arbitrage since by definition, arbitrage means betting on both sides of the same market.

Again, I'm not going to get into an argument, but when I am value-betting for picks, I always choose what I believe is good value (and statistics usually back my pick). I translate simple odds into statistics (not scientific but there you go). For example, 10/1 should translate into 10% wins but if the stats show they actually win more than 10% of the time on those odds, then you have good value.

So I keep betting on those types of games, on my picks threads, but I'm not sure I'd call that arbitrage?

You write nonsense because it has nothing to do with arbitrage betting - and Turner and Holland can lose their fights and then your supposedly "guaranteed profit" will turn into a loss.


1. The theoretical possibility is one thing, the practical implementation is another. I showed a theoretical possibility. And in fact, arbitrage opportunities are not fleeting phenomena at all - for example, if you bet a week before the event, then you will most likely have the opportunity (long in time) to make an arbitrage counter-bet. If this opportunity does not appear, then you can wait for the start of a sporting event and catch such a bet in live mode.

2. The problem of the presence or absence of the necessary bankroll does not cancel the fact that there is an opportunity to make arbitrage bets.
I do not see a fundamental difference in risk, since at a distance (as I showed in the calculations in the first post), from the point of view of mathematics, such bets are equivalent to classical arbitrage.

I think that there are two problems with this:

1. You are not going to find a lot of profitable arbitrage opportunities. Even if you sign up to a subscription service, by the time that you see a recommendation/tip it's probably already too late and the opportunity has been taken advantage of.

2. A lot of the people here don't have the bankroll management that is necessary for this, and it's not a "surebet" in the sense that you are only making paper profits (in terms of EV) and not necessarily booking it in reality. There is a huge difference in risk.

In fact, it is not the size of the bankroll that matters, but the speed of its turnover. If you play plus then you will quickly increase your bankroll with the condition that you make a lot of bets. As for sporting events with three (or more) outcomes, arbitrage strategies work for them also, but there you should place bets guided by a different algorithm.

I try to use this strategy whenever the opportunity arises. You can do a similar strategy with options in the stock market. When it comes to gambling though, these opportunities frequently present themselves. Especially with live betting. You just have to arbitrage your bets when you see that the odds change to where it’s possible.

I also will sometimes add multiple bets if there’s a “sure thing” to make the arbitrage bets more profitable as parlays. That sort of defeats the purpose, but if it’s a sure enough bet, it can enable lots of arbitrage opportunities. Just don’t lose the sure thing.

I have read in the past about people making big money with this technique, but I have never tried it. You need a big bankroll to make a profit and there is always a risk.

We could try to do arbitrage betting on UFC but sometimes the fights end in a Draw, and that would be a game over for us. And as OP mentioned, sportsbooks keep an eye on the user's bets to try to avoid this practice and they could ban our accounts.

Jalin Turner (1.67) and Kevin Holland (1.26) together is only worth only (2.10).

The way the arbitrage I posted works is, one side is (4.90) the other side is (3.58).

Bet 1 mBTC on both sides, 1st parlay pays out 3.90 mBTC and 2nd pay sout 2.58 mBTC.

Total winnings come out to either 2.90 mBTC or 1.58 mBTC once the 1 mBTC loss from the losing leg is factored in.

Its a guaranteed win as long as the lock plays hold up.

...

Arbitrage is a strategy where winning becomes possible on both sides of an outcome.

Asking for guarantees in the context of sports gambling, where there never are guarantees unless games are rigged.

Is like asking for water that isn't wet.

This is a good format for turning uncertain sporting events into arbitrage opportunities.

Which is the best anyone could hope for given the circumstances.

Individual losses or wins are not important. Only the average is important. In this example (and in any other case of arbitrage bets), the average outcome will be profitable.


Yes, I'm talking about sports betting.
I do not have all the information to prove that by arbitrage betting on different sites you will attract attention, and you cannot prove otherwise. Therefore, it is worth thinking about different options. It seems to me that bookmakers are not stupid and effectively resist those who are trying to make guaranteed money.
As for the difficulty of finding such bets, I heard that there are aggregator sites that provide such information. In addition, if you bet live, then you will have much greater opportunities to find an arbitrage bet.
Yes, crypto betting shifts the advantage towards the player. But in any case, the struggle between bookmakers and bettors is not the main topic of my thread. I wanted to show a mathematical paradox.


This is a completely wrong example of arbitrage. No matter how "confident" you are in the outcome of the battle, it may end differently. The meaning of arbitration is in guarantees. Your premonition and analytics do not guarantee anything.
If you're sure about Jalin Turner (1.67) and Kevin Holland (1.26), just bet on them and take the easy money, right?

That’s exactly what I was thinking as well, and I think it would also be better to have partners that you somehow know so you could constantly communicate about what will be your next agendas and actions in executing this. Nice comprehension and explanation here by the way, @Mauser.

The formula for arbitrage plays in sports gambling looks like this IMO.

To cite an example, consider the last UFC event:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UFC_272

Let's say you were fairly certain Jalin Turner (1.67) and Kevin Holland (1.26) would win their fights.

But didn't have an idea of who would win the fight between Ludovit Klein (2.33) and Devonte Smith (1.70).

Make 2 parlays

Ludovit Klein(2.33), Jalin Turner(1.67), Kevin Holland(1.26) = (4.90)

Devonte Smith(1.70), Jalin Turner(1.67), Kevin Holland(1.26) = (3.58)

That's one potential method of turning uncertain matches (with good odds) into arbitrage winners as long as the locks hold up.