One of the most important things to get rich on betting is NOT to create the best model – Instead you need to balance your model with how much liquidity that is available in the market. No use of calculating the most accurate odds, load it with your margin, just to find out that there is no one in the market to take your bets.
I know for my self that I haven’t really been on top of this issue, the reason mainly for betting with low stakes (and therefore almost all the time getting matched). As my account has grown the requested bet size has become bigger and bigger and it will eventually be an issue that I need to address with more intelligence.
I made a graph to see how much I manage to get matched (as percentage) by different requested amounts:
The “amount asked” is rounded to nearest 250 interval, so 0 means asked amounts < 125 SEK. Just as expected there is a quite obvious trend that shows the problem of getting full amounts through at higher stakes.
I’ve also added a linear trend so that I can make a very simple prediction of my match% as my account (and stakes) grows. Actually when playing around with the trend I found out that the exponential trend had the best fit so I use:
y= 0,8412*exp(-0,06x) where x equals my group (0=0 SEK,1=250 SEK, 2=500 SEK …). Extrapolating this on higher stakes gives:
Ouch! I hope that the curve flattens out more when reaching higher stakes in practise.
One reason to be bothered about this fact is that I suspect that I risk getting more matched in parts of my model where there is a lower expected value, meaning that the ROI of my model will eventually also decline as I reach higher stakes. So far I have no evidence of this, but in my mind it is logical.
I will follow up on this, I expect to reach the 2000 and 3000 stakes within a year and will then return to this subject.