Hi everyone. Keith here with my second months update on our re-review of Football Betting Alerts.
Month one in October saw a small gross profit that after deduction of Betfair commission and FBA subscription costs resulted in an overall loss of £16 when using £20 stakes so almost a break even month.
November saw yet another international break in the football calender and so the number of selections was once again reduced from what we would probably expect in a full month program.
All selections have been placed on the FBA web site in good time and have also been received by email, again in good time.
There have been no changes to the rules during November and that means during the month we had:
- 61 Professor’s Picks.
- 51 of those selections qualified after passing the half time max odds and red card rules.
- 24 won with either a full stake or two half stakes placed.
- 12 won but only had a half stake placed as the match had a second half goal scored before the reduced odds bet was matched.
- 15 lost. All losing selections will have the full stake or two half stakes placed as the second reduced odds bet will always get matched.
This means that when using the advised £20 stake November showed:
- Gross Profit: £-450.00
- Net Profit after deduction of 5% commission : £-480.00
- Net Profit after deduction of 5% commission and subscription costs (£59 per month): £-539.00
The suggested bank size is 40 points so for the advised £20 stake that is £800. Therefore our bank has reduced after costs by 67.00%
Given the number of selections and the win/loss ratio in November, along with the gross profit figure there wouldn’t have been a break even stake figure as there was a gross loss.
The official results posted to the FBA web site show a gross profit of £-310 so there is quite a discrepancy of £140 between my figures and the official FBA figures. The question is of course why?
Well it seems to be for a number of reasons.
Firstly there were two matches in November where the half time score was in the “Any Other Home Win” category with half time scores of 4 – 0 and 4 – 1. These selections could not be bet on using the Correct Score market. Both of these games could have had bets placed on them on the Over Goals markets, Over 4.5 goals and Over 5.5 goals respectively. As I am only collecting data for the Correct Score market I can’t say what the odds of these alternative markets were and have these down as NO BET selections on the attached results spreadsheet. These two matches would have increased the gross total by £40 had the alternative market been used as I assume the official results has done.
Secondly there was a match with a first half red card which according to the rules should therefore be a no bet selection but it is shown as a winning selection on the official results, presumably an oversight. Again this creates a £20 difference between the FBA gross figures and my own.
These two reasons would bring the difference between the official results and my own down by £60 to £80
Looking at all the results it would seem that the reason there is still a difference is down to two things. Some selections in the official results showing as qualifying selections when my data says the half time odds were too high so they should have been no bet selections and others where the second, lower odds, averaging bet shows as being matched in play but my data says the odds never got low enough for that to happen before another goal was scored, cancelling the bet.
A couple of selections showing £20 wins where I have them as no bet selections along with a few £20 wins where I have them as £10 wins would soon make up the difference in our two gross totals.
I have been told by FBA that the professor doesn’t live in a country where Betfair is allowed and so uses Smarkets and Bet365 so on that basis there could at times be a difference between what are official results and what can be achieved when using Betfair. Personally I feel the results page could be improved to give better detail to the reader for each selection but that is a decision for the vendor.
So where does that leave us so far after two months use?
Well in total so far there have been :
- 125 Professor’s Picks.
- 101 of those selections qualified after passing the half time max odds and red card rules.
- 53 won with either a full stake or two half stakes placed.
- 24 won but only had a half stake placed as the match had a second half goal scored before the reduced odds bet was matched.
- 24 lost. All losing selections will have the full stake or two half stakes placed as the second reduced odds bet will always get matched.
This means that when using the advised £20 stake our total shows:
- Gross Profit: £-372.00
- Net Profit after deduction of 5% commission : £-437.00
- Net Profit after deduction of 5% commission and subscription costs (£59 per month): £-555.00
The suggested bank size is 40 points so for the advised £20 stake that is £800. Therefore our bank has reduced after costs by 69.38% after all related costs have been added/deducted (gross P/L, Betfair commission, System Subscription costs)
If we take the view that the bank size should only be to cover the actual system betting part and not the subscription costs, so saying does the actual system work if it was free, then our “betting bank” has reduced by 54.62%.
Either way this is quite worrying and requires a very good December to get things back on track.
I’ll be back in a month to see if that happened 🙂
In the meantime, you can find out more about Football Betting Alerts over here.
Update: 1st November 2017
Hi everyone, Keith here with my first months update on our re-review of Football Betting Alerts.
After an inconclusive, unfinished, review earlier this year it’s an attempt to get to the bottom of whether it’s something you should be looking at as part of your betting portfolio or one to leave alone.
First things first and a bit of a correction on the intro from last month. I stated that we would be looking at the figures for the official “Professor’s Picks” and the “PAD tool“. This is not actually going to be the case.
I was under the impression, wrongly, that the PAD tool had been used for some time and that the selections emailed out to subscribers from it were the official method of using it.
This isn’t the case with the tool only being used for a couple of months and the supplied selections from it just an example of how it can be set up.
The results from it are not included in the results on the FBA website so I think it’s best that we stick to what does make up those results which is now solely the Professor’s Picks.
So what’s the system about?
Once you have a subscription you get access to a number of different services.
These include the Professor’s Picks, the PAD tool (Prematch Analysis Data), Goalfinder (an in-play match analysis tool), Market Matcher and a trading chat room.
The Professor’s Picks are the only official selections with all the other bits being in effect free add-ons that you can either use or not.
This of course makes determining the value of the subscription hard to do as it would depend partly on which of the free add-ons you used and benefited from.
The official “Professor’s Picks” is a “lay the current score at half time” system using a very simple staking plan and rules and the suggested stake is £20 per selection giving a £70 liability.
This is what we will use for our review, but I will also be looking at just what stake is required to break even among other things.
Well as mentioned the Official Picks of FBA is a lay the current score at half time system.
The rules state that if the current score at half time is trading at over 7.00* to lay then that is a no bet selection. If it is trading at between 4.60 and 7.00 inclusive, then we place a half stake lay at the available odds plus a second lay at reduced odds to give an average of 4.50.
Example: If we are using the suggested £20 stake and the half time odds are 5.40 we would place a £10 lay at 5.40 (liability £44) and also a second £10 lay at 3.60 (liability £26) giving us an average of 4.50 (liability £70). In some cases, this second bet will not be matched before a subsequent goal goes in and the bet is cancelled.
The only other rule is that any match with a red card before half time is a no bet selection.
That’s the rules, as simple as they can get really although time consuming as you have to be there at half time for each of the selections to check the odds.
Although I wouldn’t pass on the rules of some systems in a review, as they are what make the system, it’s actually the selections that make this service not the rules. It’s simply a tipping service with a staking plan in reality.
*Note: The maximum half time odds has recently been changed from 6.00 to 7.00 after analysing past data. Although some people may find any system that changes its rules a little concerning I am personally in full agreement with the change as I couldn’t see the point of it being at 6.00 in the first place.
There are times when rules are changed to hide something or to try an extend a failing system. There are also times when rules are changed to improve the system. For me this is an “improve the system” change.
The review results will use the rules that are in force at the time of the selections so this first month will have a combination of max odds 6.00, pre 17th Oct, and max odds 7.00, 17th Oct onwards.
The Professor’s Picks selections are posted to the FBA members web site and also emailed out generally a couple of days in advance of the fixtures.
The selections are not just UK based or even Euro based but can be from anywhere in the world.
This gives us a problem when placing bets manually in that selections could easily start before 6am and run all the way through until after midnight and only the most dedicated users will be sat there all that time.
I am not one of those so what I have done is set up a system that records the odds and liquidity of the correct score market for each selection every minute during the 2 hour period starting at the kick off time.
This data can then be used to determine the P/L of any selection that I’m not able to see live as I know exactly what the half time odds were and how they moved during the second half of the match.
Although it’s unlikely that anyone using FBA manually will be betting on all the selections due to the start times, and so not obtaining the same results, I think it’s important the whole list of selections is used to determine the systems performance.
Without the use of an automated bot everyone is likely to get different results depending on which matches they can physically bet on.
FBA do give instructions on how several third party bots can be set up to run the system and there is also a third party bot designed specifically for the Professor’s Picks.
Neither the bots or the set up instructions are being tested as part of this review.
FBA do stress that they have no affiliation with any of these bots including the one designed for the purpose and any problems when using them should be directed to the bot vendors although I’m sure they would be happy to assist if they can.
During October we had 64 Professor’s Picks:
- 50 of those selections qualified after passing the half time max odds and red card rules.
- 29 won with either a full stake or two half stakes placed.
- 12 won but only had a half stake placed as the match had a second half goal scored before the reduced odds bet was matched.
- 9 lost. All losing selections will have the full stake or two half stakes placed as the second reduced odds bet will always get matched.
Click here for the full results.
This means that when using the advised £20 stake October showed:
- Gross Profit: £78.00
- Net Profit after deduction of 5% commission: £43.00
- Net Profit after deduction of 5% commission and subscription costs (£59 per month): £-16.00
The suggested bank size is 40 points so for the advised £20 stake that is £800. Therefore, our bank has reduced after costs by 2.00%
Given the number of selections and the win/loss ratio in October we would have had to place stakes of £27.97 to break even after all costs.
October started with an international break in the football calendar which means we only had 12 selections in the first two weeks followed by 52 selections in the following two and a bit weeks so the figures we got in October may not be completely indicative of a normal month but I wanted to include it as international breaks are part of the football year.
The official results posted to the FBA web site show a gross profit of £80 so when compared to my £78 that is well within the variance I would expect when using anything other than SP.
I’ll be back at the end of November with the next instalment.
In the meantime, you can find out more about Football Betting Alerts over here.
Keith’s Introduction: 2nd October 2017
Hi everyone. I’m Keith and some of you may know me as one half of the Acebots team behind Bethawk.
As Amy has a lot of reviews to catch up on, I’ve volunteered my services to help out where I can. She has asked me to take on a review which in the past has been quite volatile on these pages and hopefully bring some clarity to it. I would hope that being a system vendor myself will help me see any issues that arise from both a vendor and subscriber perspective.
The systems on offer from Football Betting Alerts seem to have changed a bit since the review earlier this year and will now contain the Professor’s Picks, which are lay the score at half time selections and the PAD (Pre Match Analysis) Tool which allows you to input certain criteria, again based on goals, and will output matches where your criteria fits. I will be running these systems from 1st October for what is at the moment a non fixed term.
One of the issues I see on the horizon is that of being available to place bets for all the selections so I will be recording the half time odds for each selection so that every selection made can be verified against the published results at FBA regardless of whether I was available to place bets on it. There is an optional bot for use with the system from a third party vendor but we do not have access to that for this review.
There is an international break in the football calender coming up so me may get off to a slow start but these periods are now part and parcel of football of course.
Once we have some results under our belt I’ll be back with an update of how things are going.
Lucy’s Original Introduction: 2nd March 2017
I have been hearing a lot lately about a new service called Football Betting Alerts.
(Pre-Match, in fact, did better than ‘pretty well’: it walked off with my 2013 Best Product Oscar).
Football Betting Alerts, however, looks like quite a different beast from its predecessors.
Importantly, it can be used for straight betting rather than just trading: which is likely to extend its appeal to folks with less time on their hands than your average trader.
It also comes with some very impressive claimed results.
Now, of course, I can’t vouch for these but still: you have to start somewhere.
So… what’s it all about?
FBA is a service that has apparently been developed with the help of a maths professor.
Well, no, I didn’t initially believe it either.
But the people at FBA assure me that the person behind the service is indeed a professor of mathematics – which, if true, suggests the service will be all about value.
The strike rate is also expected to be higher than I am used to – over 80%, in fact – which should hopefully make for a relatively comfortable ride.
And the service itself?
Well, it appears to depend largely on two main bet types:
- laying the draw (well, it wouldn’t be a football product without LTD, would it!?)
- laying in the correct score market – primarily, it would appear, in-play during the half-time interval.
The idea is that laying alerts are issued by the service when value is detected – so that all you have to do is enter your bets as instructed. You can attempt to trade outcomes or, if you prefer, just let the bets run until full-time.
The service is intended to be used at the exchanges, so, if it works, it will offer hope to those punters whose bookie accounts have long since been closed down.
I’m really excited about this trial.
The initial results, from the bets I’ve seen, seem very encouraging: though, of course, as ever, we need to run a robust trial ourselves and not trust third-party data.
Martin, a veteran of various trials here at Lay Back, is going to lead this one for me. And, as ever, we will aim at a minimum of 200 bets. He will be here with his first report in early April.
In the meantime, you can find out more about Football Betting Alerts over here.
Update: 31st March 2017
Hello there, my name’s Martin, and Lucy has kindly arranged for me to trial Football Betting Alerts.
There has been quite a lot of fuss around this service and the results it is supposedly capable of producing. So naturally, I was keen to get involved and see if it would live up to all the hype.
FBA was developed by the people who produced Pre-Match Trading, In-Play Trading and a whole host of other similar trading products. Pre-Match and In-Play both did pretty well here at Lay Back And Get Rich so I was feeling cautiously optimistic when I kicked off the trial.
I’ve now been going for about a month and, as you’ll see, I’ve been pretty busy, putting on over 100 bets in that time.
And the good news is that I’m starting to get to grips with the service – and I’m making money.
So what is FBA all about?
The service provides selections, called Picks, via the FBA site only. Their advice is to check on the site 3 or 4 times a week to see if any are available. There is no email notification of these.
The posting of the Picks can be a bit random, as they are sometimes available 2 or 3 days in advance of the games but, at other times, are not posted until a few hours before kick-off. I’m not clear as to why this should be as a few times the site mentioned that there would be X amount of picks for a specific date in the future, so clearly the Picks had been decided on but they weren’t published until closer to that date.
The Picks started out as either Lay the Draw (LTD) at a stated odds value or Lay Current Score (LCS) at half time, again for a recommended odds value. Sometimes a back of the Over X Goals would be taken instead of the LCS depending on which option was most beneficial.
An additional strategy was added last week, which required that a Lay of the HT draw (HT LTD) be done for part stakes at different times during the First Half.
There didn’t appear to be any prior notification about this and the explanation of how to carry it out initially caused some confusion amongst subscribers in the chat room. A full explanation has since been posted on the site.
Living with the service
The service chat room is well populated in the evening and weekends. It is usually visited at peak times by one or more of the administrators so questions can be asked and advice received from them. This can include some live coaching of betting strategies.
The service can be time-consuming, particularly at weekends when there are lots of Picks. The LTD is ok as it can be set up pre-match but the LCS is reliant upon whatever the score and odds are at half-time and so requires input at that time.
The new HT LTD strategy also requires input at points in the first half. There is a third party bot that can be used to place bets automatically but it does not work yet for the HT LTD strategy and is only available at extra cost.
I chose to purchase a subscription to the bot but there have been some problems and it has had a number of updates in the last month. It does seem to be working now however and should be a time saver for the LCS.
The system can also be used with a small number of other generic bots on the market.
My top-level results are as follows:
|No. of Bets Placed||105|
|No. of Winning Bets||83|
Interestingly, my profits are better than the official results as follows:
|Profit total @ £10 stakes less Betfair Commission|
|FBA Official Results||£114.07|
You can download my results log here. It includes notes on individual trades where appropriate.
There could and will be many different reasons why my figures differ from the official service results, including:
- Some bets may not have been matched before a goal is scored.
- Bets may or may not have been placed after a red card has occurred.
- Bets may have been traded in late in the game where the score was close (you’ll see where I did this on my results log against individual bets).
- Some games were played in the early hours of the morning and so were not placed.
- On one occasion Betfair wasn’t working and so FBA decided it would be fairer to strike the results from their list; however, I managed to place them using other bookmakers (for a healthy profit!).
The first month of FBA has been very satisfactory. I’ve made good returns at a more-than-acceptable strike rate and, reasonably quickly, got the hang of the service.
I feel the bot offers real potential for reducing my time commitment so naturally, I’m hoping it performs smoothly in future.
I am looking forward to month #2 and will return around the end of April with my final report.
Meanwhile, you can read more about Football Betting Alerts here.
Update: 1st May 2017
Hello, Martin here with my second report on Football Betting Alerts.
There has been a lot of ‘interest’ in this new service – both positive and negative. You can get a sense of how it has divided opinion by looking at the comments section.
FBA was built by the folks behind Pre-Match Trading, In-Play Trading and a number of other trading tools. Pre-Match, in particular, was a big hit here at Lay Back so, naturally, I was hoping for great things when I kicked off the trial.
My first month went very well, with profits of around 21 points for the period, which, incidentally, was significantly better than the service’s official results.
Sadly, I lost money this month though remain in the black for the trial as a whole.
The headline figures are as follows:
|Last Month’s Profit (b/fwd)||£217.80|
|This Month’s Profit||-£98.40|
|Overall profit (Pts)||11.94|
All bets have been entered to £10 stakes except for a few half stakes where the Correct Score odds were too high.
As mentioned last month, a new strategy, Lay the HT Draw, had just been introduced, which actually bombed on the first day. I lost over £100 using it. It was immediately withdrawn, although selections are still available for those who want to run with it but it is not included in the results.
Ironically the picks for the day after it was withdrawn would have won back pretty much all the losses made the previous day.
As the strategy had apparently been tested and was sound, it seems that perhaps its withdrawal was just an over-reaction to the terrible results of the first day. However, from many of the comments in the chat room and my own experience, there was no confidence in it and many would not have used it again.
You can download the complete results log for month #2 by clicking here.
The month #1 log is available for review here.
The performance of the two main strategies is as different as chalk and cheese.
The Lay the Current Score (LCS) is performing well, making a profit of £222 this month and actually surpassing last month’s LCS figure which was £151.
However, it is being dragged down by the other strategy, Lay The Draw (LTD), which lost £216 this month compared to a profit of £75 last month.
Several of the losses were, to some extent, my fault, as the advice is to trade out of a LTD any time after 82 minutes, especially if the scores are tight. I sometimes did that but I also sometimes took a chance and let the bet run or didn’t have the opportunity to trade out with the result that I inevitably got bitten by late goals and lost where I could have made a small profit. Given the discrepancies between them, there is an argument perhaps to split the two strategies and run them against separate banks.
The system is not ‘set and forget’ as interaction is needed to trade out of LTD if required and for LCS to place the bets at HT depending on the current score and odds, however there is a separately sold bot which, after a number of iterations, now seems to be working properly and is able to take on those tasks.
I would suggest that unless you want to be tied to the computer all night or all weekend, that this would be an essential additional purchase to use with the FBA system.
I’m not sure but I get the impression that as things are not running as well as first expected and that some interest has been lost. The results which were updated and published on the web page every couple of days in the past have not been amended since 20th April.
Also, apparently one or more of the Admins were on holiday or otherwise unavailable and so the picks for last weekend were sent by e-mail and not put up on the web site, despite the standing advice being to check the website every few days for picks.
I can’t understand how, if it were possible to compile a list and email it out why it was not possible to update a web page with that same information. The subscription for this service is quite high and so it should not be too much to ask to have a little consistency about this.
The system is still in profit and things look encouraging for the LCS part of the system, although the high subscription fee would have to be factored into any decision about whether it represents good value.
I intend to run the trial for another two months to get past the ups and downs of normal trialling. Let’s hope this month was just a blip and we return to winning ways next time.
I’ll be back around the start of June.
Meantime, you can read more about Football Betting Alerts here.
Update: 31st May 2017
Hello, Martin here with my third monthly report on Football Betting Alerts.
I’m almost reluctant to make comments on the system this month, as I feel the whole subject has proven to be so controversial. If you don’t know what I’m referring to, you just need to look at the comments at the foot of the page.
I fear some readers, seeing these remarks, may well have essentially consigned the product – and my trial of it – to the dustbin. But my testing is ongoing and I intend to see it through to the end so that the results can speak for themselves.
A quick recap then: FBA is a new service from the guys behind Pre-Match Trading, In-Play Trading and a whole family of other betting products, several of which have done pretty well in trials here at Lay Back.
I have been testing for three months, during which, almost inevitably given that this is sports betting, I’ve experienced boths ups and downs.
In short, month #1 went well and month #2 didn’t but I came into month #3 with a modest profit.
So… would FBA return to form in month #3 or would there be further setbacks along the way?
It’s actually been a pretty positive month for the service.
The top-level performance statistics are as follows:
|Football Betting Alerts – Month 3|
|Month 3 Combined Profit (All 3 Methods)||£189.40|
|Method 1 – LCS Monthly Profit||£278.16|
|Method 2 – LTD Monthly Profit||-£88.76|
|Method 3 – HT LTD Monthly Profit||£0.00|
|Brought Forward Profit from Months 1 & 2||£119.40|
|Whole Trial Net Profit (£)||£308.80|
|Whole Trial Net Profit (Pts.)||30.88|
As you can see the overall profit has risen from £119.40 last month to £308.80, an increase of £189.40 after Betfair commission to £10 stakes.
Without the LTD bets, the monthly profit would have been £278, which inevitably make you wonder whether to bother with them at all (You can see why I don’t have a decision to make about this in the Summary section below). In any event, I think it’s fair to say that FBA has had a good month overall.
If only the LCS picks had been bet on, the results would have been even better. Interestingly, if you look at the previous two months, each of those would have been profitable as well, if only LCS bets had been entered.
You can get hold of the complete results log for month #3 by clicking here.
The service is performing a lot better in my trial than many of the naysayers would have you believe.
However, the monthly subscription charge is £79, so this does need to be taken into account when looking at what profit is made.
My concern is that FBA was supposed to have been tested extensively, so it seems odd that, three months or so after its release, the supplier has effectively admitted that there is an issue with the LTD picks and that that they will be concentrating only on LCS bets for a while.
That, and the withdrawal of the HT LTD tips after disastrous results last month, makes me wonder just how rigorous the testing really was.
There are one or two other gripes as well.
- A few times, the game times that were published were out by one hour which meant I missed putting bets on.
- Also, the general administration has sometimes been of poor quality. I recently received a message to say that now the admins were back from holiday this would be addressed. But for a supposedly professional service charging a very large subscription, I think the absence of administrators for whatever reason should not impact on the service people are paying for.
I’m going to keep the trial going for at least one more month and then wrap things up for good.
I’ll be back with my conclusion around the end of June.
Meanwhile, you can find out more about Football Betting Alerts here.