Backing on Over 0.5 Goals at increasing prices
Description
This strategy is as simple as it says so on the label: you just back on the teams in a football match to score at least one goal. However, there is a staking plan within this strategy:
1. You bet a fixed percentage of your current bank.
2. Start by backing the highest amount on Over 0.5 at the beginning of the game, while the price is still low.
3. As the game continues, place another back bet on Over 0.5, with a lesser amount and at a higher price.
4. Close to the end of the first half, place the third bet at the highest price.
5. If the score is still 0 – 0 towards the end of the game, distribute the loss evenly.
6. If you suffered loss in a game, increase your next 3 bets by 20%, then revert to the initial bet size. E.g. with a bank of $1,000 and a bet size of 2%, you back 20. If you lost -$15.00, and your bank is now $985, the next 3 bets will be $985*0.02 + 20% = $23.64.
This strategy heavily relies on the low chances of a game ending with a nil score. But it would be pointless if you were betting before or shortly after the start of the match, because the price of Over 0.5 Goals normally reflects the high chances of at least one goal in a match. That’s why you need the second and third bets.
Triggers
Download the trigger setup file.
Profile name: three-back-bets-over-05
How to run this trigger package:
1. Download and run the above installation file.
2. It contains three files: the trigger file, the Market Locator search template and the program settings. These files will be copied to corresponding folders on your computer (where other triggers and templates are already stored).
3. Run MarketFeeder Pro and choose the right settings profile from the drop-down list:
Here are the constants you can adjust:
| bet_size | Size of the first bet, % of the bank |
| bet2_size | Size of the second bet, % of the first bet |
| bet3_size | Size of the third bet, % of the first + second bet |
| bet1_minute | When to place the first bet (minute of the match) |
| bet2_minute | When to place the second bet (minute of the match) |
| bet3_minute | When to place the third bet (minute of the match) |
| close_minute | When to distribute the loss (minute of the match) |
| max_05_price | Maximum price for the first bet |
| min_vlm | Minimum market volume |
| cycle_length | Number of steps in the loss recovery cycle |
| max_loss | Maximum loss, % of the bank, after which the loss cycle is restarted |
| multiplier | Number by which to multiply the bets following the loss |
Let’s track my progress together.
Triggers In Action
Day 1, January 03, 2019
I started with the following settings:
| bet_size | 2 |
| bet2_size | 20 |
| bet3_size | 7 |
| bet1_minute | 5 |
| bet2_minute | 20 |
| bet3_minute | 40 |
| close_minute | 80 |
| max_05_price | 1.14 |
| min_vlm | 500 |
I did not have any loss recovery at first, as I was merely testing the waters to see how many wins I can get and at what odds.
Total P/L: 11.19
ROI: 1.17%
Wins: 42, losses: 3.
Download Statement for 03/01/2019
Day 2, January 04, 2019
This was an OK result, so I proceeded into the second day without changing anything.
Total P/L: -17.85
ROI: -2.19%
Wins: 27, losses: 4.
Download Statement for 04/01/2019
Day 3, January 05, 2019
Since my second day ended up with a loss, I wanted to try and insure the losses in Over 0.5 goals against another market of the same match.
So I came up with this idea: alongside with backing on Over 0.5 goals, I will also back on Under 1.5 goals and green up after the 20th minute if the score is still 0-0. This way I will generate some profit even if nobody scores a goal.
I also adjusted the maximum price of the bet after I considered the prices of my losing bets.
My settings were as follows:
| bet_15_size | 2 | The size of the back bet on Under 1.5 goals, % of the bank |
| bet_15_minute | 20 | When to place the bet on Under 1.5 goals, minute of the match |
| greenup_15_minute | 7 | When to green up the bet on Under 1.5 goals, minute of the match |
| min_15_price | 5 | Minimum price of Under 1.5 goals |
| max_05_price | 1.12 |
I introduced additional triggers, which you can download from this link:
Download the triggers with backing on Under 1.5.
Total P/L: 7.81
ROI: 0.22%
Wins: 99, losses: 22.
Download Statement for 05/01/2019
Day 4, January 06, 2019
I thought that the whole insurance scheme was not worth the effort and traffic spent on refreshing an extra market per each football match. Instead, I decided to introduce a loss recovery plan, because my strike rate vs average odds were looking good. Read more about the correlation between the strike rate and loss recovery efficiency here.
I chose the typical multiple-step loss recovery, where the accumulated loss is divided by a certain number of steps (cycle_length) until it is fully recovered or until the loss has reached its predefined maximum value (a percentage of the bank, max_loss).
I also lowered the minimum market volume limit, as I was eager to try this plan in as many markets as possible, and my bets were not very big anyway.
My settings:
| cycle_length | 6 |
| max_loss | 30 |
| min_vlm | 400 |
Total P/L: 1.32
ROI: 0.11%
Wins: 39, losses: 5.
Download Statement for 06/01/2019
Day 5, January 07, 2019
Leaving all settings without change, I tested the triggers for another day.
Total P/L: -4.46
ROI: -0.19%
Wins: 35, losses: 3.
Download Statement for 07/01/2019
Day 6, January 08, 2019
I was obviously making no headway, although not suffering any noticeable loss either. I needed a breakthrough!
Having done some mathematical modelling based on my account statements, I decided to try a different loss recovery plan. This time I will increase a fixed number of bets (cycle_length) in the markets that immediately follow the lost bet, and I will do so by multiplying them by a fixed number (multiplier). As soon as cycle_length is over, I will get back to the initial bet size.
I added the new constant (leaving all others unchanged):
| multiplier | 1.2 |
This means, after a loss, I bet 20% more in the next three markets, and then got back to square 1.
Total P/L: 51.21
ROI: 8.14%
Wins: 28, losses: 0.
Download Statement for 08/01/2019
Too bad I did not have a chance to test my new loss recovery plan – there was simply no loss that day! Yay!
Day 7, January 09, 2019
Pleased as I was with a finally promising result, I needed to stick to the plan to find out whether it was performing correctly with real loss.
Having studied my previous account statements, I also noticed I was missing on an opportunity to increase my profits without significantly increasing my risks by betting more on the third go, after the 40th minute of the match! So I changed the size of the third bet.
| bet3_size | 10 |
Total P/L: 43.42
ROI: 4.98%
Wins: 34, losses: 1.
Download Statement for 09/01/2019
My bank balance and statistics:
Overall, I definitely see potential in this strategy! It appeals to me because it is very low-risk, but it can bring in a steady stream of profit – a workhorse among betting strategies.
I’d like to find the time to experiment with the sizes of the three bets, or rather with how they are correlated with each other – perhaps I should have been backing less the first time and more – the second and third time as the match progressed and the prices were crawling up?
At any rate, I felt sorry that the week was over and I had to switch to the next strategy!
User Review
Our long-time user and a valuable member of community, BobH, offers some thoughts on this strategy below:
I ran it weekend before last, and I tested 5 scenarios.
1. The original triggers as is (Original plan)
2. Plan 1: Amended bets to 1.25% of bank, then 60%, then 37.5%. No minimum price first bet, spreading losses at 80 mins.
3. Plan 2: 1.25%, 60%, 37.5%, minimum price first bet $1.05, spread losses at 80 mins.
4. Plan 3: 1.25%, 60%, 37.5%, no minimum price first bet, no spread of losses at 80 mins.
5. Plan 4: 1.25%, 60%, 37.5%, minimum price first bet $1.05, no spread of losses at 80 mins.
The reason I amended the bet sizes was that having the highest bet at the lowest price was never going to work, and the amendment increased average return.
Results are produced below.
Starting bank: $1,000:
Testing Period 5th to 8th April 2019
| Plan | Games | Wins | Strike Rate % | Commission paid | Profit/Loss | ROI |
| Original | 454 | 401 | 88.3% | -$25.79 | -$101.82 | -$1.1% |
| Plan 1 | 459 | 406 | 88.5% | -$28.29 | -$63.90 | -$0.7% |
| Plan 2 | 400 | 352 | 88.0% | -$31.10 | +$10.34 | +$0.1% |
| Plan 3 | 452 | 413 | 91.4% | -$28.67 | -$95.63 | -$1.2% |
| Plan 4 | 404 | 366 | 90.6% | -$30.76 | -$95.58 | -$1.4% |
You can amend the triggers to follow any of the suggested plans and check whether they make sense to you! We thank Bob for taking the time to do these great tests!
If you liked this trigger review, sign up for our newsletter to be the first to learn about new reviews!
Download the trigger installation file above and start testing this strategy right now! Are you not using MarketFeeder Pro yet? Try now!
How and where I test the triggers?
I use our BetVPS service to pre-set the triggers and Market Locator and leave it to run on its own until I check on the results at the end of the day.I occasionally use Time Machine to get a proof of concept or test any tweaks that I want to make to my triggers, on historical markets similar to the ones in which I bet when testing a particular strategy.
I use Test Mode only.
You can generate your own graph and statistics like the ones in these Triggers in Action reports. Read how to do this.
If you would like a unique guest-post for your blog covering one of such strategies, please email me a request.