Acca lesson #1

[maffew]

Shockers happen.

I've got back into it recently and lost £250 in the space of 2 days...

1. Each Way Dutched a 5 runner race. Only 1 horse finished so only 1 place was paid out.
2. Very next day, EWDed an 8 runner and there was a very late non-runner which reduced the place payouts from 3 to 2, and the favourite then hacked up.

I've never really got into accas though, strangely, although I understand they can be a decent and steady stream.

I dont know if I would be disciplined enough to go into low risk/ EVs heck I'm not even disciplined enough to always do a simple one properly without taking a punt with the free bet

 

[StonehamPark]

Yeah this wasnt a shocker money wise, just stupidity. on a side note I remember many years ago when it was a fairly new thing and a huge thread on moneysavingexpert someone (IIRC) losing 1.7k or might have even been 17k, screwing up a lay on a tennis match, and another event which wiped out thousands from loads of accomplished bettors

I lost just over £2000 around June last year on a lay mistake. Just one horse that did it.
Before that day, I'd have counted myself as a totally competent matched-better. I'd bet over £100k (not profit obviously!) over 3 years, no other mistakes that I could recall. Healthy enough profit.
Packed it in that day, haven't been back since.

 

[Bevendean Hillbilly]

Yeah this wasnt a shocker money wise, just stupidity. on a side note I remember many years ago when it was a fairly new thing and a huge thread on moneysavingexpert someone (IIRC) losing 1.7k or might have even been 17k, screwing up a lay on a tennis match, and another event which wiped out thousands from loads of accomplished bettors

My mistake? Dont laugh, lesson learnt for being greedy and stupid (and not entirely risk free)...

Tenner on new account with PaddyPower. If the bet loses the £10 gets refunded Bet it on Chelsea Burnley Draw. Laid it on Betfair (Yes I know they are the same company but lets ignore that). Was all set to make a nice £7 Profit at 66%. Anyway, 89 minutes and I checked Paddy Power and they were offering £3.50 to cash out at 2-1 down. Oooh I thought I'll have that, not thinking it would void my £10 back so cashed out. Therefore breaking even. Then they said here's some free spins and I had £3.50 left in my account after my **** up. Must have clicked on the wrong thing as I had one spin, it cost me £2 so I end up with around 8 quid from a tenner for all that hassle

.

A series of unfortunate events.

Ouch.

 

[Johnny RoastBeef]

Acca lesson #1 should be NEVER DO ACCAS! They are the bookmaker equivalent of a carnival fixed sideshow. All you are doing when placing an accumulator bet is magnifying the bookmakers edge. In the long run you can never win. That's why the bookies use ACCAS as their go to promotional tool.

Here is a exert from the excellent book The Football Code THE SCIENCE OF PREDICTING THE BEAUTIFUL GAME by James Tippett, which explains why ACCAS are a bad idea.

'The second cunning device which bookmakers offer is accumulator betting. In much the same way as cashing out is a bad idea, so too is the placing of accumulator bets. Placing an accumulator, or “acca”, is essentially betting that a series of results will all occur. Suppose, one Saturday afternoon, you think that West Ham, Crystal Palace and Millwall all have a strong chance of winning their respective matches. You check the with the bookmakers, and are delighted to discover that they are offering 9/ 1 for these three teams to win. These seem like great odds (a £ 5 bet returns a full £ 45 in winnings), so you place money on the accumulator. Let’s assess why betting in this manner is foolish, and how the bookmakers exploit this ignorance for money. As we have seen, it is crucial to calculate the probabilities surrounding any bet we place. Say that our punter thinks that West Ham, Crystal Palace and Millwall each have a 40% chance of winning their games. This would make them all favourites. How then do we work out the probability that all three of these teams will win? It’s easy, we simply multiply the probabilities in decimal terms: 0.4 x 0.4 x 0.4 = 0.064 Thus, the probability that all three sides will win, and the bet succeeds, is 6.4%. When you translate the bookmakers’ odds of 9/ 1 into percentage terms, you are left with 10%. In other words, the bookies are giving all three teams winning a 10% chance of happening, whilst the bettor is giving it a 6.4% chance. The odds that the bookmakers have set are overvalued, meaning there is a negative expected value to the bet. The punter is destined to lose money over the long run.

What has gone wrong? What has made such a seemingly lucrative bet so unappealing all of a sudden? Of course, most bettors don’t ask these questions. They will continuously place accumulators, virtually handing the bookmakers their money. If the punter was to stop and question the mechanics in process, he would realise that the problem stems from our incapacity to multiply percentages effectively. We do not realise that when you multiply together the chances of three pretty likely things occurring, the accumulation of odds makes the desired outcome incredibly unlikely. In fact, if our punter was to add another team with a 40% chance of winning to the accumulator (say, Charlton, carrying on our London club theme), the odds of all four teams winning would be 2.6%. This bet would succeed once in every forty or so attempts. Nevertheless, the bookies would only pay out odds of roughly 20/ 1, assigning roughly a 5% chance to the possibility of all four teams winning. The key to gambling is finding the outcomes that you think are more likely than the bookmakers are predicting, something that you will hardly ever accomplish with accumulated bets.'

 

[Bozza]

Acca lesson #1 should be NEVER DO ACCAS! They are the bookmaker equivalent of a carnival fixed sideshow. All you are doing when placing an accumulator bet is magnifying the bookmakers edge. In the long run you can never win. That's why the bookies use ACCAS as their go to promotional tool.

Here is a exert from the excellent book The Football Code THE SCIENCE OF PREDICTING THE BEAUTIFUL GAME by James Tippett, which explains why ACCAS are a bad idea.

'The second cunning device which bookmakers offer is accumulator betting. In much the same way as cashing out is a bad idea, so too is the placing of accumulator bets. Placing an accumulator, or “acca”, is essentially betting that a series of results will all occur. Suppose, one Saturday afternoon, you think that West Ham, Crystal Palace and Millwall all have a strong chance of winning their respective matches. You check the with the bookmakers, and are delighted to discover that they are offering 9/ 1 for these three teams to win. These seem like great odds (a £ 5 bet returns a full £ 45 in winnings), so you place money on the accumulator. Let’s assess why betting in this manner is foolish, and how the bookmakers exploit this ignorance for money. As we have seen, it is crucial to calculate the probabilities surrounding any bet we place. Say that our punter thinks that West Ham, Crystal Palace and Millwall each have a 40% chance of winning their games. This would make them all favourites. How then do we work out the probability that all three of these teams will win? It’s easy, we simply multiply the probabilities in decimal terms: 0.4 x 0.4 x 0.4 = 0.064 Thus, the probability that all three sides will win, and the bet succeeds, is 6.4%. When you translate the bookmakers’ odds of 9/ 1 into percentage terms, you are left with 10%. In other words, the bookies are giving all three teams winning a 10% chance of happening, whilst the bettor is giving it a 6.4% chance. The odds that the bookmakers have set are overvalued, meaning there is a negative expected value to the bet. The punter is destined to lose money over the long run.

What has gone wrong? What has made such a seemingly lucrative bet so unappealing all of a sudden? Of course, most bettors don’t ask these questions. They will continuously place accumulators, virtually handing the bookmakers their money. If the punter was to stop and question the mechanics in process, he would realise that the problem stems from our incapacity to multiply percentages effectively. We do not realise that when you multiply together the chances of three pretty likely things occurring, the accumulation of odds makes the desired outcome incredibly unlikely. In fact, if our punter was to add another team with a 40% chance of winning to the accumulator (say, Charlton, carrying on our London club theme), the odds of all four teams winning would be 2.6%. This bet would succeed once in every forty or so attempts. Nevertheless, the bookies would only pay out odds of roughly 20/ 1, assigning roughly a 5% chance to the possibility of all four teams winning. The key to gambling is finding the outcomes that you think are more likely than the bookmakers are predicting, something that you will hardly ever accomplish with accumulated bets.'

That would be the case if it were not the case that most bookies offer an insurance option should one leg of five lose.

Therefore by choosing low odds 5-leg only accas the edge returns to the punter.

 

[Wrong-Direction]

Acca lesson #1 should be NEVER DO ACCAS! They are the bookmaker equivalent of a carnival fixed sideshow. All you are doing when placing an accumulator bet is magnifying the bookmakers edge. In the long run you can never win. That's why the bookies use ACCAS as their go to promotional tool.

Here is a exert from the excellent book The Football Code THE SCIENCE OF PREDICTING THE BEAUTIFUL GAME by James Tippett, which explains why ACCAS are a bad idea.

'The second cunning device which bookmakers offer is accumulator betting. In much the same way as cashing out is a bad idea, so too is the placing of accumulator bets. Placing an accumulator, or “acca”, is essentially betting that a series of results will all occur. Suppose, one Saturday afternoon, you think that West Ham, Crystal Palace and Millwall all have a strong chance of winning their respective matches. You check the with the bookmakers, and are delighted to discover that they are offering 9/ 1 for these three teams to win. These seem like great odds (a £ 5 bet returns a full £ 45 in winnings), so you place money on the accumulator. Let’s assess why betting in this manner is foolish, and how the bookmakers exploit this ignorance for money. As we have seen, it is crucial to calculate the probabilities surrounding any bet we place. Say that our punter thinks that West Ham, Crystal Palace and Millwall each have a 40% chance of winning their games. This would make them all favourites. How then do we work out the probability that all three of these teams will win? It’s easy, we simply multiply the probabilities in decimal terms: 0.4 x 0.4 x 0.4 = 0.064 Thus, the probability that all three sides will win, and the bet succeeds, is 6.4%. When you translate the bookmakers’ odds of 9/ 1 into percentage terms, you are left with 10%. In other words, the bookies are giving all three teams winning a 10% chance of happening, whilst the bettor is giving it a 6.4% chance. The odds that the bookmakers have set are overvalued, meaning there is a negative expected value to the bet. The punter is destined to lose money over the long run.

What has gone wrong? What has made such a seemingly lucrative bet so unappealing all of a sudden? Of course, most bettors don’t ask these questions. They will continuously place accumulators, virtually handing the bookmakers their money. If the punter was to stop and question the mechanics in process, he would realise that the problem stems from our incapacity to multiply percentages effectively. We do not realise that when you multiply together the chances of three pretty likely things occurring, the accumulation of odds makes the desired outcome incredibly unlikely. In fact, if our punter was to add another team with a 40% chance of winning to the accumulator (say, Charlton, carrying on our London club theme), the odds of all four teams winning would be 2.6%. This bet would succeed once in every forty or so attempts. Nevertheless, the bookies would only pay out odds of roughly 20/ 1, assigning roughly a 5% chance to the possibility of all four teams winning. The key to gambling is finding the outcomes that you think are more likely than the bookmakers are predicting, something that you will hardly ever accomplish with accumulated bets.'

Yeah but it's just like the lottery, gotta be in it to win it and anything can happen.. as I lose another acca..

Sent from my SM-A310F using Tapatalk

 

[Johnny RoastBeef]

That would be the case if it were not the case that most bookies offer an insurance option should one leg of five lose.

Therefore by choosing low odds 5-leg only accas the edge returns to the punter.

But does it? All you are doing is winning a second chance at fixed game. As the example shows statistically you will still lose money in the long run.

 

[maffew]

.

A series of unfortunate events.

Ouch.

Ah in my boredom I just asked their chat where my bet was pointing out that the Ts and Cs dont mention cashing out (which it does kind of) so they gave me a freeby

 

[maffew]

I lost just over £2000 around June last year on a lay mistake. Just one horse that did it.
Before that day, I'd have counted myself as a totally competent matched-better. I'd bet over £100k (not profit obviously!) over 3 years, no other mistakes that I could recall. Healthy enough profit.
Packed it in that day, haven't been back since.

Ouch I dont think I could stomach that, numbers way too high! The addictive nature in me would leave a risk to chasing my 'losses' I reckon

 

[Jesus Gul]

Looks likely I’m going to land a 7 fold.
Citeh, Juve, Barca, PSV, PSG, Porto, Bayern
What could go wrong? (Realistically Napoli or Benfica pipping my picks)
Only returns about 80/1

 

[Munkfish]

Looks likely I’m going to land a 7 fold.
Citeh, Juve, Barca, PSV, PSG, Porto, Bayern
What could go wrong? (Realistically Napoli or Benfica pipping my picks)
Only returns about 80/1

Juve vs Napoli this weekend, 4 points between them.

I'd love to see Napoli win the league. But I hope your bet comes in, how much did you lump on?

 

[Gazwag]

But does it? All you are doing is winning a second chance at fixed game. As the example shows statistically you will still lose money in the long run.

Depends on how you play the game

 

[KZNSeagull]

I've been doing +EV accas for most of the season and am £1250 up so far. Accas are also good for account image - I have yet to be gubbed by a bookie on which I have placed a reasonable number of accas.

 

[Simster]

But does it? All you are doing is winning a second chance at fixed game. As the example shows statistically you will still lose money in the long run.

Yes, it does. [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION] is right. That said you do have to be very careful about the accas you take:
1) You have to take odds where the bookie has miscalculated their edge
2) Even then, if you are laying these off sequentially, you do have to hope the market isn't too volatile and that it moves against you.

 

[Jesus Gul]

Not enough unfortunately £1.50. Also had some 20p sixfolds

 

[Johnny RoastBeef]

Yes, it does. [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION] is right. That said you do have to be very careful about the accas you take:
1) You have to take odds where the bookie has miscalculated their edge
2) Even then, if you are laying these off sequentially, you do have to hope the market isn't too volatile and that it moves against you.

You're talking about arbing, which will get your accounts gubbed.

I'm talking about placing genuine accas, which will only lose you money long term.

 

[StonehamPark]

I'm talking about placing genuine accas, which will only lose you money long term.

Sequential accas can make you a very decent profit.
Mug betting loses you money long term.

 

[Johnny RoastBeef]

Sequential accas can make you a very decent profit.
Mug betting loses you money long term.

Agreed, ACCAS are fundamentally the worst kind of bet when you mug bet.

But how do you avoid the bookmakers restricting your accounts if you only sequential? Surely you need to throw them off by mug betting?

 

[StonehamPark]

Agreed, ACCAS are fundamentally the worst kind of bet when you mug bet.

But how do you avoid the bookmakers restricting your accounts if you only sequential? Surely you need to throw them off by mug betting?

Never heard of anyone being gubbed by placing sequential accas.
Placing the acca itself is 'mug betting'.

 

[Johnny RoastBeef]

Never heard of anyone being gubbed by placing sequential accas.
Placing the acca itself is 'mug betting'.

Interesting. Thanks, I'll give it a go.