BSG Review
I think both the draw systems work, but the biggest problem at the moment is bank management and knowing how big the drawdowns are going to get. I am reviewing the systems to find ways to reduce those drawdowns.
What are the current drawdowns?
The MDDs (Maximum Draw Down) for the core trends of the Betaminic draw strategies are in the range of the ELS x2-3. (Estimated Losing Sequence) This is based on a snapshot analysis of all the 12 years of data in the Betamin Builder database.
The Betaminic draw strategies actual drawdown from TippingSports data is currently -49 points after 888 bets, which is the ELS 23 x2 of a 33%-win rate strategy, but the 10 Betaminic Draw System strategies actually have win rates between 30-36%.
The BSG Draw System core trend A2 tips actual drawdown from TippingSports data was -95 points after 3,905 bets, which is the ELS of 23 x4.1. So far, it has recovered from all its drawdowns to date.
This is one of the reasons I say the Betaminic Draw system may have less volatility since the core trend itself has smaller drawdowns. But both systems work. They have drawdowns, but they come back up and go to new highs. It is just a matter of keeping the bank going until it recovers.
Is a drawdown of the ELS x2 or x4 normal?
The only way we can gauge these things is through comparison of data.
There are 743 Public Strategies at the moment. I did an analysis of their Maximum Drawdown to ELS ratio.
I would say a drawdown which is the ELS x1-4 could be considered normal. Over x4 is unusually volatile.
I think the MDD/ELS ratio is a good new indicator of how volatile a system is in comparison to others because it takes into account bet numbers and win rates. In this way we can compare high win rate strategies with low win rate ones, and we can compare strategies with 10,000 bets worth of data with those that have less than 1,000 bets worth of data. We can finally find a fair unit of comparison.
How should we calculate the total possible drawdown of the bot sets?
I think we can calculate the possible drawdowns of a bot set as the combined drawdowns of the component bots based on their win rates and the ELS we get from them.
The big question is what multiple of the ELS should we pick?
The answer to that is how safe you want to be with your bank.
We can plan on the ELS multiple that has happened in the past (aggressive) or plan on the ELS multiple that has happened in the past +1 or 2 ELS multiples on top of that.
Using bots with higher win rates will have smaller ELSs and drawdowns. So that is an argument to stop using the 0-0 correct score bot since it has the lowest win rate of all the bots at 13%. It is also an argument to find alternative markets that express the core trend but have higher win rates, such as HT draws, under/over 0.5HT, under/over 1.5HT, under/over 2.5FT. I will be running tests on these and update you on the results.
How does my MDD aggregation calculation work for my current bots?
From my notes, the BetaminicDraw set has had a total drawdown of -210 points for 5 bots.
The BSG Draw System has had a total drawdown of -250 points for 6 bots (Including the 0-0 Correct Score bot).
The aggregate ELS of the 5 bots in the BSG set are 130. If we add the 0-0CC bot it becomes 196.
The current actual -250 MDD of the set is the 5 bot ELS of 130 x1.92. So we could say that the MDD is the aggregate ELS x2 at absolute minimum. If we want to be even safer, we should use the ELS x3, and in fact, I would prefer to go even further and suggest an ELS x4. 83% of all the Betaminic strategies have MDDs of the ELS x4 or less. 68% of all the Betaminic strategies have MDDs of the ELS x3 or less.
Does that mean we need to imagine the MDD of the BSG Draw System is actually 390 or even 520? But please bear in mind that is the combined drawdown of 5 bots, not one bot. Maybe we should start considering each bot separately. Either way, those are large drawdowns needing a larger bank to bear them.
How can we reduce drawdown?
The answer is one or a few of the following options:
A) Keep the current bot set, but be prepared to use a larger bank if needed. The aim being maximum profit.
B) Reduce drawdowns by reducing the number of bots in the set. Rank the bots by win rate or points profit per month and add them to your set in that order as your bank size allows.
C) Try to find higher win rate markets that are still connected to this trend.
D) Try to find alternative draw selection methods with higher win rates or a better ROI.
I took my BSG draw test bot data and looked closer at the win rates and ELS. The test bots have been running the longest and so have the most data.
There are some new bots in there looking at connected markets.
A6 Backs the full time 0-0 correct score.
A7.1 Backs the half time 0-0 result through the under 0.5 goals market.
A7.2 Backs the half time under 1.5 goals selection.
A7.3 Backs the half time draw.
A7.4 Backs the half time 0-0 result through the half time correct score market. There is little liquidity in this market so there are fewer qualifying bets.
A8 Backs the full time under 2.5 goals selection.
It is not certain that these markets will also make profit long term just because the pre-match match odds draw bet is value, but it is worth trying to see if we can find a market with a higher win rate that we can bet on.
The bots with the highest win rates will have the lowest drawdowns.
We then face a choice of adding in bots based on their ELS x4 which we use an expected drawdown.
We can add them based on low drawdown or high points profit per month.
If we add them based on low drawdown, excluding the ones currently making a loss, we see it actually makes sense to just follow the one with the highest win rate that your have trust in. e,g, The A7.3 HTdraw bot to get +47 points per month or even add theA7.1 HT0-0 bot and A2 current odds pre-match draw bet to get +30 points per month. Then we could be more efficient with our bank. But questions I have would be “Does splitting the stake among different markets make the volatility smoother or not?” and “Is there enough liquidity in those new smaller niche markets?”
If we add them based on points profit per month, excluding the ones currently making a loss, it is less obvious what is best. It seems to make sense to follow the top 3 bots to get +30 points per month.
The newer bots have far too little data to draw conclusions from, but my gut feeling is that we should go with the profit making bots with the highest win rats, since they should have the lowest drawdowns.
So, if you wanted to take the leap, you could aim for +30 points per month with:
A7.3 BSG Htdraw
A7.1 BSG U0.5HT
A2 BSG current odds pre-match draw bet
The calculations being that even with an ELSx4, they would not need a bank of more than 212 points.
Or in another way to view it, bet 0.47 points of a 100-point bank on each bet.
1,000 bank -> +300 per month
3,000 bank -> +900 per month
3,300 bank -> +1,000 per month (The target number for me.)
Let’s try and do the same analysis for the BetaminicDraw System
If we add them based on low drawdown, excluding the ones currently making a loss, we see a similar result to the BSG results. Just betting on one bot with the highest win rate is the most efficient use of the bank. The half time draw bet yielding +28 points per month from a 100-point bank since it has just an expected MDD of -48 points. The more bots we add in, the more the bank needs to increase to manage the bigger drawdowns and the less efficient the system is with our betting capital.
If we add them based on points profit per month, excluding the ones currently making a loss, again it s not clear what the best choice is. He most efficiency comes from following the top 2 A2 pre-match current price draw bot and A7.3 htdraw bot which suggest +19.68 points profit on a 100 point bank each month. Again, here I see by adding 2 more bots we still have +15.5 points per month but my gut feeling of security from following multiple markets instead of one.
Again, the data for the new bots is meaninglessly small, but the similar trends of the HTdraw for both the Betaminic and BSG draw picks is encouraging.
So, if you wanted to take the leap (before the data is properly developed), you could aim for +20 points per month with:
A7.3 BM Htdraw
A2 BM current odds pre-match draw bet
The calculations being that even with an ELSx4, they would not need a bank of more than 138 points.
Or in another way to view it, bet 0.72 points of a 100-point bank on each bet.
1,000 bank -> +200 per month
3,000 bank -> +600 per month
5,000 bank -> +1,000 per month (The target number for me.)
I am not going to recommend changes to you all just yet, but I am going to watch the data carefully.
But if you do want to reduce drawdowns, then pause or lower stakes on the bots that you have the least interest in, either because they have large drawdowns (ELSx4), low points per month or low ROI. (Also balance your choices with putting more trust in the bots with more data behind them.)
Personally, I am adding all these bots at £10 stakes, but that is because I am profit driven and hedging my bets that my old or new bots will do well over the next few weeks, and also because I have the ability to add another 1,000 to my bank if needed. I am very sure that the BSG core trend works and any downturns will return to positive territory eventually. Nearly 10,000 bets of data for BSG draw system says that.
2024-4-4 update
A night’s sleep can help information settle and ideas form.
The new bots with higher win rates look promising, but they have too little data, so we must exclude them from our options for now. We must focus on the long running bots.
BSG 5-bot set
With this new calculation method, the longest running 5 bots have an ELSx4 of -627 points. This is much larger than my currently recommend 300-point bank.
If we convert that to a 100-point bank, we should be betting 0.16 points per bet with a monthly target of 11.61 points. +11.61% per monthly increases on your bank would still be a very good result. The stake size should only be increased only during losing runs of the core A2 trend.
BSG 6-bot set
The new 0-0 correct score bot now has 573 bets of data, and I think that is enough to be meaningful. The only worry there is that the bot has only been running for 2 months and we want to see it go through a few more winning and losing months. But if include this bot it improves the monthly performance of a 100-point bank.
With my new calculation method, the current 6 bots have an ELSx4 of -879 points. (But that is only in the case that all of the bots have 4 of their statistically expected longest losing runs in quick succession. This is literally the worst case scenario and very unlikely, so planning our bank based on this makes it much safer.) This -879 points is much, much larger than my currently recommend 300-point bank. So we must reconsider our bank management if we ae using these 6 bots.
If we convert that to a 100-point bank, we should be betting 0.11 points per bet with a monthly target of 16 points. +16% per monthly increases on your bank would be a very good result. And of course, the stake size should only be increased only during losing runs of the core A2 trend.
BSG 2-bot set
If we want to simplify things, we could just follow two of the long term bots, the pre-match and in-play current odds bets. They follow the same draw trend, but with the luck of inplay goals, one bot can have a winning run when the other has a losing one. They offer some spreading of risk.
These 2 bots have an ELSx4 of -222 points. This is lower than my currently recommend 300-point bank.
If we convert that to a 100-point bank, we should be betting 0.45 points per bet with a monthly target of 16 points. +16% per monthly increases on your bank would be a very good result. And of course, the stake size should only be increased only during losing runs of the core A2 trend.
This simplified bot has the same monthly increase as all 6 bots together. My gut feeling is that following the trend expressed through different bots may help to make monthly volatility smoother.
BSG 3-bot set
This adds in the 0-0 correct score bot so that we have the FT draw, FT 0-0 and FT score draw covered.
This increases the monthly increase to nearly +22 points per month with 0.21 point bets from a 100-point bank.
That is an improvement on the previous sets and we are spreading the bets among 3 different expressions of the core trend, so monthly results may be smoother.
For the BSG draw set, I feel the 6-bot (+16p) or 3-bot (+22p) set are the top choices.
BSG 6-bot set
100-point bank
+16 points per month
0.11 points per bet (143.07 points x 0.11 stakes = about 16 points aggregate profit)
880 point estimated maximum drawdown (880 x 0.11 point stakes = 96.8 points)
A £6,000 bank aims for £1,000 profit per month
BSG 3-bot set
100-point bank
+22 points per month
0.21 points per bet (103.51 points x 0.21 stakes = about 22 points aggregate profit)
473 point estimated maximum drawdown (473 x 0.21 point stakes = 99.33 points)
A £4,500 bank aims for £1,000 profit per month
Please adjust your bots and stakes based on these calculations.