I've trialed this for six consecutive days; covered 18 games; lost money in two and returned on 16. A return of 23%. Small stakes only and cashed out immediately the first goal went in. I could have held on for more but wanted to get a worst case scenario. Very low maintenance strategy, and easy to duck in and out of on my mobile. No time consuming research - I just went with the games where the odds on over 2.5 were shorter than under 2.5. My go to, simple strategy.
Disadvantage to dripping stake into the market would be that a goal goes in before all parts are matched, in which case there would still be a small profit. Wonder if it all evens itself out over time?
You are definitely right but it would depend on the market. The Over 2.5 rises pretty quickly and you need a goal pretty soon to be profitable. So dripping buys you more time in the market.
The problem with dripping in your entry is that a proportion of your winners will only be partially matched, but ALL of your losers will be fully matched.
These strategies always sound really good, and the winning examples are great. But I just can't understand how they can be profitable in the long run. As one loss is significantly greater, so just wipes out any profits.
Hi Ben! It may be better to start with a half or full steak according to game statistics (goal attempt, position) as in the case of trade under 2.5 goals. And if the goal was not scored in the first half, what would you choose, to leave or continue in the second half?
Thanks for the video, although my personal opinion in calling this 'the most profitable method confirmed!' is inaccurate, and potentially misleading. Why? Because (a) this was a sample size of 1 game, and (b) you were lucky when the goal was scored, right after your third drip back. Had the goal gone in in min 11 you would have made 3 times the profit if you have backed your full stake at min 10 compared to a drip back. In other words, it all depends on when the goal is scored. In order to validate your title statement, you would need to take hundreds of games as a sample size, and then we would have the answer. I get that drip backing buys you some time, but that benefit is offset if a relatively early goal is scored. My guess is there's probably not much in it, but happy to be proven wrong on a big sample.
It’s a fair point. Only about 30% of games are 0-0 at half time. So there’s a 70% chance you won’t get your full stake in. It’s essentially cost averaging vs order size. I do wonder if putting a 1.1 or similar lay order might be a good idea. You can always cancel it and cash out manually.
The other argument for dripping is that the longer it takes for the first goal to go in does not guarantee that the lay price will drop below the back price that the first order was placed. The longer it takes for the first goal to go go in will invariably result in a loss. The need for the second goal to bring the price down into profit isn't guaranteed.
dripping will always lead to more profit,as long as your game is going to have goals A couple of quick questions for you, Ben: How long did it take you to become profitable? And what was the turning point for you?
Great idea Ben, tried this on 2 matched this evening, 30% Profit on the first trade and a scratch trade on the 2nd match, both goals went in minutes after the 2nd half, I'm 100% behind the dripping method, even if you dont manage to get your full stake in position your reward to risk % should be the same as this means an early goal has been netted before you could put your final trade on around 20-25mins mark, ok you dont make as much money but a loss is worse. And by dripping your bets at higher and higher odds as times passes they will average out anyway and provide a profit providing you get a recent goal, I agree with alot of the below comments about an exit strategy and to be honest im very suprised you didnt touch on this as you do in most of the videos ive watched of yours. The Chelsea v Leicester match tonight, 2 goals not allowed, i was teased twice with a goal and in the end cashed out when Chelsea scored in the 46th minute for a 50p profit, was in the red £7.77 during half time, drip betting £5 each on the 10th, 15th and 20th minutes.
Thankyou Ben another excellent video guide for newbees and more experienced traders that dont have your Simulator .You are currently doing the best guides on trading no one else comes close to your quality production thanks you are amazingly kind guy and generous
In this example I would have taken only liabilities out (no complete cash out) after the goal. The dog did score and it is very likely that this will wake the favorite up and we will get more goals in this match. I don't think a game that goes that much according to plan is a good example. If the goal had come after the first third of your stake, it would have been more profitable to go straight into the market with 100%. You should only be able to make a well-founded statement after about 300 test trades. Still, I also believe that dripping into the market is the best method for most trades.
quite often he has shown this method taking liability out and not cashing out in other vids as was said just basically was showing this method for newbies so they can just see profit that can be taken out
When it comes to the over 2.5 i personally taget games that do have a high chance of going over 2.5 but i will not get involved untill about 20 minutes as theres no chance i am taking odds of 1.4 lol theres no value in that the sweet spot for goals in general is around the 30 minute mark so i find dribbling my stakes in from 20 onwards tends to work the best, if theres no goals but the 70th minute i will trade out for a loss, by targeting games that do have a high chances of goals it means you can get in later and get a much better price and much higher ROI if a goal goes in before my pre defined entry point thats fine i will just not trade that game
This strategy is fine because you will get a better value as the price increases when there is no goals. This is a no brainer 😆😆 Thanks for those Tennis videos am now conflicted between Football and Tennis 😆😆 This is the best Trading #Channel on RUclips. Am a Football Trading #Pro, I never considered Tennis until those videos. So thanks again and keep up the #Outstanding work.......#Bless you 👊👊
Do u have to cash out when going over 2.5 soon as goal scored surly be better off waithing for next 2 goals for max profit or is that just betting not trading?
Hey Ben, great content and appreciate the efforts mate. One question about trading software...which ladder interface software would you recommend or do you use? Which software..geeks toy or angel..etc does your course support??
Brilliant post as always Ben. Regarding this method' what if there isnt a goal in the first half? Do u cash out for small loss? I'm guessing the matches u choose would have a thought percentage of first half goal
Can i ask something please? 3:30 why didnt you just lay over 2.5 @ 1.47. The back price will rise above the ley over time and can green out. Why would back bet it later on... then lay the bet when it scores? Can you drip the lay?
Hey Ben, Great strategy (as usual!). I have a question. Say you've got 100% stake matched by 30 mins, if no goal looks likely, when is the best time to get out of the trade? Cheers.
Timing was perfect if every trade was that easy ? But yes I agree drip in your stakes for a bigger window for your profit/loss ,also you could back 00 for insurance 👍great tips as always
@@SportsTradingLife brilliant I'm still trying to crack the double chance market but unsure how to trade it .was watching it on the Newcastle game and was a massive 30+ ticks before any goals worth looking at ?cheers for great content 👍👍👍👍
I really didn't get comparison on the Newcastle v Man City game it was obvious in this perfect example dripping would have worked had the goal been scored earlier before you got your second stake on ?
There is no value in dripping. When you drip in you increase long term volatility, that's it. If you do your bets in stages you forget that if goal comes in after first drip... you get profit from 33% of your stake and not from 100% of your stake. So essentially - early goal (after first drip) - less profit.. and later goal like in this video - more profit, opposing to 100% straight bet in from the start. Trading is "advanced betting" and nothing else. There is no difference between betting and trading - only that you can "specify" your bet to your needs.. like in this case guessing there will be a goal soon.. . This trade is no different to betting on over 0.5 goals or drip feeding if you like more volatility and fun. Btw why there is no live chat anymore on UFT?
If the goal had gone in before your final drip, would it have been as profitable as going in with 100% stake at the start? I would say not. Dripping is only better if you are lucky enough to have the goal come after you are fully matched, if you are not that lucky then it is not better. Some games you will make more dripping, other games you won't. Over time it would probably even itself out, unless you are particularly good at picking games where the goal doesn't come early.
The advantage of dripping is you actually buy more time in the market also. The goal is much more likely to arrive in the preceding 70 minutes of a match rather than during that 10 minute window. I will cover this in a new video to explain more.
@@SportsTradingLife how much time is it going to buy you though in reality? 5 minutes? Not to mention entering the orders is more work, for basically the same reward, even with software. You're gaining 5 minutes (maximum) extra in the market but for 20-25 minutes of the game you are less profitable if a goal goes in. It all evens out. I don't expect you will agree but any benefits of dripping are negligible.
This strategy doesn't work for me. After multiple attempts some of them with defensive stakes in the match odds market, didn't produce any profit in the long run.
Wouldnt it be better to 'back under 2.5' for the first part of the match, and then after the 10 minute mark start on the 2.5? My bad if it sounds moronic, but I'm just starting with this. I've made profit on close to 90% of the trades with backing under 2.5 with the start of most matches
@@SportsTradingLife By the way, I used the idea of dividing the stake in the match between Verona vs Bologna today. When the match was 1-1 I placed 50% of the stake at the 1.70 odd of over 3.5 goals, then I put 25% at 1.80 and a further 25% at 2.00. After 2-1 I identified that I would be able to continue on the market and made a freebet that ended up giving a beautiful green after 2-2.
Aston villa/Everton would have been a good one. Usually goals in Villa games and in Everton's away games, but not a thing a few days back. What next to escape a big loss.
Hi Ben, love your strategies and a few years ago i used some of them with succes. But sadly betfair and other exchange platforms are now restricted in my country (The Netherlands) 😔😔. I still have hope that one day they are allowed again. If anybody knows a work around of this problem and give me tips how i can still trade in a country where it is restricted. Pfffff, i can bet on betting sites that are allowed in The Netherlands, but can't trade on sports. So f* up. I am not a gambler but a trader. fingers crossed 🤞🤞🤞 that betfair gets the license. Ben, keep up the good work. Cheers
Sorry Ben I like the idea but claiming dripping your stake into the market is the most profitable trade is not really accurate. For the perfect match from your point of view ,yep no arguments it worked however if the goal had gone in say on 12 mins two thirds of your stake would not count so the guy putting his entire stake on at 10 mins would have made a bigger profit,sorry but far from putting the matter to bed I feel it remains very much open to debate....
To be honest, this dimostration, hasn't really any meaning statistically. You simulated just this match. What if Gols is scored after 2 mins from your trade? With Drippin you would earn much less than full stake. You should test 200/300 match e compare two approches in order to see if Dripping stake has really an advantage on long term above Full Stake. I'm not saying it hasn't, but I have to say that this test means nothing statistically speaking.
seems veryone using different strategy that work for each one. its really depends on the games, there are so many detail to concerns about. keep looking for the strategy that work for you guy. gluck to you all.
Absolutely correct. I always want 200-300 samples to find out whether a method works or not. On average you will get 1/3 of games with no first half goal. When the first goal happens later in the game (I would say later then 60 minute) the price will not be low enough to trade out with a profit. You will need 2 goals then. It is - once again - down to game selection, and/or a good exit plan. Trading the Over2.5 is and can be a profitable method. But it needs more then dripping in the stakes to make it work.
![🔥⚽️Top #5 [PROFITABLE] Football Trading Strategies (For Match Odds Market!)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/D2oipImKGIc/mqdefault.jpg)
I've trialed this for six consecutive days; covered 18 games; lost money in two and returned on 16. A return of 23%. Small stakes only and cashed out immediately the first goal went in. I could have held on for more but wanted to get a worst case scenario. Very low maintenance strategy, and easy to duck in and out of on my mobile. No time consuming research - I just went with the games where the odds on over 2.5 were shorter than under 2.5. My go to, simple strategy.
Disadvantage to dripping stake into the market would be that a goal goes in before all parts are matched, in which case there would still be a small profit. Wonder if it all evens itself out over time?
You are definitely right but it would depend on the market. The Over 2.5 rises pretty quickly and you need a goal pretty soon to be profitable. So dripping buys you more time in the market.
The problem with dripping in your entry is that a proportion of your winners will only be partially matched, but ALL of your losers will be fully matched.
These strategies always sound really good, and the winning examples are great. But I just can't understand how they can be profitable in the long run. As one loss is significantly greater, so just wipes out any profits.
you can cash out and lay your position at any time
Hi Ben! It may be better to start with a half or full steak according to game statistics (goal attempt, position) as in the case of trade under 2.5 goals. And if the goal was not scored in the first half, what would you choose, to leave or continue in the second half?
Thanks for the video, although my personal opinion in calling this 'the most profitable method confirmed!' is inaccurate, and potentially misleading. Why? Because (a) this was a sample size of 1 game, and (b) you were lucky when the goal was scored, right after your third drip back. Had the goal gone in in min 11 you would have made 3 times the profit if you have backed your full stake at min 10 compared to a drip back. In other words, it all depends on when the goal is scored.
In order to validate your title statement, you would need to take hundreds of games as a sample size, and then we would have the answer. I get that drip backing buys you some time, but that benefit is offset if a relatively early goal is scored. My guess is there's probably not much in it, but happy to be proven wrong on a big sample.
It’s a fair point. Only about 30% of games are 0-0 at half time. So there’s a 70% chance you won’t get your full stake in. It’s essentially cost averaging vs order size.
I do wonder if putting a 1.1 or similar lay order might be a good idea. You can always cancel it and cash out manually.
The other argument for dripping is that the longer it takes for the first goal to go in does not guarantee that the lay price will drop below the back price that the first order was placed. The longer it takes for the first goal to go go in will invariably result in a loss. The need for the second goal to bring the price down into profit isn't guaranteed.
Yes that is a bit of a frustration with the 2.5 market and one reason the 1.5 is much better.
dripping will always lead to more profit,as long as your game is going to have goals
A couple of quick questions for you, Ben:
How long did it take you to become profitable? And what was the turning point for you?
Great idea Ben, tried this on 2 matched this evening, 30% Profit on the first trade and a scratch trade on the 2nd match, both goals went in minutes after the 2nd half, I'm 100% behind the dripping method, even if you dont manage to get your full stake in position your reward to risk % should be the same as this means an early goal has been netted before you could put your final trade on around 20-25mins mark, ok you dont make as much money but a loss is worse. And by dripping your bets at higher and higher odds as times passes they will average out anyway and provide a profit providing you get a recent goal, I agree with alot of the below comments about an exit strategy and to be honest im very suprised you didnt touch on this as you do in most of the videos ive watched of yours.
The Chelsea v Leicester match tonight, 2 goals not allowed, i was teased twice with a goal and in the end cashed out when Chelsea scored in the 46th minute for a 50p profit, was in the red £7.77 during half time, drip betting £5 each on the 10th, 15th and 20th minutes.
Thankyou Ben another excellent video guide for newbees and more experienced traders that dont have your Simulator .You are currently doing the best guides on trading no one else comes close to your quality production thanks you are amazingly kind guy and generous
Many thanks for the kind words mate!
In this example I would have taken only liabilities out (no complete cash out) after the goal. The dog did score and it is very likely that this will wake the favorite up and we will get more goals in this match. I don't think a game that goes that much according to plan is a good example. If the goal had come after the first third of your stake, it would have been more profitable to go straight into the market with 100%. You should only be able to make a well-founded statement after about 300 test trades. Still, I also believe that dripping into the market is the best method for most trades.
quite often he has shown this method taking liability out and not cashing out in other vids as was said just basically was showing this method for newbies so they can just see profit that can be taken out
Yes you are right, this match was nailed on for over 2.5 but I wanted to keep things simple for the sake of the video.
Kinda ideal scenario...But You need to think...a goal could be scored after first drip..and the,the profit would not be that big..🙂
I like this approach, looks like it is more viable than the traditional 100% stake from outset.....cheers.
Thanks Ben
👁 opening strategy
Thanks for the video Ben. I really enjoy your videos and get a heck of a lot of learning out of them ! Cheers
Glad you like them!
When it comes to the over 2.5 i personally taget games that do have a high chance of going over 2.5 but i will not get involved untill about 20 minutes as theres no chance i am taking odds of 1.4 lol theres no value in that the sweet spot for goals in general is around the 30 minute mark so i find dribbling my stakes in from 20 onwards tends to work the best, if theres no goals but the 70th minute i will trade out for a loss, by targeting games that do have a high chances of goals it means you can get in later and get a much better price and much higher ROI if a goal goes in before my pre defined entry point thats fine i will just not trade that game
Great video, Ben. Many thanks
This strategy is fine because you will get a better value as the price increases when there is no goals. This is a no brainer 😆😆 Thanks for those Tennis videos am now conflicted between Football and Tennis 😆😆 This is the best Trading #Channel on RUclips. Am a Football Trading #Pro, I never considered Tennis until those videos. So thanks again and keep up the #Outstanding work.......#Bless you 👊👊
Very true!
Very good strategy indeed, thanks!
Do u have to cash out when going over 2.5 soon as goal scored surly be better off waithing for next 2 goals for max profit or is that just betting not trading?
big thx for sharing your strategy !
Hey Ben, great content and appreciate the efforts mate. One question about trading software...which ladder interface software would you recommend or do you use? Which software..geeks toy or angel..etc does your course support??
Brilliant post as always Ben. Regarding this method' what if there isnt a goal in the first half? Do u cash out for small loss? I'm guessing the matches u choose would have a thought percentage of first half goal
Yes I think I will cover exit strategies in another video so people have an idea.
My strategy is to back 0-0 first half. Insurance bet to cover your stake! You can also bet 0-0 at full time for longer odds .
If 0-0 at HT I would exit and take the loss as you would need 2 goals in the second half to be able to salvage the trade
Yes definitely true, one of the frustrating things with Over 2.5 Goals since sometimes it is hard enough to just get the one goal! ;-)
Can i ask something please?
3:30 why didnt you just lay over 2.5 @ 1.47. The back price will rise above the ley over time and can green out.
Why would back bet it later on... then lay the bet when it scores?
Can you drip the lay?
Hey Ben, Great strategy (as usual!). I have a question.
Say you've got 100% stake matched by 30 mins, if no goal looks likely, when is the best time to get out of the trade?
Cheers.
Best thing is to decide how much you are willing to lose BEFORE the trade (your stop loss) and stick to that.
@@SportsTradingLife OK, fair enough, I'll keep an eye on the red amount.....Cheers.
@@SportsTradingLife how do you decide how much you are willing to lose?
Timing was perfect if every trade was that easy ? But yes I agree drip in your stakes for a bigger window for your profit/loss ,also you could back 00 for insurance 👍great tips as always
Yes it was the ideal trade but the point was to show the difference between the two approaches. I will cover this in more detail in the next video.
@@SportsTradingLife brilliant I'm still trying to crack the double chance market but unsure how to trade it .was watching it on the Newcastle game and was a massive 30+ ticks before any goals worth looking at ?cheers for great content 👍👍👍👍
I really didn't get comparison on the Newcastle v Man City game it was obvious in this perfect example dripping would have worked had the goal been scored earlier before you got your second stake on ?
If there's no goals at what stage do you bail out of the market, And can't 1 trade wipe out your daily profits
Would you do pre game analysis in the morning say and have a list of some games you’ll get involved in ? Thanks
Yes in the morning, the day before or even in the hour leading up to kick off. Always helps.
how do you handle 0/0 at half time ben
There is no value in dripping. When you drip in you increase long term volatility, that's it. If you do your bets in stages you forget that if goal comes in after first drip... you get profit from 33% of your stake and not from 100% of your stake. So essentially - early goal (after first drip) - less profit.. and later goal like in this video - more profit, opposing to 100% straight bet in from the start. Trading is "advanced betting" and nothing else. There is no difference between betting and trading - only that you can "specify" your bet to your needs.. like in this case guessing there will be a goal soon.. . This trade is no different to betting on over 0.5 goals or drip feeding if you like more volatility and fun. Btw why there is no live chat anymore on UFT?
If the goal had gone in before your final drip, would it have been as profitable as going in with 100% stake at the start? I would say not.
Dripping is only better if you are lucky enough to have the goal come after you are fully matched, if you are not that lucky then it is not better.
Some games you will make more dripping, other games you won't. Over time it would probably even itself out, unless you are particularly good at picking games where the goal doesn't come early.
The advantage of dripping is you actually buy more time in the market also. The goal is much more likely to arrive in the preceding 70 minutes of a match rather than during that 10 minute window. I will cover this in a new video to explain more.
@@SportsTradingLife how much time is it going to buy you though in reality? 5 minutes? Not to mention entering the orders is more work, for basically the same reward, even with software. You're gaining 5 minutes (maximum) extra in the market but for 20-25 minutes of the game you are less profitable if a goal goes in. It all evens out. I don't expect you will agree but any benefits of dripping are negligible.
@@alphaguru You make some good points. I will address some of this in a future video!
When would you get out of the market if no goal is scored?
That is a good question and is totally down to the trader and their perception on the match. I will cover this in a new video!
@@SportsTradingLife That will be great.
How much have you won this year mate ?
This strategy doesn't work for me. After multiple attempts some of them with defensive stakes in the match odds market, didn't produce any profit in the long run.
And Chelsea has just scored again in the 66th minute but i would of been insane to hold my position ;)
Wouldnt it be better to 'back under 2.5' for the first part of the match, and then after the 10 minute mark start on the 2.5? My bad if it sounds moronic, but I'm just starting with this. I've made profit on close to 90% of the trades with backing under 2.5 with the start of most matches
What is your average % profit on each trade? Odds are usually poor for under 2.5 goals so you are going to need to keep a high win loss ratio
What if a goal comes in the dying minutes of the 2nd half and they is no option of cash out
Good, but what if the goal doesn't happen or happens late? How long should we wait?
A few are asking so I will line up another video to explain.
@@SportsTradingLife Thanks mate! Its content is very valuable, i use your tennis strategies and it has worked. I will be waiting for this new video!
@@SportsTradingLife By the way, I used the idea of dividing the stake in the match between Verona vs Bologna today. When the match was 1-1 I placed 50% of the stake at the 1.70 odd of over 3.5 goals, then I put 25% at 1.80 and a further 25% at 2.00. After 2-1 I identified that I would be able to continue on the market and made a freebet that ended up giving a beautiful green after 2-2.
@@llluanm great result Luan, but then u r a bettor..right...?!
What if, to do the same thing on the over 1,5 Goals market?
Aston villa/Everton would have been a good one. Usually goals in Villa games and in Everton's away games, but not a thing a few days back. What next to escape a big loss.
Yeah that was an awful match. Had it on in the background, turgid!
Hi Ben, love your strategies and a few years ago i used some of them with succes. But sadly betfair and other exchange platforms are now restricted in my country (The Netherlands) 😔😔. I still have hope that one day they are allowed again.
If anybody knows a work around of this problem and give me tips how i can still trade in a country where it is restricted.
Pfffff, i can bet on betting sites that are allowed in The Netherlands, but can't trade on sports. So f* up.
I am not a gambler but a trader. fingers crossed 🤞🤞🤞 that betfair gets the license.
Ben, keep up the good work.
Cheers
betinasia with orbit exchange
Well explained I think I'll give that a twirl... Was looking for a way into trading and this looks like a good one to start with . 👍
Sorry Ben I like the idea but claiming dripping your stake into the market is the most profitable trade is not really accurate.
For the perfect match from your point of view ,yep no arguments it worked however if the goal had gone in say on 12 mins two thirds of your stake would not count so the guy putting his entire stake on at 10 mins would have made a bigger profit,sorry but far from putting the matter to bed I feel it remains very much open to debate....
N=1
Si può avere una traduzione italiana?
What do you do if no goals are scored?
Back Half Time 0-0 and Full-Timee 0-0 to cover your stake.
I'm a member of UFT but Betfair banned my country and account :(
isn't just backing HT 0.5 , 3 times, starting from 10min ?
If you are planning to get out at HT then yes, but there wasn't a specific exit point in this video.
if you drip your stake in , your liability increases........six of one half and dozen of the other
To be honest, this dimostration, hasn't really any meaning statistically. You simulated just this match. What if Gols is scored after 2 mins from your trade? With Drippin you would earn much less than full stake. You should test 200/300 match e compare two approches in order to see if Dripping stake has really an advantage on long term above Full Stake. I'm not saying it hasn't, but I have to say that this test means nothing statistically speaking.
Another problem to this is that there was no mention of what to do if no goal was scored...
seems veryone using different strategy that work for each one.
its really depends on the games, there are so many detail to concerns about.
keep looking for the strategy that work for you guy. gluck to you all.
Absolutely correct. I always want 200-300 samples to find out whether a method works or not. On average you will get 1/3 of games with no first half goal. When the first goal happens later in the game (I would say later then 60 minute) the price will not be low enough to trade out with a profit. You will need 2 goals then. It is - once again - down to game selection, and/or a good exit plan. Trading the Over2.5 is and can be a profitable method. But it needs more then dripping in the stakes to make it work.
@@Klaus80804 what strategy works best for you?
If a goal is scored after 2 mins you don’t bother trying to profit from the game because the opportunity is gone. For the over 2.5 strategy anyway.
Trading - Needs 1 Goal To Win. LOL.