Hi guys,my first thread here and i am looking to backtest the oddsefficiency of Pinnacle Closing odds against the outcomes in Brazil and Portugal for the last couple of seasons because despite the medium/high liquidity in those markets there are some very odd movements constantly,that to me are worth an investigation regarding the efficcient market hipothesys there.Any ideas of some pratical way to do it,or any software/site that would make the process easier?

Uh the only way to really do this is to build your own handicapping model of the games and see if it wins against closing lines, out of sample. If it does and then keeps winning after you start betting, then yeah, it's not efficient.

There is plenty of stuff out there where the pinnacle close is not efficient at all. I know because I would be living in a box right now if it had been efficient.

Not a soccer guy but I do believe you can bet fairly large on the leagues you mention, with other books taking much bigger action than pinnacle. And soccer is the mostly widely bet on sport around by large syndicates, so I don't think it's dumb money behind the moves as they'd get hit back the other way. Of course it's always possible these are set-up type moves to hit following books. I'd guess the large line movements are probably due to injury or roster announcements.

Thank you for your Feedback Irs,i will test the closing lines for those markets.The reason i'm doing this is because i ve been noticing a trend in a subset of games that the Openers often Beat the closers for the last couple of seasons.Is it possible(assuming odds are GENERALLY efficient in those high liquidity markets)that Pinnacle openers are that soft that a basic technical analysys would make a nice profit long term?

you don't need to build your own model, the betting line itself is essentially a model you can test against the actual game outcome.

Hi TomG,have been reading the blogs all around web and you are a veteran here and in an other famous blog,thank you for your post.Anyway if i compare the closing odds in a specific league with the outcomes for the last 3-5 seasons and the payout is similar to Pinny payout the market is efficient?

The market is always efficient unless it's some sub K **** kicker league.

Ok.

Lol then how can thousands of pros exist?

Hey there. I am the developer of http://kick.bet and we are tracking Pinnacle opening and closing lines (also for the two leagues you are asking for). At least for the 2016 and 2016/17 and 2017 seasons (80+leagues tracked) I can assure that closing beats opening by almost 2% (overall). So the opposit of what you are saying is the case.

I know, 2% seems ok. But don't forget that Pinnacle has a 98% payout and if you manage to make these 2% long-term you are still not beating Pinnacle. Also selling your opening odds for closing odds on an exchange would only cover your fee.

Anyways, I recommend you don't look up the overall outcome but instead focus more on certain odds ranges. Odds in the range of 1-2 (favorite betting) take another developement as odds in the range of 2-3, 3-4 etc. Also the payout for each possible outcome (1x2) has to be calculated/guessed for every match seperately but is very hard to determine. As said, Pinnacle has an overall 98% payout but it is more likely the case that you have (for instance) a 96% payout on the home team but a 100% payout on the away team. If you realy want to beat Pinnacle you need to know where Pinnacle trys to exploit you and shifting their odds over or under the average 98% payout line. But this is another topic.

After all, the "beating the Pinnacle closing line strategy" does not look promising enough for me, so I probably cease tracking Pinnacle opening/closing odds after the 2016/17 and 2017 season and focus on my major betting strategy only, which has its advantages but of course comes with other challenges.

Get me a message if you need some further help and I'll try backtesting your thoughts. Always interested into some qualified input from outside...

lol

but what threshold do you use for inefficiency?

lets say in sport A, the line correctly favors the right side 60% of the time.

in sports B, the line correctly favors the right side 85% of the time.

its possible sport A is more efficient of a market because that sport has more randomness than sport B (for example, if sport B's lines should be able to favor the correct side 85%, but sport A tops out at 60%)

this situation shows you need to have more than betting lines and outcomes to show inefficiency when you are in new territory

nice man you got me

thousands of pros exist

dam lines are inefficient