Mike left a comment on the previous post –
Always good to follow your progress. I’ve been trialing the new Gruss at home but have yet to let it loose with my Bots on my VPS. You say; “To note, the charts on the VPS are showing lower times than those at home” I’m reading that to mean “faster” times not “slower” times. What’s the bandwidth usage like with multiple sheets running?
As for the NSW markets, if you lay first it is theoretically possible to close out/green/red up your trade by laying out the other runners across the field, thereby not placing any back bets and avoiding the turnover charge. Albeit more complicated mathematics and process and it may not suit your trading style, but it is an option.
Thanks for the comment.
You are right, I meant faster times. Below is an image showing the charts whilst streaming from the VPS and from home, both monitoring same event at same time. Although the scales are different, I’ve added 100, 200 and 300 increments to highlight the difference. The VPS is generally lower times, faster, but more importantly, the consistency is better. For example, the VPS chart has 1 refresh greater than 300ms for this period, whereas at home I see 12 occasions of greater than 300ms.
In this next image I’ve tried to match the timings. Interestingly it looks like the home refresh is sometimes faster but this is just a consequence of refreshes coming in close after the refreshes that are notably slower (otherwise, if every refresh was slower, the market would drift away behind real time as the delay is compounded – mind boggling).
I’m not too sure how best to measure bandwidth in real-time but this is from the resource monitor in Windows Task Manager. This was taken with two sheets open. The first was a UK evening greyhounds with about 40s to off. The other was a US horse race from about 2 mins out (approx £5K matched). 2600 Bit per second is equal to 325 Byte per second (according to Google). Hope this helps, or let me know if there’s a better measure.
Your possible solution to the NSW issue is very much outside the box and an excellent reminder of what we’re doing in the market. If you back one selection, you’re not only backing it, you’re effectively laying every other selection. Using this logic, as you say, it’s possible in theory to trade through the market without having to place a back bet. It does require a market with tight spreads. And also a large enough stake to be able to lay all other selections with as close to calculated values as possible. But it could work. Not likely for me though, off the top of my head, my initial stakes would be too low. I like the thinking though.