This is a one off review of SOCCER BETTING HQ.

What we have here is a package of five trading methods for use on the major football leagues. All five methods have pages explaining them in the ebook and a video to watch of a trade being executed.

As the sales page lists all five and gives a brief outline of them I will do the same but add my findings/opinions to each one:


“We will use under 2.5 market to make 5-10% of stake in short span of 5-7 minutes. Very effective strategy.”

A method I’ve used myself for many years and one of my staples. My version is slightly different but only a little. Realistically you’re looking at 5-7.5% on average. This one is the highlight of this package and the only one I would say you could probably get away with using exactly as they say in the book, although I would most certainly say you need to have a hard and fast rule about the level of liquidity in the market before you enter a trade.


“It is lay the draw but with a twist”

Lay The Draw (LTD) is pretty much as old as Betfair. It used to be very easy money indeed but then everyone cottoned on to it and it keeled over in it’s most basic format. It is still a good earner of a trading method BUT you have to put serious research into which game you are willing to get involved with. What you cannot do is just trade in any old game that fits a single at-a-glance type odds based rule. You can add whatever fancy “twist” you like to try and limit losses but any half decent trader will tell you that you want to make sure you need that loss limiter on as few occaisions as possible and the best way to do that is to make damned sure you’re in a game that you stand a good chance of profiting from. This method is beyond basic and is just the sort of thing that puts people off using LTD. Have a dig into a teams’ form, their head-to-head recent record, their average scoring times and patterns etc etc etc, all easily accessible from a plethera of entirely free websites. Good money to be had from LTD but not via this book’s method. Longterm it will fall over.


“System 3 is sniper strategy.  This is again a low risk strategy and will give you exact to enter the Match Odds market.  Profit for single trade is estimated to be 5-10% of stake”

I’m not entirely sure what to make of this one. There are three scenario under which you would get involved in a game at a set period and with a set minimum odds price. On paper this one looks good but you don’t often get things to line up. The price is nearly always below the minimum allowable when trying to apply any of the events you’re looking for. I can’t really slam it or praise it with any conviction as I havn’t been able to see it in action enough. On the odd occaisons it has all lined up I did feel that I was exposed to liability at a dangerous time, the business end of the game, so to speak, and although I can’t say it lost a lot of money when I looked at it I can say that it didn’t make much either and one badly timed goal would be a big big dent.


“If match is going 0-0, then we will use system 4.”

Much like system three this one is only used at a set time and a set minimum odds level and much like system three you won’t get very many trades with this as the min odds rule won’t be met at that point of the game. If you do get matched then this isn’t too bad a trade but you do need to in and out pretty swiftly as a goal at the wrong time will mean either a big loss or a very tense wait with your fingers crossed.


“We can’t lose except one score line. Very close to almost zero risk strategy”

I don’t like the second sentence for obvious reasons. I’ve seen this method in various guises lots of times and I never really see the point in doing it this way. The idea is that you place bets in a couple of different markets if you have the potential to end up with around 5% return. You use a betting calculator to work out how much to put on each bet in each market and if the end product is over 5% you go ahead. As they state in their quote you can only lose if one score line occurs. Well the obvious thing to me is to not bother placing bets in multiple markets, just lay the killer scoreline if the odds allow you to make the 5%. If you’re only involved in one market then it’s far easier to look for ways out if the trade looks to be going wrong. It is a low risk method but trades will be relatively few and far between and one going wrong will wipe out twenty good ones.


So as you can probably tell, I’m not very keen on this package at all. There’s also the issue of staking, the advised levels are so aggressive that they border on the dangerous in my opinion. For example the Lay The Draw method says to STAKE 15% of your bank per bet. That means that your liability is going to be 35-40% of your bank. Yikes. Even if this is badly worded and they mean that you should have the 15% as your total liability you still run into the problem that the lack of selection criteria mean that you will have a lot of qualifying matches. One weekend I looked at earlier in the season for the English Premier League showed that every game on the Saturday afternoon fell within the rules for this method. How do you know which to do and which to ignore? You can’t do them all as your bank won’t take it. They also advise you to apply more than one strategy to any game that qualifies, I think that would be quite tricky to do and the consequences of one freak type result could be very damaging to your bank and to your confidence in trading.

The ebooks are pretty well laid out and easy to follow and understand but the videos are more of an annoyance than a help. He stumbles over his words quite often and has a habit of pronouncing Bilbao as “Bill-a-bo” that drove me mad. This last point is probably hightened by my tetchiness and my dislike for this product.

Priced at £70 with the usual strict no refunds policy I couldn’t possibly recommend this when we’ve got other trading packages reviewed on this site that are head and shoulders above this in quality and are cheaper to buy (TotalFootballTrading)

I’m caught between wanting to put this into either failed or neutral. System one is quite good as written, system two is extremely poor in my opinion. The whole package suffers from the same failings, it all needs more qualifying criteria and trade out type advice. Also more realistic parameters on systems three and four would be of much greater help.

I think I’d feel more comfortable with this being filed under FAILED for all the reasons stated.

You can get Soccer Betting HQ here: