Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Ok Quids - your help please - I have ?5 on

> Villegas at 95 - he is now 25s - how can I make

> money out of that?



lay him at say ?15 .......if he wins you win ?475 on the win and pay ?375 on the lay so profit ?100


or he loses, you win ?15 on the lay, lose ?5 on the bet...profit ?10


Guaranteed profit


ps excluded commmsion for simplicity

Thanks Quids - I thought it might work something like that - I think I might stick with him a little longer though as I don't really think ?10 guaranteed profit would put much of a dent in the ?70 I have now placed on the Open.

Also its the big wins that give you most satisfaction, so hedging, whilst prudent, must take away a lot of the potential excitement.

A lot of my best bets over the years have been losing bets, ?5 or ?10 at long odds which fails at the last hurdle is exciting. Its the big wins that put me in profit over the last few years, they fund a lot of small losing bets.


If Villegas were to win and I had laid it off I'd feel I picked him at 95s and gave ?375 of my profit away.


I'm just thinking though it as I type. I guess if he has a good day tomorrow, I might follow your advice and lay him then at shorter odds so I'm not giving away so much if he should win.


Cheers for the help.


Think Woods is now a better bet than he was yesterday - he can easliy make up 5/6 shots - he was rubbish today and still shot 71. He is still very dangerous.

Gambling not trading - but that's cool. If you were trading you'd be happy with a 2/1 or 20/1 guranteed profit, you'd be doing this with far more cash and frequently.


I will be gambling too I think. I can effectively get a free ?10 bet on tiger at 3/1 if i fancy it, which think i may go for. I'm gonna stay with Goosen (gambling)

Yep - I like to gamble - more fun really. But the problem is its only one of many bets on this tournament, so it would not be a guaranteed profit, if he lost, I'd be ?60 down overall. I need one of the guys to win to get me a profit overall.


What I have done in the past is if I have a big potential win towards the end of a tournament, I'd put a couple of savers on the most likely other winners, this is a hedging which allows me a significant upside, whilst not being guaranteed, as someone else could enter the equation unexpectedly.


For example with my Duval bet, I'd have backed Glover near the end, but was at work so could not do it. In the French Open I backed Kaymar near the end to win a small profit, when Westwood would have been a better result.


So I do hedge sometimes, just differently. But I'd never give up a big share of a potential ?500+ win, those are the fun bets.

Weather has turned and is only going to get worse, so after today we should get a good idea of who will make a serious challenge over the final two days. Goosen in a good position. I think Woods could struggle if his game doesn't pick up, yesterday the conditions were forgiving, no room for error today!..

Tom Watson is the best bad weather player in the history of golf - but those aching bones. Having said that he's only the same age as Bruce Springsteen and he can jump around for 3 hours, so if Watson is fit enough who knows. Would be great to see him still in the mix come Sunday, he was one of my heroes growing up.


Woods has always coped as well as anyone with the poor weather at the Open.

Fatboy is carrying too much weight surely?


My golf bets are just hanging in there at the mo - of my 10 (!!) bets 5 guys are under par, so hope they can stay there as its raining. 2 of the ten will miss the cut and McIlroy and Harrington are on the cut mark, so really out of it unless they can make a major move tomorrow.

?10 on Australia to win at Lord's at 7:1. Bookies are already writing Australia off, but this is the team that scored 670 just last weekend....England enforce follow-on, Australia score 450 in second innings, England crumble chasing 200 with Clarke and North spinning them to victory on a fifth day pitch. Alas it's only too plausible an outcome, 7 to 1 seem like good odds.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • In what way? Maybe it just felt more intelligent and considered coming directly after Question Time, which was a barely watchable bun fight.
    • Yes, all this. Totally Sephiroth. The electorate wants to see transformation overnight. That's not possible. But what is possible is leading with the right comms strategy, which isn't cutting through. As I've said before, messaging matters more now than policy, that's the only way to bring the electorate with you. And I worry that that's how Reform's going to get into power.  And the media LOVES Reform. 
    • “There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda ” I would call this “generous”   Labour should never have made that tax promise because, as with - duh - Brexit, it’s pretending the real world doesn’t exist now. I blame Labour in no small part for this delusion. But the electorate need to cop on as well.  They think they can have everything they want without responsibilities, costs or attachments. The media encourage this  Labour do need to raise taxes. The country needs it.  Now, exactly how it’s done remains to be seen. But if people are just going to go around going “la la laffer curve. Liars! String em up! Vote someone else” then they just aren’t serious people reckoning with the problem yes Labour are more than a year into their term, but after 14 years of what the Tories  did? Whoever takes over, has a major problem 
    • Messaging, messaging, messaging. That's all it boils down to. There are only so many fiscal policies out there, and they're there for the taking, no matter which party you're in. I hate to say it, but Farage gets it right every time. Even when Reform reneges on fiscal policy, it does it with enough confidence and candidness that no one is wringing their hands. Instead, they're quietly admired for their pragmatism. Strangely, it's exactly the same as Labour has done, with its manifesto reverse on income tax, but it's going to bomb.  Blaming the Tories / Brexit / Covid / Putin ... none of it washes with the public anymore  - it wants to be sold a vision of the future, not reminded of the disasters of the past. Labour put itself on the back foot with its 'the tories fucked it all up' stance right at the beginning of its tenure.  All Lammy had to do (as with Reeves and Raynor etc) was say 'mea culpa. We've made a mistake, we'll fix it. Sorry guys, we're on it'. But instead it's 'nothing to see here / it's someone else's fault / I was buying a suit / hadn't been briefed yet'.  And, of course, the press smells blood, which never helps.  Oh! And Reeve's speech on Wednesday was so drab and predictable that even the journalists at the press conference couldn't really be arsed to come up with any challenging questions. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...