Jump to content

Recommended Posts

???? Wrote:

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

> Do you mean 7/1 or 7 decimal? You can't guarantee

> a decent or indeed any profit (I think)...you've

> got ?350 to cover

>

> Arsenal have some easy games approaching...maybe

> leave it and then lay them if they get expected

> results. You could also bet Man U on individual

> games as they're your biggest problem...but you're

> going to be down if Chelsea win too! I'd just stay

> with what you've got to be honest.


Well I think I can guarantee a profit - ?446 on Arsenal or ?100 win on MU and Chelsea but it means another ?568 on MU and ?511 on Chelsea!!!!


Arsenal win:


Team bet odds Profit/(Loss) Win ("W")/Loss

Arsenal 250 6.5 1625 w

chelsea 50 2 -50

Liverpool 50 -50

MU 568 1.7 -568

chelsea 511 1.7 -511



Bet so far 350

Additional Risk 1079

Result 446






Chelsea:

Team bet odds Profit/(Loss) Win ("W")/Loss

Arsenal 250 6.5 -250

chelsea 50 2 100 w

Liverpool 50 -50

MU 568 1.7 -568

chelsea 511 1.7 868.7 w



Bet so far 350

Additional Risk 1079

Result 100.7



ManUnited:

Team bet odds Profit/(Loss) Win ("W")/Loss

Arsenal 250 6.5 -250

chelsea 50 2 -50

Liverpool 50 -50

MU 568 1.7 965.6 w

chelsea 511 1.7 -511



Bet so far 350

Additional Risk 1079

Result 104.6


So another > ?1k bet will guarantee me a profit overall - but I think I'll pass on that thanks and check it out again after a few Arsenal wins (hopefully).

I don't fancy putting down ?1k even if it guarantees me a win overall.

Actually my Arsenal odds are better than I thought - so I can guarantee an approx ?300 profit on all teams as follows:


(Only problem is that I need to bet another ?1,650 - might have to raid the housekeeping)


Team bet odds Profit/(Loss) Win ("W")/Loss

Arsenal 250 8.22 -250

chelsea 50 2 -50

Liverpool 50 -50

MU 850 1.7 1445 w

chelsea 800 1.7 -800



Bet so far 350

Additional Risk 1650

Result 295

Ladymuck Wrote:

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

> ???? Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > ...darn

>

>

> ha ha ha ha ha ha...made my day!!!!:))



Hang on...


I'm confused...


Should I be laughing? Actually I don't think I should. Darn indeed...what is going on here?...???? explain!(6)

???? Wrote:

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

> If you wait until the end of March Arsenal really

> should have picked up 9/9 points, Man U have

> Liverpool and Chelsea have an easier set but have

> Fulham. Either that or put ?1700 in.


Thought it was an interesting exercise - of course I'm not going to be parting with that sort of money, so hope Arsenal can go on a good run.

I think he has left the forum Narnia - which is good as I might have owed him money.


Anyway


I have invested ?19 in a 1 month full membership of Racing Post website - to give me the inside track for the festival !!!


The one they seem to be backing is Quantitativeeasing for the Coral Cup on St Patricks Day. I have backed it at 8s.

Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote:

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

> Did you catch the piece on R4 this salvo? V.

> interesting debate on making racing more sexy for

> its own sake as opposed to making betting the be

> all and end all.


Interesting as I've never been in this thread before.


Mrs ruffers has, on occasion, had to suffer me going through the entire range of sports available on a full Sky package but has repeatedly heard me say that racing, almost uniquely amongst sports, hold no interest for me, and I comment that without the betting it just wouldn't exist which in some ways damns it as a genuinely uninteresting sport. Now I'm not sure why I have such apathy, if there was nothing else on I'd watch 3 Day eventing or at a real (ie telly broke) push showjumping as they have a however tiny interest to me as sport.

So back to the question - without the betting would anyone else watch it?


And the reason I came here. Khan to knock out Malignaggi. I've been in a bookies about three times in my life but think this is worth a go - how do I maximise my winnings on this?

Fair enough. Though I come from the other angle - I'm slightly potty about horses so that's what drives my interest. I find the whole trainer/jockey stuff fascinating too (but that could be as a result of reading too much Dick Francis/John Francome/Jenny Pitman ouvre.)


Plus it's quite a lark to observe a horse in the paddock and pick it on looks/conformation alone rather than looking at form - that method has got most of my wins.

ruffers Wrote:


never been in this thread

> before.

>

> Mrs ruffers has, on occasion, had to suffer me

> going through the entire range of sports available

> on a full Sky package but has repeatedly heard me

> say that racing, almost uniquely amongst sports,

> hold no interest for me, and I comment that

> without the betting it just wouldn't exist which

> in some ways damns it as a genuinely uninteresting

> sport. Now I'm not sure why I have such apathy,



There are many many people in horse racing who never bet. Owners and trainers mostly. They just love to race horses.


For the rest of us the betting might have given us out initial interest but who can deny that todays Kauto v Denman is a massive sporting occaision. I'd say it is of interest to a lot of people who do not normally follow racing and will be the headline sports new tonight.

Was sitting on a ?320 profit on France Slam so have backed the "no slam" at 5.7 so am now guaranteed a ?260 profit either way.


Seemed a small price to play for peace of mind and the right thing to do to compensate for Cheltenham losses. Could not leave it to chance. :-$ ashamed of hedging.


6.2/5.2 seems very good odds on the France Slam with hindsight.

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

    • Hey Sue, I was wrong - I don't think it would just be for foreign tourists. So yeah I assume that, if someone lives in Lewisham and wants to say the night in southwark, they'd pay a levy.  The hotels wouldn't need to vet anyone's address or passports - the levy is automatically added on top of the bill by every hotel / BnB / hostel and passed on to Southwark. So basically, you're paying an extra two quid a night, or whatever, to stay in this borough.  It's a great way to drive footfall... to the other London boroughs.  https://www.ukpropertyaccountants.co.uk/uk-tourist-tax-exploring-the-rise-of-visitor-levies-and-foreign-property-charges/
    • Pretty much, Sue, yeah. It's the perennial, knotty problem of imposing a tax and balancing that with the cost of collecting it.  The famous one was the dog licence - I think it was 37 1/2 pence when it was abolished, but the revenue didn't' come close to covering the administration costs. As much I'd love to have a Stasi patrolling the South Bank, looking for mullet haircuts, unshaven armpits, overly expressive hand movements and red Kicker shoes, I'm afraid your modern Continental is almost indistinguishable from your modern Londoner. That's Schengen for you. So you couldn't justify it from an ROI point of view, really. This scheme seems a pretty good idea, overall. It's not perfect, but it's cheap to implement and takes some tax burden off Southwark residents.   'The Man' has got wise to this. It's got bad juju now. If you're looking to rinse medium to large amounts of small denomination notes, there are far better ways. Please drop me a direct message if you'd like to discuss this matter further.   Kind Regards  Dave
    • "What's worse is that the perceived 20 billion black hole has increased to 30 billion in a year. Is there a risk that after 5 years it could be as high as 70 billion ???" Why is it perceived, Reeves is responsible for doubling the "black hole" to £20b through the public sector pay increases. You can't live beyond your means and when you try you go bankrupt pdq. In 4 yrs time if this Govt survives that long and the country doesn't go bust before then, in 2029 I dread to think the state the country will be in.  At least Sunak and co had inflation back to 2% with unemployment being stable and not rising.   
    • He seemed to me to be fully immersed in the Jeremy Corbyn ethos of the Labour Party. I dint think that (and self describing as a Marxist) would have helped much when Labour was changed under Starmer. There was a purge of people as far left as him that he was lucky to survive once in my opinion.   Stuff like this heavy endorsement of Momentum and Corbyn. It doesn't wash with a party that is in actual government.   https://labourlist.org/2020/04/forward-momentum-weve-launched-to-change-it-from-the-bottom-up/
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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