Betting Matters....

[????]

Games at

Arsenal

Man City

Spurs

Chelsea

All over 2.5 goals

Stoke V Sunderland

under 2.5

[Alan Medic]

Can you do a multiple for over/under on BF Quids?

[????]

I don't think you can on these mr M. Despite not being an accy fan, I was thinking on similar lines myself. Some of the games are different kick offs/days so you could kind of do one yourself in that sense, although it's slightly more of a pain.

[Alan Medic]

Would you dare go < 1.5 with Stoke v Sunderland?

[????]

depends on odds

[Alan Medic]

< 1.5 = 2.96

< 2.5 = 1.63

[Mick Mac]

???? Wrote:

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

> depends on odds

Depends on what you think will happen.

[Alan Medic]

I've predicted it to be 1-0 but you know how bad I am at that Seamus.

[red devil]

On the weekly football predictions, most people seem to manage to predict at least one correct score, which must pay decent odds. So this week I'm going to check to see what my predictions would return if I placed a ?1 on each...

[????]

Mick Mac Wrote:

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

> ???? Wrote:

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

> -----

> > depends on odds

>

>

> Depends on what you think will happen.

Tsk Mick, Not true for a pro bettor. If the odds offered are better than your prediction of the likelihood of the result then you have value. I don't think Ed Milliband will be next PM if you offer me above 4/1 I am taking it all day.

[????]

Alan Medic Wrote:

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

> < 2.5 = 1.63

That looks like a resonable reflection of the eventualities so no value, so no, not for me....maybe the under :)

[Mick Mac]

red devil Wrote:

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

> On the weekly football predictions, most people

> seem to manage to predict at least one correct

> score, which must pay decent odds. So this week

> I'm going to check to see what my predictions

> would return if I placed a ?1 on each...

Good luck RD.

[????]

Mick Mac Wrote:

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

> red devil Wrote:

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

> -----

> > On the weekly football predictions, most people

> > seem to manage to predict at least one correct

> > score, which must pay decent odds. So this week

> > I'm going to check to see what my predictions

> > would return if I placed a ?1 on each...

>

>

> Good luck RD.

Probably not worth it. You need to get 10/1 to break even. Just two weeks without a 10/1 and your bankroll starts to suffer badly. Stick to losing money on straight bets like the rest of us RD :)

[Mick Mac]

???? Wrote:

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

> Mick Mac Wrote:

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

> -----

> > ???? Wrote:

> >a

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

>

> > -----

> > > depends on odds

> >

> >

> > Depends on what you think will happen.

>

>

> Tsk Mick, Not true for a pro bettor. If the odds

> offered are better than your prediction of the

> likelihood of the result then you have value. I

> don't think Ed Milliband will be next PM if you

> offer me above 4/1 I am taking it all day.

Not sure about that. I'd say a pro bettor (non poker) chooses what he thinks will happen but will only bet on it if the odds represent good value. They surely don't bet on what they think won't happen.

[Alan Medic]

Bankroll.........now there's a term completely alien to me!

[????]

Mick Mac Wrote:

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

> ???? Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Mick Mac Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > ???? Wrote:

> > >a

> >

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

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > depends on odds

> > >

> > >

> > > Depends on what you think will happen.

> >

> >

> > Tsk Mick, Not true for a pro bettor. If the

> odds

> > offered are better than your prediction of the

> > likelihood of the result then you have value. I

> > don't think Ed Milliband will be next PM if you

> > offer me above 4/1 I am taking it all day.

>

> Not sure about that. I'd say a pro bettor (non

> poker) chooses what he thinks will happen but will

> only bet on it if the odds represent good value.

> They surely don't bet on what they think won't

> happen.

Nope. Most pro bettors look for value. Plus EV is a pro betting concept as well. If you find 3/1 outcomes priced consistently at 4/1 you make a profit in the long term.

[red devil]

You're probably right Quids.

I've got 2 @ 6/1, 2 @ 15/2, 1 @ 8/1, 2 @ 10/1, 1 @ 20/1, and 1 @ 25/1 (9 in total as I missed the early kick-off).

Assuming the two outside bets don't win, I would need to get 2 of the others correct to make a profit.

I'm not placing any bets, just doing a 'what if'. I'll also see what happens if I placed ?1 on each correct result prediction...

[Mick Mac]

Boll*cks. Forgot about the golf this morning. Rory lost by one.

[????]

???? Wrote:

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

> Games at

>

> Arsenal

> Man City

> Spurs

> Chelsea

>

> All over 2.5 goals

>

> Stoke V Sunderland

>

> under 2.5

A small profit :)

[red devil]

red devil Wrote:

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

> You're probably right Quids.

> I've got 2 @ 6/1, 2 @ 15/2, 1 @ 8/1, 2 @ 10/1, 1 @

> 20/1, and 1 @ 25/1 (9 in total as I missed the

> early kick-off).

> Assuming the two outside bets don't win, I would

> need to get 2 of the others correct to make a

> profit.

> I'm not placing any bets, just doing a 'what if'.

> I'll also see what happens if I placed ?1 on each

> correct result prediction...

I predicted two correct scores @ 17/2. If I had placed ?1 on each of the 9 games I would've made a ?10 profit in total.

I predicted 7 correct results. If I had placed ?1 on each of the 9 games I would've made ?11.50 profit in total.

After only 1 week, too early to draw conclusions, but without doubles etc, there will never be big gains/losses with such a system...

[Mick Mac]

Keep up the search RD. :)

[red devil]

I'm hoping the thesis will be published pre-Christmas Mick.

I think a big factor is that once you introduce real money, I'm sure it influences decisions, and you become more conservative in your predictions, so not sure how you could ever quantify that...is this getting too deep? ;-)

[????]

RD, well done buy can I give you a reality check.

Bookies odds are more or less perfect - ie they reflect the narket (certain promos aside). This is especially true in big betted markest where thay have plenty of data (eg Premiership football). This maens that, in the long term, you'll break even if you predict perfectly ie the times you get it right you#ll be paid similar to what the likely probablity is. However good you are and on 3 weeks data (ie absolutely bugger all of a sample :)) you've startwed promisingly you#ll get bad weeks and lose plus you're not , with all respect likely to be perfect, so in the long term you'll lose. (add in tax etc) then it's even harder. It's why betting is really for mugs., unless you have better info or stats than the oddsetters.

Do it for a season and I'll believe taht you could possibly make money on it, in the meantime you're just running hot as we say in poker. It's, in all likley, just statistical variance...sad, mathematical fact as that is.

...now trading, that's different.

[red devil]

Don't worry Quids, I only bet for fun and what I can afford to lose. I've always known that the odds/probabilties are stacked in favour of the bookies. I've never got into trading, seems time hungry, constantly having to check whether to trade or not...

[????]

Games at...

Swansea

Spurs

West Ham

all over 2.5

Fulham

under 2.5