Betting.Betfair

Statistics are part and parcel of the NFL, the lifeblood almost, but from the plethora of stats that abound here are five that could have a game changing impact on Superbowl XLV:

Both sides are capable of putting points on the board

The Packers in three play-off games have rattled up 90 points, while the Steelers, who played just two play-off games, scored 55 points. In the regular season they were equally adept at putting points on the board, both sides averaging more than 23 points per game. But this will be the fourth Super Bowl in which the team that gave up the fewest points in the regular season (Steelers) faces the team that gave up the second-fewest points (Packers) and this could be a little more defensive than is expected from these two storied franchises.

With two potent offences on display last year - New Orleans and Indianapolis - a big points total was anticipated, but you have to go back to 2004 to find a Super Bowl that has topped 50 points. They'll have to go some to top the 75 points that San Francisco and Denver racked up in Super Bowl XXIX - but recent history suggests a total nearer 45-50. This is no normal game and teams sometimes take time to settle - the two highest scoring Super Bowls in the last ten years in 2003, 69 points, and 2004, 61 points, only totalled six points in the first quarter combined. The average over the past decade is 45.9 and the points line is settled around that mark this time.

Quarter by quarter

Pay attention to the ebb and flow of the game by quarter. In the last ten Super Bowls the first quarter has only contained 55 points. Eight of those ten first quarters have contained seven or less points, and two were scoreless. Both sides started their Championship games quickly but this is the Super Bowl and I expect a more conservative start. The points totals by quarter in the last ten Super Bowls are: Q1-55, Q2-123, Q3-101, Q4-180.

The Packers are early 2½ point favourites

Why? The game is indoors, which means Green Bay play on a fast surface. You saw what happened the last time they did that they rattled up 48 points against Atlanta in the Georgia Dome. For the record, Head Coach Mike McCarthy is 11-6 indoors and 1-1 inside during the playoffs. Here's another reason to favour Green Bay - The Packers haven't been behind by seven points at any time this season and trailed for only three minutes of the playoffs. They also became only the third team to reach the Super Bowl by winning three straight road games. The last two to do it - the 2007 New York Giants and 2005 Pittsburgh Steelers - each walked off with a league championship. QB Aaron Rodgers has a history of playing extremely well indoors, which makes him a good fit for Super Bowl XLV in Dallas. He's thrown 25 touchdown passes with just six interceptions in 12 career indoor games and his passer rating is the highest in indoor games (including playoffs) since 2008.

Experience is key

Experience is always a factor and here the Steelers hold a considerable edge, not only on the pitch but in the coaching ranks. The most telling experience margin comes at quarterback though where Ben Roethlisberger goes head-to-head with Aaron Rodgers. He's 10-2 in playoff games and has evolved into one of the league's all-time great clutch quarterbacks. He's one of the best in the league rolling out to the right and creating big plays on the run and he has been superb at engineering fourth quarter comebacks throughout his career.

Roethlisberger has been here before

Both Super Bowl quarterbacks have strong arms and can make big plays. Both can make first downs with their feet. Rodgers heads to the Super Bowl as the hotter quarterback. He has completed 71% of his passes (66 of 93) for 790 yards and six touchdowns in three playoff games. But there is a subtle difference that could give Roethlisberger a slight advantage. Super Bowl balls usually have a little more paint on them and are a little harder to handle. For Roethlisberger, it shouldn't be a problem. This will be his third game using Super Bowl balls, this will be Rodgers' first experience and it could just give Roethlisberger a little edge.

For more US Sports betting articles, go to http://betting.betfair.com/us-sports/

A homophobic riposte could see Jeff Brazier exit the Dancing On Ice scene this week, says Eliot Pollak, while it seems that Sam Attwater is set for a smooth skate to DoI 'glory' . . .


Ah, sexism. Not an area we would ever stray into in this column. But during a week in which the word 'banter' has been subjected to an investigation so rigoruous, it makes water-boarding look like a quick shower, it may be worth chipping in with some D on I related interpretations.

Jeff Brazier will certainly be grateful to the Sky duo for hogging the headlines this week, following his dubious quip at gay judge Jason Gardiner regarding 'insemination'.

Due to double standards and general misplaced media hysteria however, it has entirely escaped everybody's attention. Brazier may however have lost the gay vote - and at risk of putting two and two together and getting it all wrong (in this PC week of all PC weeks!!!), a hunch suggests that the gay vote may be essential to winning the Dancing On Ice trophy. Of course, heterosexual men, women (both heterosexual and homosexual) and indeed those who do not fit into any of those narrow categories, are also at liberty to enjoy the show, and perhaps even vote. But we're not saying they have to. Up to them really. Okay, think we've covered that one now...

In light of all this, Brazier is 8.0 to be the sixth eviction this week, and that may be money well spent. Our overall tip remains Sam Attwater (now priced as short as 1.74), running away from the field faster than Richard Keys leaving a WI meeting.

Elsewhere, ongoing whispers are hinting at the odd 'smash' ensuing between Jennifer Metcalfe and her ice dance partner, someone or other. Their speculative love making will have, fittingly, been put on ice earlier this week when she went crashing into said hard surface, taking a chunk out of her beautiful thigh, which one imagines to be an integral element in the 'smashing' process. Will it heal in time? In short, yes.

Metcalfe is currently third favourite in the 'Top Woman' category, priced at an alluring 5.6. At 6.2 and just behind her is Kerry Katona, who is feeling wonderfully confident after having had her stretch marks miraculously zapped at an expensive clinic. Tired, working-class mothers watching will no doubt find that very inspiring.

And finally, Vanilla Ice hilariously called Keanu Reeves "canoe" by accident once. He has also been laughed at by The Sun for copping a quick glance at his ice dance partner's rounded bottom. Because as we've seen this week, that conduct in 2011 Britain is simply unacceptable.

For more specials betting articles, go to http://betting.betfair.com/

Although he moans about watching football in the freezing cold, Dan 'The Betting Man' Fitch disagrees with Sir Alex Ferguson about whether the sport should switch to summer.


I don't know about you, but I'd describe football as being pretty popular right now. The game seems to get quite a lot of media attention, there's a reasonable amount of matches shown on TV and quite a bit of money pumping through the sport's veins.

If you can't tell, I'm actually downplaying things a little in a lazy attempt at sarcasm. The fact is that football is HUGE at the moment and if it continues to grow, one day it could even be as popular as sex, breathing, or Glee.

Yet those blokes at FIFA are still not content with things. They can't stop tinkering with football and their latest madcap scheme is to turn the world's most popular winter sport into the world's most popular summer sport.

Last week the story broke that there are plans to create a new international football calendar, that would see league football played between March and October.

It would be easy to dismiss this as a crackpot scheme that has no chance of coming to fruition, but then that's what I originally thought of the rumours of Tottenham bidding for the Olympic stadium. The truth is that if the powers to be think that it is likely to make them more money then they'll go for it.

With a winter World Cup in Qatar on the agenda, something would certainly have to be done to reschedule domestic football in 2022 anyway. I could see FIFA pushing for this, although whether they'd be able to convince the Premier League, Bundesliga, Serie A and La Liga, is another matter.

I can also see some benefits of football becoming a summer sport. For one we will no longer have to put up with the now annual and always boring saga of David Beckham trying to get a loan move, in order to secure some half-decent football.

The pub that I drink in before Spurs games has a nice beer garden and I wouldn't have those 'why do I put myself through this?' moments in January, when I can no longer feel my feet on the terraces. More seriously, we would no longer have to suffer games being postponed due to bad weather. Even the Blackpool ground staff could cope with a March frost.

In general though, I think that it's a bad idea. I find the winter depressing enough, but without football to tide us through the cold, dark days, suicide rates would go through the roof.

I can just about get through a June and July without football because of distractions like music festivals and women wearing very little clothing. Imagine a football-free month where the most exciting thing that you'd have to look forward to is filling in your self-assessment tax return.

Alex Ferguson thinks differently, although this is probably because he can afford to spend his winters in the Bahamas. He stated on Friday that he was in favour of a move to the summer, but has doubts as to whether the TV companies would let it happen. United are now 1.73 to have the league title in the bag by May.

I think that a lot of managers and players would be happy with a switch to summer. It would be even easier for Manchester City to attract foreign stars if they didn't have to provide them with snoods to survive our winters.

The fans though would have to suffer missing their team's local derby, because the wife had booked two weeks away in Tenerife. The vast majority of supporters wouldn't want it, but when has that ever been important to football's decision makers?

For more great football betting articles, go to http://betting.betfair.com/football/

The odds suggest the Super Bowl is bound for Green Bay but there are plenty of reasons to get behind Pittsburgh, says the Betfair Contrarian

There was once a time when the Contrarian greeted the wild world of US sports with mild caution but now he approaches it with a swagger. And can you blame him? Last year, he correctly identified outsiders the New Orleans Saints as Super Bowl winners and just three weeks ago he foresaw the downfall of the New England Patriots. It's left to the Pittsburgh Steelers and Green Bay Packers to determine the 45th Super Bowl champions and the Contrarian unsurprisingly has an opinion on that too - it won't be the Packers. Here's why he's laying them at 1.81...


The Steelers are Super Bowl superstars...
By winning the Super Bowl in 2009 - yes, they were champions as recently as two years ago - the Steelers confirmed themselves as the most successful team in NFL history with six triumphs, two of which were achieved in the last five years. Even more impressively, they have only ever been beaten once in the season finale, against the then mighty Dallas Cowboys in 1996 at the height of a 13-year stretch in which NFC teams completely dominated. Of every franchise to have contested two or more, only the San Francisco 49ers boast a better win percentage than them. The Packers by contrast haven't even been on American football's biggest stage for 13 years.


...and their players have greater experience too
The Steelers have far more Super Bowl experience than the Packers, as the majority of their roster was on the team that were victorious against the Arizona Cardinals two years ago. Of the Packers starters, only Charles Woodson has made a Super Bowl appearance and that was as an Oakland Raider in their emphatic 48-21 defeat to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers eight years ago.


The Packers are vulnerable to the Steelers' blitzes...
The Packers will be relying on inexperienced rookies James Starks and Andrew Quarless, who are 24 and 22 respectively, to combat the Steelers' blitzes, which puts quarterback Aaron Rodgers in serious peril. The effectiveness of Pittsburgh's blitzing is proven by the fact that they sacked the opposition more than anybody else during the regular season, a statistic that comes as no surprise given that it was the third campaign in a row in which they've ranked in the top two.


...and will struggle to break through their defense
Pittsburgh align their defense in a 3-4 formation featuring three down linemen and four linebackers and that's a strategy that Green Bay frequently struggled to gain results against in 2010. They came up against teams set up in such a fashion on seven occasions and in that time contrived to lose to the Washington Redskins and the Miami Dolphins, two franchises that ended the season with losing records, and the New England Patriots, while they were held to nine points in a victory over the New York Jets.


Conference breeds confidence for the underdogs
The AFC representatives have won nine of the last 13 Super Bowls and though the New Orleans Saints took the title in 2010, you have to go back to the mid 90s to find the last time that NFC sides triumphed in successive years. If that isn't enough to convince you that the Packers' NFC background is a hindrance, consider this - they have been defeated in seven of their 12 meetings with AFC teams over the last three seasons, whereas the Steelers have won nine of their 13 against the NFC in that period (including post-season games).


Head-to-head advantage belongs to the Steelers
These teams met in Pittsburgh during the 2009 regular season. The Steelers won 37-36 despite heading into the encounter on an awful run of five straight losses, a result that was rendered even more impressive by the absence of their star defensive back Troy Polamalu.

For more great US Sports betting articles, go to http://betting.betfair.com/us-sports/

It's a long time since a British player won a Grand Slam (yawn) but Andy Murray is the brightest hope we've had for many years. Betting.Betfair's punting pugilists Max Liu and Joe Dyer do battle over the Scot's chances in 2011.


YES

As if constant reminders of the long wait for a British Grand Slam winner weren't putting ample pressure on Andy Murray, Betfair now runs a Murray GS Event Win market.

With the new season stretching ahead with all the promise of a blank page (alas, not my own) it's time to consider a bet on said market. I say back Yes at 2.56. Think about it: he's ranked fifth in the world and there are four Grand Slams. Obviously that means there are only enough Grand Slams for the players ranked above him to win but if Andy can edge out one of Rafael Nadal, Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic or Robin Soderling at Melbourne, Roland Garros, Wimbledon or Flushing Meadows then he will have his Slam.

Amateur sports psychologists know that when you're playing tennis you're playing against yourself rather than your opponent and Andy's most formidable challenge may well be pressure. After all, Nadal has dodgy knees, Federer is an ageing cry baby, Djokovic is erratic and Soderling is no good. The markets agree with me, at least on the last two, which is why Andy is third favourite to win the Australian Open.

He reached the final last year, his second after the 2009 US Open, and I believe he's on the brink. Sport is full of surprises - that's why we bet: belief in surprises, faith in the long shot, the will to defy churning inevitability, a mini version of beating death.

There's something death defying about Murray (there was something deathly about Henman). It's that defend from deep style and channeled angst as well as his ability to rise up when he's been written off by my B.B colleagues. Ralph Ellis is a great one for dismissing Muzza, reporting disconcerting noise coming from the Scot’s camp, recommending him as a lay for some Masters event in the middle of America. And then, a week later, as if driven by some Ellis-baiting demon, Andy has turned around his form and is hoisting a trophy.

Really, I know nothing, as you may have gathered. I leave actually knowing about tennis to men like Ralph, Sean Calvert and Ben Caudell. I just like it. A lot. And I like Murray. A lot. Major man crush sort of thing. As Jack Houghton once said when recommending a cricket wager: "I have no idea what I'm talking about." It was the most sincere statement anyone had ever written on the internet but this should surpass it: Come on Andy!

NO

After witnessing year after year of total embarrassing failure in British tennis, it ain’t half nice to have a world class player in our ranks for once.

For the first time in a long time people are suggesting that, in Andy Murray, we have someone who could just scale the peaks of the men’s game and finally do what was last achieved by a male Briton in 1936 – win a Grand Slam (the last man to do so being Fred Perry, of course).

But for all the skill, tenacity and desire Murray boasts, I refuse to get carried away and can confidently say the plucky young Brit will not win a Grand Slam in 2011 – not when that man Rafal Nadal is still around and uninjured.

Not to mention that other fella, Roger Federer, of course.

Because, while the Swiss man’s crown may have slipped a little in recent years, he still retains the touch of a genius and is armed with a bewildering range of outrageous shots. In fact he is far and away the best world no.2 ever.

But then, of course, we have Rafa. After wins at the French Open, Wimbledon and the US Open in 2010 the Majorcan is hot on the heels of Fed’s record number of 16 Grand Slams.

That 2010 record was one of pure, unadulterated dominance. And the history of tennis tells us that when one man dominates, the rest might as well just settle for the runners-up prizes.

Between 2004 and 2007 Federer had Wimbledon, the Australian and US Opens pretty much locked up, only failing at the French Open, which is the most idiosyncratic of the four and in any case belonged to the undisputed king of clay, Nadal.

The Swiss continued to win Grand Slams over the next two years, largely sharing the big prizes with Nadal, but it’s the Spaniard’s time now and at just 25 years of age he is set fair for a period of utter dominance.

So, while there is a chance that Murray can match the achievements of Novak Djokovic at the 2008 Australian Open or Juan Martin del Potro a year later at Flushing Meadows, it’d be a rare pin prick in Nadal’s era.

He could do it – and I’d be genuinely happy if he did – but these are the Rafa years and I'll be backing the Spaniard for Grand Slam glory every time.

For more great sports betting articles, go to http://betting.betfair.com/

Since the middle of December, Labour have led in every national opinion poll bar one tie, by a margin extending to a high of seven points last week. They also won the Oldham-East & Saddleworth by-election, increasing their majority by over 3000. So having advised a bet on Labour to win the next General Election back in September at 2.24, I'm rather miffed that the market has barely moved in response. As the dust settles on a dramatic week in Westminster, the time has come to press up.

This has nothing to do with Andy Coulson, whose departure might affect David Cameron's spin operation, but will barely resonate outside Westminster. By far the more significant development concerns Alan Johnson's resignation, and his replacement by Ed Balls as Shadow Chancellor. Formerly Gordon Brown's right-hand man at the Treasury, Balls is a pugnacious character with enemies across the political divide, from Tories to former Cabinet colleagues. Most of them will consider Balls' return to be a disaster for Labour, reminding voters of the Brown legacy and potentially destablising Ed Miliband's leadership. On the other hand, as one of the most respected economic voices in Parliament, Balls is the perfect fit for what was a gaping hole in Labour's armoury.

Inevitably, the media are drawing parallels between the explosive Blair/Brown relationship, with Balls playing the role of his former mentor.That might make for an amusing narrative, but I rather doubt it tells us anything about his or Labour's political prospects. When it comes to the next election, Balls will be defined by his performance in opposition, not by ancient history recorded in memoirs most people will never read.

Ultimately, that election will be determined by perceptions of the government's radical economic strategy. Britons are bracing themselves for a brutal period, with job losses, inflation and massive cuts to public services in the pipeline. House prices are predicted to fall, interest rates to rise. Public opinion is moving steadily against the cuts, which probably explains Labour's growing lead. Indeed, given Miliband's low personal ratings and a double-digit Tory lead on economic competance, the current polls surely reflect unease with the coalition rather than any particular love for Labour.

If that economic competance rating were to reverse as voters blamed the government for their worsening prospects, it is easy to envisage a large Labour lead opening up. Until now, they've failed miserably to defend against Tory charges that the economic problems are Labour's fault. In Balls, they now have someone whose economic expertise is widely recognised, and who will simply never accept that accusation. He's already offered more in fighting talk after two days in the job than his colleagues managed in eight months.

Moreover, nobody is better positioned to capitalise on failure than Balls, as the most prominent politician to have gone out on a limb in opposing the cuts strategy on economic, (rather than social), grounds. In a well-publicised speech at Reuters during the Labour leadership contest, Balls argued that the cuts would derail the recovery, and that even Labour's plan to halve the deficit in four years was too austere. At the time, his views were backed by various commentators, including the FT columnist Martin Wolf and even London's Tory Mayor, Boris Johnson.

This does seem to be the ideal moment to become Shadow Chancellor. Such is the prevailing global economic gloom, that Osborne could even be right about the medicine, without getting any reward. If for instance the deficit were to be halved, rather than eliminated, his policy might be seen as a failure. Likewise, a jobless recovery is unlikely to win over voters. Economic competance is not an exact science. It is largely driven by voters' general feelings about their own economic prospects, rather than distant, relatively arcane issues like the structural deficit or GDP growth. The last Tory government boasted impressive growth figures following recession, but couldn't recover the damage done by Black Wednesday and raising interest rates to penal levels.

But what of the concerns about Balls' divisive influence within the Labour Party? If there's one thing that could render all their critique of the coalition irrelevant, it would be another internal feud. Contrary to the media narrative, I expect the two Eds will work fine together, at least for now. Remember, while the seeds of the Blair/Brown feud were sown in 1994, it never mattered until they were in government. And while Balls does indeed resemble his former mentor in many respects, we should remember that Brown was well respected for 15 years until the financial crisis and taking on the PM job, for which he simply lacked the personal skills.

On policy, the one known difference between Miliband and Balls, concerning the speed and scale of deficit reduction, is overstated. Oppositions are rarely judged on the nuances of their evolving economic policy, as we saw with Cameron and Osborne. Their economic critique and platform shifted several times between 2005 and 2010. What mattered was that by the time of the election, they had a clear, consistent plan.

Far likelier than a split between Miliband and Balls, both of whom were Brownites, is a reaction from the Blairite wing of the party. As well as the personal disputes, the party's feud revolved around ideological differences. Ed Balls is a distinctly left-of-centre politician, and will add to the growing sense that the 'New' Labour era is over, and the party is gradually shifting to the Left. It remains to be seen whether there is a future in such a party for the likes of David Miliband or John Reid. For now though, any differences on that front will surely be put aside in favour of a strategy upon which they can all agree - scoring open goals against an increasingly unpopular government.

Recommended bet: Labour to win the next General Election @ 2.24


For more great politics betting articles, go to http://betting.betfair.com/specials/politics-betting/

Off the field Darren Bent has not exactly covered himself in glory over the last week. His departure from Sunderland, just 18 months after agitating for a move away from Tottenham, bears all the hallmarks of the typical greedy, modern day footballer he is.

But Sunderland's bleating this week about Aston Villa using underhand tactics to tap up their leading goalscorer is just a case of sour grapes. "I'd have expected a call from Villa's manager," said Bruce. "I'd have expected Gérard Houllier to have had the decency to pick up the phone but that's not been the case. I would have thought that, out of respect, maybe he would say 'we're interested in buying your striker' in order to give me a chance to do something." What like, say 'no'?

Like it or lump it, tapping-up goes on in football all the time and there's nothing anyone can do to stop it. Clubs will always want to find out whether a not a player is willing to join them without risking upsetting the applecart in their own dressing room. They will want to convince the player to move before his club has a chance to persuade him otherwise while also avoiding the embarrassment of being turned down in public.

Furthermore, if Sunderland wanted to take the moral high ground they should have refused to sell him. Nobody forced them to take the £24m for the sometime England striker, but they did. So if they were prepared to sell him then they have no right to bleat about it. And the only reason, one assumes that the Black Cats are whingeing publicly, is so that the fans don't turn on them (they are priced at 3.5 to finish the season in the sixth place they now occupy) for having sold their goal machine to a rival club.

And that is what Bent is. He may not possess the grace of Fernando Torres, the skill of Carlos Tevez or the power of Didier Drogba but he scores goals. He brings to mind David Trezeguet in his pomp in that he is not a scorer of great goals but he is a great goalscorer. The statistics speak for themselves. Since the 2005/06 season, no player has scored more Premier League goals; he is level with Wayne Rooney and Drogba on 82 strikes.

That is why Villa paid so much money for him. If Bent's goals keep Villa in a Premier League, in which they are hovering three points above the drop zone (you can lay them in the relegation market at 12.0), then £24m is a price worth paying. There is a very good reason why top strikers are paid a king's ransom.

Yesterday, for example, Manchester United crushed Birmingham 5-0 with the help of a Dimitar Berbatov hat-trick that took the Bulgarian three goals clear of Tevez in the scorers' charts and in to 2.1 (from 4.1 when last mentioned in this column - to finish as top marksman for 2010/11.

Robin van Persie also hit three against Wigan and it is not insignificant that Arsenal have looked a different force since the forward's return from injury. Harry Redknapp's wife would have probably scored against Wigan playing in that Gunners side, but it is worth pointing out that Arsène Wenger's men have won seven and drawn one of the eight matches the Dutchman has started this season. If he can stay fit - admittedly a big 'if' - then their tempting 3.8 title odds will also keep shortening.

Every ambitious clubs needs a goalscorer. Hence the reason Manchester City have shelled out £27m for Edin Dzeko and why Tottenham, without a league win in three, have been scouting Diego Forlan. Spurs need a better quality marksman than Peter Crouch, Roman Pavlyuchenko and Robbie Keane to dovetail with Rafael van der Vaart, who like Bent has nine league goals to his name this season, and better exploit Gareth Bale and Aaron Lennon's plentiful supply line.

Bent got off to a dream start by scoring the winner against City, putting Dzeko in the shade for the time being, and further denting Roberto Mancini's title hopes, which are now priced at 15.5, and only time will tell whether he justifies the outlay invested in him - after all Charlton still went down in 2007. My feeling is that with Stewart Downing and Ashley Young in the side, Bent might even fire Villa back into European contention next season - before jumping ship when Liverpool or Everton get hold of his phone number.

For more great football betting articles, go to http://betting.betfair.com/football/

Dan Fitch looks at the NFL superstars who had it all and let it slip through their fingers...

It looks as if the Indianapolis Colts are ready to make Peyton Manning the highest-paid player in the history of the NFL. Manning's current $98-million deal is expiring soon and he is set to receive a mammoth new deal.

These figures are so vast that it would seem impossible to spend it all in a lifetime, but as many former NFL greats have proved in the past, a football player and their money can soon be parted.

According to a Sports Illustrated report 78% of former NFL players either find themselves broke or financially stretched after retirement. Here are 7 NFL stars who blew all their money.

7. Johnny Unitas - Estimated lifetime earnings: $4 million
Although the legendary quarterback Johnny Unitas played at a time before football contracts were worth millions, he still earned an absolute fortune for the time. His first yearly contract in 1956 with the Colts of $7000 would be worth around $56,405 today, while his $250,000 salary plus a $175,000 bonus paid in his last season in 1973, would today be worth around $2,160,000.

After Unitas' football career ended, he gradually frittered away his earnings on a string of failed business ventures, including a chain of bowling establishments, a prime-rib restaurant, an air-freight company and a Florida real estate investment.

Unitas filed for personal bankruptcy protection in 1991 after investing in a failed circuit-board manufacturer. He died 11 years later with a lawsuit from his estate hanging over all of his businesses.

6. Dick Lane - Estimated earnings: $5 million
Dick Lane earned an estimated $5m during his career with the Los Angeles Rams, Chicago Cardinals and Detroit Lions in the fifties and sixties, living the celebrity lifestyle with his jazz singer wife Dinah Washington.

In fact he enjoyed the high life a little too much and blew much of his money on drink and drugs, with bad investments in real estate, the music business and overseas scams accounting for the rest of his fortune.

5. Raghib Ismael - Estimated lifetime earnings: $20 Million
Unlike a lot of the stars of the NFL who lost their fortune because of their wild lifestyle, Raghib 'Rocket' Ismail was only guilty of very poor business sense.

Ismail earned somewhere between $18m to $20m in his 12-year pro football career, but lost the lot by investing in a series of ventures that went bust, including a Rock n' Roll Café, COZ Records, a movie, cosmetics, nationwide phone-card dispensers, and calligraphy proverbs kiosks.

Today, the 41-year old Ismael presents a sports show for the Dallas Cowboys and as a devout Christian, appears as an inspirational speaker at churches.

4. Travis Henry - Estimated lifetime earnings: $20 million
To date the former Buffalo Bills, Tennessee Titans and Denver Broncos running back Travis Henry has fathered eleven children by ten different women. His lawyer claims he is obligated to pay at least £170,000 a year in child support payments and he was arrested in 2009 for the non-payment of £16,600 towards his childrens' upkeep.

Most people would struggle to pay that sort of child support, but having earned $20m in his career you'd think that Henry would have stood a chance. Unfortunately he couldn't keep on the straight and narrow. Henry was released from his $22.5m deal with the Denver Broncos, just one year into a five-year contract, having tested positive for marijuana and generally showing a lack of commitment.

Worse was to come when he was charged with conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute, receiving $4m in fines and a three year federal jail term.

3. Deuce McAllister - Estimated lifetime earnings: $23m
The New Orleans Saints running back earned an estimated $23m during his career between 2001 and 2008, but that didn't stop him having to file for bankruptcy for his Nissan car dealership in 2009.

Whitney National Bank claimed McAllister owed $753,183.08 plus interest after defaulting on three loans. McAllister stated that the debt was purely on his failed car business and that his other financial affairs were in good order, but if that really was the case, then why wouldn't he have just paid off a debt that was relatively small in comparison to his career earnings?

2. Lawrence Taylor - Estimated lifetime earnings: $50 million
A legendary player for the New York Giants, Lawrence Taylor earned around $50m during his career, but just five years after retiring he was declared bankrupt.

Taylor lost millions on his company All-Pro Products and was also found guilty of tax evasion. His personal life was chaotic, being charged with drug possession on several occasions, as he spent thousands each day on cocaine.

One of his excesses was to pay for prostitutes to visit the hotel rooms opponents' hotel rooms the night before a game in an attempt to tire them out. Taylor was recently charged with statutory rape, after sleeping with a 16-year old prostitute.

1. Michael Vick - Estimated lifetime earnings: More than $130 million
If you find yourself being named by Forbes as one of the 10 richest athletes in the world, then you should be set for life. Michael Vick had a $139m contract with the Atlanta Falcons as well as commercial contracts with Nike, EA Sports, Coca-Cola, Powerade, Kraft, Rawlings, Hasbro and AirTran.

Things started to turn sour for Vick when he was imprisoned for being involved with a dog fighting group. The endorsement deals were all left to expire, Vick was suspended from the NFL and he was forced to pay back a signing bonus of $19.97m to the Atlanta Falcons.

Earning just 12 cents an hour cleaning pots and pans in jail, you would have thought Vick would have reduced his spending, but instead he is estimated to have continued paying $30,000 a month to leeching family and friends. In 2008, whilst still in jail, he sought bankruptcy.

The bankruptcy saw the details of his messy finances become public. It was alleged that his business manager had wrongfully removed $900,000 from Vick's accounts and a total of $1,112,664 dollars had been withdrawn as 'cash out'. That's a total of 2764 ATM withdrawals of $400 dollars a time (including the $2.50 service charge). Having been released from jail in 2009, Vick has found employment once more with the Philadelphia Eagles.

For more NFL betting articles, go to http://betting.betfair.com/us-sports/nfl/

Former Atomic Kitten and tabloid favourite has decided that slating the ex-Peter Andre is a wise move, and maybe it will be. Meanwhile other contestants are playing it safe by snogging their ice partners...

Having whittled down the line-up over the past two weeks, Dancing on Ice 2011 can now start for real. As can the betting. Sam Attwater seems to be the judges' favourite right now, and with Chloe Madeley and Laura Hamilton hot on his heels, this might well be the first time that he has ever been the most famous name in a sentence about celebrities.

Attwater is also very much the favourite with the Betfair market too - trading at a staggering 1.97. We love a bandwagon, so he can have our support too. As previously pointed out, SA has the right combination of male genitals and a soap opera background to win the prestigious gong, or whatever trinket the winning contestant receives. Probably a golden skate on a tree stump from Jane Torville's garden or something similarly tasteful.

And so to the week's gossip.

Jennifer Metcalfe - the most overtly 'loose-moraled' of the girls if you completely discount Kerry Katona - has clearly taken a few leaves from Kara Tointon's winning handbook (very poor spelling throughout it), by suggesting that she might be going at it like the clappers with her dance partner behind the scenes. The pair drooled into one another's mouths at the end of the weekend skate-off.

Meanwhile, to the relief of the nation, Kerry Katona has reinvigorated the long forgotten Jordan/Peter Andre feud by nailing her colours to TEAM PETER, after suggesting that Jordan is only divorcing that violent transvestite fellow because Peter has declared his love for Frank Lampard's former port in a storm, Elen Rives. It's a story which will no doubt polarise the voters, meaning that Kerry could have snared at least half of them by getting all political about it. Smart move. KK is available at 15.0.

Talking of Cry me a Rives, like Ransen before her, she's been bitching about her portrayal on the show. Apparently she's completely hilarious in real life, they just chose to edit out the jokes. Or something. We've all used that one Elen. We've all used that one.

And there was also politicking from Chloe Madeley of all people, who seems to be wooing the Christian right, when she proudly stood up for monogamy in a magazine interview.

Meanwhile another 20 years of obscurity looks set to seduce Henry from Neighbours following his exit. He blamed the weather for his swift exit. He'll be in for a shock when he eventually heads home...

For more great specials betting articles, go to http://betting.betfair.com/specials/

A legend that always bounces back - that's the Betfair Contrarian's assessment of Kauto Star as he explains why you should back Paul Nicholl's two-time Gold Cup winner for more Cheltenham glory in 2011...


The Contrarian has twice argued against Kauto Star winning the Cheltenham Gold Cup, so is under no illusion just how hard it is to oppose the horse which BBC Sports Personality of the Year Tony McCoy described as the best in his lifetime. Imagine therefore the favourite-layer's relief upon learning that his latest assignment was to state the case for backing the two-time winner at an absurdly huge 10.0. With no shortage of ammunition, here's why the Contrarian is confident of seeing Kauto Star in the winner's enclosure at Cheltenham...

Kauto Star is a Gold Cup legend
He may not hold the benchmark for the most Gold Cup wins, but Kauto Star is certain to go down as one of the all-time greats of the Cheltenham Festival's showpiece. He confirmed his place in history in 2009 by becoming the first to ever regain the Gold Cup after being dethroned, and did so in spectacular fashion with a 13-length romp.

He always bounces back
The feat of regaining the Gold Cup is just one in a long series of remarkable recoveries that have served to make the 11-year-old so popular and earned his supporters plenty of money. The French-bred horse has won a staggering six of his last seven races that have followed a setback, finishing second in the only one in which he wasn't first past the post during that period.

Imperial Commander isn't good enough to win twice
Imperial Commander may be the defending champion and 5.0 favourite, but have a look at the list of multi-time winners, such as Arkle and Best Mate, and most will agree they are among the finest chasers ever. Imperial Commander is nowhere near that level, as a record of only four victories in his last ten races confirms, and given that modern day icons Kauto Star and Denman both failed to achieve successive triumphs, it's a mistake to expect Imperial Commander to do so.

Don't fall for the Long Run hype
The King George VI Chase is sometimes seen as a strong Gold Cup indicator but besides four-time winner Kauto Star, only three of the horses to have won the race in the last 21 years have claimed the big one: See More Business (1999), the exceptional Best Mate (2002) and Kicking King (2005). Long Run, the 7.6 second favourite following his success this year at Kempton, has a long way to go before proving that he is in that class. His two prior outings at Cheltenham - on a hilly course that differs vastly and is far more challenging than the flatter one at Kempton - have produced two third-placed finishes. Another obstacle is that the last six-year-old to win was Mill House way back in 1963.

Two months is a long time
There are many reasons to avoid fussing over Kauto Star's underwhelming showing in the King George VI Chase, the main one being that as Paul Nicholls revealed on Betting.Betfair, he bled from his nostrils in the aftermath and likely bled during it, clearly affecting his run, and has since been diagnosed with a low-grade infection. Even so, without being in peak form, he took third place. The other major difference between last Saturday and March is that Kauto Star's favourite jockey Ruby Walsh will be back in the saddle after an absence with a broken leg. Tony McCoy steered the horse for the first time at Kempton and as owner Clive Smith said: "He's got a different style to Walsh and maybe that showed. It was his first ride on him. It's very hard to get on a horse like Kauto and ride to suit him."

It's not a race for favourites
Rather surprisingly given all the build-up and analysis that it attracts months in advance, the Gold Cup has only been won by the favourite six times in the last 20 years, while Kauto Star is the only horse in the last five years to have triumphed as the frontrunner, so there is no reason to be scared off by the fact that he is available at a much longer price than usual.

For more great racing articles, go to http://betting.betfair.com/horse-racing/