Cricket
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Toss in 20 mins
Will be interesting to see which pitch they will use.
The pudding from the 2nd game, the runway from the 3rd or a new one
Will be interesting to see which pitch they will use.
The pudding from the 2nd game, the runway from the 3rd or a new one
Show More
Jos Buttler is not in great nick either so it will be a tough choice for Ricky Pointing to make at Mumbai Indians for the role of finisher.
OK just paid for the B365 account, there is no live streaming of cricket for us.
NHL , Spanish La Liga, Belgium Soccer, NBA, MLB, Tennis Miami Open , still get access to that though....cant complain
whoops sorry about that WCE no idea it was country based. Apologies.
thought they would have provided the cricket as well....
ECE
All you have to do is download the Mobdro app for free.........on android..
It has every station in the cricket world........
...for free........
all the sky all the bt
TEN CRICKET PAK TV WILLOW CRICKET oZ SPORTS AND ON AND ON espn etc
All you have to do is download the Mobdro app for free.........on android..
It has every station in the cricket world........
...for free........all the sky all the bt
TEN CRICKET PAK TV WILLOW CRICKET oZ SPORTS AND ON AND ON espn etc
will consider buying a Samsung Galaxy in future though
Ok I am out of this match...dont see Windies coming out alive of this...
it may have other options than android
but you can have it on phone too
or buy a kindle for peanuts............
top streaming
but you can have it on phone too
or buy a kindle for peanuts............
top streaming
EVen if Pakistan tried to bottle this, they still wouldn't lose.
Yes Charles, all streams encounter some problems...
But better than no pictures
But better than no pictures
I've steamed these 1.5s...............cant believe it...on already at 2.18
Interesting for me again (but probably no one else) is how I get out of this. I need about 1.5 to break even. Not losing a great amount so no real pressure but do like the challenge.
Although everyone keeps telling me there's no difference it will involve betting/laying Windies not Pakistan. As soon as pecker puts me right about cross matching that may change though 
Interesting for me is how you just cant say i am green now and will leave it alone..really
I have to give it to you..how you manage no losses in T20...I lost my shirt yesterday..!!!nightmare it was
Charlies Ebook will be coming soon, "How to always win in T20" - £9.99
Charlies T20 strat
1. Back the team batting first
2. If they're in the **** keep doubling up at higher odds
3. If they do a **** score, full bank on chasing team to recover losses.
4. Profit
Am i close Charlie!?
1. Back the team batting first
2. If they're in the **** keep doubling up at higher odds
3. If they do a **** score, full bank on chasing team to recover losses.
4. Profit
Am i close Charlie!?
Neah as far as I have seen he just backs the high odds whoever it is...
Cliche...early wickets needed by Windies..to stand any chance.
1. is correct
2. is wrong i think (but not sure what you mean)
3. is close but no where near full bank (and often continue to lay favourite)
4. is correct!
This was initial reply but it's far too simplistic, as there are trades going on all the time.
2. is wrong i think (but not sure what you mean)
3. is close but no where near full bank (and often continue to lay favourite)
4. is correct!
This was initial reply but it's far too simplistic, as there are trades going on all the time.
Just laid again at 1.17 but I have to be careful I'm not just trying to prove a point!
Which does go against what I said earlier about playing on Windies.
Cross matching was introduced by Betfair under the guise of 'Market Efficiency'.
They said it was to ensure tat people could get matched quickly and fairly at the requested price..
So if your request was not matched on one side it would be matched on the other side if monies were available.
This means 'Betfair', WE WILL INTRODUCE OUR BOTS TO THE MARKET and hoover up any over round available before you even see it often and thus put an end to the previous 'Scalping' that peeps like me had been doing for previous years, thus creating less winners immediately, and robbing the mostly losers on here aswell as taking the PC charge off them resulting in less Newbies coming on board and as a result pishing off the regular market makers and so reducing significantly liquidity.They did not care because they want losers to go to sporstbook and for Sharp minds to fight it out amongst themselves and pay stupis amounts of PC to do so..
So now you have to stick to one side..
that side is the fav side ...all the time..and lay or back accordingly...
you can not gain advantage on the shallow side because of the Bots and you will just get snaffled and margined out bit by bit...
I hope this makes it clearer for you Charles....
Whatever you do , good luck..
But lay for 50 is 43 43 at 2.14 is only 49.02
They said it was to ensure tat people could get matched quickly and fairly at the requested price..
So if your request was not matched on one side it would be matched on the other side if monies were available.
This means 'Betfair', WE WILL INTRODUCE OUR BOTS TO THE MARKET and hoover up any over round available before you even see it often and thus put an end to the previous 'Scalping' that peeps like me had been doing for previous years, thus creating less winners immediately, and robbing the mostly losers on here aswell as taking the PC charge off them resulting in less Newbies coming on board and as a result pishing off the regular market makers and so reducing significantly liquidity.They did not care because they want losers to go to sporstbook and for Sharp minds to fight it out amongst themselves and pay stupis amounts of PC to do so..
So now you have to stick to one side..
that side is the fav side ...all the time..and lay or back accordingly...
you can not gain advantage on the shallow side because of the Bots and you will just get snaffled and margined out bit by bit...
I hope this makes it clearer for you Charles....
Whatever you do , good luck..
But lay for 50 is 43 43 at 2.14 is only 49.02
Say what you like Charles....thats the fcuking numbers and they cant be beat and i am here
15 years.......................
15 years.......................
Tom, you know what i mean...
i am typing lots and spoon feeding the babies ff sake............
i am typing lots and spoon feeding the babies ff sake............
OK...pulled the plug...not losing..not winning...but I am happy that I have made my money on the run lines...now would cheer for Windies.
Still laying Pakistan. But will bail soon so that I can get a game.
Charles, has it ever crossed your mind as to why there is a 3/10ths gap on the Windies side all the time...
You really should be more observant.
You really should be more observant.
Pakistan taking it slowly..but thats how they mug things usually...start getting too careful and then just collapse in a heap..
pecker, yes and I like to fill the gap with £2 which messes things up.
Apr 2, 2017 -- 7:50PM, Charlie wrote:
pecker, yes and I like to fill the gap with £2 which messes things up.
Charlie bamboozles the bots!
I do it all the time Tom. Virtually every time I see a gap I stick £2 on it. It provides information.
Missed it put up lay at 14 (following a £2 bet) but four spoiled it.
After timing here but was rather pleasantly surprised to be able to get on Pak around 2.1. They've managed the chase, such as it is, well. Doesn't make up for the amount I lost last game but then it's been a very good weekend otherwise.
Apr 2, 2017 -- 8:16PM, slip5 wrote:
pakistan seem a straight team these days
Still not great with the bat but good enough to chase 125.
pecker did you originate the abovt cross matching? I can see what you're saying but it's still bollocks.
Must admit a bit ill mannered of me I'll post reasons why tomorrow.
pecker thanks for the cross matching. Read it and digested it. It's still bollocks.
pecker
It was very rude of me to call something bollocks without at least offering an explanation so here goes.
In your example you used laying £50 @ 1.86 to give £43 and then backing £43 at 2.14 to give £49.02. So you would be 98p better off laying.
The implied probability (1/odds) for odds of 1.86 is 0.5376. The closest to make a round book on the lay side is 2.16 (not 2.14 as given by you) with an implied probability of 0.4630. Using these figures lay £50 at 1.86 to give £43 (as before) but now backing £43 at 2.16 gives £49.88. So you are still better off by 12p laying than backing. Which supports your argument.
If we now change the odds slightly to 1.85 which is an implied probability of 0.5405 then the required back odds are 2.18 with an implied probability of 0.4587. Now we get lay £50 at 1.85 equals £42.50 and back £42.50 at 2.18 which is £50.15. So we would be 15p better of by backing. Which goes against your argument.
So it appears, theoretically, sometimes we would be better off laying and some times better off backing.
It was very rude of me to call something bollocks without at least offering an explanation so here goes.
In your example you used laying £50 @ 1.86 to give £43 and then backing £43 at 2.14 to give £49.02. So you would be 98p better off laying.
The implied probability (1/odds) for odds of 1.86 is 0.5376. The closest to make a round book on the lay side is 2.16 (not 2.14 as given by you) with an implied probability of 0.4630. Using these figures lay £50 at 1.86 to give £43 (as before) but now backing £43 at 2.16 gives £49.88. So you are still better off by 12p laying than backing. Which supports your argument.
If we now change the odds slightly to 1.85 which is an implied probability of 0.5405 then the required back odds are 2.18 with an implied probability of 0.4587. Now we get lay £50 at 1.85 equals £42.50 and back £42.50 at 2.18 which is £50.15. So we would be 15p better of by backing. Which goes against your argument.
So it appears, theoretically, sometimes we would be better off laying and some times better off backing.
Charles
Yes, 1.84 as Tom pointed out or 2.16 as you say, which was a typo as Tom was aware.
However the gap increases as you go up the scale.
Where you operate 6 becomes 6.2...500 becomes 520
1.2 500/100 at 1.21 500/105
Work that out
However you still miss the point
The BOT is always ahead of you..always...
You submit £2 bets for information you said.
What exactly is that.
You cant get the perceived value(which isn't there anyway) because the BOT is always ahead of you because it is programmed to do so.
The implication is therefore that when you're bet(that's you)is taken it is because the BOT is creaming the margin FROM YOU.
Yes, 1.84 as Tom pointed out or 2.16 as you say, which was a typo as Tom was aware.
However the gap increases as you go up the scale.
Where you operate 6 becomes 6.2...500 becomes 520
1.2 500/100 at 1.21 500/105
Work that out
However you still miss the point
The BOT is always ahead of you..always...
You submit £2 bets for information you said.
What exactly is that.
You cant get the perceived value(which isn't there anyway) because the BOT is always ahead of you because it is programmed to do so.
The implication is therefore that when you're bet(that's you)is taken it is because the BOT is creaming the margin FROM YOU.
pecker thanks for reply I find it quite interesting and has got me thinking (which is unusual!).
I'm struggling to understand the relevance of 1.2 500/100 and 1.21 500/105. In first back odds should be 6 which gives a 100% book and no difference whether backing or laying. In the second the question is what are the correct back odds 5.7 or 5.8; one favours the layer the other favours the backer (5.8 is slightly closer to a 100% book so would favour the backer).
I fail to see how a bot can be in front of me if I'm the first one to put a price up or put a bet on, say, the second best odds available.
£2 for information was a bit tongue in cheek but I do "frequently fill the gap" with a £2 bet. Pre-match I've observed that frequently there's a stand-off between backers and layers. I may be trying to decide whether the odds will go up or down before placing a bet or be trying to get slightly better odds. A £2 bet, daft as it sounds, often sparks the market into life. Again frequently the backing or laying side will take the bet and there's no longer a gap. Sometimes some bastard will just take the £2 though and I'm non the wiser. Not a very good explanation I know what I mean but that's not much use to anyone else.
In-play works much the same but obviously much quicker plus I'm sometimes pissed off that somebody will be profiting by backing and laying either side of the gap and hope my £2 pisses them off - maybe unlikely (especially if a bot) but for £2 which may win or lose gives me pleasure.
I don't mind bots doing their stuff. If there are cricket bots that can accurately calculate the correct odds either pre-match or in-play I'd be very surprised.
I'm struggling to understand the relevance of 1.2 500/100 and 1.21 500/105. In first back odds should be 6 which gives a 100% book and no difference whether backing or laying. In the second the question is what are the correct back odds 5.7 or 5.8; one favours the layer the other favours the backer (5.8 is slightly closer to a 100% book so would favour the backer).
I fail to see how a bot can be in front of me if I'm the first one to put a price up or put a bet on, say, the second best odds available.
£2 for information was a bit tongue in cheek but I do "frequently fill the gap" with a £2 bet. Pre-match I've observed that frequently there's a stand-off between backers and layers. I may be trying to decide whether the odds will go up or down before placing a bet or be trying to get slightly better odds. A £2 bet, daft as it sounds, often sparks the market into life. Again frequently the backing or laying side will take the bet and there's no longer a gap. Sometimes some bastard will just take the £2 though and I'm non the wiser. Not a very good explanation I know what I mean but that's not much use to anyone else.
In-play works much the same but obviously much quicker plus I'm sometimes pissed off that somebody will be profiting by backing and laying either side of the gap and hope my £2 pisses them off - maybe unlikely (especially if a bot) but for £2 which may win or lose gives me pleasure.
I don't mind bots doing their stuff. If there are cricket bots that can accurately calculate the correct odds either pre-match or in-play I'd be very surprised.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539