Cricket
Gubbing and Flipper Thread
|
By:
|
|
By:
That must really hurt! All that green voided! I guess that's when you go for the (Thai Green) "Curry" bet as insurance, if you remember to in the heat of the moment.
An additional point to note - the 1.01 gubbing here would have also resulted in a low odds gubbing of Thai "No". |
|
By:
IPL 1st match Chennai vs RCB @ MA Chidambaram Stadium (average 1st innings score here is 163)
1st Innings Runs (RCB) 90 1.01 £8,141 95 1.01 £337 100 1.01 £1,031 105 1.01 £200 110 1.03 £3663 120 1.02 £873 130 1.04 £769 1.01s were matched at other lower levels down to 65 runs. |
|
By:
RCB only managed 70, by the way.
|
|
By:
IPL Match #2 KKR v Sunrisers Sun 1.1 got overturned after a broken-floodlights delay.
|
|
By:
IPL Match #4 Rajasthan Royals vs King's XI Punjab
5 significant flips across evens, 7 if you include what looks like a brief spike on the graph - I think it was when RR scored a six by followed by a catch. RR really looked like chasing this but caved in quite spectacularly at the death. Noteworthy dodginess - a no-ball free hit gift was fluffed then another donation was made immediately on the next ball. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
I hate it when it does that. I'll try again.
I think you need to record more info for the thread to be useful. Such as who was batting and bowling, how many did the chasing team need (if that's when the odds flipped) how many overs were left and how many wickets. State of pitch, lots and lots of stuff. I do realise that's a lot of data to be recorded especially in-play but to be useful that's what you need. And I'm not volunteering to do it. |
|
By:
That is too much work charlie, we are all sofa loafers here.
|
|
By:
I'm recording these mainly to see how frequently they seem to occur, but I agree extra info would be useful.
Plenty of posters put such detail on the match threads and would be welcome to add summaries here. But I'm grateful for any contributions to the cause (rattles tin). Anecdotally from memory I have a feeling the IPL is more volatile than other T20 tournaments, whether through dodginess or the quality of players. But I'd like to see if the numbers bear this out. Apologies for the double-spacing earlier. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
Match #5 Delhi v Chennai
Before the final over, with two runs needed, Delhi traded at 1,000, then a wicket and two dots later they traded below 100 - that's a ten-bagger! Chennai began slightly odds on and crossed evens convincingly four times before going on to win. http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/8048/game/1175360 "Rabada comes back on with CSK needing just two. I'd have used him in the 19th and tried to swell the last-over target as much as possible. It was always going to be about that one ball, wasn't it? Dhoni knew he'd get one in his slot, and he knew he'd hit it for six. RISHU: "Why Mishra when 1 each of rabada and Paul is left? Interesting choice by Shreyas." 19.1 WICKET!! Rabada to Jadhav, OUT, a wicket. Back of a length wide of off, extra bounce, and Jadhav gets a thin edge to the keeper as he reaches out to steer to third man KM Jadhav c †Pant b Rabada 27 (34b 2x4 0x6) SR: 79.41 19.2 DOT Rabada to Bravo, no run, ooh, there's that pace and bounce again. Short outside off, and extra bounce beats the flashing square-cut Dwayne Bravo walks in. 19.3 DOT Rabada to Bravo, no run, and again. Another short, rising ball outside off. Wide enough to cut but too fast and too bouncy for the new man, who still hasn't got a measure of the conditions. He goes hard at it, but can't make contact 19.4 FOUR Rabada to Bravo, FOUR runs, and Bravo finishes stylishly. Shortish, closer to off stump on this occasion. Steps across and then whips it into the gap between square leg and long leg, with front leg up in the air Wow. Two to get, three balls remaining. This game seemed to be done and dusted half an hour ago, but CSK have huffed and puffed their way to this target. They never seemed under undue pressure, but taking it so deep and losing a wicket at an inconvenient time left a new batsman facing the pace and bounce of Kagiso Rabada. They've done the job in the end, though, but their net run rate might become an issue if it comes down to that. Won't come down to that if they keep winning, of course." |
|
By:
|
|
By:
I agree with Charlie. Some days ago I was going to suggest that we make separate threads for Tests, T20s and the domestic games. A month from now this thread is going to be full of posts that are going to read the same. And the only conclusions we will be able to draw would be, 'Oh I never knew this happens so often...'.
I also think FLIP FLOPS are not relevant for T20. They happen too often I think. Plus they don't offer any value in such a short format. Flip flops can happen on a 20 run over. They are more relevant for tests imo where there are three possible results. For both tests and T20s, I suggest we devise a system or a template where we can insert info about the match such as team names and link to the scorecard. Then maybe write some text as to how, when and why the odds moved. Use a particular text color when making such a post so that they can be differentiated from opinions or commentary from others. Plus use different colors for odds that move from 1.1 to 1.5, 1.1 to 2 and 1.1 to a full gubbing. That way there'll be some consistency. There are 60 games in the IPL and this thread will be a useless mess by the last game. It is better that we invest some time in creating a particular format for posting, and stick only to serious gubbings. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
Why are we using the term Gubbing here by the way?
Gubbing or getting gubbed is when a bookmaker bans you from free bets and bonuses. |
|
By:
In my eyes a gubbing is 1.01-1.05.
Agree flip flops are irrelevant. Virtually all gubbings are by the batting side coming from nowhere. Very rare a team bowling goes over 20's and then wins. I know that PSL game was one but it's rare compared to the chasing side coming from the bowels of hell. Another good one is chasing 10 or less in the last over. Again, very rarely does the bowling side win from my recollection That would make a good thread. Runs required at the start of final over, odds at the start of that over & through the over + final result. |
|
By:
See how many anecdotal insights we've already generated?
Very rare a team bowling goes over 20's and then wins - that's the kind of interesting idea that this thread will hopefully validate (or disprove). Let's say it's true - that would mean that by laying 20s only when the high odds are on the bowling team you'd be eliminatng most of the occasions when the 20s might actually go on to win, which would suggest that the value you are really offering is more like only 10s (or that the true odds on your 20s lay are more like 40s). Whichever way you look at it that would be quite some edge. @ DT https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=gubbed Your definition does also come up in searches but I've not heard it used on here. "Banned" or "restricted" seem to serve the purpose clearly enough already. The original Scottish word "gub" means "gob". "Derived from 'gub', the Scots word for mouth, 'gubbing' someone originally meant halting whatever was coming out of their mouth by force. However, over time the word's meaning has changed to encompass anything, or anyone, that has fallen into an irretrievable state of disrepair or damage." Regarding flip-flops being irrelevant - that's an arguable point. Every flip-flop means that bets on both sides of the market when correctly timed would generate a guaranteed profit. So then you have to look at how often they happen and how profitable they are compared to times when the bet loses outright, or wins only a small amount because it was traded off for a hoped-for flip-flop that never came. Multi-flippers give chances to massively multiply profits on both sides of the market. Those opportunity should not be dimissed lightly. |
|
By:
And just to annoy:-
espncricinfo.com/series/18886/game/1174240 Pak v Aus 3rd ODI Aus 160 runs 1.02 (and a little of my 1.01) half-gubbed, i.e. popped up to evens or higher and back down. Handy as I got my stake back on all the lower 1.01 lays. |
|
By:
Sorry that was 260 runs.
|
|
By:
I am not sure I understand flip flops correctly here. A flip flop is when the odds cross over, right? So teams trading at 1.8/2.24 flip flop to trade at 2.24/1.8, right?
I would be more interested in that if the difference between the odds is big. Say 1.5/3 changes to 3/1.5. The nearer the odds are to even, the lesser the return the flip flop provides. And happens too often. I still think sub 1.1 to 2.0 is the kind of gubbing i'd like to keep track of. |
|
By:
I still think sub 1.1 to 2.0 is the kind of gubbing i'd like to keep track of.
That's fine but you also have to keep track of how many times it didn't happen. What percentage do teams trading at 1.1 win? |
|
By:
Agreed re. the magnitude, particularly for the first/only flip-flop, but multi-flips are still noteworthy. Let's get people contributing regularly before we start fine-tuning the results.
1.1 to 2.0 is what I call a half-gubbing, on the logic that if odds of evens are "fair" then you should be indifferent to betting on one side or the other, so should therefore green out of a low-odds lay to make a profit regardless of whether or not the gubbing goes onto become fulfilled. In practice momentum often takes the odds well past evens but I usually leave a modest resting bet at evens in case it only touches. |
|
By:
@ Charlie = that's why I suggested people keep a note of how many matches were palyed that day/week, or in that tourny.
Number of non-gubs = no. of matches minus gubs. |
|
By:
Or what percentages do teams go from 1.1 to 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 etc and who won?
Flip-flops are useful for betting and you'll sometimes see my comments of i'll try and back both teams over evens from now on. Recording information of why they happened isn't useful imo. |
|
By:
VV
I can see where you coming from but really think there's too much data for lesser mortals like myself. Of course by all means collect everything and then share it with us! |
|
By:
To be more precise, that's "No. of matches actually played to a match-odds payout outcome (i.e.excluding ties)".
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
So we will need to first create a template of storing or printing information here so its easily readable. Then we can modify that to include any future info that we consider relevant.
|
|
By:
Writing a program that, for instance, starts recording odds once a team hits 1.1 would be a much easier way. I should be able to write something like that with what I study but im too lazy.
|
|
By:
It is shet loads of work if we start doing it manually. Easy to do it in tests but i'd say impossible to store so much info for T20s without investing some time after each game.
|
|
By:
Well it doesn't matter too much if we make a total mess of this thread (as long as it doesn't end up being used for general chit-chat) but when there's enough data I'll separate it out and summarise it.
I just think finding the info from individual match threads is a horrendous task, whereas picking out 1.01 gubbings from 1.1 gubbings and flip-flops all contained in one thread should be relatively easy. Better to have too much raw data than too little. Details of significant match moments can't really do any harm either, if people can be bothered to add them. Basic info needed is the identity of the match itself, the tourny (if applicable) and then the reason for it being featured here. Useful extra info is a link to the CricInfo page and a match summary or other relevant details. If there were more of us forumites then laziness wouldn't be a problem cos there'd always be some smart-arse or other willing to post/boast about their spectacular win. As it is we keep missing a lot of these gubbings, but I hope people will keep reporting them as they notice them even if they are not basking in glory every time. |
|
By:
Apart from I'm too lazy I'm certain I'd not have time to think about recording data when I'm in one of my frequent fire fighting games. I certainly encourage you and others to do so though!
|
|
By:
IPL Match #6 KKR v Lions
In the dying moments Kings lost a last-hope wicket and the odds spiked to 250+ but after a successful appeal they traded back down and KKR went as high as 1.04, possibly 1.05, so a possible 10-bagger there for the quick-fingered. |
|
By:
Titans v Cobras Momentum One-Day Cup
Titans traded at 1.04 then must have lost a few quick wickets as they briefly spiked to 5s (which I missed). I got evens before they shrank lower and went on to chase the total down. |
|
By:
Match #7 Mumbai v RCB
espncricinfo.com/series/8048/game/1175362 Mumbai first innings runs 170 1.01 up to 1.8+ 175 1.04 up to 3.0+ 180 1.11 up to 6.0+ Mumbai went on to set a target of 187 There were at least 4 small crosses of evens of 0.2 or more in the first innings. During the chase there were 5 major crosses, the first starting from 1.5 (Mumbai). Each spike reached to above 3.0 (one touched 5.0) before dropping back to evens, often dipping appreciably below. One cross resulted from a first-ball drop of Devilliers. Mumbai managed to defend despite a fragile spell during their own innings and some clumsy fielding. |
|
By:
188 target
|
|
By:
What happened here ffs............
If i want a novel i'll buy a bleedin book  |
|
By:
What happened here ffs.........
People kept bleating on about wanting more details  It will all be worthwhile in the end, I hope. |
|
By:
Aus v Pak 4th ODI (D/N) espncricinfo.com/series/18886/game/1174241
Pak 1.09 gubbed |