|
By:
Wolves are too short. Wouldn't touch them with stolen money. Lay them.
|
|
By:
i prefer colchester to beat carlilse at 1.82 this evening
|
|
By:
How are Wolves too short and what's the justification for laying them?
|
|
By:
Crawley have scored plenty of goals already this season. IMHO that makes betting on them losing a little dangerous.
|
|
By:
so you simply ignore the wolves team they'll be facing and the fact Crawley have shipped [against inferior opposition] as many goals as they've scored ?
|
|
By:
The price is the justification for laying them. I think they are rightly favourites but the price is laughable.
|
|
By:
The price is the justification for laying them. I think they are rightly favourites but the price is laughable.
|
|
By:
what price would you have them at mary?
|
|
By:
1.72 is generous
|
|
By:
1.67 now
|
|
By:
so you simply ignore the wolves team they'll be facing and the fact Crawley have shipped [against inferior opposition] as many goals as they've scored ?
Not at all. I just think their are significant risks and when you add a probably lack of in play liquidity in this League 1 game it is not the kind of bet I would choose to get involved with. |
|
By:
Poor price. Should be 1.9 imo.
|
|
By:
A full international front line (with various levels of international representation behind) operating in League 1 should be offered at 1.9?
Yeah, right. ![]() |
|
By:
goals goals goals
|
|
By:
It wouldn't surprise me if Crawley had been working on their defence all week. Teams that ship goal win nothing. Most good managers will go back to basics to shore up the defence. If the Crawley manager is any good he will be looking for a clean sheet.
|
|
By:
i think they should win about 5-0 personally. got 500 quid on em at 1.72. mind you, ive only won 19 of 20 bets this week so what would i know. setting myself up for a fall i know, im not one to shout about things but 1.72 looks a cracking price to me.
|
|
By:
"A full international front line (with various levels of international representation behind) operating in League 1 should be offered at 1.9? "
Have your lump on at 1.68. You'll probabaly win, but backing Wolves at this price in the long term is the road to the poor house, pure and simple. |
|
By:
Lol at people on this thread expecting Wolves to win 5-0 every week.
I can just see the posts this time last year. "Wolves at home to Brighon? They're premier league players aren't they - should win 5-0" ![]() |
|
By:
The only person who has said anything about Wolves winning 5-0 every week or backing them at 1.68 long term is you. We're talking about Wolves v Crawley tonight.
Platitudes and generalisations don't cut it in the long run. |
|
By:
So you think Crawley are cannon fodder. Where do you expect them to finish in the league out of interest?
|
|
By:
over 2.5 ?
|
|
By:
Wolves and Peterborough = free promotion money as we storm through this league
HTH |
|
By:
got 114 on at 178 thing of laying 50 166 as 50 was my starting bank or stick what experts think please
|
|
By:
This is a monster price assuming wolves are to mount a promotion challenge doubt crawleys back 4 have faced a current scottish international before not a wolves fan but this in my opinion is a big bet
|
|
By:
I think if they ship 3 away to Tranmere they're cannon fodder tonight (my guess, Griffiths first goal - but I won't be backing that).
I expect them to be a mid-table side but I don't know the extent of their financial woes (they're looking for a buyer apparently). They look good for overs and some home wins but I can't see myself backing them for away wins anytime soon. |
|
By:
Are we seriously receommending 1.68 because Crawley's back 4 haven't haven't faced a Scottish Internaional before!??
![]() |
|
By:
Hippie - I'm not saying I want to back them - I'm saying Wolves at 1.68 are bad value.
|
|
By:
Over 2.5 and 3.5 for me.
|
|
By:
750 000 macdonald from sheff utd also poss play tonight
|
|
By:
Everything that has happened so far this season suggests 1.68 is good value.
|
|
By:
Eh? They've only played 3 games FFS. Absurd comment.
|
|
By:
Whatever. You're becoming tiresome now.
|
|
By:
I'm merely pointing out that using 3 games as evidence to justify backing a 1.68 shot at home is absurd.
Like I said - lump on. You'll probably win, but backing Wolves at 1.68 will cost you money in the long term. If you think 1.68 is good value what price do you think Wolves should be? 1.3? ![]() |
|
By:
By: This user is offline. marychain1
Date Joined: 05 Apr 05 Add contact | Send message When: 23 Aug 13 14:04 Joined: Date Joined: 05 Apr 05 | Topic/replies: 18,897 | Blogger: marychain1's blog The price is the justification for laying them. I think they are rightly favourites but the price is laughable. I never understand this argument , the price should never come into it ,, if you fancy Wolves to win , then back them Dont lay them because the price is too short wolves win at 1.9 Wolves win at 1.8 Wolves win at 1.7 The same result is a Wolves win |
|
By:
Are you serious? The price is everything because it effects your profitability if you were able to re-run the same event hundreds of times over. And thus effects your long term success.
If I offered you 1/100 on Man Utd every game you'd normally win, but I'd win overall. |
|
By:
spot on java
|
|
By:
I think that when my mate flicks this coin it's going to land on heads. He has given me odds of 1.68, and I think that's a good bet so I'm lumping on. I'm sure it will be heads. In fact, I think the next 10 are going to be heads so I've had 10 x £100 singles all at 1.68.
Doesn't matter about the price on any of them, because I'm quite confident they will all be heads. |
|
By:
Wolves great value. Shame the odds keep dropping. They were @ 1.9 last night, now 1.6. Will place bet though just before kick off
|
|
By:
Ah only 5 were heads, still, that's not bad out of 10, I got half of them right and I got some money back. I'll try again next weekend. I might try tails next time, he says he'll give me 1.75 for tails. Happy days :-)
|