Backing Over 0.5 goals @ Half Time.

dont really matter about percentage mate , just lay the draw in the ht mkt for small stke say a 5er for a liabilty of say 8 . then bet the draw.ht say at 6to4 ish.if the ht is 0.0 you lose abit cos you win as you bet the draw. if its 1.0 either way you get your money bk , but if its 1.1 or two two you got double bouble, cos you bet the draw and layed the 0.0 , i only play in the championship .it makes good profit today

Crackerpants, I am very interested in this and was hoping you were going to explain the system before the games kicked-off today. 

I still don't understand though. Can you please explain in a different way?

Mar 6, 2015 -- 3:54AM, timbuctooth wrote:

Am I missing something, or are you actually doing a bit better than that?Welshie5121 22 Feb 15 17:09  22/2/15 - Over 0.5 @ HTEverton vs Leicester - @ 1.4 won£100 stake = £40 returnRunning p/l = -£94.00 (excluding commission)with your next post sayingWelshie5121 01 Mar 15 00:11  28/2/15 - Over 0.5 @ HTBurnley vs Swansea - @ 1.3 wonManchester United vs Sunderland - @ 1.25 wonStoke vs Hull - @ 1.36 won£100 stakes = £91.00Running p/l = -£43.00 (excluding commission)Which would leave you £90 up, overall?

Cheers mate, just checked. For some reason I haven't added the Everton returns to the running total.

**Revised running total**

11/2/15 - 3 bets/2 winners - (£34.00)
21/2/15 - 1 bet/0 winners - (£134.00)
22/2/15 - 1 bet/1 winner - (£94.00)
28/2/15 - 3 bets/3 winners - (£3.00)
3/3/15 - 1 bet/1 winner - £37.00
4/3/15 - 2 bets/2 winners - £90.00

Bets placed 11 - Staked £1,100.
Winners/Losers - 9/2.

Running p/l = 90.00 (excluding commission)

Why was TSO was saying this was laying 0-0 HT it's nothing like laying 0-0 HT

When I first started getting into this I did find it interesting that 0-0 FT and 0-0 HT were so different, i.e. I initially expected 0-0 HT to be 1/2 of 0-0 FT, but it made sense after a while.

nothing like BACKING 0-0 HT. I know what I meant, sorry, hard today, early night I think :)

OK CCJEFC. try it with the championship cos thats the best league where it works. click on a game what you think might be tight. you can just play one if you like until youve done it a bit. then one more two or three or as many as you like when youve built a profit up. il take you through it .click on the game you think will be tight.but goal scoring sides. go in the ht mkt and lay the 0.0.then go in the ht mkt and bet the draw in the same game.if the game is 0.0 at ht you only lose about two fifths of your stake. cos you bet the draw.if one team is winning at ht say 1.0 or 0.1 etc, you get all your money back less a bit of commision. cos you laid the 0.0.but the jackpot your realy playing for is a score draw at ht cos that way you got the lay o.o and you also got the draw.you only need one scoring draw for every 3 o.o s to profit if you play more than 1 game,try it for small stakes and see how you go i made good profit today

surely just back 1-1 ht then/

?

No Lifter because 2-2 or even 3-3 would make you win as well.

This sounds quite decent I might have to give this a go.

ill give it a miss, but GL.

Mar 7, 2015 -- 8:47PM, Just Checking wrote:

Why was TSO was saying this was laying 0-0 HT it's nothing like laying 0-0 HT When I first started getting into this I did find it interesting that 0-0 FT and 0-0 HT were so different, i.e. I initially expected 0-0 HT to be 1/2 of 0-0 FT, but it made sense after a while.

I never said anything on this thread about laying the HT 0-0

What I said was the creator of this thread is essentially laying the 0-0 in the correct score market but with a lower liability

If a 0-0 is going to happen then just because you lay 0-0 at HT in the CS market doesn't mean that the 0-0 wont now happen

Since there has been so many 0-0 challenges that failed this one will go the same way because its not doing anything different, yes sure you will get in profit giving you a false sense of security and then bang, just 1 or 2 0-0's and all your profits gone in a flash

"I never said anything on this thread about laying the HT 0-0"

The Special One™ Joined: 16 Apr 10
"isn't this same as laying the 0-0 HT score"

Yes  that should have said "CS"

This isn't a challenge TSO.

The opening poster is essentially laying 0-0 in the "CS" market but with a lower liability by waiting till HT

I know its not a challenge, im just pointing out that the none of the "laying 0-0" threads succeeded

Even that mufc who posts the jinx "get on the 0-0 score" threads has gone quiet as theres been a few 0-0's recently and he must have been hit by a few

I would love the laying 0-0 to work, as its such a nice stress free bet, just lay it and forget it, no trading, no sitting at laptop etc..... but it simply doesn't, unless anyone shows me differently,

TSO, there may, arguably, be value in laying 0-0 @ HT vs laying 0-0 to FT in some games.

I don't know myself. There are some things about this I think in pullein's book, but ...

I think there might be value, but not across the board. The HT/FT isn't a new idea to be analysed, I'm sure many have already looked at this as it's all recorded with a zillion stats there to crunch.

I dabble in HT but it depends on the game. I have theories, but not saying :)

TSO, I think the original poster is saying he has noticed that if a prem game is 0-0 at half time chances are if you back over 0.5 second half there is a good chance of a goal. Sure you will hit 0-0's along the way at full time but chances are it will not be many games. I guess trying this over a season could turn out to be profitable.

And the Prem has a low 0-0 rate over a season.

Yes there are less 0-0's in the premier league but they do occur, and the OP is not making any attempts to dodge them

So really the profit will be down to number of 0-0's that occur, detailed stats would tell you if your going to be profitable or not before even placing a bet, look back say last 20 years premier league results and see hoe many were 0-0 and HT and not 0-0 at FT, crunch those stats and bet accordingly if the stats are in your favour

I disagree with looking at stats from previous years. Every game is different

Mar 7, 2015 -- 11:25PM, Blockfire wrote:

I disagree with looking at stats from previous years. Every game is different

Wasn't talking about stats or a individual game

Im talking about stats on the number of 0-0's occurred in the premier league over the last 20 years

*on

Why 20 years isn't that abit much?

Wouldnt that give a more accurate % stat that say the last 10 years?

If your betting on % stats then its better to have a bigger sample as possible to see if its going to be worthwhile

Maybe but the league has changed so much since the older days.

true, so I would look at stats from year 2000 onwards

what would you do with said stat TSO?

Mar 7, 2015 -- 11:37PM, Lifter wrote:

what would you do with said stat TSO?

have you not read post above?

With the said stat you can see if laying 0-0 in the premier league is going to be profitable or not as the stats would tell you the % of 0-0's that occurred each season since 2000, so take the average from each season and you have a indicator of roughly what % of scores will be 0-0 in a season, if this % is in your favour then you can bet accordingly knowing that you will make a profit even with hitting some 0-0's

ah okay, knock yourself out mate.

BTW you say backing a goal at HT is the same as backing a goal at the start, but less liability, yes? Well that's the nature of inplay, its the same with over 2.5 aswell. If you notice a lot of goals are in second half then why get on at the start, I regularly get on over 1.5 goals at HT in Brazil/Arg @ around 3s.. whereas if I got on at start it would be around 1.4 and no where near as profitable.

But of course the people driving the markets will have the exact same stats in front of them, and this is as an easily categorised statistical "event" (as you've just said, kind of) so ... unless you can bring some edge to it?

Mar 7, 2015 -- 11:45PM, Lifter wrote:

BTW you say backing a goal at HT is the same as backing a goal at the start, but less liability, yes? Well that's the nature of inplay, its the same with over 2.5 aswell. If you notice a lot of goals are in second half then why get on at the start, I regularly get on over 1.5 goals at HT in Brazil/Arg @ around 3s.. whereas if I got on at start it would be around 1.4 and no where near as profitable.

Yes but what im saying is if a 0-0 is going to happen, then just because you layed 0-0 at HT wont now stop that 0-0 from happening

So essentially your just laying 0-0 with a lower liability which is essentially the same as laying 0-0 before KO, and you wont profit in the long term

you're forgetting a huge diff in odds

im talking about having knowledge and thinking there will be a late goal... not just doing randomly on any game btw

Lifter I see what you're saying, TSO ... anyway.

Mar 7, 2015 -- 11:47PM, Lifter wrote:

you're forgetting a huge diff in odds

I have mentioned the lower liability

But it is still the same as laying 0-0 before KO, let me demonstrate it

Lets take punterA and PunterB

PunterA lays 0-0 before KO

PunterB only lays 0-0 at HT if the score at HT is 0-0

Now the % profit and loss both punterA and punterB will make is the same

Both rely on not being hit by a 0-0

Ok I'll explain this in laymans terms.

TSO you are taking a massively helicopter view that what will be will be. TOO helicopter.

THESE guys are making the observation that in some games, statistically, they may change at HT, so it's not linear, as a statistic, across the game. Some teams may be happy with 0-0. Some only brighten up second half. Etc. Etc.

This is quite obvious, I know you've been kicking about the forums for years so I can't understand if you're being deliberately obtuse, or just don't understand the basics of how someone might observe and obtain an edge?!

You could say that about any market thought TSO. Say punter A gets on a team to win at the start and Punter B gets on at half time, Punter B is having the better oh the deal because of better odds. Same with laying the 0-0 at half time.

Mar 7, 2015 -- 11:54PM, Blockfire wrote:

You could say that about any market thought TSO. Say punter A gets on a team to win at the start and Punter B gets on at half time, Punter B is having the better oh the deal because of better odds. Same with laying the 0-0 at half time.

Yes but PunterB will also miss out if goal in 1st half

Don't forget the OP is only laying 0-0 if score at HT is 0-0

If there is a goal in 1st half then the punter that lays 0-0 at HT missed out altoghther

Im out of this im going back to betting on South American football

This really is simple, you can tell if this is going to be profitable or not by looking at the stats over the last say 5 to 10 premier league seasons to see what of results were 0-0

If this percentage is in your favour say less than 20% then you can profit laying 0-0 at HT or pre kick off by betting with a staking plan to use the % in your favour

So just by looking at the stats you can answer the question that the opening poster is trying to answer (is laying the 0-0 at half time if score is 0-0 profitable) without even risking a penny

Anyway good luck with it hope it works whoever is on it, im just not convinced

Blockfire I love south american football.

Argentinian 0-0s PUT MY QUINTUPLETS THROUGH COLLEGE!*



* I don't have quintuplets.

Mar 8, 2015 -- 12:13AM, Just Checking wrote:

Blockfire I love south american football. Argentinian 0-0s PUT MY QUINTUPLETS THROUGH COLLEGE!** I don't have quintuplets.

Because I work nights its my favourite.

Sorry blockfire, little joke to myself for two reasons :)
1. I made a similar joke about twins through college cos I made money on tonights RM loss and Barca a couple weeks ago ;)
and
2. I used to (when I had time) get involved in the argie games and SO MANY were 0-0 it was so funny, and so many would sit on the match threads in anger having blown their bank on overs on a game that was like 8.0 0-0 at kick off :)

Ha, thats uneducated punters for you

14/3/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Leicester v Hull - @ 1.44

14/3/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Leicester v Hull - @ 1.44 lost

£100 stakes = -£100.00

Running p/l = -£10.00 (excluding commission)

15/3/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Swansea v Liverpool - @ 1.33

15/3/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Swansea v Liverpool - @ 1.33 won

£100 stakes = £33.00

Running p/l = £23.00 (excluding commission)

21/3/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Aston Villa v Swansea - @ 1.36
West Ham v Sunderland - @ 1.32

21/3/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Aston Villa v Swansea - @ 1.36 won
West Ham v Sunderland - @ 1.32 won

£100 stakes = £68.00

Running p/l = £91.00 (excluding commission)

Burnley 0 tottingham hotSpuds 0

This will have wiped out the £91 profit and running P/L would now be -£9 (prob more with the commission taken off)

As i said this is just layign the 0-0 at a lower liability becuase you are only laying for 45 mins rather than 90

Since laying 0-0's doesnt work in the long term then i cant see this working either

5/4/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Burnley v Tottenham @ 1.36

5/4/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Burnley v Tottenham @ 1.36 lost

£100 stakes = -£100.00

Running p/l = -£9.00 (excluding commission)

11/4/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Southampton v Hull @ 1.38
Sunderland v Crystal Palace @ 1.34

11/4/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Southampton v Hull @ 1.38 won
Sunderland v Crystal Palace @ 1.34 won

£100 stakes = £72.00

Running p/l = £63.00 (excluding commission)

12/4/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

QPR v Chelsea @ 1.3

12/4/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

QPR v Chelsea @ 1.3 won

£100 stakes = £30.00

Running p/l = £93.00 (excluding commission)

25/4/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

QPR v West Ham @ 1.34
West Brom v Liverpool @ 1.4
Burnley v Leicester @ 1.39
Crystal Palace v Hull @ 1.36

Laying 0-0 in the first half is easy enough
to check, do that and save yourself some time.

25/4/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

QPR v West Ham @ 1.34 lost
West Brom v Liverpool @ 1.4 lost
Burnley v Leicester @ 1.39 won
Crystal Palace v Hull @ 1.36 won

£100 stakes = -£125.00

Running p/l = -£32.00 (excluding commission)

26/4/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Arsenal v Chelsea @ 1.31

26/4/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Arsenal v Chelsea @ 1.31 lost

£100 stakes = -£100

running p/l = -£132.00 (excluding commission)

2/5/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Swansea v Stoke @ 1.32

2/5/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Man United v West Brom @ 1.35

2/5/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Swansea v Stoke @ 1.32 won
Man United v West Brom @ 1.35 won

£100 stakes = £67.00

running p/l = -£65.00 (excluding commission)

[   This image is no longer available.   ]

9/5/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Everton v Sunderland @ 1.35
Hull v Burnley @ 1.35

9/5/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Everton v Sunderland @ 1.35 won
Hull v Burnley @ 1.35 won

£100 stakes = £70 return

Running p/l = £5.00 (excluding commission)

11/5/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Arsenal v Hull @ 1.31

11/5/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Arsenal v Hull @ 1.31 won

£100 stakes = £31.00 return

Running p/l = £36.00 (excluding commission)

How did you manage to mix up Hull with Swansea and your called Welshie

May 15, 2015 -- 7:15AM, Blockfire wrote:

How did you manage to mix up Hull with Swansea and your called Welshie

Haha, thanks for that.

11/5/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Arsenal v Swansea @ 1.31 won

£100 stakes = £31.00 return

Running p/l = £36.00 (excluding commission)

16/5/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Tottenham v Hull @ 1.3
Burnley v Stoke @ 1.38
Sunderland v Leicester @ 1.35
West Ham v Everton @ 1.3

:D

16/5/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Tottenham v Hull @ 1.3 won
Burnley v Stoke @ 1.38 lost
Sunderland v Leicester @ 1.35 lost
West Ham v Everton @ 1.3 won

£100 stakes = -£140.00 return

Running p/l = -£104.00 (excluding commission)

Arsenal 0 Sunderland 0

[   This image is no longer available.   ]

why half-time for every match? Half-time is not the opportune time for every single match. The prices will be more or less the same but some will look a lot better than others on paper at least. Stick to the most likely matches and ask yourself is there a better time in the second half to go in at a higher price

20/5/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Arsenal v Sunderland @ 1.34

20/5/15 - Over 0.5 @ HT

Arsenal v Sunderland @ 1.34 lost

£100 stakes = -£100 return

Running p/l = -£204.00 (excluding commission)

24/5/15 Over 0.5 @ HT

Crystal Palace v Swansea @1.32
Hull v Manchester United @ 1.34
Newcastle v West Ham @ 1.32

24/5/15 Over 0.5 @ HT

Crystal Palace v Swansea @1.32 won
Hull v Manchester United @ 1.34 lost
Newcastle v West Ham @ 1.32 won

£100 stakes = -£36.00 return

Running p/l = -£240.00 (excluding commission)

This hasn't even come close to working. Will have to re-evaluate for next season.

Thanks for peoples input, it has all been appreciated.

See you in two months.

What is the basis of this idea?  I can't see what the logic is

fwics in the last five seasons 551 PL games have been 0-0 at HT, 145 have finished 0-0, so 406/551 winners.

So to break even (before commission) you would have to have backed at an average of 1.357.  With 4% comm, you are look at 1.372 just to break even.  What is your average (winning) back price?  Do you expect to beat that price consistently?

Welshie
I think the most important thing you've done on this thread is tell the truth.  Well done.

May 25, 2015 -- 3:15PM, Welshie5121 wrote:

This hasn't even come close to working. Will have to re-evaluate for next season.Thanks for peoples input, it has all been appreciated.See you in two months.

As i said many times in this thread it wont work

Because it is exatcly the same as laying 0-0 except your laying 0-0 at HT so you get to lay the 0-0 price at half what it was at KO

So if laying 0-0 doesnt work in the long term then why would this work? Just becuase you lay 0-0 at HT rather than before KO doesnt mean thee is more chance of a goal in the 2nd half

With 0-0 yo wull win a lot of bets but 1 0-0 will wipr out many winning bets and yoru back to square one


[   This image is no longer available.   ]


[   This image is no longer available.   ]

Because it is exatcly the same as laying 0-0 except your laying 0-0 at HT so you get to lay the 0-0 price at half what it was at KO

you don't add prices of separate events, you multiply them

the op may have had a point if he had noticed a pricing inefficiency at half-time that could be exploited

May 25, 2015 -- 5:10PM, sugarfoot wrote:

Because it is exatcly the same as laying 0-0 except your laying 0-0 at HT so you get to lay the 0-0 price at half what it was at KOyou don't add prices of separate events, you multiply themthe op may have had a point if he had noticed a pricing inefficiency at half-time that could be exploited

Irrespective of price though

Look at laying 0-0 before KO - loads of challenges for this have been done on here and they all failes

So all this opening poster is doing is axctly the same thing but making a move at HT rather than before KO

The fact that a 0-0 lay bet has now been placed at HT just does in any way increase the chance of a goal being scored in the game, if the game was going to end a 0-0 it will still end 0-0

This is the thing you are going to catch some 0-0's when doing a laying 0-0 bet before KO, So the fact you make a move later int he game is going to give the same result if your going to catch a 0-0

As for the price, well of course its going to be of more value because your not laying 0-0 for 90mins you are laying 0-0 now for just 45mins

And if the 1st half as a dull dire borefest with no shots on goal then the 0-0 price will be lower than half what oif the 0-0 price just before KO

waccoe75 • May 24, 2015 10:16 PM BST

    May 24, 2015 -- 9:56PM, never give up wrote:


    Tightfisted • May 23, 2015 10:33 PM BSTUnfortunately I'm still working about 2 days behind you...but it's better than nothing even though there may be a few mistakes and only the big layers are included Grin    Layer            BSP            Avg       waccoe75            399             410        IwonIwon            278             343        JonHig.            270             268        Knight Commander             142             142        marbellaman            69             73        zipper            19             13        deadbrain59            -3             5        never give up            -5             44        Dave The Rave            -7             -4        daveyworcs            -13             -3        angeleyz            -25             -25        bluebeard            -68             -59        madhatters            -86             -76        The Special One?            -204             -143        TOTALS            823             1045


minus 204 to £10 level stakes now as TSO only does £100/£150 stakes hes about 3k down in 20 days LaughLaughLaughLaugh but as he don't bet hes on zero LaughLaugh
Report
•
Quote
•
Block User
GRANTCKING • May 24, 2015 10:18 PM BST
-3k, jesus tso thats a lot of paper money

sorry wrong thread

Irrespective of price though

Look at laying 0-0 before KO - loads of challenges for this have been done on here and they all failes

So all this opening poster is doing is axctly the same thing but making a move at HT rather than before KO

The fact that a 0-0 lay bet has now been placed at HT just does in any way increase the chance of a goal being scored in the game, if the game was going to end a 0-0 it will still end 0-0

This is the thing you are going to catch some 0-0's when doing a laying 0-0 bet before KO, So the fact you make a move later int he game is going to give the same result if your going to catch a 0-0

As for the price, well of course its going to be of more value because your not laying 0-0 for 90mins you are laying 0-0 now for just 45mins

And if the 1st half as a dull dire borefest with no shots on goal then the 0-0 price will be lower than half what oif the 0-0 price just before KO

for some reason you have basically repeated what you said the first time without really thinking about what I had typed

the price is all important.  if the op had spotted an systematic misprice, if the 0-0 price at half-time was lower than statistical likelihood, then he may have had a point.  in fact if he had noticed such a misprice at any consistent point in the game, then he may have had a basis for his method.  it may look like the same strategy to you, but if there are different rules to entry (or exit) points, then it is a different strategy.

the problem is that he has no evidence to support what he is doing, and in fact the data seems to show a less bad outcome by backing 0-0 instead of laying it.  that's the only thing that really matters