Mar 11, 2015 -- 3:38PM, CJ70 wrote:

Does it matter if you were on or not? The prices were well out of line, so you would have opposed the market.As I said, you will be losing long term with that tactic.

I created about a thread few weeks back about a similar game

away side was 2-0 up but the home side were shorter than the away side winning 2-0 !!!

So here the market was saying home side will come back

and guess what, final score was 4-2 or 3-2 cant remember which but home side won

The reason why I opposed the market in laying the draw in Beirut game was because laying at 1.77 isn't going to break the bank is it ? The draw at 1.77 to lay with 30 mins left to play is screaming value

As for the Radiant game, I would have layed the away side if they were trading higher than the losing home side as the market is saying no way will the away side win this

Mar 11, 2015 -- 3:55PM, The Special One™ wrote:

Jesus Christ at HT the draw in Beirut game was 2.0 !! anyone with any sense would lay that with a whole 2nd half still to play

Yes. New Radiant were 2.0 at HT while losing 1-0. You would have backed that.

Apart from saying you would back the outcome that has subsequently won you aren't making much sense.

Mar 11, 2015 -- 3:54PM, CJ70 wrote:

You are confusing yourself.In your first explanation you are laying the market because it is out of line and won't break the bank.In the second explanation you are backing the market because it is out of line.There are good reasons for doing either, but in defence of a position of opposing the market when it is out of line and my suggestion that you'd be losing long term by doing this, it isn't very logical.

ok lets say away side are 2-0 up and they are trading at 2.1 and the losing home side trading at 1.7

Jesus Christ can you see something wrong there?? home side should be at least 3.0 and winning away side should be around 1.6 to 1.7

In that case you would lay the away side even though they are winning 2-0

Mar 11, 2015 -- 3:58PM, The Special One™ wrote:

Mar 11, 2015 --  2:54PM, CJ70 wrote:You are confusing yourself.In your first explanation you are laying the market because it is out of line and won't break the bank.In the second explanation you are backing the market because it is out of line.There are good reasons for doing either, but in defence of a position of opposing the market when it is out of line and my suggestion that you'd be losing long term by doing this, it isn't very logical.ok lets say away side are 2-0 up and they are trading at 2.1 and the losing home side trading at 1.7Jesus Christ can you see something wrong there?? home side should be at least 3.0 and winning away side should be around 1.6 to 1.7In that case you would lay the away side even though they are winning 2-0

I agree. which is why you backed the draw.

Mar 11, 2015 -- 3:57PM, CJ70 wrote:

Mar 11, 2015 --  2:55PM, The Special One wrote:Jesus Christ at HT the draw in Beirut game was 2.0 !! anyone with any sense would lay that with a whole 2nd half still to playYes. New Radiant were 2.0 at HT while losing 1-0. You would have backed that.Apart from saying you would back the outcome that has subsequently won you aren't making much sense.

no because it wasn't 1-0 it was 0-0 at HT and the draw was 2.0 in the match odds, draw should have been about 2.7, so I waited till the 60th min when it dropped to 1.77 and at that price it had to be layed with 30 mins still to play

Mar 11, 2015 -- 3:58PM, wisewords wrote:

what is it TSO? TAKING VALUE or FOLLOWING THE MARKET?

on the back/lay of teams you would follow the market

But in the case of the draw if the price is low enough oppose it

Mar 11, 2015 -- 4:07PM, The Special One™ wrote:

Mar 11, 2015 --  3:05PM, wisewords wrote:but you don't see this value in the New Radiant game?Read post above I wasn't on the Radiant game

That's not the point is it. What you are effectively saying is you only have value on option 1 without taking into account other options.

As I said above you will lose heavily long term with this, your confused defence of your position only leads to seeing that is the case.

Mar 11, 2015 -- 4:02PM, The Special One™ wrote:

Mar 11, 2015 --  2:58PM, wisewords wrote:what is it TSO? TAKING VALUE or FOLLOWING THE MARKET?on the back/lay of teams you would follow the marketBut in the case of the draw if the price is low enough oppose it

I explained it in the post above, red it again, no contradiction here

Mar 11, 2015 -- 4:28PM, CJ70 wrote:

Does that really matter? For your own benefit you need to look at what you've said in this thread and realise where you are going wrong. Otherwise you are going to be losing heavily.

How can laying the draw at such low odds with so much time yet left in the game be a long term losing strategy??

Mar 11, 2015 -- 4:57PM, CJ70 wrote:

Mar 11, 2015 --  3:40PM, The Special One wrote:Mar 11, 2015 --  3:28PM, CJ70 wrote:Does that really matter? For your own benefit you need to look at what you've said in this thread and realise where you are going wrong. Otherwise you are going to be losing heavily.How can laying the draw at such low odds with so much time yet left in the game be a long term losing strategy??Laying the draw from the start of the game can be a long term losing strategy.However, we aren't discussing that, and that's not what you stated earlier. You've shoe horned the draw into the argument as you've seen you were contradicting yourself. At the end of the day, I and others don't care if you and emilly want to make up winning bets and amounts. Just don't expect to do it without being able to back up what you've said.

I haven't made up anything, wasn't I the first here to post about the draw being so low in Beirut game? AND THAT WAS AT HT So either I backed it or layed it, the smart bet would be to lay it

Why are you now making things up?

Not once have I mentioned anything about laying the draw form the start

I spotted the draw being too low at HT and so I posted about it to ask here if anyone knows why its so low, not 1 reply initially except from jonny_MUGstang who posted a mug comment nothing to do with the game, then soon as a goal was scored and I said I layed it, OMG!!!! the thread went into MELTDOWN with posters coming from all over the place

Mar 11, 2015 -- 5:48PM, The Special One™ wrote:

Mar 11, 2015 --  3:57PM, CJ70 wrote:Mar 11, 2015 --  3:40PM, The Special One wrote:Mar 11, 2015 --  3:28PM, CJ70 wrote:Does that really matter? For your own benefit you need to look at what you've said in this thread and realise where you are going wrong. Otherwise you are going to be losing heavily.How can laying the draw at such low odds with so much time yet left in the game be a long term losing strategy??Laying the draw from the start of the game can be a long term losing strategy.However, we aren't discussing that, and that's not what you stated earlier. You've shoe horned the draw into the argument as you've seen you were contradicting yourself. At the end of the day, I and others don't care if you and emilly want to make up winning bets and amounts. Just don't expect to do it without being able to back up what you've said.I haven't made up anything, wasn't I the first here to post about the draw being so low in Beirut game? AND THAT WAS AT HT So either I backed it or layed it, the smart bet would be to lay itWhy are you now making things up?Not once have I mentioned anything about laying the draw form the startI spotted the draw being too low at HT and so I posted about it to ask here if anyone knows why its so low, not 1 reply initially except from jonny_MUGstang who posted a mug comment nothing to do with the game, then soon as a goal was scored and I said I layed it, OMG!!!! the thread went into MELTDOWN with posters coming from all over the place

I'm not making things up. Just pointing out your basic logic errors.

If you think that the events as you lay them out there are correct, good luck to you. You're either lying to yourself or delusional.