Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
cardifffc
20 Aug 18 10:08
Joined:
Date Joined: 10 Oct 03
| Topic/replies: 13,051 | Blogger: cardifffc's blog
most likely winners but far too short

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 1 of 5  •  Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 197
By:
REDUNDANT PUNTER
When: 20 Aug 18 10:23
Whilst they are short and any team can fail to win i imagine if u lay something that s most likely to win you will end up poor

its a flawed strategy and for that reason i can't invest so I'm out
By:
n88uk
When: 20 Aug 18 10:27
^That's not true at all if the odds are too short.
By:
REDUNDANT PUNTER
When: 20 Aug 18 10:31
I stand by my comments of you are laying something u think will win as a strategy you are using flawed logic
By:
Latalomne
When: 20 Aug 18 10:41
Of course it all depends on price, RP!  Back enough true even money shots at 1.5 and you will do your plums.  That's basic maths.
By:
n88uk
When: 20 Aug 18 10:43
But the flawed logic is 100% from you rather than the OP. Using this logic you would never lay a heavy favourite ever, as I imagine nearly every heavy favourite if you were asked to pick a winner you would pick the heavy favourite, you're hardly ever going to look at 1.43 shot and think I don't think they should be favourites to win.
By:
REDUNDANT PUNTER
When: 20 Aug 18 10:48
If your laying something expecting it to win the all your doing is changing it

If someone said in laying Liverpool tonight because palace are in form have a good attack that scores goals a decent defence they have a good home record and a good head to head agauns t this opposition and are at full strength

And could be a match for them given all those things in going to lay them

Then I'd say yes that's good logic but saying in going to back something that's most probably not going to happen is not a good strategy imo if course

It's all about opinions
By:
REDUNDANT PUNTER
When: 20 Aug 18 10:50
On the contrary i back things i think will happen based on my view

Not because I think it won't happen but I'm back it just in case
By:
Latalomne
When: 20 Aug 18 10:52
The phrase "far too short" implies that he thinks the odds should be bigger.  He's just trying to get a value angle, which is the only way you will make money in the long-run.
By:
REDUNDANT PUNTER
When: 20 Aug 18 10:56
As i say it's just a view and value can only ever be in the eye of the beholder

That's the essence of an exchange again imo
By:
Cork Langer
When: 20 Aug 18 10:57
Our record against Pool is better away than at home in recent seasons, results so far this weekend should serve to give Pool extra reason if they needed it to get a win, on the flip side we are playing much more for each other than I have seen in a long time and confidence will be high given the performances that have carried over from the way we finished last season, has the makings for an entertaining high scoring game which probably means it will be a mundane bore draw...!
By:
Latalomne
When: 20 Aug 18 11:00
At an instance in time, you are right that value is in the eye of the beholder, but you will find out over a period of time whether you are any good at finding value in the market through what happens to your balance.
By:
REDUNDANT PUNTER
When: 20 Aug 18 11:03
I'm not saying Liverpool represent value at the price in offer but i can we why they are favourites

So for me if rather not oppose them cos as the opening poster says most probably will win

So for me i wouldn't invest my money opposing my view they would most probably win

It's not the laying that I'm opposed to its just the thought process

He may well then out to be right and i wouldn't put anyone off their choices it's their money
By:
n88uk
When: 20 Aug 18 11:05
At the prices it's tough, I'm waiting to see what happens in the day as normally Liverpool always get backed in, won't surprise me if it's high 1.3x by KO which definitely seems really bad. I tend to agree with OP, the price does seem bad, it depends how much you think Liverpool have improved, and that's very hard to evaluate off 1 game at home to weak opposition.

Liverpool have got to be really good to justify these sort of prices, right up with Man City's level. As is I tend to lean toward it is very bad when I have Liverpool down as 1.64 shots, but that might not totally factor in how much they might have improved.
By:
n88uk
When: 20 Aug 18 11:10
RP, there's not going to be a single person on the forum or anywhere who isn't just trolling that thinks Liverpool shouldn't be favourites though. It's not debatable them being favourites or not or even odds on favourites.

There's nothing wrong with idea of I think x will win, but the price is far too short and has to be laid. The current odds given Liverpool around a 70% chance of winning, if you think say the true chances are 60% (just using basic numbers, but eg. the 1.64 I've plucked is 61%) that's still saying you think Liverpool will win, but would also make them a lay at a price that rates them at 70% to win.
By:
REDUNDANT PUNTER
When: 20 Aug 18 11:10
As i say it's all about opinions for me i can't invest money on something i don't think will happen

If i think  it most probably won t happen im happy not to bother
By:
DirkDiggler
When: 20 Aug 18 11:27
At an instance in time, you are right that value is in the eye of the beholder, but you will find out over a period of time whether you are any good at finding value in the market through what happens to your balance.


Correct.
By:
mafeking
When: 20 Aug 18 13:01
1.43 is ridiculous away from home and is the route to the poor house. as n88uk says the price suggests they'd win 7 out of 10 away to mid table opposition like palace. that's surely overrating their chances
By:
REDUNDANT PUNTER
When: 20 Aug 18 13:06
I'm not or wasn't questioning the price or its value just the thought process of backing something you think most probably won't happen

I don't see how you must lay liverpool followed by most likely win is a basis for a bet

But that's just my opinion maybe it's just the way it's worded but like I said couldn't spend money on something I thought most probably wouldn't happen
By:
gibmark
When: 20 Aug 18 13:30
Liverpool will win , so 1.43 is decent return
By:
tobermory
When: 20 Aug 18 14:45
Assessing value is difficult, especially at start of season, but I never understand the 'bet on what you think will probably happen' outlook.

Anyone can see a Liverpool win is the most likely outcome but nobody knows whether they will or not. Of course people think they know and if they do win will likely say 'I knew they would win' . But these same people knew Liverpool would beat Palace before the 3-3 game and before the back to back defeats to them at Anfield.

It's hard to see how you could ever back anything bigger than 2/1 if it's necessary that you expect it to win.
By:
JC1326
When: 20 Aug 18 15:19
^ That last line is such a good point.

As for the game, I never understand the point in blindly laying something because you think one team is too short. Surely the whole point is to be a bit more selective? Surely it's not about whether Liverpool are short at 1.43, but more about how strongly you feel they'll do. I would never lay Liverpool tonight, as they could quite easily destroy Palace, imo, and that 1.43 may be spot on
By:
REDUNDANT PUNTER
When: 20 Aug 18 15:27
My point was why would u back something expecting it to loose
Or thinking it's most probably going to lose

Nothing wrong with expressing a view or putting up a bet and being wrong or right it's your own view and opinion
By:
Latalomne
When: 20 Aug 18 15:34

Aug 20, 2018 -- 9:19AM, JC1326 wrote:


^ That last line is such a good point.As for the game, I never understand the point in blindly laying something because you think one team is too short. Surely the whole point is to be a bit more selective? Surely it's not about whether Liverpool are short at 1.43, but more about how strongly you feel they'll do. I would never lay Liverpool tonight, as they could quite easily destroy Palace, imo, and that 1.43 may be spot on


On the contrary, if you have a known edge, then your profit is a function of turnover.  The more events you bet on, the better.

By:
DirkDiggler
When: 20 Aug 18 15:41
You don't lay a team winning 2-0 because you expect the other team to come back and win neccesarily, you do so because the odds are very short and you only need the opposition team to score the next goal in a reasonable time-frame to be in profit, and you think the chances of that based on what you've seen are greater than the odds you've laid at.

Only backing outcomes you expect to fully come to fruition after 90mins is incredibly limiting and for most people that approach belongs in the dark-age of betting shops with little slips of paper and crappy plastic pens.


It's hard to see how you could ever back anything bigger than 2/1 if it's necessary that you expect it to win.


Bingo, anyone that has tried betting exclusivley at 2/1 and under knows it is very difficult and yields small profits at best. Around evs you need to be winning 2/3rds of the time to make it worthwhile.
By:
REDUNDANT PUNTER
When: 20 Aug 18 15:48
But if your constantly betting at under 2/1 then it not putting any thought into it your just following odds

So if u stick to that then u will always be a hostage to other people's thoughts
By:
gibmark
When: 20 Aug 18 15:57
there are some basic do `s and don't`s , rest is all just opinions
By:
stridingedge
When: 20 Aug 18 16:37
Liverpool have been awful value in games like this at heavy odds on prices for years and years.

I agree with whoever siad you'd have to think they've improved to a level near City to merit such confidence.

Very surprised with your comments RP tbh, of course it's possible to go against a likely result with the correct price. There's always got to be a level where the price looks wrong even if you think the outcome is likely to happen!

I remember in the early days your massive long shots on the racing forum 100+ pokes. You weren't backing them cos you thought they were the likeliest winner or placers even , you were surely backing them cos you just thought they were too big in said race.

No difference in this example surely?
By:
REDUNDANT PUNTER
When: 20 Aug 18 16:41
No i read more he form of the race and i thought they had a chance to place and if they had a chance to place they had a chance to win

Then I looked at the price and i backed them
By:
mega88
When: 20 Aug 18 16:42
Youre all doing it wrong, that's why most fail long term, Large % of becoming successful at football gambling lies in how you conduct yourself psychologically and how you handle your bank, football is football and the outcome and going ons is infinite, odds don't mean jack when Malaga hold Barca to a 0_0 at nou camp, LEARN AND ADAPT PEEPS !!
By:
stridingedge
When: 20 Aug 18 16:46
RP if I offered you 5/2 on getting a 5 or 6 when rolling a die it wouldn't be the likeliest outcome but it would be a better bet long term than taking 4/6 on throwing 1-4.
By:
DIE LINKE
When: 20 Aug 18 16:53
you'd expect to have this sort of convo with a betting mug, but not someone who has been on here for 13 years.
By:
REDUNDANT PUNTER
When: 20 Aug 18 16:55
Lol
By:
stridingedge
When: 20 Aug 18 16:56
RP is certainly no mug, I've been on here since jun 04 in a couple of guises and have seen more than enough to know that. It's obviously the way he punts which I am not objecting too at all, each to their own. What I would differ with is that there certainly is an acceptable logic of taking on a likely winner at a price you think is too short.
By:
duffy
When: 20 Aug 18 17:09
The problem with the "value" argument is notwithstanding the fact that although it is correct, in a perfect world, the fact is that it isn't an exact science and is very much subjective so it will only be relevant to an individual bet if you see it through long term and your assessment of value is always accurate.

We've all had the debate about everything has a price and if you can get 1 point bigger than the price it should be then you MUST back it Even if you don't necessarily think it will happen because LONG TERM you will profit on those decisions.

Problem is that you're judgment of what's value won't be always be accurate so the whole process is flawed.
By:
REDUNDANT PUNTER
When: 20 Aug 18 17:16
Y apply my own value to a decision i made it on my contentment with what my return will be for my stake

So I'm happy to take fifty pound for a hundred of iv e come to the outcome it's going to be successful

I don't make a decision then look at t he price and think oh no it's fifty to one so I m not backing that

My opening comment stands for me i would not bet on something i believe most probably won't happen
By:
pushkin99
When: 20 Aug 18 17:22

Aug 20, 2018 -- 10:37AM, stridingedge wrote:


Liverpool have been awful value in games like this at heavy odds on prices for years and years.I agree with whoever siad you'd have to think they've improved to a level near City to merit such confidence.Very surprised with your comments RP tbh, of course it's possible to go against a likely result with the correct price. There's always got to be a level where the price looks wrong even if you think the outcome is likely to happen!I remember in the early days your massive long shots on the racing forum 100+ pokes. You weren't backing them cos you thought they were the likeliest winner or placers even , you were surely backing them cos you just thought they were too big in said race.No difference in this example surely?


Agree with all that stridingedge.

Liverpool may well go onto win, though 1.45 is a silly price against a decent and improving team.

I hope I am wrong, but in addition Palace have a good record of upsetting Liverpool's applecart also having a manager and players with points to prove.

By:
stridingedge
When: 20 Aug 18 17:27
I'm not sure it's a silly price Pushkin, I know for a fact and i posted such evidence last season that Liverpool odds on have been poor value for at least the 10 seasons I looked at.

PERHAPS this season with the new keeper and Keita additions in particular this will turn  many of the frustrating draws into wins.Liverpool should win more games this season imo.

I'm still not happy to back them tonight at 1.45, but with my thoughts they should be better this season I'm not laying them either. Need a bit more evidence.
By:
n88uk
When: 20 Aug 18 17:46

Aug 20, 2018 -- 9:48AM, REDUNDANT PUNTER wrote:


But if your constantly betting at under 2/1 then it not putting any thought into it your just following odds So if u stick to that then u will always be a hostage to other people's thoughts


The point I think he was making is that you can't realistically expect anything at odds of higher than 2/1 to win in a 2/3 way market. Therefore if you only bet on what you think will win you're exclusively going to bet on lower odds as you can't realistically expect a 10/1 shot to win.

By:
n88uk
When: 20 Aug 18 17:49

Aug 20, 2018 -- 11:09AM, duffy wrote:


The problem with the "value" argument is notwithstanding the fact that although it is correct, in a perfect world, the fact is that it isn't an exact science and is very much subjective so it will only be relevant to an individual bet if you see it through long term and your assessment of value is always accurate.We've all had the debate about everything has a price and if you can get 1 point bigger than the price it should be then you MUST back it Even if you don't necessarily think it will happen because LONG TERM you will profit on those decisions.Problem is that you're judgment of what's value won't be always be accurate so the whole process is flawed.


I don't really buy into if something is 1 point higher than what you think it should be you should back it. What you say is why you allow some sort of margin in your decisions if you just backed or laid any price 1 point higher than you think it should be you'd be involved in every match. But reality is commission is a thing so this isn't true, and you've also got to allow some leeway that you might be wrong.

If you think something should be evens and it's 2.06 I'm going to guess almost certainly you shouldn't just be piling in.

Page 1 of 5  •  Previous 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com