Football
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
In the last four games where they didn't keep a clean sheet, they won two and drew two, but in every game they went 0-1 down.
And...Tianjin ARE bottom of the table with just one point from seven games.
Make of that what you will.
And...Tianjin ARE bottom of the table with just one point from seven games.
Make of that what you will.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 422
|
By:
Tiajin have taken a sharp fall in prices; that might be where the value is, although won't be getting involved myself. Good luck if you do.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Can't see the favs not winning but at 1.2?
Now if they were to go a goal down..... They probably won't and certainly shouldn't. They won their last game 3-0. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Will be interesting to see how it pans out, considering the prices are still falling for Tianjin (spelt correctly this time)
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
And the favs seem to be drifting slightly.
Shall just keep an eye on score-line. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
I'm avoiding all games until 3pm+ today. Even the Odense friendly looks a dangerous gamble. May consider my annual bath instead
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Could have been 2-0 already.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
1-0
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
I find with most Chinese Super League games, the odds never seem to reflect the match itself. SIPG have just scored, but Tianjin have had more chances than you would expect from a with odds so high. Tianjin are now 42/1 to win, but I wouldn't rule them out for getting a goal when you look at the chances they have created already. It makes it hardly worth bothering backing CSL games when there is a favourite. 1.09 now for SIPG, not worth the hassle.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Shocking Penalty miss from Tianjin
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Jeez! It's happened again.
I lost interest at 1-0. Tianjin DID have one or two half chances early on and might have nicked a short lived 1-0 lead but they didn't, end of. Teams in their position often come out fighting, they're desperate for points but Shanghai managed it, and that was that. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Just imagine if they had scored in the first half, and put their penalty away. The only value in CSL games is to back the underdog.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
BTW, the favs should have had put the game to bed inside fifteen minutes, they were careless/sloppy/confident to the point of arrogance, whatever. Maybe that's the reason for my opening post. Maybe they need a kick sometimes to move it up a gear.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Fine it a dull league to watch
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Good is as good does mate.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
I'll sit looking at the inplay mkt page, that tells it's own story.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
CSL is always good for goals/overs markets. You can pretty much back Overs market totally blind.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
That's the last time I type a message with a quote.
 Interesting post TWTIA, so interesting in fact that I took a look at a site I use for info, it gave these figs for over 2.5 in the CSL: 2019 ..... 64.17% 2018 ..... 58.75% 2017 ..... 59.58% Which [ kind of ] bears out what you say but ..... [always there is a but ], I would think that in most of those games over 2.5 would have bee well odds-on so " backing the overs market totally blind " would ultimately, I suspect, have been a loser. I suppose that with a few adjustments, homes/aways/league positions etc. there might be a smidgeon of wheat to be gleaned from all that chaff, but I prefer to go with recent form, probably why after all these years I'm still a two-quidder. Never the less, it's worth noting Take-All, interesting. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
I have had a quite a number of punts on the goals market and yes, they are odds on, usually, but not stupidly so. Today's 11am is currently 2.12.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Here is a fuller data set going back to 2014
So, in theory, the break even price for blindly backing over 2.5 goals for this season to date is 1.59, thus 2.12 represents "value"  | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Qingdao Huanghai averaging 2.71 goals per game in 2020, Wuhan Zall averaging 2.57.
Surely makes the 2.18 currently on offer a full mortgage job  | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Angoose, not looking for a punch-up here, I'm as keen to find an edge as you are, but I would have to wonder why a 2.12 shot IS, 2.12. And no I'm not suggesting that just because over 2.5 is 2.12 it can't happen.
Actually, without even looking at the tables, have you looked at Zall's [ goals against ] record, league positions etc? Shall a quick look now. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
When I say backing it blind, I would only do this on over 1.5, not 2.5. I guess it all depends when you get on. I have a few ways of how I like to do my overs. If I don't have time to watch the game, then I might go over 1.5 at kick off. Small profits, but it all counts. If I have time to watch the game and see how it's going then I take a different approach. For example, 1-0 HT and it looks like there will be more goals. I will back over 2.5 around 50-55 minutes with half of my stake I intend to use. Around 65 mins if still no goal has been scored but still looks likely someone will score, I will use the other half of the stake, or cash out for a loss and move on.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
I also forgot to mention the important part
. I cash out, or lay my stake out when/if a goal is scored. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Humans are involved, the matches are not played under laboratory conditions, there simply isn't a sure fire winning system waiting to be applied
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
No 1 size fits all, but if what you are doing wins more than you are losing, you're not going far wrong.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Yes there are different ways of going about one's business.
Just seen your last post, I to, like the colour green. I like your style take all. Jeez! Now Angoose. Whoa! Slow down already. Anything that reduces the probability of losing, and that's really what we're talking about here, is worth looking at. And it's a [results over time] thing. Swings and roundabouts. Wins over losers, I'll go along with that. Also, what you say about small profits, something else to think about. That's where the value-factor has to be considered I suppose. I really don't like risking money for too small a profit, losses can take so long, too long to recover. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
In simple terms, you lose because you make a wrong decision.
Thus, it appears logical that you should reduce the number of decisions that you make in a given event. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
"Humans involved"? I couldn't agree more.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
2.18 now!
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
And remember what you are up against.
The likes of B365 have huge resources to throw at the problem. They have hugely powerful computers, top notch programmers and statisticians, and data, lots and lots of data. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Angoose, for me there is only one decision, play or no-play.
Some days, I won't have a play, I am pursuing very tight parameters right now. Yes I have a strategy, of sorts, and I try to stick to it. And as with take all's willingness to take a small profit, I am equally willing to cashout with a small loss if I don't like the look of things. Looking forward to seeing how that game goes Angoose. Won't be getting involved, you can kick my arz later. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Good thread lads, and angoose you are correct about 365 etc, BUT they have to price up all events, but we can pick and choose the events that we want to play.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
I am unlikely to be getting involved in the 11am CSL game also [I will review that decision at HT]. The 1pm kick off game is much more appealing
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
It never ceases to amaze me how quickly the 2.5 mkt drifts. 2.3 already.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
0-1
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
I agree twtia,
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Unbelievable
|