General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
10 Jan 11
19:47
Joined:
Date Joined:
20 Aug 05
There have been some very interesting threads on this forum lately and I've been inspired to do some serious research on Kelly staking and modelling football games using maths as my guide. I'm going to try and and generate some profits using what I've developed over the last week or two and hopefully learn a bit more as time passes. Some of the questions that I want to answer for myself are:
1. Is Kelly staking optimal?
2. Does my model work?
3. Are Betfair football odds very accurate, or not?
So, without further ado I will get the ball rolling. The bank is £2,500 and I will use half Kelly stakes to begin with. I will only be looking at league games as I haven't yet figured out how to model form between sides in different leagues anywhere near accurately.
Bet 1 Hercules v Atletico Madrid
My model threw up almost precisely the same match odds as available on here (which gave me some sort of comfort, I think!) but the prices were quite a bit out of line on the Over/Under 2.5 goals market.
I have overs at 1.72 (58.13%) so 2.10 looks very attractive. Being conservative I've used 55% in the Kelly calculator and it suggests a bet of £315.18 including an allowance for my commission rate, so that's £157.60 at half stakes.
1. Is Kelly staking optimal?
2. Does my model work?
3. Are Betfair football odds very accurate, or not?
So, without further ado I will get the ball rolling. The bank is £2,500 and I will use half Kelly stakes to begin with. I will only be looking at league games as I haven't yet figured out how to model form between sides in different leagues anywhere near accurately.
Bet 1 Hercules v Atletico Madrid
My model threw up almost precisely the same match odds as available on here (which gave me some sort of comfort, I think!) but the prices were quite a bit out of line on the Over/Under 2.5 goals market.
I have overs at 1.72 (58.13%) so 2.10 looks very attractive. Being conservative I've used 55% in the Kelly calculator and it suggests a bet of £315.18 including an allowance for my commission rate, so that's £157.60 at half stakes.
Show More
Nice start Homer.
That indeed was a good call.
And all the pressure off by half time as well.
That indeed was a good call.
And all the pressure off by half time as well.
Thanks very much guys - it won't come as a surprise that both of you contributed a great deal to the threads I mentioned earlier from where I got the inspiration to work this maths thing out properly.
That was remarkably straightforward for the first bet - I'm sure plenty will not be so comfortable. A profit of £167.30 on the bet, so the bank climbs to £2,667.30 and that will be the basis for the next stake.
That was remarkably straightforward for the first bet - I'm sure plenty will not be so comfortable. A profit of £167.30 on the bet, so the bank climbs to £2,667.30 and that will be the basis for the next stake.
Enthused by early success I ran all tonight's league 1 and 2 games through my model with some very interesting results. When I say interesting I think worrying would be a more appropriate word as the outputs threw up some major variances to the available odds. This either means that the markets are very wrong in places (unlikely) or that my model has some major flaws (highly probable). The resulting Kelly stakes are of course astronomical and way beyond my acceptable levels of risk. Of course the model could be right, and over the last week or two the test results have been very encouraging and profitable on paper, but some of these outputs look far too exaggerated to be plausible.
This is work in progress and I will put up the bets nonetheless, as maybe I will be pleasantly surprised by results. One immediate question has come to mind ... at full Kelly if you stumble across 1 or 2 exceptional value bets and they don't oblige then your bank would be decimated. It seems like there is a flaw in the staking methodology somewhere, albeit mathematically sound. Either that or such value bets never actually exist and when they do it's a sure sign that the model is weak - perhaps that's the flaw. Any thoughts on this would be welcome!
Ok, reverting to paper bets for these bearing in mind the issue above. All are half Kelly stakes:
Bet 2 Bristol Rovers v Walsall Over 2.5 Goals £648.50 at 1.84(!)
Bet 3 Peterborough v Brentford Over 2.5 Goals £407.42 at 1.70
Bet 4 Stockport v Rotherham Over 2.5 Goals £201.01 at 1.80
And the variance on these is so big that I won't even put any stakes up, but for the record there appears to be value here:
Bristol Rovers Draw at 3.70
Oldham Win at 3.80
Crewe Win at 3.25
Stockport Draw at 4.10
Apologies for the long post!
This is work in progress and I will put up the bets nonetheless, as maybe I will be pleasantly surprised by results. One immediate question has come to mind ... at full Kelly if you stumble across 1 or 2 exceptional value bets and they don't oblige then your bank would be decimated. It seems like there is a flaw in the staking methodology somewhere, albeit mathematically sound. Either that or such value bets never actually exist and when they do it's a sure sign that the model is weak - perhaps that's the flaw. Any thoughts on this would be welcome!
Ok, reverting to paper bets for these bearing in mind the issue above. All are half Kelly stakes:
Bet 2 Bristol Rovers v Walsall Over 2.5 Goals £648.50 at 1.84(!)
Bet 3 Peterborough v Brentford Over 2.5 Goals £407.42 at 1.70
Bet 4 Stockport v Rotherham Over 2.5 Goals £201.01 at 1.80
And the variance on these is so big that I won't even put any stakes up, but for the record there appears to be value here:
Bristol Rovers Draw at 3.70
Oldham Win at 3.80
Crewe Win at 3.25
Stockport Draw at 4.10
Apologies for the long post!
GL with thread Homer....Think FOOTBALL is so very hard to bet using KELLY ......but it does make you think harder re your stakes ....so is a better way to bet than LEVEL STAKES IMO...
I do my own ratings and 90% of the time my prices are close
enough to the market not to bet, which means I get one bet
in ten. Whenever I have a big difference I have another look.
GL.
enough to the market not to bet, which means I get one bet
in ten. Whenever I have a big difference I have another look.
GL.
impressive stuff HJS especially the draws part, nice one
hope you ended up making the bets [;)]
hope you ended up making the bets [;)]
he had the over2.5 on both of them TM so the only results possible were the 2-2 and 3-3 although i don´t believe he went for the 3-3
DFC, thanks for the good wishes. For me where you have 2 or 3 outcomes it feels much easier to model the probabilities than horse racing, where there are so many variables and possible outcomes. That's possibly down to my low level of maths skills though!
Kenilworth - that's what I expected to happen but I seem to have 4 or 5 out of 10 at the moment.
The Management - as it turns out 2-2 and 3-3 would have been a good bet in both the drawn games but I didn't have any bets tonight as I was concerned about the huge variance between my model and the prices here. Turns out I should have gone with them, but I'm just pleased to see some encouraging results at this point.
Lusitano - thanks very much for the kind words.
Kenilworth - that's what I expected to happen but I seem to have 4 or 5 out of 10 at the moment.
The Management - as it turns out 2-2 and 3-3 would have been a good bet in both the drawn games but I didn't have any bets tonight as I was concerned about the huge variance between my model and the prices here. Turns out I should have gone with them, but I'm just pleased to see some encouraging results at this point.
Lusitano - thanks very much for the kind words.
Well, what a good evening that was ... on paper!
The bank would have risen to £3,623.36 with a profit on the 3 overs bets of £956.06 to half Kelly suggested stakes. However that would have meant risking 47% of the bank on three games, and unless any Kelly advocates can tell me otherwise that can't be a wise staking strategy long term. Maybe it's a case of having the balls to get the money down when such good value arises? Anyway I am gaining some faith in the model which is probably the most important factor at this early stage and I imagine that fractional Kelly stakes that are a smaller % of the total bank will have to be the way forward (1/4 or even 1/6 Kelly).
The match odds results were also very profitable thanks to those 2 draws, but there is no way I could have staked them with the £2,500 bank as well as the O/U2.5 bets at half Kelly.
More questions than answers tonight but that's all part of the fun!
The bank would have risen to £3,623.36 with a profit on the 3 overs bets of £956.06 to half Kelly suggested stakes. However that would have meant risking 47% of the bank on three games, and unless any Kelly advocates can tell me otherwise that can't be a wise staking strategy long term. Maybe it's a case of having the balls to get the money down when such good value arises? Anyway I am gaining some faith in the model which is probably the most important factor at this early stage and I imagine that fractional Kelly stakes that are a smaller % of the total bank will have to be the way forward (1/4 or even 1/6 Kelly).
The match odds results were also very profitable thanks to those 2 draws, but there is no way I could have staked them with the £2,500 bank as well as the O/U2.5 bets at half Kelly.
More questions than answers tonight but that's all part of the fun!
I did one of these threads..was a fkin disaster 
.Sure you will do better Homer.
.Sure you will do better Homer.
Kelly is all about getting an edge of about 10% and anything bigger than that
you have to question how you calculate your edge. Professional compilers don't
get things wrong by much, especially with overs/unders and draws, and anyone
who thinks their price on two matches can carry so much as between £680+ and £201
will soon find out different, especially as the market had them both around
1.80 to 1.84. However, I wish the OP all the best and look forward to what comes
next.
you have to question how you calculate your edge. Professional compilers don't
get things wrong by much, especially with overs/unders and draws, and anyone
who thinks their price on two matches can carry so much as between £680+ and £201
will soon find out different, especially as the market had them both around
1.80 to 1.84. However, I wish the OP all the best and look forward to what comes
next.
Apologies for dampening the enthusiasm, but I don't see anything here that luck does not explain. GL though Homer, but I can't see how guessing which teams will win/lose or have overs/unders is remotely possible long term. The BF odds are derived from the opinions of a huge amount of gamblers, and only those with the largest banks can shift them out of kilter to representing a value position, and even then not by much.
I've seen odds out by more than 10% with large amounts available, though not recently. Guess those guys have gone bust 
Tobermory - I don't see this being any different, after all there are much brighter people than me out there who can't find an edge in football. But thanks for the good wishes!
Kenilworth - I agree entirely with your point around questioning how the edge is calculated when the variance is so large, something I mentioned before the matches last night which prevented me from putting any money down.
Trevh - whilst I agree with your point around luck, to be fair I am not really guessing. I've built a mathematical model which, although is no doubt very basic compared to some, is producing probabilities on all outcomes and where the variance is large (admittedly way too large) I am posting the bets. I think that's a bit different to guessing, but in time it may well be proven to be a flawed model. I have always shared your view on the BF market being accurate on football without really testing it for myself properly. I will say, however, that the BF market on horse racing is definitely not always accurate, despite being a representation of the views of many.
The Investor - the only good news is that I won't be going bust with this whatever the outcome, especially if I don't have the balls to put the money down!
Kenilworth - I agree entirely with your point around questioning how the edge is calculated when the variance is so large, something I mentioned before the matches last night which prevented me from putting any money down.
Trevh - whilst I agree with your point around luck, to be fair I am not really guessing. I've built a mathematical model which, although is no doubt very basic compared to some, is producing probabilities on all outcomes and where the variance is large (admittedly way too large) I am posting the bets. I think that's a bit different to guessing, but in time it may well be proven to be a flawed model. I have always shared your view on the BF market being accurate on football without really testing it for myself properly. I will say, however, that the BF market on horse racing is definitely not always accurate, despite being a representation of the views of many.
The Investor - the only good news is that I won't be going bust with this whatever the outcome, especially if I don't have the balls to put the money down!
Bristol Rovers Draw at 3.70
Oldham Win at 3.80
Crewe Win at 3.25
Stockport Draw at 4.10
I will be following this thread with great interest.
Can you not exploit this further.
1. Bristol Rovers were as low as 1.21 when 2-1 up. The strategy that i use was saying that Walsall were likely to score again so homer bet In Running as well.
1a Stockport 3-1 up so lay them im running at a short price.
2. I may be clutching at straws but you had Oldham win and Crewe win. Does this not mean that odds of draw were lower then expectation of draw so lay draw?
3. looking at your over bets the home teams overs are now 100% (peterborough) and 69% and 70% ie expectation of the game being overs.
4. Hercules game was screaming overs as i poinyed out on a thread. This was based on probability of early goals.
So chaps what do you think? In the hercules game unders were as low as 1.8 pre ko because i assume the market maker wanted to put some weak traders in the red pre ko.
Oldham Win at 3.80
Crewe Win at 3.25
Stockport Draw at 4.10
I will be following this thread with great interest.
Can you not exploit this further.
1. Bristol Rovers were as low as 1.21 when 2-1 up. The strategy that i use was saying that Walsall were likely to score again so homer bet In Running as well.
1a Stockport 3-1 up so lay them im running at a short price.
2. I may be clutching at straws but you had Oldham win and Crewe win. Does this not mean that odds of draw were lower then expectation of draw so lay draw?
3. looking at your over bets the home teams overs are now 100% (peterborough) and 69% and 70% ie expectation of the game being overs.
4. Hercules game was screaming overs as i poinyed out on a thread. This was based on probability of early goals.
So chaps what do you think? In the hercules game unders were as low as 1.8 pre ko because i assume the market maker wanted to put some weak traders in the red pre ko.
Hi jonny, thanks for input. Until I've got some idea on how the model is going to work, which will mean a lot more selections and testing, I won't be ready to try anything more adventurous. I'm keeping an eye on your SOT stats though and enjoy watching the games unfold and reading your thread (by the way I would pay particular attention to what Bayes said - he knows his stuff)
On the Oldham game I had the draw very close to the market so it wouldn't have been a lay. I did have the Torquay draw as slight value, but Crewe's value was much bigger which is why I put that one up. The thing is there will always be losers so I'm not worried about finding a winning bet every time, just a matter of beating the odds over a long series of bets.
Interesting that your stats also pointed to overs in the Hercules game - and that Atletico 1st half goal stat is amazing really for Spanish football.
On the Oldham game I had the draw very close to the market so it wouldn't have been a lay. I did have the Torquay draw as slight value, but Crewe's value was much bigger which is why I put that one up. The thing is there will always be losers so I'm not worried about finding a winning bet every time, just a matter of beating the odds over a long series of bets.
Interesting that your stats also pointed to overs in the Hercules game - and that Atletico 1st half goal stat is amazing really for Spanish football.
Before I continue I should warn anyone against backing these selections, my model is by no means proven yet and based on the points made by some experienced guys above, it will almost certainly prove to be inaccurate.
The bank sits at £3,623.36 and there are 4 stand out value bets tonight according to the model. Stakes are still half Kelly to keep things consistent, which still means a risk of 45.4% of the bank tonight:
Bet 5 £377.22 Blackpool Win at 4.00
Bet 6 £443.36 Blackpool Over 2.5 goals at 1.98
Bet 7 £453.80 Hamilton Under 2.5 goals at 2.24
Bet 8 £370.58 Hamilton Draw at 5.60
The bank sits at £3,623.36 and there are 4 stand out value bets tonight according to the model. Stakes are still half Kelly to keep things consistent, which still means a risk of 45.4% of the bank tonight:
Bet 5 £377.22 Blackpool Win at 4.00
Bet 6 £443.36 Blackpool Over 2.5 goals at 1.98
Bet 7 £453.80 Hamilton Under 2.5 goals at 2.24
Bet 8 £370.58 Hamilton Draw at 5.60
Thanks jonny - let's hope they keep up the 100% record!
Celtic Under 2.5 goals away is 62% with 4 0-0 ht draws so i can see that is a good bet at odds against.
well done homer.
with sot and your model
if celtic equalise you have a full house
with sot and your model
if celtic equalise you have a full house
3 out of 4 up - come on Blackpool! What a thread!
Acca up jonnyg! Well done Homer! Now, please describe your prediction model!
amazing i cant believe it, i almost never follow predictions but today i did, i made all 4 bets (but half the stakes of HJS so i guess it was 1/4 kelly 
) but i also traded along the way which went great, but i must admit that if Celtic scored and eventually wins i would've made a ton
anyway great stuff again HJS, congrats [;)]
) but i also traded along the way which went great, but i must admit that if Celtic scored and eventually wins i would've made a tonanyway great stuff again HJS, congrats [;)]
Nice start Homer, well done, but I think your followers are mad if they think this is any more predictable than the lottery! I'm quite suprised tbh, just goes to show why tipsters can make money when even seasoned gamblers believe :)
no ken he should take the profit, ditch the kelly nonsense, use level stakes and watch the bank grow a little week by week.
The beauty of compounding and all that.
Level staking % of bank: it's not exciting and you need incredible patience, but it works a treat. Ramping up and down has no benefit LONG-TERM plain and simple. (I quit 2011)
we all compile ratings and books....if kelly is telling you to stake so high, your book is way out.....trust me
or can u look into the future?
kelly imo is just an excuse for people to gamble
no1 can be 100% accurate without the benefit of hindsight
if its not a 3pt max bet, then don't play at all - this is my view on ramping up and down
and when you hit 10% ROI week after week staking 3% of bank every bet.....
why would you want to lower the ROI by using a simple maths formula with an irish name?
The beauty of compounding and all that.
Level staking % of bank: it's not exciting and you need incredible patience, but it works a treat. Ramping up and down has no benefit LONG-TERM plain and simple. (I quit 2011)
we all compile ratings and books....if kelly is telling you to stake so high, your book is way out.....trust me
or can u look into the future?
kelly imo is just an excuse for people to gamble
no1 can be 100% accurate without the benefit of hindsight
if its not a 3pt max bet, then don't play at all - this is my view on ramping up and down
and when you hit 10% ROI week after week staking 3% of bank every bet.....
why would you want to lower the ROI by using a simple maths formula with an irish name?
Thats a good nights work Homer
What i'm not clear on is when you are betting on games taking place at the same time , and the bank is say 3,000 , and bet 1 is recommended to be 10% (£300) , if bet 2 is also 10% do you still count the bank as 3K and bet £300 on that too? Myself i would then consider the bank to be 2,700 and bet 10% of that.
What i'm not clear on is when you are betting on games taking place at the same time , and the bank is say 3,000 , and bet 1 is recommended to be 10% (£300) , if bet 2 is also 10% do you still count the bank as 3K and bet £300 on that too? Myself i would then consider the bank to be 2,700 and bet 10% of that.
Trevh you take yourself too seriously man, chill out!
you dont get fat eating a lot in just one day
you dont get fat eating a lot in just one day
Morning all.
Last night's profit came to £3,699.36 and the bank climbs to £7,322.72 taking into account my commission rate. There's no decent league football today so it's a day off. I was thinking about Saturday/Sunday while walking the dogs this morning and there is no way I will be able to run every game through the model and keep up with all the bets while doing the day job so I will have to be ultra-selective and work around the racing.
Thanks very much for all the advice/comments which I'll read again and reply to shortly.
Last night's profit came to £3,699.36 and the bank climbs to £7,322.72 taking into account my commission rate. There's no decent league football today so it's a day off. I was thinking about Saturday/Sunday while walking the dogs this morning and there is no way I will be able to run every game through the model and keep up with all the bets while doing the day job so I will have to be ultra-selective and work around the racing.
Thanks very much for all the advice/comments which I'll read again and reply to shortly.
Tobermory - I've simply been taking the bank for the day and using a Kelly calculator to work out the stakes based on that bank for all bets. The recommended % of the bank to stake varies depending on the perceived edge and so it wouldn't make sense to enter a reduced bank for bet 2 of 4 as you suggest, as bet 2 would then be under-weighted.
Iquit - you make some interesting points. I should maybe point out that in my day job I use level stakes for all bets based on a % of my overall bank precisely as you suggest. Some decisions I make are very late, based on market movements, and I couldn't even contemplate trying to use Kelly staking when things are moving so quickly. However, I have read some extremely good papers relating to Kelly staking and I can see the merits in markets with 2 or 3 outcomes. I'm not quite sure why people seem to get so emotional about what seems to me to be a very logical and mathematically sound concept - bet more when your edge is greater. I don't see that as being an excuse to gamble, providing that your stakes are in line with your overall bank.
That leads me to another point. It seems fairly evident based on the views of the seasoned gamblers that if your model churns out anything above 10% edge, then it has to be the model that's flawed. Assuming that's the case, then Kelly staking will be in much better proportion to the bank than I've experienced so far by default. If I've stumbled across an edge greater than 10% then the logical move is to apply fractional Kelly staking to ensure stakes are in much better proportion to the bank (1/4 or even 1/8), but either way ditching the concept altogether doesn't have to be the only way forward.
Trevh - If you'd like this week's lottery numbers just let me know! Seriously I have warned people about 'following' these bets as I share your belief that something must be flawed. Although after last week's results which I didn't share here and this week's performance to date I must admit I am finding it harder to be cynical about what I'm seeing. No doubt the lucky run will come to a crashing end soon.
Kenilworth - come on that wouldn't be much fun, would it? I thought you'd enjoy seeing the inevitable happen!! Besides which I won't get very far with £4k.
Iquit - you make some interesting points. I should maybe point out that in my day job I use level stakes for all bets based on a % of my overall bank precisely as you suggest. Some decisions I make are very late, based on market movements, and I couldn't even contemplate trying to use Kelly staking when things are moving so quickly. However, I have read some extremely good papers relating to Kelly staking and I can see the merits in markets with 2 or 3 outcomes. I'm not quite sure why people seem to get so emotional about what seems to me to be a very logical and mathematically sound concept - bet more when your edge is greater. I don't see that as being an excuse to gamble, providing that your stakes are in line with your overall bank.
That leads me to another point. It seems fairly evident based on the views of the seasoned gamblers that if your model churns out anything above 10% edge, then it has to be the model that's flawed. Assuming that's the case, then Kelly staking will be in much better proportion to the bank than I've experienced so far by default. If I've stumbled across an edge greater than 10% then the logical move is to apply fractional Kelly staking to ensure stakes are in much better proportion to the bank (1/4 or even 1/8), but either way ditching the concept altogether doesn't have to be the only way forward.
Trevh - If you'd like this week's lottery numbers just let me know! Seriously I have warned people about 'following' these bets as I share your belief that something must be flawed. Although after last week's results which I didn't share here and this week's performance to date I must admit I am finding it harder to be cynical about what I'm seeing. No doubt the lucky run will come to a crashing end soon.
Kenilworth - come on that wouldn't be much fun, would it? I thought you'd enjoy seeing the inevitable happen!! Besides which I won't get very far with £4k.
Homer, I would get no pleasure from seeing it go t!ts up, I
assure you, that's why I'm saying take the money and run.
assure you, that's why I'm saying take the money and run.
management, looks your telling the OP to ignore those who who disagree
with him, except for your good self !
with him, except for your good self !
Betting at odds of 3 to 1 is relying on luck to win. Try betting at 1 to 3 instead.
He will do all his money if he carries on with those random bets.
Homer Jay Simspon
Your 'voyage of discovery' makes for interesting reading.
However, I do have a question for you given kenilworth's advice to "take the money and run".
Are you actually placing these bets?
I'm confused because you appear to have added the profit from Tuesday's 'paper bets' to the bank and then calculated the stakes for yesterday's bets from that point. Adding paper profits to the bank would suggest, imho, that this thread is purely a 'suck it and see' exercise.
Perhaps you would be kind enough to clarify?
Thanks.
Your 'voyage of discovery' makes for interesting reading.
However, I do have a question for you given kenilworth's advice to "take the money and run".
Are you actually placing these bets?
I'm confused because you appear to have added the profit from Tuesday's 'paper bets' to the bank and then calculated the stakes for yesterday's bets from that point. Adding paper profits to the bank would suggest, imho, that this thread is purely a 'suck it and see' exercise.
Perhaps you would be kind enough to clarify?
Thanks.
this thread is purely a 'suck it and see' exercise.
Sounds gay
Sounds gay
Homer - don't let the bu99ers get you down. I believe it is perfectly possible to have a model that will (if not regularly), at least occasionally churn out price discrepancies of 10%+, so stick with it.
However I am a touch worried at the variance in your overs/unders modelling (compared to mine).
Management, did you not post the above ?
However I am a touch worried at the variance in your overs/unders modelling (compared to mine).
Management, did you not post the above ?
the management re Celtic game did you not take into consideration lack of celtic goals in the first half this season.
Under 2.5 celtic game seemed a spot on trade.
celtic away
0-0ht
0-0 ht
1-1 ht
1-1 ht
2-0 ht
0-1 ht
0-0 ht
0-0 ht
a cracking bet unders .
Under 2.5 celtic game seemed a spot on trade.
celtic away
0-0ht
0-0 ht
1-1 ht
1-1 ht
2-0 ht
0-1 ht
0-0 ht
0-0 ht
a cracking bet unders .
management, who do you work for ? Some people have made various
comments, but instead of dealing with them individually, you
lump them together as ''buggirs''! Perhaps you were in a hurry
to get to your own constructive observations. We all do things
differently.
comments, but instead of dealing with them individually, you
lump them together as ''buggirs''! Perhaps you were in a hurry
to get to your own constructive observations. We all do things
differently.
You started it by collectively critising, so perhaps you
should stick to football only.
should stick to football only.
''Unders'' in the Juventus match at 2.18 or better is a good price IMO.
unders has drifted because there is an expectation of 2.96 goals according to my shot on target calculations.
Some big trader must be looking at my thread.
Some big trader must be looking at my thread.
Also there is an expectation of one or more goals in the first half.[;)]
In the almeria game the expectation is 2.3 goals. how does a chap score 0.3 of a goal.
I have also got deportivo as more likely to score.
Sot had Blackpool more likely to score as well. Does not mean dep will win but again i would not be backing Almeria at 2.04.
rtivo as more likely to score.Sot had Blackpool more likely to score as well. Does not mean dep will win but again i would not be backing Almeria at 2.04.
just shows you dont need a phd in maths to understand goal expectation.
what do you have for real game?
you first
haha
what do you have for real game?
you first
haha
i forgot to ask management
what did you think of drift on overs in blackpool game?
everything pointed to overs.
liverpool score more when gerrard does not play this season.
i had 2.585 goals for that game.
what did you think of drift on overs in blackpool game?
everything pointed to overs.
liverpool score more when gerrard does not play this season.
i had 2.585 goals for that game.
is it pure price manipulation like the hercules game which was screaming goals.
At the risk of sounding patroning, I thought
your rating on the Deportivo and Juventus
realistic.
your rating on the Deportivo and Juventus
realistic.
I had Juventus at 2.0 and Almeria 1.72 (Unders that is)
management, thank you for drawing my attention
to Juventus and Almeria ''Unders''
to Juventus and Almeria ''Unders''
Bet 9 Greuther Furth £335.25 at 2.92
Bet 10 Alemannia Aachen £262.33 at 3.30
My ideal scenario in Germany 2 tonight would be to lay both home teams, but the balance of value sits with the away sides so that's the call. The draw prices look close to being accurate according to my model.
Whatever the results of these games I'll make this my last post on this little project here. I might start a blog or something where the contributions can be limited to sensible content. I should have known better after seeing this place fall into terminal decline, but it was worth a try!
Bet 10 Alemannia Aachen £262.33 at 3.30
My ideal scenario in Germany 2 tonight would be to lay both home teams, but the balance of value sits with the away sides so that's the call. The draw prices look close to being accurate according to my model.
Whatever the results of these games I'll make this my last post on this little project here. I might start a blog or something where the contributions can be limited to sensible content. I should have known better after seeing this place fall into terminal decline, but it was worth a try!
Aachen are just as likely to score but looks a draw on paper. same goes for furth. i see your resoning because both home teams are weak favs.
Homer, Sorry this will be your last post on this thread as it has been great reading and refreshing to see new ideas just like Jonny G's thread SOT.
Some of us don't always make comments but please be reassured contributions such as this will always be welcome and respected by the silent masses. Good luck and will follow your blog with great interest if it goes ahead.
Some of us don't always make comments but please be reassured contributions such as this will always be welcome and respected by the silent masses. Good luck and will follow your blog with great interest if it goes ahead.
unfortunate of you HJS to let the bad apples win, here you can block people or simply ignore them, the ignore one is pretty powerful
lusitano71, ''bad apples'' ? Who, what are you referring to ?
I posted the following enquiry on 13 Jan 11 at 14:51.
Homer Jay Simspon
Your 'voyage of discovery' makes for interesting reading.
However, I do have a question for you given kenilworth's advice to "take the money and run".
Are you actually placing these bets?
I'm confused because you appear to have added the profit from Tuesday's 'paper bets' to the bank and then calculated the stakes for yesterday's bets from that point. Adding paper profits to the bank would suggest, imho, that this thread is purely a 'suck it and see' exercise.
Perhaps you would be kind enough to clarify?
Thanks.
Assuming he'd read it, a response from the OP would have been appreciated.
Homer Jay Simspon
Your 'voyage of discovery' makes for interesting reading.
However, I do have a question for you given kenilworth's advice to "take the money and run".
Are you actually placing these bets?
I'm confused because you appear to have added the profit from Tuesday's 'paper bets' to the bank and then calculated the stakes for yesterday's bets from that point. Adding paper profits to the bank would suggest, imho, that this thread is purely a 'suck it and see' exercise.
Perhaps you would be kind enough to clarify?
Thanks.
Assuming he'd read it, a response from the OP would have been appreciated.
i dont know kenilworth whoever or whatever HJS didnt like, i didnt say this regarding anyone because tbh i didnt even realised that anything was going on here, my point was, he should do his thing and dont let other people put him off, simples
Lusitano, In view of your response it was surely wrong to
use the expression ''bad apples'', unless you can be
specific, otherwise withdraw the comment. Perhaps you should to
see what the OP has to be sensitive about, before giving him
advice as to how to deal with it.
use the expression ''bad apples'', unless you can be
specific, otherwise withdraw the comment. Perhaps you should to
see what the OP has to be sensitive about, before giving him
advice as to how to deal with it.
Seems the cry baby who started this thread no longer has the balls to carry on. Tell you what Homer, take your kelly staking method and shove it up your anus.
yes Kenilworth "bad apples" are guys that are always posting on the threads with a negative/destructive approach and/or with a superiority complex, thats what i call "bad apples" (though i'm not saying its you and i dont care who it was, i was speaking in general terms) but you are far from being a very constructive person here, i've seen too often your type of responses to know that..and i withdraw nothing
Lusitano, I don't get excited like you and a couple of others do, when
someone puts up a couple of bets that happen to be successful. Even a broken
clock will be right twice a day, and your enthusiasm tells me more about
your knowledge of betting than the OP himself. If my cautious attitude is
seen by you as being negative, I plead guilty to that, and I will be still
betting on here when you have disappeared with your tail between your legs.
In future point out to me when I am less than constructive, rather than
generalising, and I will address your observation. I won't hold my breath.
someone puts up a couple of bets that happen to be successful. Even a broken
clock will be right twice a day, and your enthusiasm tells me more about
your knowledge of betting than the OP himself. If my cautious attitude is
seen by you as being negative, I plead guilty to that, and I will be still
betting on here when you have disappeared with your tail between your legs.
In future point out to me when I am less than constructive, rather than
generalising, and I will address your observation. I won't hold my breath.
[url=http://www.bbcode.org/images/lubeck.jpg][/url]
Lusitano, I don't get excited like you and a couple of others do, when
someone puts up a couple of bets that happen to be successful. Even a broken
clock will be right twice a day, and your enthusiasm tells me more about
your knowledge of betting than the OP himself. If my cautious attitude is
seen by you as being negative, I plead guilty to that, and I will be still
betting on here when you have disappeared with your tail between your legs.
In future point out to me when I am less than constructive, rather than
generalising, and I will address your observation. I won't hold my breath.
..."bad apples" are guys that are always posting on the threads with a negative/destructive approach and/or with a superiority complex...
i rest my case
someone puts up a couple of bets that happen to be successful. Even a broken
clock will be right twice a day, and your enthusiasm tells me more about
your knowledge of betting than the OP himself. If my cautious attitude is
seen by you as being negative, I plead guilty to that, and I will be still
betting on here when you have disappeared with your tail between your legs.
In future point out to me when I am less than constructive, rather than
generalising, and I will address your observation. I won't hold my breath.
..."bad apples" are guys that are always posting on the threads with a negative/destructive approach and/or with a superiority complex...
i rest my case
Overs at 1.97 in the ManC match was a very good price as I had that match at
1.72. No I didn't back it as I was out all day.
1.72. No I didn't back it as I was out all day.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539