General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 339 comments are related to the topic:
lay the draw
lay the draw
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 339
|
By:
children, can we get back to original thread.
All LB was trying to do was to point out that avoiding Fulham in context of THIS THREAD title maybe a good thing | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
True Hammerddh. Although I am a bit irritated at Kenilworth saying I don't have a clue when he said the following earlier on the thread:
Lat weekend there were 7 score draws and one 0-0 from 45 games. How would this system deal with those results Since Kenilworth had previously said on the thread that the system didn't work, I'm a bit mystified as to why he'd put up these figures. The only result there that would lose you lots of money (assuming you green up after the first goal) was the 0-0. One 0-0 in 45 games is very good. If you were to extend this to the whole season, you'd have no more then 8-9 draws across the 380 games. If those were the real statistics, the system would work brilliantly. Unfortunately, last year you had three times as many 0-0 draws as that. I made it very clear on that thread that I was playing around that night with small pounds compared with my normal systems. I concluded several times that simply laying the 0-0 wouldn't be a good system. However, with the addition of strong statistical research, as i-only-lay has done, perhaps it could be. I certainly wouldn't be committing much (I haven't played the system since Sunday night!) unless I had seen it working over a good period of time, and I await the development of this thread with interest. Kenilworth, feel free not to post if you don't like it. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
thought we werent talking on this thread Bobbin unless relevant!?
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
I know. I'm trying to stay off, but I can't resist coming back at some idiot who keeps insulting me when it's clear
1. He hasn't understood many of the threads (mine and those of others) 2. He hasn't understood whether I'm being serious about something or not (it should have been obvious I wasn't exactly staking my whole betting fund on this system) 3. He has a very poor grasp of statistics. He puts up some statistics that make the system sound as though it would be really effective, even in its most basic form. Given what a critic of the system he was, I suspect he meant to suggest the opposite and wasn't even intelligent enough to realise that one 0-0 draw in 45 games would be very good for this system at the sorts of odds we were dealing with. The truth is less rosy, of course, but he didn't seem to realise that. I'll go and block Kenilworth now, and then I won't feel compelled to reply to his inevitable 'smart' comeback. I like an argument, but this guy has been boring the hell out of me today. I wish I had the willpower to refrain from arguing with him but... | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
hammerddh. Joined: 15 Nov 05
Replies: 140 22 Sep 11 21:32 children, can we get back to original thread. All LB was trying to do was to point out that avoiding Fulham in context of THIS THREAD title maybe a good thing I think LB can speak for himself. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
I can and I did. All Hammerddh was trying to point out was that I was talking about Fulham as a team to avoid if you're doing this strategy. I wasn't originally launching an attack on the way the club is run.
Now, where's that block command... | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
LordBobbbin, I suspect I have forgotten more about statistics
than you will ever know or understand. YOU started this off by being quite rude to in response to a post of mine that wasn't even for you. I object to being called stupid especially from the likes of you, anyone with half a brain would know that betting is all about prices and nothing else, something you don't seem to grasp. Regards the one in 45 that I referred to, no one responded to it, because my next post was going to ask how, perhaps 6 from 45 could be dealt with, but wasn't able to follow up. I really don't mind if you block or not but I will respond to whatever I see that needs a response, and really don't care who reads it, you need to get a grip, instead of getting excited about a hackneyed old system that's been done to death on here many times. GL as you will need it. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Fulham a team to avoid ? Why, as someone posted, they have
scored more goals than Stoke in each of the last 3 years. Please don't allow the facts to spoil a good post, for good ness sake. BTW, why don'tyou guys speak for yourself instead of speaking for each other ? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
There're so many contradictions and jumps to incorrect conclusions in those two posts that it would take another very looong post to debunk all of the detritus spoken in those two messages. It's quite clear that you've jumped to completely the wrong conclusion about how I bet, based on this and Trader11's thread. It's also clear that you get the wrong end of the stick with almost every post you read.
If I respond again though, this is going to keep going on and on and on. For the sake of the other people on this thread, I'm going to refrain from putting up a lengthy reply explaining exactly why virtually every line of both those messages is flawed to its core. As far as I'm concerned this conversation is at an end. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
I suspect LB means in current season ...where STOKE appear to have improved as a team ....and FULHAM appear to be regressing a bit!
Not a lot between them last few seasons.... STATS are Stoke 5 2 2 1 3 5 -2 8 Fulham 5 0 3 2 4 7 -3 3 ================================================================= Fulham 38 11 16 11 49 43 +6 49 Stoke 38 13 7 18 46 48 -2 46 ================================================================== Stoke 38 11 14 13 34 48 -14 47 Fulham 38 12 10 16 39 46 -7 46 ================================================================== Fulham 38 14 11 13 39 34 +5 53 Stoke 38 12 9 17 38 55 -17 45 ================================================================== The above is the FACTS! | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Like I said, don't let the facts spoil a good story...
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
you love your stats DFC.
the problem with the system for me is that with a £100 stake the liability on a 0-0 is £260 or around there | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
I only respond to posts as they are posted by you and others.
Anyone who bets without reference to prices is a fool, and you know what they say about a fool and his money... | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
The point I was trying to make was that Fulham are 0-0 draw specialists. Including the league cup this year, they've already had two 0-0s this season, and we're only a few weeks in. That follows on from last year, when Fulham had more 0-0s in the league than anyone else. Stoke, strangely, had fewer 0-0s than almost any other team. Now, those stats may well be aberrations. (I am intending to get some football stats and work on a system in the next week or two, but I haven't got my figures yet, so I can't talk about past seasons.) However, I thought I'd bring it up in case anyone else wanted to look into it in more depth.
Here, again, is the list of the teams and who had the most league 0-0s last year: Fulham 5 Birmingham 4 Man City 4 Man U 4 Sunderland 4 Tottenham 4 Arsenal 3 Blackburn 3 Newcastle 3 Wigan 3 Aston Villa 2 Blackpool 2 Chelsea 2 Everton 2 West Ham 2 Liverpool 1 Bolton 1 Stoke 1 West Brom 0 Wolves 0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Stats are useful Paul!
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
kenilworth 22 Sep 11 23:43
LordBobbbin, I suspect I have forgotten more about statistics than you will ever know or understand. YOU started this off by being quite rude to in response to a post of mine that wasn't even for you. I object to being called stupid especially from the likes of you, anyone with half a brain would know that betting is all about prices and nothing else, something you don't seem to grasp. Regards the one in 45 that I referred to, no one responded to it, because my next post was going to ask how, perhaps 6 from 45 could be dealt with, but wasn't able to follow up. I really don't mind if you block or not but I will respond to whatever I see that needs a response, and really don't care who reads it, you need to get a grip, instead of getting excited about a hackneyed old system that's been done to death on here many times. GL as you will need it. ============================================================================ The bit in bold is a WILD statement re "nothing else"! | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Alot of negative input here, good luck 1-only-lay.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Well I *did* call him stupid DFC. He was taking i-only-lay to task for aftertiming, even though i-only-lay had stated the bet he was going to play and how he was going to play it several times. He was also questioning whether this particular bet had been 'easy money' - the first goal went in within a few minutes, letting i-only-lay get out for a quick guaranteed profit, which seems, in this case, 'easy money' to me. That told me he hadn't understood the rules of the system.
And then he had posted that silly 1 0-0 in 45 matches stat. I responded to him about that stat and how it seemed to defy his criticism of the system, and he didn't come back with a follow-up (despite claiming today he was going to do exactly that had anyone responded to his original stat). From all of these things, I implied he wasn't terribly bright. It was maybe a touch unkind of me (he might just have problems with reading comprehension instead), but I have little patience with people who berate others for aftertiming when, in fact, the 'aftertimer' had always been very clear about the bets they were going to place. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
He was also questioning whether this particular bet had been 'easy money' - the first goal went in within a few minutes, letting i-only-lay get out for a quick guaranteed profit, which seems, in this case, 'easy money' to me.
It seems because a bet is a winner, it was therefore, ''easy money''. What happened was a bet was placed and an early goal would ensure a profit. An early goal came, but that doesn't make it ''easy money''. Only a naive fool would say that. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Here are some points to consider.
There were 25 0-0's last season in the EPL, so if you layed all 0-0's you would have made a slight profit. In 2009-10 there were 32 0-0's and in 2008-09 there were 42 0-0's so you probably would have made a slight loss if you had just been laying 0-0's for the last 3 seasons. Secondly it is quite difficult to know which teams to use and which to avoid re 0-0's. I definately agree that Fulham do have more than their fair share of 0-0's but in the case of Stoke, they had 6 0-0's in 2009-2010. So therefore even though they only had 1 0-0 in 2010-11 you would have avoided them as they had 6 0-0's the season before. If they only had 1 0-0 last season and 6 the season before are they a good team to use or not? Liverpool had 5 0-0's in 2009-10, Wolves had 4 and Bolton had 2. Finally you have to take into account the prices. The average 0-0 back price for Fulham taking into account every EPL game they played last season was 11.41. The average 0-0 price for West Brom taking into account every EPL game they played last season was 15.30. That's quite a difference. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Well yes, it is quite hard (if not impossible) to have an idea of where the next 0-0 comes from. One season's results isn't really enough. As you point out, last season Wolves and Stoke would have looked likely to get 0-0s based on their stats from the previous season. The results would have been very different, although that's not to say that they won't still be decent bets for 0-0s this year.
On the other hand, should results really count for much if they come from the previous season, and the season before that, and the season before that.. Teams do change over time, and it isn't always apparent from the stats when that's the case. Whether there's any way of telling from a team's last few matches whether they're likely to be scoreless, I couldn't tell, but that would probably be the route I'd explore if I was going to take this seriously. But obviously you'd be looking for matches where the odds didn't reflect the probability of success or failure. I'll be very interested to see what i-only-lay comes up with though. I hope he'll be back over the weekend, and I'll be monitoring his progress. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
...On the other hand, should results really count for much if they come from the previous season, and the season before that, and the season before that.. Teams do change over time, and it isn't always apparent from the stats when that's the case.
An interesting comment from the poster who suggested that they do count, hence the references to Fulham, Stoke, Bolton etc. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
BTW, an excellent post from U.A.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Oh for God's sake Kenilworth. The point I was originally trying to make (several times) was that the stats from last season said one thing. I said I hadn't got the stats from any other seasons (I am going to plug them into my system and look at them over the following weeks, but I have several more important sets of data relating to my normal sports to look over before I get round to investigating something that, to me, is no more than an intriguing aside).
I thought the stats were an interesting starting point though, and I hoped that somebody who did have information going back over several seasons would be able to shed more light on whether we were looking at trends or aberrations (or neither). U.A.'s post was exactly the sort of well-informed reply I was hoping to get, and I thought there would be the basis there for an interesting discussion about what (if anything) we should be looking for here, and how far back it was sensible to go. Sadly, the utterly irrelevant argument that has developed between the two of us is more indicative of how these threads often go. I didn't respond to your 08:36 post, but I see you're still having potshots at me. Could you please leave us alone to discuss the laying the draw strategy, even if you strongly believe it to be utter nonsense that only hooks fools. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Lord Bobbbin, 0-0 draws are extremely random also
their likelyhood is usually recognised in the market. Moral for you, Remember that,and engage brain before opening mouth. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Moral for me, engage block before opening Kenilworth post.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Well I hope noone did the Napoli vs Fiorentina game that was close enough odds
some great posts guys btw | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
God kenilworth and Bobbin are so boring. Your ruining this thread you two. Why don't you just message each other instead of us having to read two children arguing on a forum
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Well I've seen numerous threads I've been interested in ruined by the petty squabbling of others, so I'm not going to feel too bad about being at fault here. However, I hope our argument's at an end and that Kenilworth won't post any more responses to me and we can move on to discussing the draws.
In the absence of the OP (who seemed to stop posting long before Kenilworth and I got into a dispute), is there anyone else who has any contributions to make, as my honest attempt at putting up some quick stats in order to kickstart a fuller debate seems only to have annoyed people. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
hope the OP comes back to the thread, maybe it was a for one night only thing
 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Well he came back Monday night too, but he's disappeared since then. He's still posting on other threads though.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Pssst... Don't want to annoy anyone here, but, erm, Fulham got their third 0-0 of the season...
Just saying... | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
pathetic team
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
The way to look at this is how do the potential profits from lay the draw compare to laying 0-0. A £25 profit on one successful trade might suggest a profitable strategy when 0-0's happen every 12 or 13 games. But what if the underdog scores first? Or there's a red card? Or two quick goals to make it 1-1 and no further goals? Happens often enough to make this strategy a loser - check out google to research. Arguably there's more value in laying the draw after the first goal. The number of people following lay the draw drives the back price down aftr a goal (apologies to anyone doing this counter-strategy already)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Well the idea of the OP was to be looking for teams that were reasonably closely matched. That way there wouldn't be an underdog as such, and the opening goal ought to move the odds regardless of which team it came from. Of course, looking for closely matched teams theoretically makes it more likely there'll be a draw
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
all been covered. probably not a winning strategy in long term but good as a quick fix potentially
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
Got Hung, Dried & Deep Fried on that England v West Indies 20/20 last night so want to Explore Other Avenues so gonna look into this laying the draw. Trevh seems to be a Fount of some knowledge on this so will comb through his postings carefully and do some of my own research!
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
LordBobbbin Joined: 01 Sep 08
Replies: 2755 25 Sep 11 17:58 Pssst... Don't want to annoy anyone here, but, erm, Fulham got their third 0-0 of the season... Just saying... It was also the eighth 0-0 draw in 58 Premier League matches so far this season, a higher % than Fulham's 5 from 38 last season. Should we ignore the Premier League matches in ''lay the draw'' or should we backing 0-0 ? Are these figures significant, or just a fluky run ? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
The number of 0-0's varies hugely from season to season. Looking at some old stats the number of 0-0's in the Bundesliga were 15,19,24,25 in the four seasons to 2008/9 (306 matches per season). Similar variances apply to the other three major European leagues. But as per my post above 0-0's are only part of the story. Team A and B are evenly matched. Team B go down to ten men but take the lead shortly after. What happens to the draw price? The suggested strategy depends on a half decent profit on every trade to counteract the effect of the inevitable 0-0 now and again. (And WBA drew 0-0 this weekend, proving that it's not that easy to predict when this will not happen). Also there are quite a few games where the first goal is, say, in the 65th minute and the equaliser is in the 66th and the game ends 1-1. The market may not have unsuspended or at least reformed sufficiently to get the back bet down. On the upside, if the opening goal arrives in the last few minutes the back price will give a large profit.
Sorry if this is flogging a dead horse - but there appear to be people reading this thread who think it may be easy money | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By:
here are some stats for you.. note the top league in each country is assigned as 1 i.e. England -1 is Premier League, England -2 is championship and so on
|