Forums

General Betting

Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
i-only-lay
18 Sep 11 19:45
Joined:
Date Joined: 11 Nov 09
| Topic/replies: 25 | Blogger: i-only-lay's blog
lay the draw pre kickoff then trade out after a goal

simples

napoli-ac milan @ 3.40
lyon-marseille @ 3.30

£100
Show More
Loading...
Report kenilworth September 19, 2011 7:14 PM BST
Rather than waffle on using past results to prove points, which
IMO, is meaningless without prices as it happens, let's see how
this evenings's match pans out.
Ipswich v Coventry.
Does it qualify for the system ?
If so the lay price of the draw is 3.80.
What about it then ?
Report i-only-lay September 19, 2011 7:55 PM BST
layed 3.80,  backed 4.90 after 7 mins Cool

easy money.  if this is 1-1 at ht i will be going in again
Report kenilworth September 19, 2011 7:57 PM BST
Easy money ? In your dreams.
Report kenilworth September 19, 2011 7:58 PM BST
How come you didn't post your bet till
after the goal was scored ?
Report LordBobbbin September 19, 2011 8:07 PM BST
Kenilworth, are you really this stupid?
Report LordBobbbin September 19, 2011 8:09 PM BST
i-only-lay has talked about this bet several times today. He's explained his reasoning behind it. He was always going to get out after a goal.  Definitely no aftertiming here.
Report i-only-lay September 19, 2011 8:39 PM BST
posted early this afternoon i would be using the ipswich/cov game.  posted about 4 times actually.

I dont sit all day on this forum you know.  I also said I would be looking at horsens/odense to be a draw at halftime and it was.

laid it @ 2.50 and 63rd min odense 2-1, then 3 mins later 3-1


had 5 trades 5 winners.


you upset because you thought ipswich was going to be a low scoring game.  You obviously thought i was going to lose here as you have posted elsewhere you thought this would be 0-0

I knew different [;)]
Report i-only-lay September 19, 2011 8:40 PM BST
oh and LB you are more than welcome to post on the thread if you wish.  I dont mind who posts on it and im sorry if i gave the impression i didnt want you posting on it
Report LordBobbbin September 19, 2011 8:50 PM BST
Thanks i-only-lay, but that's okay. You're the one who has the strong and well-reasoned views, so I will try and leave this thread to you as much as possible.   I have felt compelled to jump in a couple of times today when Kenilworth was spouting nonsense..

Generally though, I think it would be better if the rest of us left this thread to you as much as possible. Paul, in particular, likes to chat, so the fewer of us there are on here, the fewer chances he'll have to blether on to somebody and fill up a potentially very interesting thread with irrelevant guff!
Report i-only-lay September 19, 2011 9:00 PM BST
I have some of the profits on the ipswich side to lay them

layed ipswich @ 1.08 for £100.  Coventry had some good chances and if they can get the next goal it is game on.  Cov are more capable of getting back into this as ipswich cant defend.
Report flatliner September 19, 2011 9:00 PM BST
Do like these bets sometimes, but only on price. Just laid the Torino match 0-0 at 55mins draw@2.08
Report kenilworth September 19, 2011 9:01 PM BST
I didn't say I thought it would be 0-0, I said 0-0, 1-0. and 2-0
would suit me. Have another look.
Report i-only-lay September 19, 2011 9:04 PM BST
ipswich: £13.77
coventry: £116.28
draw: £116.28

i deally I want it back to 2-2,  then i lay the draw and someone wins 3-2 in stoppage time and make £500 Laugh
Report u want some September 19, 2011 9:06 PM BST
Going well. Im gonna leave you to it now on this thread. All the best.
Report kenilworth September 19, 2011 9:17 PM BST
Has it occurred to anyone who layed the draw at Ipswich
and closed their bet after a goal, they, in effect gave
away 77% of their profit from the lay ? doesn't seem very
clever to me.
Report paulme September 19, 2011 9:49 PM BST
yes but its smal gains
Report paulme September 19, 2011 9:51 PM BST
must be a game we can target each day to use this system on
Report u want some September 19, 2011 9:52 PM BST
I've tested something similar 8 times now.
Report kenilworth September 19, 2011 9:59 PM BST
This 'laying the draw' then backing the draw when a goal is scored
is an old chestnut, marketed a few years ago, called (I think) THE
CASH GENERATOR. The weakness thought at the time was the 0-0 draw,
the slight chance of two quick goals, and dependence on prices. GL
to those who play.
Report paulme September 19, 2011 10:01 PM BST
yep we outlined the 2 major flaws last night so just need to select games that are unlikely to be 0-0 and hope we get 8 or 9 out of 10 right i guess Confused
Report Bridgeboy September 19, 2011 11:04 PM BST
It seems to me that if there was a way of predicting the "correct"price on the cs markets pre match ie-0-0,1-1,2-2 ltd would be an excellant way to trade yourself to semi riches. Soccer mystic is s hite by the way. . .
Report kenilworth September 19, 2011 11:36 PM BST
Select the matches unlikely to be 0-0 ? Every match
is very unlikely to be 0-0, is it not ?
Report paulme September 19, 2011 11:41 PM BST
isnt it one of the top 4 scores
Report kenilworth September 19, 2011 11:43 PM BST
About 4th or 5th but still about 12/1. Aren't
12/1 chances very unlikely ?
Report paulme September 19, 2011 11:46 PM BST
well what you reckon kenno if we pick a 0-0 every 8/9 games are we in profit overall long term?
Report kenilworth September 20, 2011 9:17 AM BST
Probably not.
Report paulme September 21, 2011 10:25 AM BST
just realised the original liability on the Lyon draw here is £230 Shocked
Report Bingo..... September 21, 2011 7:51 PM BST
Lay the draw is a tried and failed system. Type 'lay the draw' into google. Many have tried and failed with the same system. Be careful with this one guys.
Report LordBobbbin September 21, 2011 9:57 PM BST
Following on from those stats I posted a few days ago saying Fulham had more 0-0 draws than anyone in the league last year, I see they've just recorded another 0-0 in the League Cup tonight. In fact, combined with the 0-0 with Aston Villa in the Prem League, that's two 0-0 draws for Fulham already this season!  (And that's not including the 0-0 recorded in the Uefa Cup..)     

I guess an aversion to seeing goals being scored would help if you're a Fulham fan.
Report kenilworth September 22, 2011 12:23 AM BST
Fulham are a solid Premier League side who do what they
do, that is stay in the top league, won't win it, but
won't get relegated, play to their strengths, stay solvent,
good fan club base, get full houses (almost) every match
cos of their shrewd match pricing, etc. What are they
doing wrong ?
Report LordBobbbin September 22, 2011 1:13 AM BST
Well they're not doing an awful lot wrong as such (I was talking about them more in the context of a team to avoid if you're laying the 0-0 and hoping for there to be goals).  However, they're not wildly exciting are they?  Their solidity is, in its way, something of an achievement, but I doubt their fans go there expecting to be thrilled and aroused every week! (And I thought football was supposed to be about passion.)

Also, should they get pulled down into a relegation fight this year, I think their fans will quite quickly turn on them - being bored by their own football team is acceptable when the side is doing well, but it'll become something of a sore point if they're dull but not even certain of staying in the Prem.
Report kenilworth September 22, 2011 9:58 AM BST
So what should they do then ? They know they can't win the
league so their target is to achieve as high a position as
possible, which they do admirably. Maybe from your point of
view, they are a boriing lot, but they do their best. As
regards how the fans reaction to them being dragged into a
relegation fight, perhaps we should wait till it happens
before judging them. Don't for a moment think I am a Fulham
fan,(I support no Premier League side) but I salute the
'Fulhams' of the League. I can think of a few sides in the
lower leagues who would swop places with them in a flash.
Report LordBobbbin September 22, 2011 1:50 PM BST
Well if I was a Fulham supporter, I'd perhaps be sending covetous glances in the direction of Stoke and Bolton, who are at least making an attempt to lift themselves to higher heights. It may end in tears, but at least they're having a go at being something other than safe and bland.

Anyway, I'm not interested in having a long discussion about this. I don't have any particular gripe about Fulham, even if I think they are the most boring side in the PL in terms of the thrills they give their supporters. I was really only highlighting their lack of a scoring edge since it's important to anyone looking for a team not to lay 0-0 draws on.  But then, since you've misinterpreted almost every other comment on this thread, it doesn't surprise me that you're getting overly stroppy about mine.
Report kenilworth September 22, 2011 2:38 PM BST
Me getting stroppy about your comment(s) ? You
flatter yourself it seems. I say it as I see it,
and most posts are just that, not a response to
anything you post.
Report LordBobbbin September 22, 2011 3:21 PM BST
I was the only one who mentioned Fulham. You came straight back with a post all about Fulham, posing the final question what were they doing wrong?  I can only assume that was a response to what I had posted, and I don't see there was any 'flattery' involved on my part.

I never said most of your posts were responses to me, just that that particular one was, and also that you had misinterpreted almost all of the other comments (mostly written by people other than me) on the thread. And again you've misinterpreted my comment just now, so there's a theme here.

Anyway, this was a worthwhile thread earlier in the week. I was trying to get a discussion going about which clubs we might want to keep an eye open for with regards to avoiding scoreless draws, and you seem to be trying to turn it into a pointless debate about what makes for a well-run team. (If you want to talk about that, why don't you start a thread on the football forum?)
Report kenilworth September 22, 2011 4:06 PM BST
You suggested that Fulham were a negative side and that their fans
could be throwing covetous glances at the likes of Stoke and Bolton,
sides who actually finished 5 and 6 places behind them in the Premier
League last season, incidently in the 2nd half of last season, 10
away games each, collected just 2 draws between them, yes Fulham fans
would be envious of that. Perhaps you are right about those sides, not
being much chance of them drawing 0-0, especially away from home!
One thing I do disagree with you on, is your opinion that this was a
worthwhile thread, as this old chestnut has been around a long time
and been discussed many times, though it may be a new one to you. Just
save your money.
Report LordBobbbin September 22, 2011 4:25 PM BST
This particular topic clearly isn't of interest to you, but, strangely enough, this forum doesn't revolve around you.   Like I said before, if you want to go and keep discussing this, feel free to start a thread on the topic and I'm sure you'll have plenty of people discussing the merits of being a safe and secure side as opposed to one which is spending money (though not in excessive amounts) in an attempt to aim at higher success (Stoke).
Report kenilworth September 22, 2011 5:29 PM BST
What would higher success be for Stoke, finishing above Fulham ?
Regards the topic of this thread, I find it fascinating that any
one would back a system that shows no reference to prices, and
you yourself are backing it seemingly because you are bored ! I
suppose that is the reason why so many lose money punting, cos
they are bored.
Report kenilworth September 22, 2011 5:36 PM BST
Just read a few of your earlier posts on this thread. It
seems you don't really have a clue as to what you are
doing.
Report U.A. September 22, 2011 8:48 PM BST
Fulham have outscored Stoke in each of the last 3 premiership seasons.
Report hammerddh. September 22, 2011 9:32 PM BST
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
Report LordBobbbin September 22, 2011 10:36 PM BST
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.
Report paulme September 22, 2011 10:38 PM BST
thought we werent talking on this thread Bobbin unless relevant!?
Report LordBobbbin September 22, 2011 10:47 PM BST
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...
Report kenilworth September 22, 2011 11:28 PM BST
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.
Report LordBobbbin September 22, 2011 11:31 PM BST
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...
Report kenilworth September 22, 2011 11:43 PM BST
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.
Report kenilworth September 22, 2011 11:47 PM BST
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 ?
Report LordBobbbin September 23, 2011 12:04 AM BST
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.
Report DFCIRONMAN September 23, 2011 12:05 AM BST
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!
Report kenilworth September 23, 2011 12:11 AM BST
Like I said, don't let the facts spoil a good story...
Report paulme September 23, 2011 12:13 AM BST
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
Report kenilworth September 23, 2011 12:13 AM BST
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...
Report LordBobbbin September 23, 2011 12:17 AM BST
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
Report LordBobbbin September 23, 2011 12:20 AM BST
Stats are useful Paul!
Report DFCIRONMAN September 23, 2011 12:20 AM BST
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"!
Report acquiesce12 September 23, 2011 12:20 AM BST
Alot of negative input here, good luck 1-only-lay.
Report LordBobbbin September 23, 2011 12:31 AM BST
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.
Report kenilworth September 23, 2011 8:36 AM BST
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.
Report U.A. September 23, 2011 9:19 PM BST
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.
Report LordBobbbin September 23, 2011 11:28 PM BST
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.
Report kenilworth September 24, 2011 12:13 AM BST
...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.
Report kenilworth September 24, 2011 12:14 AM BST
BTW, an excellent post from U.A.
Report LordBobbbin September 24, 2011 1:06 AM BST
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.
Report kenilworth September 24, 2011 11:40 AM BST
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.
Report LordBobbbin September 24, 2011 3:23 PM BST
Moral for me, engage block before opening Kenilworth post.
Report ThePLOPKingOfSpam September 24, 2011 9:35 PM BST
Well I hope noone did the Napoli vs Fiorentina game that was close enough odds

some great posts guys btw
Report u want some September 24, 2011 9:39 PM BST
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
Report LordBobbbin September 24, 2011 9:56 PM BST
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.
Report paulme September 24, 2011 10:05 PM BST
hope the OP comes back to the thread, maybe it was a for one night only thing Confused
Report LordBobbbin September 24, 2011 10:07 PM BST
Well he came back Monday night too, but he's disappeared since then. He's still posting on other threads though.
Report LordBobbbin September 25, 2011 5:58 PM BST
Pssst... Don't want to annoy anyone here, but, erm, Fulham got their third 0-0 of the season...

Just saying...
Report paulme September 25, 2011 9:40 PM BST
pathetic team
Report HCT153 September 25, 2011 11:04 PM BST
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)
Report LordBobbbin September 26, 2011 12:41 AM BST
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
Report paulme September 26, 2011 1:49 AM BST
all been covered. probably not a winning strategy in long term but good as a quick fix potentially
Report Cardinal Scott September 26, 2011 10:18 AM BST
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!
Report kenilworth September 26, 2011 5:26 PM BST
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 ?
Report HCT153 September 26, 2011 7:23 PM BST
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
Report ocean0201 September 26, 2011 7:33 PM BST
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

    League        Draw %        FT 0-0 %   
    Belgium        25.06%        7.24%   
    German - 1        24.84%        6.54%   
    Germany - 2        26.73%        7.84%   
    England - 1        26.42%        8.37%   
    England - 2        27.75%        7.72%   
    England - 3        25.54%        6.70%   
    England - 4        26.92%        7.32%   
    France - 1        30.11%        11.74%   
    France - 2        30.95%        11.00%   
    Italy - 1        27.37%        7.95%   
    Italy - 2        31.43%        10.48%   
    Netherlands        22.81%        6.14%   
    Portugal        28.25%        11.00%   
    Scotland        23.95%        7.81%   
    Spain - 1        23.26%        7.42%   
    Spain - 2        29.74%        8.70%   
Report HCT153 September 26, 2011 7:47 PM BST
Ocean0201 - which period do those stats cover?
Report ocean0201 September 26, 2011 7:48 PM BST
sorry should have stated.. 06/07 till last season...
Report kenilworth September 26, 2011 7:59 PM BST
HCT, and there are people on here who would have
some believe that it is easy money.
Report HCT153 September 26, 2011 8:02 PM BST
Interesting stuff. I've noticed that (for instance) movement in the draw price following a first half goal in a Bundesliga game is much lower than other 'elite' leagues. To some extent this can be covered by the higher back price on 0-0 - but still a difficult strategy with which to secure long term profits. It all depends on selecting the right games - and I've not found the key to that.
Report HCT153 September 26, 2011 8:04 PM BST
Kenilworth - as I'm sure you're implying those people are probably working their own strategy (as i hinted in the earlier post).
Report kenilworth September 26, 2011 8:15 PM BST
... LB omitted to mention that WBA, prior to Saturday hadn't
drawn 0-0 in their 5 games this season, plus all of last season,
a total of 43 league matches... At least. Just thought I'd mention it.
Report kenilworth September 26, 2011 8:19 PM BST
HCT, i'm implying there are irresponsible posters (not you) hinting
that it's easy money, which it most certainly isn't. 
.
Report HCT153 September 26, 2011 8:35 PM BST
No problem Kenilworth - we're of one mind on this. The fact that the lay the draw 'system' has been widely sold for some time (maybe less so now) tells you everything that you need to know about it. Wisely or not, I don't like to see other forumites be encouraged to go down the 'get poor slowly' route... (I know that is probably not the right attitude for my own long term profits - but then I'm quite happy with doing what I'm doing re BF)
Report Cardinal Scott September 26, 2011 8:44 PM BST
Maybe there some Hidden Agenda's here people posting of the benefits of the Laying the Draw while concealing the fact that they may be in the Backing the Draw camp.
Report Mums Irish Stew September 26, 2011 10:17 PM BST
Looking through this it does appear that the OP is the only one stating it is easy stuff. It certainly isn't. I have tried this method with numerous insurances - backing nil nil etc but to grind out a profit without risking large(ish) liability is not my idea of fun. Lord bobbin has never implied it is easy so see no reason to argue with his reasonings. Just for the record West brom v Fulham regardless of previous stats on W Brom's side looked a fair bet as nil nil. I dutched backing 0-0, 0-1 and 1-0 with little down side. I do think the backing of correct score market is underrated on here. But maybe this is the wrong thread...
Report HCT153 September 26, 2011 10:26 PM BST
Interested that backing c/s is underrated. Could you expand on this?
Report Mums Irish Stew September 26, 2011 10:47 PM BST
HCT153, I play primarily as a trader/scalper. In my opinion there are excellent opportunities to dutch several correct score markets. Most with a view to trading. Some examples - I regularly back the 2-2 score which is normally generous odds. The price will come in on numerous occasions - if selections are suitable but of course you will get losing runs. One back can make up for this. if the score reaches 1-1 or 2-1/1-2 the 2-2 price will have shortened considerably. Another example - Italian leagues often have low scoring games - I regularly dutch the 0-0, 1-0, o-1 and 1-1 and often trade out in last 10 minutes if my bet is alive. Since accepting losing runs I have moved forward. Slowly oh so slowly but forward all the same.
Report aceporty September 27, 2011 3:32 PM BST
Most people miss the point with LTD, you can be successful, like anything else you have to put hardwork into identifying matches or belong to a service which has a proven track record. Maybe most people would not pick a Fulham game as a LTD candidate based on previous results. People will use various filters for game selection.
Report kenilworth September 27, 2011 7:54 PM BST
aceporty, hard work identifying matches ? the games with lowest
goal expectancy.
Report aceporty September 28, 2011 2:09 PM BST
Not sure what you mean kenilworth.
Report kenilworth September 28, 2011 2:32 PM BST
You don't know what goal expectancy means ?
Report aceporty September 28, 2011 7:21 PM BST
Not sure, do you mean crunching the stats to get an average.
Report kenilworth September 28, 2011 7:41 PM BST
Roughly speaking, yes. The lower the expectancy, the more likely lower
than average goals. The less likely we have goals , the more likely a 0-0,
at least in theory.
Report bob_terwilliger April 19, 2012 10:46 PM BST
Yeah come on contrarian give us a better strategy

still waiting.

what a chump
Report cpfc4me April 21, 2012 11:19 PM BST
A better strategy appears to be to take Ian Erskine's FTS selections, and BACK the draw after the first goal. With millions of followers all over the world trying to exit at this point, the value is in backing, and since tracking these selections (77), backing the draw pre-game has an ROI of 12.2% so you will miss the 0-0s, but usually get a better price on the draw. Early days, but the logic seems sound. Check out my blog for more details.
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com