General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
16 Jan 12
19:36
Joined:
Date Joined:
01 Feb 04
I'll have a go at one of his attempts. As far as I can remember he managed to at least double and almost triple his starting bank on this one before it failed.
Starting bank is 40 k. That money is put into 5 separate banks. Betting will mostly be done at odds asound 1.5 and I'm using a modified martingale system.
This challenge will at least go on until starting bank is doubled or if it's busted.
Starting bet size will increase roughly whenever 2 k is won.
I don't have many rules for what sports to bet on. Only one so far is that I may bet on horses with bank 1 , but no betting on horses with any of the other 4 banks.
Bank 1: 400 ,Bank 2: 1.2 k , Bank 3: 3.6 k , Bank 4: 10.8 k , Bank 5: 24 k
1. Manchester City to beat Wigan. 400 @ 1.42
Starting bank is 40 k. That money is put into 5 separate banks. Betting will mostly be done at odds asound 1.5 and I'm using a modified martingale system.
This challenge will at least go on until starting bank is doubled or if it's busted.
Starting bet size will increase roughly whenever 2 k is won.
I don't have many rules for what sports to bet on. Only one so far is that I may bet on horses with bank 1 , but no betting on horses with any of the other 4 banks.
Bank 1: 400 ,Bank 2: 1.2 k , Bank 3: 3.6 k , Bank 4: 10.8 k , Bank 5: 24 k
1. Manchester City to beat Wigan. 400 @ 1.42
Show More
He has admitted that he's picking random events but he still may be pitching offers at the favourable end of the spread to achieve value. Eddie is no guesser but this is clearly just a bit of fun for him (and us).
Th 5 bank system is now a little fecked up due to not being fully matched on bet 31 and because the follow up bet 31 B lost.
For the next bet, I've just used the amount needed to come out of this run with a small profit should it win and I would then be back to using bank 1. If it loses, I will have finished the first 3 banks and also used 2048 from bank 4.
Bank 1: 420 Bank 2: 1.26 k Bank 3: 3.78 k Bank 4: 11.34 k Bank 5: 25.2 k
24. Laid Scotland Street(08.22 Pinj) to win @ 2.87 for a liability of 420 Won
25. Simon to beat Benneteau inrunning. 420 @ 1.83 Lost
26. Laid the draw in Bani Suweif-AIAI(Egyption football) @ 3.18 for a liability of 1260 Won
27. Laid The Cockney Mackem(15.50 Taun) to place @ 2.8 for a liability of 420 Lost
28. Laid the draw in Panaitolikos-OFI(Greek football) @ 3.25 for a liability of 1260 Won
29. Reykjavik to beat Fram(Icelandic football). 420 @ 1.66 Lost
30. Sp Lisbon to beat Moreirense inrunning. 1260 @ 1.51 Lost
31. Miami Heat to beat LA Lakers. Not fully matched. 1830,25 @ 1.49 Won
31 B. Dolgopolov to beat Tomic inrunning. 2300 @ 1.42 Lost
32. B Munich to beat Mgladbach. 4400 @ 1.76
Banked : 1912.85
For the next bet, I've just used the amount needed to come out of this run with a small profit should it win and I would then be back to using bank 1. If it loses, I will have finished the first 3 banks and also used 2048 from bank 4.
Bank 1: 420 Bank 2: 1.26 k Bank 3: 3.78 k Bank 4: 11.34 k Bank 5: 25.2 k
24. Laid Scotland Street(08.22 Pinj) to win @ 2.87 for a liability of 420 Won
25. Simon to beat Benneteau inrunning. 420 @ 1.83 Lost
26. Laid the draw in Bani Suweif-AIAI(Egyption football) @ 3.18 for a liability of 1260 Won
27. Laid The Cockney Mackem(15.50 Taun) to place @ 2.8 for a liability of 420 Lost
28. Laid the draw in Panaitolikos-OFI(Greek football) @ 3.25 for a liability of 1260 Won
29. Reykjavik to beat Fram(Icelandic football). 420 @ 1.66 Lost
30. Sp Lisbon to beat Moreirense inrunning. 1260 @ 1.51 Lost
31. Miami Heat to beat LA Lakers. Not fully matched. 1830,25 @ 1.49 Won
31 B. Dolgopolov to beat Tomic inrunning. 2300 @ 1.42 Lost
32. B Munich to beat Mgladbach. 4400 @ 1.76
Banked : 1912.85
Northbouy, the reason I wasn't fully matched in bet 31 was because I took whatever was available @ 1.49 when I place my bet roughly 2 hours before the match started. The unmatched part was left there first in the queue and I thought it would be matched before the start as most money up to this point was matched @ 1.5.
I didn't checck the market again until 10 - 15 minutes prior to the off and found that only a small amount more had been matched. The spread was now 1.47 - 1.48. I moved the rest down to 1.48 , but prices dropped further down to 1.46 - 1.47. I then moved it down to 1.47, but prices kept on dropping. At one pont a few minutes before the off the spread was 1.44 - 1.45. I decided not to chase the price any further and hoped it would come back during the last minutes before the off. I think the spread was 1.45 - 1.46 at the suspend and I hadn't made it a keep bet.
As soon as the inrunning market opened it seemed to be plenty of money wanting to back, but much smaller amount wanting to lay.
I didn't have pictures from the match so I decided not to just put the money up and let some fast picture guy get all the value. So I just turned off the computer and went to bed.
I didn't checck the market again until 10 - 15 minutes prior to the off and found that only a small amount more had been matched. The spread was now 1.47 - 1.48. I moved the rest down to 1.48 , but prices dropped further down to 1.46 - 1.47. I then moved it down to 1.47, but prices kept on dropping. At one pont a few minutes before the off the spread was 1.44 - 1.45. I decided not to chase the price any further and hoped it would come back during the last minutes before the off. I think the spread was 1.45 - 1.46 at the suspend and I hadn't made it a keep bet.
As soon as the inrunning market opened it seemed to be plenty of money wanting to back, but much smaller amount wanting to lay.
I didn't have pictures from the match so I decided not to just put the money up and let some fast picture guy get all the value. So I just turned off the computer and went to bed.
fair enough, i am just busting your chops.
I want to see you make a success of this, but we all know that this staking plan has been a failure in the past. I am hoping you can make it work, but Schalke tried it numerous times and although probably didnt get value when he needed to, regardless of that, its not that uncommon to have 5 outs at these sorts of odds.
I want to see you make a success of this, but we all know that this staking plan has been a failure in the past. I am hoping you can make it work, but Schalke tried it numerous times and although probably didnt get value when he needed to, regardless of that, its not that uncommon to have 5 outs at these sorts of odds.
It is basically a gamble rather than a money making ploy whether taking value or not altough it stands a bit more chance of success if Eddie is getting value.
I know this could go bust at any point, but I actually did like it when Schalke tried this particular one a couple of years ago.
I never liked his 1.01, 1.02 , 1.03 ... challenges, but on this one he actually at least doubled and from memory almost tripled his money before it failed.
I know a few of the regulars on here will choke when they read this, but I actually belive a compulsive or recrational gambler has a better chance of making some real money from gambling using this or other similar systems rather than using one of the more acknowledged staking systems.
I never liked his 1.01, 1.02 , 1.03 ... challenges, but on this one he actually at least doubled and from memory almost tripled his money before it failed.
I know a few of the regulars on here will choke when they read this, but I actually belive a compulsive or recrational gambler has a better chance of making some real money from gambling using this or other similar systems rather than using one of the more acknowledged staking systems.
not many recreational gamblers I know have 40K set aside for 'fun'
On first thought I like the system, but if you really turn over a large volume you simple end up making more profit.
So the big disadvantages here are clearly:
- Only one bet at a time.
- Betsizes are smallish compared to your full bank.
- Looks easy to do in theory, but will require some huge decisions, because a big amount of the bank might be risked on small edges (or none at all).
If you really want to double your bank you probably end up doing it faster if you simply go with a more aggressive staking plan, like 3%-5% on < 1.5 shots, rather than this system.
Ok you need to be able to pick value, if you are not than this system might be better but not otherwise
So the big disadvantages here are clearly:
- Only one bet at a time.
- Betsizes are smallish compared to your full bank.
- Looks easy to do in theory, but will require some huge decisions, because a big amount of the bank might be risked on small edges (or none at all).
If you really want to double your bank you probably end up doing it faster if you simply go with a more aggressive staking plan, like 3%-5% on < 1.5 shots, rather than this system.
Ok you need to be able to pick value, if you are not than this system might be better but not otherwise
As a system it's rubbish, as a bit of fun it's great!
Northbouy, you can do it with whatever amount/bank you want. Schalcke o4 did this one with a starting bank of £ 40 ! He had to place most of his bets with online bookmakers though as most of his bets were under the minimum £ 2 on here.
nooave1 and catflaqpo, I never said this was a system for anyone thinking or knowing they have an edge.
I just think it's something compulsive and recrational gamblers could use to increase their chances of making money from gambling.
nooave1 and catflaqpo, I never said this was a system for anyone thinking or knowing they have an edge.
I just think it's something compulsive and recrational gamblers could use to increase their chances of making money from gambling.
well Schalke was right about one thing, with a system like this results matter, and at the moment you ain't getting results.
the strange thing is, that you were still in profit prior to the last bet you had, and now you are in deficit.
the strange thing is, that you were still in profit prior to the last bet you had, and now you are in deficit.
and another thing.... you were virtually level before your last bet, but you have busted 2 banks. This means you now have 40K to use on your last 3 banks. When you started out you had 40K to use on 5 banks. Your odds of success from this point are quite reduced with just 3 banks rather than 5, with this suicidal staking, but you already know that. good luck with your bank 4.
Mr Martin Gale has left the building. (No shirt on his back, and his pockets inside out.)
I'm sure he will be back. Solid bet may be Wozniacki TB Jankovic at 1.5~?
I've started backing Chelsea inrunning. 2 k so far.
Why weren't these bets listed before you placed them?
Unfortunately in these kinds of threads, it's always the way as soon as things turn tits up.
Unfortunately in these kinds of threads, it's always the way as soon as things turn tits up.
Bank 1: 420 Bank 2: 1.26 k Bank 3: 3.78 k Bank 4: 11.34 k Bank 5: 25.2 k
24. Laid Scotland Street(08.22 Pinj) to win @ 2.87 for a liability of 420 Won
25. Simon to beat Benneteau inrunning. 420 @ 1.83 Lost
26. Laid the draw in Bani Suweif-AIAI(Egyption football) @ 3.18 for a liability of 1260 Won
27. Laid The Cockney Mackem(15.50 Taun) to place @ 2.8 for a liability of 420 Lost
28. Laid the draw in Panaitolikos-OFI(Greek football) @ 3.25 for a liability of 1260 Won
29. Reykjavik to beat Fram(Icelandic football). 420 @ 1.66 Lost
30. Sp Lisbon to beat Moreirense inrunning. 1260 @ 1.51 Lost
31. Miami Heat to beat LA Lakers. Not fully matched. 1830,25 @ 1.49 Won
31 B. Dolgopolov to beat Tomic inrunning. 2300 @ 1.42 Lost
32. B Munich to beat Mgladbach. 4400 @ 1.76 Lost
33. Chelse to beat Norwich inrunning. 10500 @ 1.76
Banked : 1912.85
24. Laid Scotland Street(08.22 Pinj) to win @ 2.87 for a liability of 420 Won
25. Simon to beat Benneteau inrunning. 420 @ 1.83 Lost
26. Laid the draw in Bani Suweif-AIAI(Egyption football) @ 3.18 for a liability of 1260 Won
27. Laid The Cockney Mackem(15.50 Taun) to place @ 2.8 for a liability of 420 Lost
28. Laid the draw in Panaitolikos-OFI(Greek football) @ 3.25 for a liability of 1260 Won
29. Reykjavik to beat Fram(Icelandic football). 420 @ 1.66 Lost
30. Sp Lisbon to beat Moreirense inrunning. 1260 @ 1.51 Lost
31. Miami Heat to beat LA Lakers. Not fully matched. 1830,25 @ 1.49 Won
31 B. Dolgopolov to beat Tomic inrunning. 2300 @ 1.42 Lost
32. B Munich to beat Mgladbach. 4400 @ 1.76 Lost
33. Chelse to beat Norwich inrunning. 10500 @ 1.76
Banked : 1912.85
Eddie are you actually staking these amounts?.. I thought it was a bit of fun.
Weren't you worried that Chelsea came in pre off and were the same price 20minutes in as at the start? Seems poor value to me?
I knew you were a big gambler Eddie but I didn't know you'd donate 40k for something like this.What is 40k as a % of your bank..?
You can't win unless you're getting value, no matter how you stake.
Yeah but you never truly know if you're getting value. It does matter how you stake because you might get value but go bust from overstaking before you see your money.
You know you're getting value if you can win at level stakes over a decent set of bets.
It matters how you stake of course, but it doesn't matter if you aren't getting value.
Sooner or later you have to go bust.
It matters how you stake of course, but it doesn't matter if you aren't getting value.
Sooner or later you have to go bust.
Bank 1: 420 Bank 2: 1.26 k Bank 3: 3.78 k Bank 4: 11.34 k Bank 5: 25.2 k
24. Laid Scotland Street(08.22 Pinj) to win @ 2.87 for a liability of 420 Won
25. Simon to beat Benneteau inrunning. 420 @ 1.83 Lost
26. Laid the draw in Bani Suweif-AIAI(Egyption football) @ 3.18 for a liability of 1260 Won
27. Laid The Cockney Mackem(15.50 Taun) to place @ 2.8 for a liability of 420 Lost
28. Laid the draw in Panaitolikos-OFI(Greek football) @ 3.25 for a liability of 1260 Won
29. Reykjavik to beat Fram(Icelandic football). 420 @ 1.66 Lost
30. Sp Lisbon to beat Moreirense inrunning. 1260 @ 1.51 Lost
31. Miami Heat to beat LA Lakers. Not fully matched. 1830,25 @ 1.49 Won
31 B. Dolgopolov to beat Tomic inrunning. 2300 @ 1.42 Lost
32. B Munich to beat Mgladbach. 4400 @ 1.76 Lost
33. Chelse to beat Norwich inrunning. 10500 @ 1.76 Lost
34. Everton to beat Blackburn. 25900 @ 1.66
Banked : 1912.85
Every last penny is now on, so bank busted unless Everton win. Even if Everton wins, this last run will show a small loss. iIf Everton win I will take whatever needede from the banked amount to cover that small loss.
24. Laid Scotland Street(08.22 Pinj) to win @ 2.87 for a liability of 420 Won
25. Simon to beat Benneteau inrunning. 420 @ 1.83 Lost
26. Laid the draw in Bani Suweif-AIAI(Egyption football) @ 3.18 for a liability of 1260 Won
27. Laid The Cockney Mackem(15.50 Taun) to place @ 2.8 for a liability of 420 Lost
28. Laid the draw in Panaitolikos-OFI(Greek football) @ 3.25 for a liability of 1260 Won
29. Reykjavik to beat Fram(Icelandic football). 420 @ 1.66 Lost
30. Sp Lisbon to beat Moreirense inrunning. 1260 @ 1.51 Lost
31. Miami Heat to beat LA Lakers. Not fully matched. 1830,25 @ 1.49 Won
31 B. Dolgopolov to beat Tomic inrunning. 2300 @ 1.42 Lost
32. B Munich to beat Mgladbach. 4400 @ 1.76 Lost
33. Chelse to beat Norwich inrunning. 10500 @ 1.76 Lost
34. Everton to beat Blackburn. 25900 @ 1.66
Banked : 1912.85
Every last penny is now on, so bank busted unless Everton win. Even if Everton wins, this last run will show a small loss. iIf Everton win I will take whatever needede from the banked amount to cover that small loss.
TheInvestor2, I did them inrunning because I tried to back them at 1.66 pre off, but as you said, they came in and I missed out. I was a bit pi$$ed off at that time as I could have taken all I wanted @ 1.65.
North you clearly don't know who Eddie is so give it a rest maybe. If he says he is doing them, he is.
Thanks catflopo too. 1-0 now, so looking better..
CrowsEye, I take it that's not your only forum name ?
It more likely that Eddie plays monopoly with real money than pretend martingale
It is at the moment. Some money was laundered through my old account and had to start fresh.
I'm not someone you'd remember likely, I just know you from the golf forum.
I'm not someone you'd remember likely, I just know you from the golf forum.
why not have a 6th bank with 60K in it then just in case.
Because it was a 40 k doubling bank challenge, not a 100 k one.
Northbouy, you can repeat that as many times as you will, you will still be wrong. I can assure you that the money is on, but at this point would it really matter if they are or not ? Doesn't really make any difference for the challenge at this point.
You seem to care a lot for something you're convinced isn't real.
Not sure this will convince you, but it might :
21-Jan-2012 Fixtures 21 January / Norwich v Chelsea / Match Odds 3,093 69,671
20-Jan-2012 Fixtures 20 January / Mgladbach v B Munich / Match Odds 1,296 66,578
20-Jan-2012 Third Round Matches / Dolgopolov v Tomic / Match Odds 677 65,282
20-Jan-2012 Fixtures 19 January / LA Lakers @ Miami / Match Odds 263 64,605
19-Jan-2012 Fixtures 19 January / Sp Lisbon v Moreirense / Match Odds 370 64,342
19-Jan-2012 Fixtures 19 January / KR Reykjavik v Fram / Match Odds 123 63,972
19-Jan-2012 Fixtures 19 January / Panaitolikos v OFI / Match Odds 164 63,849
19-Jan-2012 GB / Taun 19th Jan / 16:50 To Be Placed 123 63,685
19-Jan-2012 Fixtures 19 January / Bani Suweif v Al Ittihad Al Iskandary / Match Odds 169 63,562
19-Jan-2012 Second Round Matches / Simon v Benneteau / Match Odds 123 63,393
19-Jan-2012 AUS / Pinj (AUS) 19th Jan / 09:22 R6 2000m CL1 65 63,270
19-Jan-2012 AUS / Seym (AUS) 19th Jan / 09:10 To Be Placed 61 63,205
19-Jan-2012 AUS / Pinj (AUS) 19th Jan / 08:45 R5 1000m Hcap 46 63,144
19-Jan-2012 AUS / Seym (AUS) 19th Jan / 08:37 R7 1600m Hcap 36 63,098
19-Jan-2012 Fixtures 18 January / Buffalo @ Chicago / Money Line (Inc. OT) 177 63,062
18-Jan-2012 Fixtures 18 January / Real Madrid v Barcelona / Match Odds 123 62,885
18-Jan-2012 Fixtures 18 January / AC Milan v Novara / Half Time 77 62,762
18-Jan-2012 Fixtures 18 January / Braga v Penafiel / Half Time/Full Time 93 62,685
18-Jan-2012 Fixtures 18 January / Bahrain v Sweden / Match Odds 175 62,592
18-Jan-2012 GB / Sthl 18th Jan / 16:20 To Be Placed 117 62,417
18-Jan-2012 GB / Newb 18th Jan / 16:10 To Be Placed 30 62,300
18-Jan-2012 GB / Sthl 18th Jan / 15:50 To Be Placed 77 62,270
18-Jan-2012 GB / Newb 18th Jan / 15:35 To Be Placed 61 62,193
18-Jan-2012 GB / Ling 18th Jan / 15:25 To Be Placed 65 62,132
18-Jan-2012 GB / Newb 18th Jan / 15:05 2m3f Nov Hrd 35 62,067
18-Jan-2012 Fixtures 18 January / Thailand v Norway / Match Odds 180 62,032
18-Jan-2012 Fixtures 18 January / Vysocina Jihlava v Sigma Olomouc / Match Odds 117 61,852
18-Jan-2012 Second Round Matches / Querrey v Tomic / Match Odds 44 61,735
18-Jan-2012 Fixtures 17 January / Calgary @ San Jose / Money Line (Inc. OT) 62 61,691
17-Jan-2012 Fixtures 17 January / Tranmere v Rochdale / Match Odds 52 61,629
17-Jan-2012 Fixtures 17 January / Millwall v Dag and Red / Match Odds 552 61,577
17-Jan-2012 Fixtures 17 January / Xanthi v Panserraikos / Match Odds 350 61,025
17-Jan-2012 First Round Matches / Garcia Lopez v Kukushkin / Match Odds 116 60,675
16-Jan-2012 Fixtures 16 January / Wigan v Man City / Match Odds 48 60,559
21-Jan-2012 Fixtures 21 January / Norwich v Chelsea / Match Odds 3,093 69,671
20-Jan-2012 Fixtures 20 January / Mgladbach v B Munich / Match Odds 1,296 66,578
20-Jan-2012 Third Round Matches / Dolgopolov v Tomic / Match Odds 677 65,282
20-Jan-2012 Fixtures 19 January / LA Lakers @ Miami / Match Odds 263 64,605
19-Jan-2012 Fixtures 19 January / Sp Lisbon v Moreirense / Match Odds 370 64,342
19-Jan-2012 Fixtures 19 January / KR Reykjavik v Fram / Match Odds 123 63,972
19-Jan-2012 Fixtures 19 January / Panaitolikos v OFI / Match Odds 164 63,849
19-Jan-2012 GB / Taun 19th Jan / 16:50 To Be Placed 123 63,685
19-Jan-2012 Fixtures 19 January / Bani Suweif v Al Ittihad Al Iskandary / Match Odds 169 63,562
19-Jan-2012 Second Round Matches / Simon v Benneteau / Match Odds 123 63,393
19-Jan-2012 AUS / Pinj (AUS) 19th Jan / 09:22 R6 2000m CL1 65 63,270
19-Jan-2012 AUS / Seym (AUS) 19th Jan / 09:10 To Be Placed 61 63,205
19-Jan-2012 AUS / Pinj (AUS) 19th Jan / 08:45 R5 1000m Hcap 46 63,144
19-Jan-2012 AUS / Seym (AUS) 19th Jan / 08:37 R7 1600m Hcap 36 63,098
19-Jan-2012 Fixtures 18 January / Buffalo @ Chicago / Money Line (Inc. OT) 177 63,062
18-Jan-2012 Fixtures 18 January / Real Madrid v Barcelona / Match Odds 123 62,885
18-Jan-2012 Fixtures 18 January / AC Milan v Novara / Half Time 77 62,762
18-Jan-2012 Fixtures 18 January / Braga v Penafiel / Half Time/Full Time 93 62,685
18-Jan-2012 Fixtures 18 January / Bahrain v Sweden / Match Odds 175 62,592
18-Jan-2012 GB / Sthl 18th Jan / 16:20 To Be Placed 117 62,417
18-Jan-2012 GB / Newb 18th Jan / 16:10 To Be Placed 30 62,300
18-Jan-2012 GB / Sthl 18th Jan / 15:50 To Be Placed 77 62,270
18-Jan-2012 GB / Newb 18th Jan / 15:35 To Be Placed 61 62,193
18-Jan-2012 GB / Ling 18th Jan / 15:25 To Be Placed 65 62,132
18-Jan-2012 GB / Newb 18th Jan / 15:05 2m3f Nov Hrd 35 62,067
18-Jan-2012 Fixtures 18 January / Thailand v Norway / Match Odds 180 62,032
18-Jan-2012 Fixtures 18 January / Vysocina Jihlava v Sigma Olomouc / Match Odds 117 61,852
18-Jan-2012 Second Round Matches / Querrey v Tomic / Match Odds 44 61,735
18-Jan-2012 Fixtures 17 January / Calgary @ San Jose / Money Line (Inc. OT) 62 61,691
17-Jan-2012 Fixtures 17 January / Tranmere v Rochdale / Match Odds 52 61,629
17-Jan-2012 Fixtures 17 January / Millwall v Dag and Red / Match Odds 552 61,577
17-Jan-2012 Fixtures 17 January / Xanthi v Panserraikos / Match Odds 350 61,025
17-Jan-2012 First Round Matches / Garcia Lopez v Kukushkin / Match Odds 116 60,675
16-Jan-2012 Fixtures 16 January / Wigan v Man City / Match Odds 48 60,559
That's the Betfair points statement. Possible to fake of course, but would involve a lot of work.
And before anyoine spots the fault. My account is neitherin £ nor € or $, so I simplified the maths a little bit when converting to £.
So all points gained will show as roughly 7.5 % more than they should be. This also means the challenge is closer to a 43 k rather than the 40 k challenge.
If Everton go on to win, I will still keep numbers as it was a 40 k one though.
And before anyoine spots the fault. My account is neitherin £ nor € or $, so I simplified the maths a little bit when converting to £.
So all points gained will show as roughly 7.5 % more than they should be. This also means the challenge is closer to a 43 k rather than the 40 k challenge.
If Everton go on to win, I will still keep numbers as it was a 40 k one though.
not even a screen shot, and what more the aussie wallet is mixed in, like it is for all of us. 
ok so its the point statement, even easier to doctor up.
Don't bite Eddie, once people start asking for proof theyre never satisfied. Poor u25k made a video of his p/l and he was accused of faking that!
has this ever happened before?
Everton 1 - 1 Blackburn R.
Everton 1 - 1 Blackburn R.
I wasn't going to bother much more with him and now it looks like this thread is close to the end anyway.
Need a goal or this thread will be 40k done.
Gl Eddie, hope it comes in for you, if only to prove the doubters/negferrets wrong ;-).
Gl Eddie, hope it comes in for you, if only to prove the doubters/negferrets wrong ;-).
yep, you completed a "Schalke" challenge. they all end like this.
Thread over, money done.
TBF, OP never really pretended this wasn't a high-risk strategy, but this should serve as a salvo to anyone who still believes in the Martingale system (or any of its variants).
TBF, OP never really pretended this wasn't a high-risk strategy, but this should serve as a salvo to anyone who still believes in the Martingale system (or any of its variants).
tick tock, tick tock, tick tock..........
BOOM
This thread has proved a multitude.
You cannot expect to win blindly getting poor value, no matter how you stake.
Eddie has bad luck.
Eddie has taken off at the jump and landed face down in the snow.
Eddie is either full of it or the bets are real.
If he's full of it, then that's nothing new.
If the bets are real he's the biggest mug punter of all time.
I trust you'll stop trolling me now eddie, as it's all been proven beyond doubt.
BOOM
This thread has proved a multitude.
You cannot expect to win blindly getting poor value, no matter how you stake.
Eddie has bad luck.
Eddie has taken off at the jump and landed face down in the snow.
Eddie is either full of it or the bets are real.
If he's full of it, then that's nothing new.
If the bets are real he's the biggest mug punter of all time.
I trust you'll stop trolling me now eddie, as it's all been proven beyond doubt.
Bto, Eddie is a good guy and knew what he was getting into. At no point was he advocating the use of martingale and the threads failure is no indication of whether he was getting value or not, it didn't get far enough for Lori to jump in with his spreadsheet.
Well... that didn't last long. A shame it busted during the first week before it had time to really get interesting.
BTO, I think you are the only one on this forum that has managed to upset me so much that I have bothered to say on this forum what I think of you.
You may be the nicest guy on earth in real life for what I know, but you have a way of writing on this forum that make you come out as a condescending pr!ck. It always seems you try to ridicule anyone who disagree with you.
At least you used to be like this. You haven't posted much lately and from the little I've seen, you seem to have toned down a little.
BTO, I think you are the only one on this forum that has managed to upset me so much that I have bothered to say on this forum what I think of you.
You may be the nicest guy on earth in real life for what I know, but you have a way of writing on this forum that make you come out as a condescending pr!ck. It always seems you try to ridicule anyone who disagree with you.
At least you used to be like this. You haven't posted much lately and from the little I've seen, you seem to have toned down a little.
Bank 1: 0 Bank 2: 0 Bank 3: 0 Bank 4: 0 Bank 5: 0
24. Laid Scotland Street(08.22 Pinj) to win @ 2.87 for a liability of 420 Won
25. Simon to beat Benneteau inrunning. 420 @ 1.83 Lost
26. Laid the draw in Bani Suweif-AIAI(Egyption football) @ 3.18 for a liability of 1260 Won
27. Laid The Cockney Mackem(15.50 Taun) to place @ 2.8 for a liability of 420 Lost
28. Laid the draw in Panaitolikos-OFI(Greek football) @ 3.25 for a liability of 1260 Won
29. Reykjavik to beat Fram(Icelandic football). 420 @ 1.66 Lost
30. Sp Lisbon to beat Moreirense inrunning. 1260 @ 1.51 Lost
31. Miami Heat to beat LA Lakers. Not fully matched. 1830,25 @ 1.49 Won
31 B. Dolgopolov to beat Tomic inrunning. 2300 @ 1.42 Lost
32. B Munich to beat Mgladbach. 4400 @ 1.76 Lost
33. Chelse to beat Norwich inrunning. 10500 @ 1.76 Lost
34. Everton to beat Blackburn. 25900 @ 1.66 Lost
Banked : 0
24. Laid Scotland Street(08.22 Pinj) to win @ 2.87 for a liability of 420 Won
25. Simon to beat Benneteau inrunning. 420 @ 1.83 Lost
26. Laid the draw in Bani Suweif-AIAI(Egyption football) @ 3.18 for a liability of 1260 Won
27. Laid The Cockney Mackem(15.50 Taun) to place @ 2.8 for a liability of 420 Lost
28. Laid the draw in Panaitolikos-OFI(Greek football) @ 3.25 for a liability of 1260 Won
29. Reykjavik to beat Fram(Icelandic football). 420 @ 1.66 Lost
30. Sp Lisbon to beat Moreirense inrunning. 1260 @ 1.51 Lost
31. Miami Heat to beat LA Lakers. Not fully matched. 1830,25 @ 1.49 Won
31 B. Dolgopolov to beat Tomic inrunning. 2300 @ 1.42 Lost
32. B Munich to beat Mgladbach. 4400 @ 1.76 Lost
33. Chelse to beat Norwich inrunning. 10500 @ 1.76 Lost
34. Everton to beat Blackburn. 25900 @ 1.66 Lost
Banked : 0
geebus - I'd say bad luck Eddie but I'm guessing you were kind of expecting it to happen, it always did in the past with Schalke
I'd love to see you have a crack at his $1.01 - $1.05 ones and try and hit the 200 winners, would be fascinating with a decent starting bank
Thanks for the entertainment
I'd love to see you have a crack at his $1.01 - $1.05 ones and try and hit the 200 winners, would be fascinating with a decent starting bank
Thanks for the entertainment
Hard luck Eddie, the inevitable happened sooner rather than later this time round.
An update to the results staking 10% of the starting bank to level stakes (was +8k at bet 19) shows a loss of -10k exactly (allowing for 3% comm).
An update to the results staking 10% of the starting bank to level stakes (was +8k at bet 19) shows a loss of -10k exactly (allowing for 3% comm).
That's my point, he would have had 30k left in the bank and his next five bets could have won.
Or the next five bets could lose and he'd still have half his bank left.
Eddie, no good mate.
I may infuriate you, but you infuriate me as well.
I have posted sometimes that may seem condescending, but that's purely you're (and possibly others) point of view.
I don't suffer fools, and that's the way I am.
You may not be aware of the many people I've helped by PM.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I'm always willing to consider their opinion. But when they insist they are right and I know better, either because I worked in the sector at the top level, or know the data backwards, then I lose patience totally.
Basically my frustration comes from those that think they know, rather than those that know. Using the argument that the majority knows better, has proved to be flawed time and time again.
There's a lot of areas I don't know, but I don't argue to death trying to discredit the poster, just because I'm in the majority because I don't know better.
I don't ridicule everyone who disagrees with me, I ridicule those that pretend to know better, but they don't.
Putting all your money in one institution is sheer stupidity with what we know in this day and age. In fact it was the same 40 years ago.
Whether it's fraud, insolvency or collapse, it doesn't matter, it's like martingale, sooner or later you'll get screwed.
You see all these retirees and mum and dad investors crying because they lost their assets or retirement funds, and while I feel sorry for them, extremely sorry, it was always going to happen at some point, because they know no better.
Or the next five bets could lose and he'd still have half his bank left.
Eddie, no good mate.
I may infuriate you, but you infuriate me as well.
I have posted sometimes that may seem condescending, but that's purely you're (and possibly others) point of view.
I don't suffer fools, and that's the way I am.
You may not be aware of the many people I've helped by PM.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I'm always willing to consider their opinion. But when they insist they are right and I know better, either because I worked in the sector at the top level, or know the data backwards, then I lose patience totally.
Basically my frustration comes from those that think they know, rather than those that know. Using the argument that the majority knows better, has proved to be flawed time and time again.
There's a lot of areas I don't know, but I don't argue to death trying to discredit the poster, just because I'm in the majority because I don't know better.
I don't ridicule everyone who disagrees with me, I ridicule those that pretend to know better, but they don't.
Putting all your money in one institution is sheer stupidity with what we know in this day and age. In fact it was the same 40 years ago.
Whether it's fraud, insolvency or collapse, it doesn't matter, it's like martingale, sooner or later you'll get screwed.
You see all these retirees and mum and dad investors crying because they lost their assets or retirement funds, and while I feel sorry for them, extremely sorry, it was always going to happen at some point, because they know no better.
wombleoz, you certainly wont see me doing one of those 1.01 , 1.02 ... challenges. Anyone doing those(particulary 1.01) with large amounts will imo very often get really bad value for their money.
BTO, I don't doubt you are an intelligent man and are knowledgable in many areas, but that doesn't mean you always are right. What's right for you may be wrong for someone else.
I admit I want more security on this site, but I have no idea what would be the best thing to implement. You disagree and argue your case, but I still want more security here.
What really annoyd me was when you were posting things like :
If you don't know how to do this, maybe this site isn't the place for you ?
I can't remember for sure what this was about, but I think you posted this when there was someone who didn't know or understand how one could avoid paying Premium Charge.
You also implied that anyone choosing to have a large bank on here were stupid and had only themselves to blame if they were hacked and lost large amounts do to this.
Just because you don't need a large bank to work on here, there are plenty of others that do due to their strategies on here.
It's also a bit annoying when you are argueing with someone here and keep saying facts about things that clearly isn't facts.
Like this one, you didn't state fact here, but you twist the truth so that you will sound more shrewd/correct.
You see all these retirees and mum and dad investors crying because they lost their assets or retirement funds, and while I feel sorry for them, extremely sorry, it was always going to happen at some point, because they know no better.
It wasn't always going to happen and that's a fact.
I'm not looking for an ongoing discussion here. I just wanted to let you know why you annoyed me. Notice the past tense here
BTO, I don't doubt you are an intelligent man and are knowledgable in many areas, but that doesn't mean you always are right. What's right for you may be wrong for someone else.
I admit I want more security on this site, but I have no idea what would be the best thing to implement. You disagree and argue your case, but I still want more security here.
What really annoyd me was when you were posting things like :
If you don't know how to do this, maybe this site isn't the place for you ?
I can't remember for sure what this was about, but I think you posted this when there was someone who didn't know or understand how one could avoid paying Premium Charge.
You also implied that anyone choosing to have a large bank on here were stupid and had only themselves to blame if they were hacked and lost large amounts do to this.
Just because you don't need a large bank to work on here, there are plenty of others that do due to their strategies on here.
It's also a bit annoying when you are argueing with someone here and keep saying facts about things that clearly isn't facts.
Like this one, you didn't state fact here, but you twist the truth so that you will sound more shrewd/correct.
You see all these retirees and mum and dad investors crying because they lost their assets or retirement funds, and while I feel sorry for them, extremely sorry, it was always going to happen at some point, because they know no better.
It wasn't always going to happen and that's a fact.
I'm not looking for an ongoing discussion here. I just wanted to let you know why you annoyed me. Notice the past tense here
Eddie, I'm not particularly more intelligent than the next man, but I kind of have a knack of picking up things quickly and I have street smarts. However, there are plenty of smarter people than I. There are a lot of more intelligent people, but intelligence doesn't translate to wisdom in all cases.
I am the first to admit I'm not always right and acknowledge when I've learnt something from someone else.
When I have a subject pop up that I have vast experience in and have dealt with or have statistical evidence to support my claims, I can't abide someone telling me I don't know what I'm talking about.
That's when my posts seem antsy.
I'm not adverse to more security, but some of the suggestions will cause more problems than solve.
There should be a secondary account information password, but that's not going to make it more secure for those who habitually leave the front door open.
If you don't know how to do this, maybe this site isn't the place for you ?
This statement is a bit out of context, I believe it was regarding finding a breakeven strategy to churn and reduce premium charges from trading.
My contention was that if you can't find anything, anything at all that's breakeven on a site where you generally get much better odds, how can you hope to make a profit?
Unless you're a trader, you may as well pack up now and save yourself the angst and charges.
I don't think that's harsh, it's reality.
Again, what I implied was that should you choose to put all your eggs in one basket, it's extremely bad practice and frought with danger. Why can't you transfer it as needed?
I've been around security with banks and other financial institutions for a very long time, and I reckon I've seen more horrific things happen than will ever be publicised.
Basically it's a constant battle that is always playing catchup and can never be won.
And what may seem silly to you and others, is a precedent that many large organistations and investors have taken on board.
Diversity equals security.
And finally:
You see all these retirees and mum and dad investors crying because they lost their assets or retirement funds, and while I feel sorry for them, extremely sorry, it was always going to happen at some point, because they know no better.
It wasn't always going to happen and that's a fact.
No it may not have happened to them, they may have scraped through by pure luck.
But it was always going to happen to a percentage of the population who put all or most of their eggs in one basket.
I know a radioligist who retired and had all his Super in the stockmarket. The poor bloke had to go out to work again after two years in retirement.
Unfortunately there are many more like him.
Some who were due to retire in a year, and have to concede they'll have to work at least another five years.
So many things can attack you, hackers, scammers, stockmarket crashes, corporate corruption etc etc. It seems in this day and age only a few can see the implications.
Personally I would never leave all my money in any place, even a large proportion of it. I was trying to make people aware that it really is gambling if you choose to do this.
I hope it doesn't happen, but just about everyone will be or know of a victim in their lifetime.
Most things are not publicised, every single day thousands of people get hacked, scammed, or become general victims.
More security sure, if that makes you feel safe, but it won't make you completely safe and that's the bottom line.
I am the first to admit I'm not always right and acknowledge when I've learnt something from someone else.
When I have a subject pop up that I have vast experience in and have dealt with or have statistical evidence to support my claims, I can't abide someone telling me I don't know what I'm talking about.
That's when my posts seem antsy.
I'm not adverse to more security, but some of the suggestions will cause more problems than solve.
There should be a secondary account information password, but that's not going to make it more secure for those who habitually leave the front door open.
If you don't know how to do this, maybe this site isn't the place for you ?
This statement is a bit out of context, I believe it was regarding finding a breakeven strategy to churn and reduce premium charges from trading.
My contention was that if you can't find anything, anything at all that's breakeven on a site where you generally get much better odds, how can you hope to make a profit?
Unless you're a trader, you may as well pack up now and save yourself the angst and charges.
I don't think that's harsh, it's reality.
Again, what I implied was that should you choose to put all your eggs in one basket, it's extremely bad practice and frought with danger. Why can't you transfer it as needed?
I've been around security with banks and other financial institutions for a very long time, and I reckon I've seen more horrific things happen than will ever be publicised.
Basically it's a constant battle that is always playing catchup and can never be won.
And what may seem silly to you and others, is a precedent that many large organistations and investors have taken on board.
Diversity equals security.
And finally:
You see all these retirees and mum and dad investors crying because they lost their assets or retirement funds, and while I feel sorry for them, extremely sorry, it was always going to happen at some point, because they know no better.
It wasn't always going to happen and that's a fact.
No it may not have happened to them, they may have scraped through by pure luck.
But it was always going to happen to a percentage of the population who put all or most of their eggs in one basket.
I know a radioligist who retired and had all his Super in the stockmarket. The poor bloke had to go out to work again after two years in retirement.
Unfortunately there are many more like him.
Some who were due to retire in a year, and have to concede they'll have to work at least another five years.
So many things can attack you, hackers, scammers, stockmarket crashes, corporate corruption etc etc. It seems in this day and age only a few can see the implications.
Personally I would never leave all my money in any place, even a large proportion of it. I was trying to make people aware that it really is gambling if you choose to do this.
I hope it doesn't happen, but just about everyone will be or know of a victim in their lifetime.
Most things are not publicised, every single day thousands of people get hacked, scammed, or become general victims.
More security sure, if that makes you feel safe, but it won't make you completely safe and that's the bottom line.
More security sure, if that makes you feel safe, but it won't make you completely safe and that's the bottom line
I think you should post this on the security thread because it is different from the view that you seem to hold there.
You're so right about the eggs in one basket, I fell foul of this when the pound devalued - all my savings were in steering :(. Not any more!
I think you should post this on the security thread because it is different from the view that you seem to hold there.
You're so right about the eggs in one basket, I fell foul of this when the pound devalued - all my savings were in steering :(. Not any more!
No different Cat.
I accept some people want it, but my point of view is the same.
I don't support gadgets, dongles or other devices.
I accept some people want it, but my point of view is the same.
I don't support gadgets, dongles or other devices.
Yes but you come across as almost ridiculing any attempt to increase security.
Because I believe that the majority have personal security problems that Betfair security won't address.
This belief is based on revelations from posts made.
I also believe that people will think the additional security protects them totally.
Recent hacking posts further add to my beliefs.
But I'm weighing out of it now, as whatever I say makes no diffence.
This belief is based on revelations from posts made.
I also believe that people will think the additional security protects them totally.
Recent hacking posts further add to my beliefs.
But I'm weighing out of it now, as whatever I say makes no diffence.
Because I believe that the majority have personal security problems that Betfair security won't address.
This belief is based on revelations from posts made.
I also believe that people will think the additional security protects them totally.
Recent hacking posts further add to my beliefs.
But I'm weighing out of it now, as whatever I say makes no difference.
This belief is based on revelations from posts made.
I also believe that people will think the additional security protects them totally.
Recent hacking posts further add to my beliefs.
But I'm weighing out of it now, as whatever I say makes no difference.
interesting Eddie - are you saying $1.01 - $1.05 is never value??? Schalke didn't care about value at all and still managed to hit several winners in a row and get into some good positions - if there was a bit more selectiveness about the selections, and a decent starting bank, it could work out. mind you, the return probably doesn't justify the risk
Northbouy, probably better to let people just think you are stupid, rather than keep bringing this to the top to confirm it.
wombleoz, I didn't pay much attention to Schalkes 1.01 , 1.02 .... threads, but it will be much easier to possibly get value with small amounts rather than large ones.
The reason for this is that most of these prices will be available close to the end of events like football matches.
If you want to get large amounts on you need to be among the first backer at these prices, while you can afford to waite a little longer if you are putting on small amounts.
There's a big difference in betting at, let's say 1.02, in a football match when there's 2 minutes left rather than do it when it's only one minute left.
The reason for this is that most of these prices will be available close to the end of events like football matches.
If you want to get large amounts on you need to be among the first backer at these prices, while you can afford to waite a little longer if you are putting on small amounts.
There's a big difference in betting at, let's say 1.02, in a football match when there's 2 minutes left rather than do it when it's only one minute left.
All good Eddie - I don't watch the in-play markets that closely because we can't bet online from over here 
I get the feeling that nobody on this thread has any money or any life.
Is it possible to convert 10 of your British Pounds Sterling into an astronomical figure. I would like to see someevidence.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539