Forums
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Mersontheperson
03 Apr 13 14:24
Joined:
Date Joined: 08 Sep 05
| Topic/replies: 2,167 | Blogger: Mersontheperson's blog
I have spent two days collating all the entries for the Masters, the current available odds and created a unique algorithm to calculate which golfer suggests the best proposition for a value punter.

I stress that this is not a list of the most likely to win, but the golfer who by a likelihood of winning and the return for such a win. In this modern day of Tiger and Phil, people sometimes forget that we have had many surprise winners of the Masters, and the tournament hasn't even been played 80 times yet. With a field of less than a hundred and with majors having a record of 11 out of the last 16 being first time winners, a sensible bet is too look at longer odds.

The top 20 best value bets are therefore:

Hiroyuki Fujita
David Lynn
Paul Lawrie
Thaworn Wiratchant
Jamie Donaldson
Carl Pettersson 
Gonzalo Fdez-Castano
Scott Piercy    
John Senden    
Michael Thompson
Marc Leishman   
Branden Grace
David Toms   
Thomas Bjorn   
Ted Potter Jr   
Kevin Na
Russel Henly
Francesco Molinari,
DA Points   
Ben Curtis
Brian Gay   

For those who prefer to sacrifice value for more realistic chance of winning, then the following give the best chance :
 Bo Van Pelt
 Ernie Els
 Richard Sterne 
 Zach Johnson 
 Steve Stricker

Of these, only Steve Stricker has odds shorter than the number in the field. 

Don't thank me all at once, please.
Pause Switch to Standard View Masters Value Comparison Tool
Show More
Loading...
Report Eddie the eagle April 3, 2013 2:31 PM BST
Thank you...
Report DONEMYLOT April 3, 2013 2:39 PM BST
Cheers.

I would say that if they played this 100000 times Ted Potter would not win.

Again, no thanks required
Report Mersontheperson April 3, 2013 2:53 PM BST
They said the same thing at the Greenbrier Classic but he did win.

I will explain to DONEMYLOT (and to others who can't read very well or for who English is a second or third language) Ted Potter Jr doesn't have to win for this bet to be good value. If at any point in the first two rounds he hits a few birdies or gets in the top 10, his odds will drop to under 200-1, which would be a better return than betting on Tiger to WIN from the outset and him actually winning.

If you want me to find out who is most likely to win, I think that even you could work that out, if you want to find out which best are good value, then that is a different matter.
So if you are asking what is more likely, Tiger Woods to win or Ted Pooter Jr's odds to drop at one point to 200-1 or under, then that is what you should be considering as a value comparison.

By the way everyone else, I didn't consider players on the Senior Tour as they don't have a world ranking. My own opinion is that Bernhard Langer and Fred Couples offer value (particularly the former) but I do not have stats to back it up. (if you look at recent Major winners and former champions performances, I think you would see there is value on picking these guys on occaisions), and I am backing Langer myself.
Report Mersontheperson April 3, 2013 2:59 PM BST
Ahh yes, one other thing...

If anyone wants me to give the guy they have backed a rating in comparison to the other 93 in the field, I would be very happy to do so. By my calculations the three guys who offer the least value are:

1) Tiger Woods
2) Phil Mickelson
3) Charles Schwartzel.

My pleasure
Report DONEMYLOT April 3, 2013 2:59 PM BST
Thank you for explaining that to me.
Report Mersontheperson April 3, 2013 3:06 PM BST
Sorry Doneymlot, didn't mean to come across as a pr---.  I was just trying to have a bit of friendly banter in my reply. No offence meant.

Who are you backing, I will give my analysis on your picks free of charge  :-)
Report kincsem April 3, 2013 3:07 PM BST
Thanks for the list.  I'll be checking it.
Fwiw I backed Calcavecchia at 1000 in the Open when Oosthuizen won, sold at 100.
Buy to sell is your message.  It isn't just the Tiger / Phil / Rory show.
I agree with you that Woods is poor value.  I expect the unexpected this year.
Report donny osmond April 3, 2013 3:16 PM BST
if you back all 20 what is the combined odds of your selection ?
somewhere between 25 and 30/1 imo


add in the 5 others and we are down to about 14/1 ish


value ?
Report Eddie the eagle April 3, 2013 3:20 PM BST
Are you serious when claiming Tiger and Phil offer the least value of the whole field or are the 1.000 guys exempt from that ranking ?
  Surely you can't think the likes of Watson, Crenshaw, Lyle and Tianlang offers more value @ 1.000 than Tiger does @ 4.8 ?
Report Mersontheperson April 3, 2013 3:29 PM BST
I thought about that Donny, and actually I am backing more or less the best value 30 competitors, I think that works out at an average of 515 per competitor or combined odds of 18 I think...

I think my plan will be to try and be patient and only hedge out after the cut. Unless it is Bernhard Langer, who I will hedge out if he goes below 200-1 at anytime.

Kincesm,

Funnily enough I backed Oosthuizen at over 100-1 and hedged out at 10 I think.
Report DONEMYLOT April 3, 2013 3:43 PM BST
Thing is you are pretty fecked with a lot of these if any of the front 3 start well.

We know you need a few outings here to get the knowledge to play the gaff, which knocks out most of these, you need to be able to judge putt speed on loony greens which most can't and helpfully need to have taken a week off beforehand to practise round the slight amendments to the course whilst a lot of them are ruining their game in Texas.

Just my view though.

You could also say that the way Rory performs this week will have an effect on the top of the market and whilst they'll no doubt shove Tiger out for a 50 early next week, it doesn't make him any less 'value' as Eddie says.

I get your point but reckon other events rather than the specialist Masters are far more valid.
Report Mersontheperson April 3, 2013 3:48 PM BST
I think this Eddie.

None of the guys you mentioned were on my list, I excluded amateurs and seniors.


Tiger will probably get a late tee-off time, if at the end of the day he is within 1 or two shots of the lead, his odds might have shortened to 3 or 3.5, a maybe giving the backer a 20% return. If Paul Lawrie is within 1 shot of the lead, do you think his odds will shorten from 560 to 400? I think they would shorten to under a 100, in other words a 400% return.

You could then use that return on backing Woods or anyone else.

I think of it this way, if we were to play the Maters next week, and then replay it 800 times, do you think that Tiger would win it 200 times and David Lynn would never win it once? There are 90 competitors, do you really think that Tiger would win it 200 times out of 800?  David Lynn has appeared in one major in 8 years and finished 2nd in it.

So far this season the two golfers have gone head to head in 4 strokeplay tournaments, Tiger has beaten David 3 out of 4 times. The other (Honda Classic) David has beaten Tiger.  I reckon that if they played this tournament 800 times, maybe tiger would beat David 7 or 8 times out of 10, not 199 out of 200.
Report donny osmond April 3, 2013 4:00 PM BST
you aint backing lawrie at 560 though you are taking 14/1

you might get a return of 400% on that 1/25th of your bet but what about the rest ?
Report HeinzGuderian April 3, 2013 4:03 PM BST
If Tiger gets off to a flyer the whole Theory of Value in the Rank Outsider goes up in smoke.
Report kincsem April 3, 2013 4:09 PM BST
I've put a few Euro on these from your list (had already backed E Molinari)

Paul Lawrie ... odds 560 ... Ryder Cup team and a little form around Augusta.
Michael Thompson ... odds 460 ... current form, US Open 2nd in 2012.
Kevin Na ... odds 670 ... missed cut in 2010 & 2011 but ok rounds. Masters 12th in 2012.
Russell Henley ... odds 360 ... three rounds of 63 in Hawaii in January!  Good driving.

You made me look them up. Cool
Report Eddie the eagle April 3, 2013 4:11 PM BST
I think of it this way, if we were to play the Maters next week, and then replay it 800 times, do you think that Tiger would win it 200 times and David Lynn would never win it once? There are 90 competitors, do you really think that Tiger would win it 200 times out of 800?

With Tigers current form, I have to go with two yes !
Report Mersontheperson April 3, 2013 4:12 PM BST
DONEMYLOT,

You are absolutely right.  My system fails completely when a big gun goes out from the lead and stays there.

hoping this doesn't happen this time.
Report Mersontheperson April 3, 2013 4:24 PM BST
Good luck Kincesm, I will share with you all my picks and the odds I have got on them next week.

Donemylot,

I prefer backing players in the major just because of liquidity in the market, as It can be difficult to realise a good position in smaller tournaments when there is less cash about.

As much as sometimes you can get a big favourite going out in the lead, you can also sometimes get two or more outsiders in contention in the last round. Last week I had Stewart Cink and Jason Kokrak and managed to make a 1000% increase on my stake without either actually winning. That’s why I prefer my system than just trying to back a winner.
Report Knight Rider April 3, 2013 4:39 PM BST
Tiger woods makes a mockery of any numbers-based system.  Nobody should win as often as he does, but he does.
Report kincsem April 3, 2013 5:12 PM BST
Woods hasn't won it the last seven years.  He doesn't win too often.
Report Ski-Wiz April 3, 2013 10:01 PM BST
There's nothing wrong with trading 500+ odds players just to lock in some greens but there such a thing as doing too many and not getting your stakes back.
Report KangaMick April 4, 2013 6:00 AM BST
MersonthePerson,
Give these guys a rating for me mate.

Freddie Jacobson
Keegan Bradley
Peter Hanson
Report therhino April 4, 2013 7:18 AM BST
I think your system (if we can call it a system, backing long shots in golf is hardly unique) is better applied to the top 5 or top 10 market where runaway market leaders won't sink you on the first day. It doesn't have to be Tiger, Phil will dominate the market if he gets off to a flyer and as bad as his form is Rory will as well, all will be forgiven if he's on top of the leaderboard as everyone will want him covered. Also think you need to shorten that list, you need length as well as putting/experience at Augusta, the Brian Gays of the world can not help you.
Report maggot April 4, 2013 9:06 AM BST
The value this week is to back the players for The Masters that need to win this week to qualify.

Baddeley  400s
Woodland  400s
Noh       600s
Stanley   600s and 700s
Laird     600s
Byrd      700s and 800s
Karlsson  600s and 700s
Wagner    900s

All at silly prices.

If any of them win this week, their price will drop like a stone. If none of them manage a win, you lose nothing.
Report Mersontheperson April 4, 2013 9:06 AM BST
KangaMick

Freddie Jacobson = He comes out at 44th on my list
Keegan Bradley = 82nd
Peter Hanson =  41st

Fair points guys, but saying a plan or system won't work if a runaway market leader gets off to a good start and then wins comfortably, well that is true on virtually every plan unless you are backing the winner.

Backing long shots in Golf was certainly not my idea, but it is an idea that has proven to work over many years, you just have to be prepared to lose quite a lot. I think far too much attention is payed to form, types of greens, whether or not a player has one before, if they are left handed, European or American etc.
The fact is Everyone can name at least 10 surprise winners over the last 5 years of majors and PGA/European Tour events. Its basically just a numbers game, and all i am doing is playing the numbers by comparing a players odds to their world ranking.
Of course people have issues with World Rankings and they are not perfect, but more than a measurement of how good a player is, they are more a measurement of how consistent they are.
EVERY player at this years masters is capable of chipping in from off the green, scoring a birdie, or sinking a 30ft put.

Sure the very best golfers will be more consistent, but will Tger Woods really beat Fdez-Castano 79 times out of 80? I don't think so.
Report Mersontheperson April 4, 2013 9:10 AM BST
Agreed Maggot, I have backed Laird and Wagner already
I had already backed Points at 800 and can lay him off now at 500 if I wanted.
Report DONEMYLOT April 4, 2013 9:56 AM BST
Fair points. Every player is capable of a 64 at most courses where a 64 is possible. In that respect you make fair points and best of luck with your system, it makes sense if you play like that.
Report therhino April 4, 2013 10:33 AM BST
I like it maggot, very clever.
Report Eddie the eagle April 4, 2013 12:18 PM BST
Sure the very best golfers will be more consistent, but will Tger Woods really beat Fdez-Castano 79 times out of 80? I don't think so.

  You do have a real issue in calculating probability if you think that the difference in their odds (4.5 - 350, Gonzo 80 times higher than Tiger) is indicating what you are stating...
Report donny osmond April 4, 2013 12:24 PM BST
nice one maggot


good luck merson, hope all the chat helps everyone,
Report Mersontheperson April 4, 2013 12:51 PM BST
What i am proposing Eddie is that if the masters were played 350 times in a row, the odds suggest that ON AVERAGE tiger wood win it about 80 times, and Gonzalo would win it once. so head to head a difference of 80.

Out of the 18 times Tiger has competed in the Masters he has won it 3 times. 
He is my favourite to win the Masters, but if I am going to put a stake on somebody, I would prefer someone who statistically has odds longer than their probability of winning, not the other way around.
Report Mighty Whites 2008 April 4, 2013 7:54 PM BST
As Eddie said you are clearly struggling with the laws of probability
Report deansthemann April 4, 2013 8:29 PM BST
thinly veiled im a fecking d£ckhead thread
Report Puggy4 April 4, 2013 8:32 PM BST
no need for that comment, he is just giving a point of view.
Report Mersontheperson April 5, 2013 12:31 PM BST
Feel free to express your view on why you think differently, I will attempt to clarify.

If you want to make a £700 return on Tiger, you have to stake £185 at his current odds. If I want to make the same return on Castano, I would have to stake £2 (less even).

So for the same stake,  If we could run the masters over and over again this weekend, and you back Tiger and I back Castano for the same odds, then Tiger would have to win 90 times before Castano won it once, for you to reach your target amount of £700 before I would reach mine.

That's how I see it, but am happy to be corrected if you would like to show me where that is wrong.
Report Eddie the eagle April 5, 2013 1:28 PM BST
I just think you are simplyfying thing to much.  Stats can be useful, but only as a helping indicator, not the main one.

 
Out of the 18 times Tiger has competed in the Masters he has won it 3 times. 
He is my favourite to win the Masters, but if I am going to put a stake on somebody, I would prefer someone who statistically has odds longer than their probability of winning, not the other way around
.

I have no problem with the underlined part here, but it seems you are basing your opinion on Tiger beeing to short on his Masters win ratio and if that's the case, it's imo on the borderline of stupidity.

And he has won it 4 times, not 3...
Report Mersontheperson April 5, 2013 2:39 PM BST
Eddie, I don't believe in the Masters win ratio, I don't see how any event that happens in the past, has much weight to what will happen in the future. I was just trying to add a bit of context. It is possible to mess around saying he hasn't won it once in seven or you can say he has won it 3 times in 12, we both know that stuff is garbage.
Report miss anomaly April 5, 2013 3:44 PM BST
Regardless of how things pan out with merson's strategy I'm enjoying the action on here :)
Report pantsonfire April 6, 2013 11:18 AM BST
Me too, and deansthemann's contribution almost makes up for the loss of frames.
Report sweetchildofmine April 6, 2013 11:00 PM BST
Eddie, I don't believe in the Masters win ratio, I don't see how any event that happens in the past, has much weight to what will happen in the future. I was just trying to add a bit of context. It is possible to mess around saying he hasn't won it once in seven or you can say he has won it 3 times in 12, we both know that stuff is garbage.


tiger at bay hill rather makes a mockery of that statement
Report Mersontheperson April 8, 2013 9:57 AM BST
I think DA Points and Martin Laird are all the proof you need on form being over rated in picking winners.
I could go on and mention all the 'surprise' winners of PGA and Major tournaments, but anyone who watches enough golf realise that the majority of the field can win on their day.
Good luck with everyone on their strategy.

Following on from maggot's comments below:
Martin Laird was touching 700 on here last week, he is now at 140. So Backing him and laying him off now would have won you more money than backing Woods to win at 4.5, and there was basically 0 risk and a ball hasn't even been struck.
I got out at 250-1, never thought for a second Laid would go as low as 140.
Report ericthecat April 8, 2013 10:32 AM BST
Interesting thread, enjoyed reading it.

I love this and the open as betting events. My two value bets are Bo Van Pelt, and Freddie Jacobson.

Of the favourites, lefty looks to be in good form.

Really big outsider it has to be Trevor Immelman, been picking him up @ 610s
Report maggot April 8, 2013 11:26 AM BST
Indeed, merson..

My Laird plan worked out nicely.

£60 on him at between 600 and 660, which as I pointed out, was basically a free bet.

£180 laid at 160 and below.

£8.2K green, and the fella owes me nothing.
Report Mersontheperson April 8, 2013 11:36 AM BST
Nice work.
I am guessing from the other thread you started, you are waiting for betfair to sort out the starting field, so you can free up your other funds for your REAL picks?

Have you checked the weather out??
http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/4180531

Might just favour the Brits!!! (thats if they don't stop the contest at every 5 minutes)... Monday finish??
Report donny osmond April 8, 2013 1:01 PM BST
top bombing maggot

CoolCool
Report Mersontheperson April 11, 2013 8:31 AM BST
DONEMYLOT 03 Apr 13 14:39

I would say that if they played this 100000 times Ted Potter would not win.

Still as confident DONEMYLOT?? :-)
Report Catch Me ifyoucan April 7, 2019 5:51 PM BST
kincsem • April 3, 2013 3:07 PM BST

Buy to sell is your message.  It isn't just the Tiger / Phil / Rory show.
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com