Bazza any value in Chisora tonight? Fury looks v short.

Lol just read your post Red.

My thinking is just that Fury beat him convincingly the last time they fought and had only fought 14 times and Fury was only 23 and fairly raw.  Chisora didn't give him any real problems in that fight yet subsequently both Pajkic and Cunningham have knocked Fury down and it feels to me like he has become a better fighter for it.  If I remember rightly Fury was 4/7 for the first fight and won easily.  I think he deserves to be a lot shorter based on what they have done since.

See that Frankie Fraser died yesterday, too.

Ever cross paths with him when you were younger, Tikay?

No, never met him. Think I'd wee myself if I did.

I'll be writing some more about him in due course, but I did write a piece about him on Tom's Diary this morning.


http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=30601.26115

Honestly, Frankie Fraser fascinated me. Not sure why, really.

It's a bit like the seedier side of the gambling world, I always wanted to taste that, see it, but not be part of it.

Anyway, now I have an excuse to post that awesome photo again.

Look at the gait, the swagger, the attitude of Mr Stripey Suit. Wonder what he does in real life? Property Insurance, maybe, just as Frankie used to? Even Frankie's son (the other side of Frankie) has that "attitiude".

Click to see full-size image.

Think I know who the fella on the left is.  I came across him when I worked for a well known UK bookmaker.  It is fair to suggest he didn't get his stripy jacket in the pits of the commodity exchanges.

As excited about tonights card as I have been for a while.  FW can still put on a good card on his day.  Pretty surprised that Fury is available at 2/5 with Boyles for the headliner.  Also feel Saunders just has too much experience for Eubank Jr but some of the things that Eubanks sparring partners and Adam Booth have said about him suggest he could be very good but to put it into perspective he probably has about the same amount of experience at this point as someone like Anthony Joshua (maybe even less when you consider his amateur career) and there is a reason that Eddie Hearn is still putting AJ in with the likes of Sprott.  If Eubank can win this at this point in his career he will be very, very special.

Yeah, immigration in the US is pretty tough for sure, but on the other hand ours is too soft imo, I think a happy medium would be more sensible all round.

Here's a funny story for ya, I once got booted out of the U.S. for massively overstaying    

You want a happy medium between us and the US now? Why not go the whole hog and try and match Australia's immigrant population?  

I would be very happy with their current entry system mate, selective immigration based on needs, perfect.

Our needs or what some civil servant thinks are our needs?  

Australian immigration > US immigration > UK immigration.

What I think would be best lol. US immigration is very tough, way tougher than ours, so anyone who has a left leaning philosophy should prefer ours by an absolute mile. Aus immigration ftw.

Problem is that we aren't comparing apples with apples.  For a non EU immigrant to come to the US is very similar rules to a non US person to go to the States (actually it is probably marginally more difficult to come to the UK than go to the States if you are non EU).  The real issue is with EU migration here and that is a part of a much bigger conversation about whether we want to be a part of a common market etc.  You can't have the benefits of a common market realistically without free movement of labour etc and Merkel was very quick today to make Cameron back up a bit on some of that stuff.

Yeah, immigration in the US is pretty tough for sure, but on the other hand ours is too soft imo, I think a happy medium would be more sensible all round.

Here's a funny story for ya, I once got booted out of the U.S. for massively overstaying   

Actually one of the reasons we decided to live in the US was because of how difficult it was when we weren't married to get a stay here for my partner.  I got held by US immigration for a very minor, and completely accidental overstay (about 5 days and actually more their fault than mine...its a long story) for about 13 hours the next time I tried to enter.  It was about 6 weeks after my daughter had been born and I had just put all of my life savings into a house we had bought there.  I just can't describe how devastating it is to be in that position and be told you are going to get deported and hit with a long ban. Now immigration queues and in particular secondary immigration areas now literally scare the shit out of me because of the power that they have to take almost everything that is valuable away from me and that gives me a lot of sympathy for migrants that come here and elsewhere.  Obviously I understand that there are different types of migrant and the rules are there for a reason but this stuff breaks up families and it isn't always fair.

Sounds good 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30224493

Actually agree with you for once.  Of the policy changes Cameron announced this morning the only one I think is inherently unfair (and probably because it is something that has impacted my own life in a devastating fashion) is restricting the right of migrants to bring non EU family members to the UK.  The rest of it just seems to be common sense and some of it just makes you wonder how it was ever allowed in the first place.  All that said I don't see how it helps the Tories electorally because actually the number of people that are taking advantage of most of this stuff is actually tiny it is just the perception of it that is the issue and that isn't about to change and I don't really see how this will bring down the net migration figures to the levels that Cameron needs for the issue to go away for him.

If I could add one thing to it I would be a happy bunny.

British people should where reasonably possible be given preference for jobs. We have too many brits sitting on the dole that either can't get a job because of competition from EU migrants or are just lazy fucks that need a kick up the arse as they have it too good on the dole. That is where the biggest cost saving is anyway, but it's all part of the same intertwined argument anyway. I know how easy it is to get a min wage job here in Nottingham, people should be forced to take those jobs or lose benefits. Once that has happened I really don't care how many immigrants we get in to plug the gaps as well as taking on the skilled people that are clearly a benefit to us.

Are you not a Brit or summat mate?

Think the problem with that is that actually the message that they are sending is that migrants have to do everything possible to get a job now or be sent home after 6 months.  I can only see that actually driving down wages and making it harder for Brits to get off benefits.  Tend to think that the problem of Brits living on benefits is a slightly different issue and immigration is just a lazy way for lazy people to justify their lack of desire to actually work and support themselves.  I am not sure that even if net migration was neutral it would really make any difference to those people.

On me.  I am British but my wife and daughter aren't.  Immigration rules (in the States not here) have kept us apart for large parts of the year.  I don't really see how that helps anyone.  It will be sorted soon but I can't deny it has made me look at the whole issue very differently and as not as clear cut as they might first seem.

Sounds good 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30224493

Actually agree with you for once.  Of the policy changes Cameron announced this morning the only one I think is inherently unfair (and probably because it is something that has impacted my own life in a devastating fashion) is restricting the right of migrants to bring non EU family members to the UK.  The rest of it just seems to be common sense and some of it just makes you wonder how it was ever allowed in the first place.  All that said I don't see how it helps the Tories electorally because actually the number of people that are taking advantage of most of this stuff is actually tiny it is just the perception of it that is the issue and that isn't about to change and I don't really see how this will bring down the net migration figures to the levels that Cameron needs for the issue to go away for him.

Is it possible to be a British fighter now and become a world class fighter and make the money you deserve without being signed by Hearn at some point in your career to build your rep on sky sports with the UK public.  Froch was kinda forced to sign with Hearn to get the money/pr rep he deserved with the general UK public.

I'd say no. Such a small percentage of the population have access to Boxnation and the number or cards Warren puts on reduces every year. With Matchroom fm having a stranglehold on Sky I don't see things changing.

Yeah this.  I have finally cancelled my sub to box nation as there is rarely anyone I want to watch nowadays where as when I first subscribed there was at least a fight a week.

.....but obv that would never happen....nobody runs that bad!!!!

Jonas gray at 14/1 with Ladbrokes to score next TD is way too big.  If he is that price at that will be a pretty good bet too.  Also think 13/5 Fleener anytime TD scorer is pretty good given how pats are setting up on D.

Not sure you could run much worse there, unlucky mate.

How about if he was to score the one after?

Unless that happened...

 

I guess if we were going to be really, really unlucky he could also score the one after that..........

I really wish this forum was closed to outsiders because I would absolutely love to write about these TD scorer bets.  If any  city analysts really understood our business then the total inability of Ladbrokes to price the NFL in running and the fact that it has been going on for 18+ months now and  nobody in their business seems aware is symptomatic of just how broken their business is now.  The absolute total mess they made of the in running betting for the Scottish Independence voting was another great example.  At one point that evening they were 1/12 no when it was 1/40 on Betfair and 2/1 the 40-45% band when it was 5/4 on Betfair.

Jonas gray at 14/1 with Ladbrokes to score next TD is way too big.  If he is that price at that will be a pretty good bet too.  Also think 13/5 Fleener anytime TD scorer is pretty good given how pats are setting up on D.

Not sure you could run much worse there, unlucky mate.

How about if he was to score the one after?

Jonas gray at 14/1 with Ladbrokes to score next TD is way too big.  If he is that price at that will be a pretty good bet too.  Also think 13/5 Fleener anytime TD scorer is pretty good given how pats are setting up on D.

Is there a gap in the UK betting market for an ethical bookie who will take all action?

The number of time now you hear of many people losing an account (s) and having difficulty getting on makes you think if you could secure the backing and their must be interested investors in it because a solidly run company not refusing the action must still be in with a big % chance of winning?

I think there is a gap in the market for a firm that takes huge volume and keeps a small margin but the big issue is that for a year or two they won't make any money and will likely lose a fair chunk and it is a fairly high risk investment to start up.  Ultimately I guess you could argue that Betfair already fills that role in the UK.  I'd be fairly surprised if it ever happens in the UK now and even if someone did it their options in terms of an ultimate exit are fairly limited as it isn't really a business for the stock exchange etc as the market doesn't really 'get'  businesses in this sector there unique IMO.  In many ways that has been Betfairs biggest issue since listing. 

This has always been my argument about DTD.

As fantastic as it is, you can't honestly expect a company to do what they're doing. What business in their right mind is going to throw away £8,000,000?

It's value for players, yes. But it isn't commercially viable as a business. I might be completely wrong and as a business they've turned the corner and they are now a sustainable enterprise - but I have always looked at Rob Yong from a business perspective and thought of him as a maniac. No disrespect to the man intended.

Yes, he has rightly raised the bar for poker and from an objective stand point I think that it's fantastic in principle. But big business doesn't think that way. They are looking at the bottom line. They don't think it's healthy or sustainable. They'll just wait for it to burn out and when the landscape has two operators as opposed to three operators, they aren't going to have to compete in the same sense that they are now.

Which is my point. The competition is good - but that's exactly the reason why you need three fish swimming in the pond instead of one or two.

That's why I think collaboration is key. If the events are locked in and held sacrosanct, then any external forces have to fit in to the margins allowed them. I don't know the answer to this, and I am not being cryptic - but if the WPT really had to happen and it was absolutely impossible to do anything then I would be on the phone and saying, "Russell. I have got something I simply cannot refuse and I have to run it X to Y. I don't want to sting you for tens of thousands of pounds. I would just like to say in advance that I think moving Blackpool might be a good idea."

Did that happen? It may well have done. I just think these guys need to work together a little bit - because if they don't then in my opinion the real loser isn't the operators. It's you.

Surely collaboration in that sense is very close to operating as a cartel.  What next all deciding to put the rake up together?