blonde poker forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 29, 2024, 12:42:36 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
2272484 Posts in 66752 Topics by 16945 Members
Latest Member: Zula
* Home Help Arcade Search Calendar Guidelines Login Register
+  blonde poker forum
|-+  Community Forums
| |-+  Betting Tips and Sport Discussion
| | |-+  Tips for Tikay
0 Members and 20 Guests are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 8568 8569 8570 8571 [8572] 8573 8574 8575 8576 ... 9207 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Tips for Tikay  (Read 13333694 times)
bergeroo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2192


View Profile
« Reply #128565 on: June 28, 2017, 01:36:52 PM »

This has to be the most difficult Wimbledon to pin down winners from both the men's and women's competition. 

Agreed , even more so in the mens

Thats whys Federer who is nearly 36 in has to be a lay at 5 - 2 with all the younger players snapping

https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/tennis/market/1.125549192

Quite like these two coupled ........  Cilic @ 24s and Raonic @ 22s

the thing is, on the men's side, with the exception of Alex Zverev I don't see who these young players coming through 'snapping' are? Federer justified fave imo - though now perhaps a bit short
Logged
Weetabix
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 212


View Profile
« Reply #128566 on: June 28, 2017, 01:46:47 PM »

I'm not so sure about that, it speaks volumes when you see the world number 1 and  2 are 20/1+ to win the title. 
Logged
bergeroo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2192


View Profile
« Reply #128567 on: June 28, 2017, 02:00:03 PM »

I'm not so sure about that, it speaks volumes when you see the world number 1 and  2 are 20/1+ to win the title.  

Murray at around 4/1 and Djok at 6/1? Huh??
Logged
bergeroo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2192


View Profile
« Reply #128568 on: June 28, 2017, 02:01:31 PM »

I'm not so sure about that, it speaks volumes when you see the world number 1 and  2 are 20/1+ to win the title. 

I assume you are talking about the ladies side which is of course open for anybody and I'm on several players at 100/1 plus!
Logged
Weetabix
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 212


View Profile
« Reply #128569 on: June 28, 2017, 02:15:52 PM »

Yes exactly, Kerber and halep. 
Logged
bergeroo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2192


View Profile
« Reply #128570 on: June 28, 2017, 02:19:56 PM »

Magdalena Rybarikova currently 500/1 with one firm! Get in there.

two grass court titles this season and a semi in Notts. 13-1 on grass this season.
https://www.oddschecker.com/tennis/wimbledon/womens/womens-wimbledon/winner
« Last Edit: June 28, 2017, 02:23:36 PM by bergeroo » Logged
Weetabix
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 212


View Profile
« Reply #128571 on: June 28, 2017, 02:29:31 PM »

That's a massive price.  Quite a decent player to watch, makes a change to watching these robot players just bash the living daylights out of the ball.
Logged
ripple11
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6330



View Profile
« Reply #128572 on: June 28, 2017, 02:43:25 PM »

Magdalena Rybarikova currently 500/1 with one firm! Get in there.

two grass court titles this season and a semi in Notts. 13-1 on grass this season.
https://www.oddschecker.com/tennis/wimbledon/womens/womens-wimbledon/winner

Cheers Paddy....looking forward to paying off the mortgage  Cheesy
Logged
TightEnd
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile
« Reply #128573 on: June 28, 2017, 02:58:25 PM »


Magdalena Rybarikova Womens Wimbledon 2017 Winner
500/1 Each Way (2 Places at 1/2 Odds)
Total Stake: £4.42
Potential Returns: £1,661.92
Logged

My eyes are open wide
By the way,I made it through the day
I watch the world outside
By the way, I'm leaving out today
FUN4FRASER
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2249



View Profile
« Reply #128574 on: June 28, 2017, 03:07:14 PM »

Interesting age stats..........


Wimbledon not a young mans game , Surprisingly Federer was the eldest to win in recent times at 30 but that was 6 years ago  Arthur Ashe oldest at 31 in "modern times "

Oldest recent Wimbledon winners

Rank    Player           Year   Tournament   Age

1  Arthur Ashe      1975   Wimbledon   31y 11m 25d
2   Roger Federer   2012   Wimbledon   30y 11m 0d
3   Rod Laver           1969   Wimbledon   30y 10m 26d
4   Rod Laver           1968   Wimbledon    29y 10m 27d
5   Jimmy Connors   1982   Wimbledon   29y 10m 12d
6   Goran Ivanisevic   2001   Wimbledon   29y 9m 26d
7   Pete Sampras   2000   Wimbledon   28y 10m 27d
8   Roger Federer   2009   Wimbledon   27y 10m 27d


I know advancements in science and nutrition etc mean longer fitness levels however Trends dictate its a big ask to win Wimbledon at 36
Logged
dino1980
Gamesmaster
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2625


View Profile
« Reply #128575 on: June 28, 2017, 03:11:53 PM »

So I think I've spotted an edge when betting on penalty shootouts and having run the math past a friend he said it checked out. However, the info I have the bookies also do so I’m thinking there must be a flaw in my thinking so I wanted to run it past TFT.

Academic research (over a large sample) shows that the team kicking first in a shootout has a 60% chance of winning, but the bookies usually price the two teams up at the same price.

Yesterday Germany and England were both 1.9 to win on BetEveryDayOfTheYear, even when it was clear Germany was going to take the first kick.

Doing some math if we bet £20 on the team going first in 100 shootouts we risk £2,000. For each bet, we win we receive £38 (20 x 1.9). £38 x 60 = £2,280. 280/2000x100 = 14% ROI.

I think my math is correct, so what am I missing? I know this bet assumes two equally skilled teams but bet size could be scaled up or down if there’s a large skill gap between the two teams/penalties are being taken in front of Team A/B’s fans etc.

Not strictly a rec for TFT but if anyone happens to be watching the Confed Cup semi-finals this week and one goes to penalties this could be an angle.

This big discrepency is one reason they're looking to introduce the ABBA system in penalty shootouts.
/ramble
Logged
FUN4FRASER
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2249



View Profile
« Reply #128576 on: June 28, 2017, 03:19:53 PM »

So I think I've spotted an edge when betting on penalty shootouts and having run the math past a friend he said it checked out. However, the info I have the bookies also do so I’m thinking there must be a flaw in my thinking so I wanted to run it past TFT.

Academic research (over a large sample) shows that the team kicking first in a shootout has a 60% chance of winning, but the bookies usually price the two teams up at the same price.

Yesterday Germany and England were both 1.9 to win on BetEveryDayOfTheYear, even when it was clear Germany was going to take the first kick.

Doing some math if we bet £20 on the team going first in 100 shootouts we risk £2,000. For each bet, we win we receive £38 (20 x 1.9). £38 x 60 = £2,280. 280/2000x100 = 14% ROI.

I think my math is correct, so what am I missing? I know this bet assumes two equally skilled teams but bet size could be scaled up or down if there’s a large skill gap between the two teams/penalties are being taken in front of Team A/B’s fans etc.



Not strictly a rec for TFT but if anyone happens to be watching the Confed Cup semi-finals this week and one goes to penalties this could be an angle.

This big discrepency is one reason they're looking to introduce the ABBA system in penalty shootouts.
/ramble


?

If we risk £2000 we win £1800
100 bets of £20 = £2000 to win 100 x £18 so we lose £200 or 10% every time we bet

It appears your £38 x60 calculation is kind of insignificant unless Im missing something ?
Logged
Doobs
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16570


View Profile
« Reply #128577 on: June 28, 2017, 03:24:31 PM »


Magdalena Rybarikova Womens Wimbledon 2017 Winner
500/1 Each Way (2 Places at 1/2 Odds)
Total Stake: £4.42
Potential Returns: £1,661.92


I am on my phone so can't see the price history on oddschecker, but this looks like someone has reset paddies prices on her with the old/preseason price.   Did anyone check? 
Logged

Most of the bets placed so far seem more like hopeful punts rather than value spots
bergeroo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2192


View Profile
« Reply #128578 on: June 28, 2017, 03:35:28 PM »

I believe she was recently added to the market on pads, it seems like they indiscriminately added a bunch of unseeded players at 500s. She wasn't on there a couple of days ago. She also started out at 400s on Uni/triple 8 two weeks ago before being bet in a bit.


Magdalena Rybarikova Womens Wimbledon 2017 Winner
500/1 Each Way (2 Places at 1/2 Odds)
Total Stake: £4.42
Potential Returns: £1,661.92


I am on my phone so can't see the price history on oddschecker, but this looks like someone has reset paddies prices on her with the old/preseason price.   Did anyone check?  
« Last Edit: June 28, 2017, 03:38:08 PM by bergeroo » Logged
Doobs
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16570


View Profile
« Reply #128579 on: June 28, 2017, 03:48:25 PM »

I believe she was recently added to the market on pads, it seems like they indiscriminately added a bunch of unseeded players at 500s. She wasn't on there a couple of days ago. She also started out at 400s on Uni/triple 8 two weeks ago before being bet in a bit.


Magdalena Rybarikova Womens Wimbledon 2017 Winner
500/1 Each Way (2 Places at 1/2 Odds)
Total Stake: £4.42
Potential Returns: £1,661.92


I am on my phone so can't see the price history on oddschecker, but this looks like someone has reset paddies prices on her with the old/preseason price.   Did anyone check?  

Cheers.  I would still be pretty wary of taking it.  Gl
Logged

Most of the bets placed so far seem more like hopeful punts rather than value spots
Pages: 1 ... 8568 8569 8570 8571 [8572] 8573 8574 8575 8576 ... 9207 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.197 seconds with 20 queries.