Tips for Tikay

[BigAdz]

Great post Camel.

Cheering you on even more now!

[JaffaCake]

Great post keef, very interesting. Hope u boys get the lot, and Kap gets MVP ofc!

[tikay]

Fascinating Post by Keith.

For those interested, the current line is 3.5, except BoyleSports, who are 4.

http://www.oddschecker.com/american-football/nfl/baltimore-ravens-at-san-francisco-49ers/point-spread

[mondatoo]

GL Keith and all in for the coop.

[AndrewT]

Not sure if anyone else has noticed/ has any info as to why/can even be bothered why Ladbrokes seem to be making a big stand on almost every big race these days, with either the longest or shortest price on many horses in many markets?

Do they have a team of super traders in?

Does anyone know if this line is working?

They are so strong in their stance in loads of Festival markets it is quite unnerving.

Didn't Ladbrokes do a clean up of their trading operations a few months ago (ie got rid of people)?

[AndrewT]

Argo wins the SAG best ensemble cast award - it's now 4/5 Lincoln, 5/4 Argo for the Oscar. Looks like our Les Mis goose might be cooked.

We also have Les Mis for "BAFTA "Best Picture", does it affect that?

Think we have £25 @ 4/1 Les Mis in the BAFTAs, & £20 @ 15/1 in the OSCARs. 

The Bafta is still live but I fear the Oscars is now a two horse race.

[BigAdz]

Not sure if anyone else has noticed/ has any info as to why/can even be bothered why Ladbrokes seem to be making a big stand on almost every big race these days, with either the longest or shortest price on many horses in many markets?

Do they have a team of super traders in?

Does anyone know if this line is working?

They are so strong in their stance in loads of Festival markets it is quite unnerving.

Didn't Ladbrokes do a clean up of their trading operations a few months ago (ie got rid of people)?

Not sure, but it makes sense if they are more streamlined based on the strict line they are taking in so many cases

[Tal]

Argo wins the SAG best ensemble cast award - it's now 4/5 Lincoln, 5/4 Argo for the Oscar. Looks like our Les Mis goose might be cooked.

We also have Les Mis for "BAFTA "Best Picture", does it affect that?

Think we have £25 @ 4/1 Les Mis in the BAFTAs, & £20 @ 15/1 in the OSCARs. 

The Bafta is still live but I fear the Oscars is now a two horse race.

I agree the Bafta is far from a dead duck (cooked as a goose), as we Brits love a good sing song almost as much as doing the opposite of the Yanks. With Les Mis having been so successful here, it is far from out of the question that it would beat Lincoln and Argo.

Would dearly love Chastain for the Best Actress Oscar but am a little discouraged by the momentum Lawrence is enjoying at present.

[bobby1]

Wasn't the discussion on Fred laying SF based around the bet size vs overall bankroll following some wise words in a post  from Trigg?

In other words, very specific circumstances rather than a general rule.

I can't recall that specifically, but we have had lots of good & well-intentioned advice, though much of it conflicts, as we all have different circumstances.

As to the size of the potential win relative to Fred's roll, & the thread generally,I seem to recall wise words from several.

The Bet Owner has given us carte blanche to do as we wish. 

So we can decide whether to....

a) Do nothing

b) Cover our stake & let the rest ride

c) Split it down the middle so that we win about the same both ways.

Having chosen, we then need to decide how?, if it is b) or c).

I think "how?" is the most interesting part, actually.

There is an interesting piece in the RP today Tony that talked about buying footballers cheap and then getting good value for them when they were declining. it had a touch of  hedging in it and I guess it touched on reaching the point where the amounts have too big a difference between the max win and the worst result to be mentally comfortable with.

Brian Clough and Peter Taylor apparently both loved a bet so the articles says

'''In their own betting, Taylor and Clough were prepared to hedge when they thought the circumstances were appropriate, as Jonathan Wilson revealed in his biography of Clough, Nobody ever says thank you.

Offered bonuses by Forest for winning the European Cup, both Clough and Taylor guaranteed themselves a profit before the 1979 and 1980 finals by backing opponents Malmo and Hamburg'''

Can you imagine the headlines if that happened today.

[tikay]

Wasn't the discussion on Fred laying SF based around the bet size vs overall bankroll following some wise words in a post  from Trigg?

In other words, very specific circumstances rather than a general rule.

I can't recall that specifically, but we have had lots of good & well-intentioned advice, though much of it conflicts, as we all have different circumstances.

As to the size of the potential win relative to Fred's roll, & the thread generally,I seem to recall wise words from several.

The Bet Owner has given us carte blanche to do as we wish. 

So we can decide whether to....

a) Do nothing

b) Cover our stake & let the rest ride

c) Split it down the middle so that we win about the same both ways.

Having chosen, we then need to decide how?, if it is b) or c).

I think "how?" is the most interesting part, actually.

There is an interesting piece in the RP today Tony that talked about buying footballers cheap and then getting good value for them when they were declining. it had a touch of  hedging in it and I guess it touched on reaching the point where the amounts have too big a difference between the max win and the worst result to be mentally comfortable with.

Brian Clough and Peter Taylor apparently both loved a bet so the articles says

'''In their own betting, Taylor and Clough were prepared to hedge when they thought the circumstances were appropriate, as Jonathan Wilson revealed in his biography of Clough, Nobody ever says thank you.

Offered bonuses by Forest for winning the European Cup, both Clough and Taylor guaranteed themselves a profit before the 1979 and 1980 finals by backing opponents Malmo and Hamburg'''

Can you imagine the headlines if that happened today.

Yikes, no, I never knew that.

I must go get that book, I enjoy reading stuff about Cloughie & Taylor.

[horseplayer]

Wasn't the discussion on Fred laying SF based around the bet size vs overall bankroll following some wise words in a post  from Trigg?

In other words, very specific circumstances rather than a general rule.

I can't recall that specifically, but we have had lots of good & well-intentioned advice, though much of it conflicts, as we all have different circumstances.

As to the size of the potential win relative to Fred's roll, & the thread generally,I seem to recall wise words from several.

The Bet Owner has given us carte blanche to do as we wish. 

So we can decide whether to....

a) Do nothing

b) Cover our stake & let the rest ride

c) Split it down the middle so that we win about the same both ways.

Having chosen, we then need to decide how?, if it is b) or c).

I think "how?" is the most interesting part, actually.

There is an interesting piece in the RP today Tony that talked about buying footballers cheap and then getting good value for them when they were declining. it had a touch of  hedging in it and I guess it touched on reaching the point where the amounts have too big a difference between the max win and the worst result to be mentally comfortable with.

Brian Clough and Peter Taylor apparently both loved a bet so the articles says

'''In their own betting, Taylor and Clough were prepared to hedge when they thought the circumstances were appropriate, as Jonathan Wilson revealed in his biography of Clough, Nobody ever says thank you.

Offered bonuses by Forest for winning the European Cup, both Clough and Taylor guaranteed themselves a profit before the 1979 and 1980 finals by backing opponents Malmo and Hamburg'''

Can you imagine the headlines if that happened today.

Yikes, no, I never knew that.

I must go get that book, I enjoy reading stuff about Cloughie & Taylor.

Jonathon Wilson is excellent

Inverting the Pyramid: The History of Football Tactics is quite superb if hardly a light read

The work to produce that must have been quite immense

[tikay]

With the NFL season about to end, the first time I have ever watched it properly, & researched the game, the players, the venues & the structure of the game, it has been an eye-opener compared with what we might call "conventional" football as played the world over.

Most up, I like that the players, despite taking some bone-crunching knocks, never feign injury, unlike the footballers who do their triple axels to gain an unfair advantage.

The Referees are no better or worse - just human - but they are backed up by Reviews & TV Replays.

There are plenty of wrong 'uns in American Football, but the discipline by the authorities has some logic & consistency to it.

Many of the players, especially the QB's, are very bright, & clever.

The fans are different gravy. There may be crowd trouble, but I've seen little evidence of it.

"Over zealous" celebrations are frowned upon.

As for excitement, the Playoffs have demonstrated it really is a cracking game.

I wish I'd taken an interest eaerlier, when Flushy used to bang on about it. He had to be right about something, eventually.

[Tal]

So now you have to pick a team, Tikay.

Just pick any old random team in the AFC East beginning with B.

[tikay]

So now you have to pick a team, Tikay.

Just pick any old random team in the AFC East beginning with B.

I'd rather not have my "own" Team, it would mar my enjoyment & cloud my objectivity.

Currently, I love the 9ers, of course.

I'm also rather partial to the Redskins, Jets, & Bears.

[The Camel]

So now you have to pick a team, Tikay.

Just pick any old random team in the AFC East beginning with B.

I disagree with this.

One of the reason I love NFL so much is I am totally unbiased and can watch the games totally impartially.

It means I appreciate a good play whoever makes it, and I'm totally ambivalent to who I bet on.

Obviously I hate the Seahawks though.