Tips for Tikay

[maldini32]

Marlon Samuels will miss out on tomorrow's game due to a groin problem

lolz

[tikay]

Forgot one thing, Tighty:

Thursday, Sheffield:



 12 ^oC


http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/2638077

Here's the venue: the English Institute of Sport in Sheffield:



Seems to be a roof, but can't be too careful with these things.

A+

Subtle oomph & zing.

[tikay]

Marlon Samuels will miss out on tomorrow's game due to a groin problem

lolz

We are officially running bad. We can't even get a game!

[tikay]

Sorry Tony, can't quote here.

David Lynn would be one as you are betting the current BF price ew. Henley and Coetzee look solid tho Coetzee might be in the wrong side of the draw.

piercy would be a fancy if he was in a bit better form and is drawn in Tigers group which might not be ideal.Donaldson sounds short of practice, wirichant played well in the US last month but would prob err on the side of fluke.Grace looks a decent runner but out late.

Potter and Peterson out early, Potter a bit of an enigma, Peterson ran top five in the US Open last year and looked a decent player but that could be a fluke too, played a bit if lower grade stuff but still  got time to improve as a player.

I bet the top three and had a smaller bet Peterson as he might be difficult to pitch but open to other thoughts for Fred if anyone likes something.    

Laddies prices........

Coetzee 7/1

Henley 7/1

Lynn 12/1.

Am thinking something along these lines.....

Coetzee £15 EW

Henley £15 EW

Lynn £10 EW.

That make any sense?

I need to decide sharpish, I need to get to bed, & will be offline until early afternoon tomorrow.

I'll proceed as above unless  advised otherwise.

This bet is ON, as above, with Ladbrokes.

Top Debutant, The Masters, with Ladbrokes. Players & amounts.....

Coetzee 7/1, £15 EW

Henley 7/1, £15 EW

Lynn 12/1, £10 Ew


ON


Betslip Details tomorrow.

[tikay]

The Masters will be up & running before I get back Online tomorrow, so below is, roughly, our Book.

Time has been a bit of a bugger here, & I'm not sure the Book is quite what I wanted. We have no long-shots Outright, & I think I may have missed some of the Sub-Markets, but it is what it is.

There will be daily Match Bets etc, so plenty of time I suppose.

Outright

Snedeker, £25 WIN @ 25/1

Tiger Woods, £30 EW @ 6/1

Rory McIllroy, £25 EW @ 12/1

Phil Mickelson, £25 EW @ 16/1

Justin Rose, £50 EW @ 22/1

First Round Leader

Lee Westwood, £15 EW @ 33/1

Justin Rose, £15 EW @ 18/1

Charl Schwartzel, £15 EW @ 28/1

Top Amateur

Weaver, £60 @ 4.6

Top Debutant

Coetzee £15 EW @ 7/1

Henley £15 EW @ 7/1

Lynn £10 EW @ 12/1

Invested so far - £515 approx.

[Doobs]

Sorry Tony, can't quote here.

David Lynn would be one as you are betting the current BF price ew. Henley and Coetzee look solid tho Coetzee might be in the wrong side of the draw.

piercy would be a fancy if he was in a bit better form and is drawn in Tigers group which might not be ideal.Donaldson sounds short of practice, wirichant played well in the US last month but would prob err on the side of fluke.Grace looks a decent runner but out late.

Potter and Peterson out early, Potter a bit of an enigma, Peterson ran top five in the US Open last year and looked a decent player but that could be a fluke too, played a bit if lower grade stuff but still  got time to improve as a player.

I bet the top three and had a smaller bet Peterson as he might be difficult to pitch but open to other thoughts for Fred if anyone likes something.    

Laddies prices........

Coetzee 7/1

Henley 7/1

Lynn 12/1.

Am thinking something along these lines.....

Coetzee £15 EW

Henley £15 EW

Lynn £10 EW.

That make any sense?

I need to decide sharpish, I need to get to bed, & will be offline until early afternoon tomorrow.

I'll proceed as above unless  advised otherwise.

This bet is ON, as above, with Ladbrokes.

Top Debutant, The Masters, with Ladbrokes. Players & amounts.....

Coetzee 7/1, £15 EW

Henley 7/1, £15 EW

Lynn 12/1, £10 Ew


ON


Betslip Details tomorrow.

1/5 first 4 is better than 1/4 first 3.  So given the same price you'd be better off betting at Ladbrokes. 

Backing 8/1 e/w somewhere else is just a bit better than betting 7/1 e/w with Ladbrokes.  There isn't a lot in it, so our betting was close to the optimum.

Just for example, assuming Henley is a true 8/1 chance and we back £15 e/w.  You can guess he is roughly 2/1 to get top 3 or 5/4 to get top 4 (.1111 x 3 and .1111 x 4).  They feel a bit too big, but are probably close enough for this purpose. 

So at 7/1 Ladbrokes, we expect to get 15 x 8 x .1111 back from wins and 15 x 12/5 x .4444 back from places which is £29.33 in total.

If we took 8/1 elsewhere, we expect to get 15 x 9 x .11111 back from wins and 15 x 3 x .3333 back from places which is £30 total.

If you take Betfair as gospel, then the best bet looks to be Lynn, you beat Betfair by most, get the best price and get the better Ladbrokes e/w terms.

[tikay]

Superb stuff, thanks Doobs.

This (below), in particular, & ignoring Lynn, is something I have only recently grasped, & I try to do it all the time, or at least, when time permnits. It is a sort of "Value rule of thumb" it seems to me.


If you take Betfair as gospel, then the best bet looks to be Lynn, you beat Betfair by most, get the best price and get the better Ladbrokes e/w terms.

[Doobs]

The Masters will be up & running before I get back Online tomorrow, so below is, roughly, our Book.

Time has been a bit of a bugger here, & I'm not sure the Book is quite what I wanted. We have no long-shots Outright, & I think I may have missed some of the Sub-Markets, but it is what it is.

There will be daily Match Bets etc, so plenty of time I suppose.

Outright

Snedeker, £25 WIN @ 25/1

Tiger Woods, £30 EW @ 6/1

Rory McIllroy, £25 EW @ 12/1

Phil Mickelson, £25 EW @ 16/1

Justin Rose, £50 EW @ 22/1

First Round Leader

Lee Westwood, £15 EW @ 33/1

Justin Rose, £15 EW @ 18/1

Charl Schwartzel, £15 EW @ 28/1

Top Amateur

Weaver, £60 @ 4.6

Top Debutant

Coetzee £15 EW @ 7/1

Henley £15 EW @ 7/1

Lynn £10 EW @ 12/1

Invested so far - £515 approx.

It is worth backing Adam Scott with Paddy Power.  The 25/1 on offer matches Betfair and they pay quarter the odds first 6.  So you get 6.25/1 first 6 which is better than betfair's 11/2 first 5.  £20 e/w seems in line with the rest.

[Doobs]

The Masters will be up & running before I get back Online tomorrow, so below is, roughly, our Book.

Time has been a bit of a bugger here, & I'm not sure the Book is quite what I wanted. We have no long-shots Outright, & I think I may have missed some of the Sub-Markets, but it is what it is.

There will be daily Match Bets etc, so plenty of time I suppose.

Outright

Snedeker, £25 WIN @ 25/1

Tiger Woods, £30 EW @ 6/1

Rory McIllroy, £25 EW @ 12/1

Phil Mickelson, £25 EW @ 16/1

Justin Rose, £50 EW @ 22/1

First Round Leader

Lee Westwood, £15 EW @ 33/1

Justin Rose, £15 EW @ 18/1

Charl Schwartzel, £15 EW @ 28/1

Top Amateur

Weaver, £60 @ 4.6

Top Debutant

Coetzee £15 EW @ 7/1

Henley £15 EW @ 7/1

Lynn £10 EW @ 12/1

Invested so far - £515 approx.

It is worth backing Adam Scott with Paddy Power.  The 25/1 on offer matches Betfair and they pay quarter the odds first 6.  So you get 6.25/1 first 6 which is better than betfair's 11/2 first 5.  £20 e/w seems in line with the rest.

Could add Steve Stricker (60/1) and Jim Furyk (70/1) to these bets too (both at Paddy Power).  They are 64/1 and 74/1 respectively on Betfair but we get better e/w terms with Paddy Power.  You get a better price and 6 places vs 5.

Suggest £5 e/w both.  Don't misclick win only like I just did on one.

[redarmi]

1/5 first 4 is better than 1/4 first 3.  So given the same price you'd be better off betting at Ladbrokes. 

Backing 8/1 e/w somewhere else is just a bit better than betting 7/1 e/w with Ladbrokes.  There isn't a lot in it, so our betting was close to the optimum.

Just for example, assuming Henley is a true 8/1 chance and we back £15 e/w.  You can guess he is roughly 2/1 to get top 3 or 5/4 to get top 4 (.1111 x 3 and .1111 x 4).  They feel a bit too big, but are probably close enough for this purpose. 

So at 7/1 Ladbrokes, we expect to get 15 x 8 x .1111 back from wins and 15 x 12/5 x .4444 back from places which is £29.33 in total.

If we took 8/1 elsewhere, we expect to get 15 x 9 x .11111 back from wins and 15 x 3 x .3333 back from places which is £30 total.

If you take Betfair as gospel, then the best bet looks to be Lynn, you beat Betfair by most, get the best price and get the better Ladbrokes e/w terms.

Thanks for this Doobs and I appreciate this is somewhat back of envelope stuff but I would like to put out a theoretical question.  Is it fair to assume that finishing positions are distributed equally like that?  There was some discussion earlier today on Fred about the distribution of Tigers finishing positions which suggested he was significantly more likely to finish first than second, third, fourth etc.  Given that Henley is, rightly or wrongly, fourth favourite in this market isn''t he theoretically more likely to finish fourth than first and arent his finishing positions in this market largely normally distributed around his mean finishing position?  In which case that extra position in fourth may actually be disproportionately valuable......I am just putting this out there as a discussion point as I honestly don't know and if anyone will know it is Doobs i would have thought!!!!

[Doobs]

1/5 first 4 is better than 1/4 first 3.  So given the same price you'd be better off betting at Ladbrokes. 

Backing 8/1 e/w somewhere else is just a bit better than betting 7/1 e/w with Ladbrokes.  There isn't a lot in it, so our betting was close to the optimum.

Just for example, assuming Henley is a true 8/1 chance and we back £15 e/w.  You can guess he is roughly 2/1 to get top 3 or 5/4 to get top 4 (.1111 x 3 and .1111 x 4).  They feel a bit too big, but are probably close enough for this purpose. 

So at 7/1 Ladbrokes, we expect to get 15 x 8 x .1111 back from wins and 15 x 12/5 x .4444 back from places which is £29.33 in total.

If we took 8/1 elsewhere, we expect to get 15 x 9 x .11111 back from wins and 15 x 3 x .3333 back from places which is £30 total.

If you take Betfair as gospel, then the best bet looks to be Lynn, you beat Betfair by most, get the best price and get the better Ladbrokes e/w terms.

Thanks for this Doobs and I appreciate this is somewhat back of envelope stuff but I would like to put out a theoretical question.  Is it fair to assume that finishing positions are distributed equally like that?  There was some discussion earlier today on Fred about the distribution of Tigers finishing positions which suggested he was significantly more likely to finish first than second, third, fourth etc.  Given that Henley is, rightly or wrongly, fourth favourite in this market isn''t he theoretically more likely to finish fourth than first and arent his finishing positions in this market largely normally distributed around his mean finishing position?  In which case that extra position in fourth may actually be disproportionately valuable......I am just putting this out there as a discussion point as I honestly don't know and if anyone will know it is Doobs i would have thought!!!!

Will come back later.  That is why I said it is too big. 

[sharky_uk]

My first post on this thread.....

I have been betting on golf for many years and have a theory that whilst there are many factors that can be taken into consideration, by far the most important factor is 'recent form'. So much so that a system based on this single factor can prove very profitable. Based on this I backed Billy Horschel before the start of last weeks Texas Open on Betfair (65) given that he had come 2nd the previous week in the Houston Open. Whilst he did not win the Texas Open he lead after rounds 1, 2 & 3 and I was able to lay him off (with a big chunk at < 2) to make a decent profit.

Based on this theory I have 2 picks that are available on Betfair at unbelievable prices that just cannot be ignored.

D.A. Points (440) - Winner of the Houston Open just 2 weeks ago
Martin Laird (160) - Winner of last weeks Texas Open

In my opinion the above players represent huge value at these prices and I would expect them both to trade at significantly below these prices during the course of the tournament providing an opportunity of a decent profit even if they do not win.

What do you think?

[rinswun]

I wouldn't touch Points with a barge pole. I'm all for the form argument but sometimes anomalies get thrown up (see Ted Potter Jr winning the Greenbrier last year) and he most certainly is one. He won after missing 7/9 cuts in the season then reverted back to finishing T53 last week. Billy Horschel is a future star and about 100x more talented.

Laird'd game is more suited to Augusta  and he is a much classier player but last weeks win was his first top 30 of the season and he only broke 70 for one round which was the great 63. Anyone can catch fire for one round but I'd need to see way more to even consider backing him.

[Junior Senior]

I favour a strong factoring in of course and distance with golf. Thats why the masters is one of the more predictable events as they return to the same course year on year. Clearly recent form is important too.

[bobby1]

Something just struck me re the snooker Rich and your Burden bet.

Those stories of Ronnies practice sessions being really good and taken seriously might be showing in the three players he has been practicing with, White, Drago and Burden.

drago looks to have improved a stone in the qualifiers, White just knocked out too players he should prob have been beaten by these days and Burden has been in good form in tourneys recently too.

I liked the Burden bet, Harold is what he is but knows how to grind players down and there could be a reason that Burden has improved. I don't think it will be a quick game tho :-)

I was a bit surprised to se Ali Carter tweeting he was hitting the practice tables harder than at any other stage of the season,    Made me think of the Bears D coach who used to fine players if they quickened up in practice coz if they could quicken up when they had to it meant they weren't putting enough effort in in the first place.