Tips for Tikay

[tikay]

http://www.oddschecker.com/golf/uspga-championship/hole-in-one

Stanley ‏@Golf_Stats 1h
There has been a hole-in-one at each of the last 3 Majors at Oak Hill ('89 US Open, '03 PGA, '08 Senior PGA) as well as the 1995 Ryder Cup.

Colm O'Keeffe ‏@Cokeeffe1 1h
@Golf_Stats 2 hole outs at Ryder cup Howard Clark and Costantino Rocca both Aced
Expand
 Stanley ‏@Golf_Stats 1h
@Cokeeffe1 Yes, didn't have enough characters There were 4 holes-in-one on the 6th hole within 2 hours in '89 US Open: wet + sloped green
Expand
 Colm O'Keeffe ‏@Cokeeffe1 1h
@Golf_Stats so basically ur stats tell us dat d 4/6 on a hole in one is a shoe-in! #Lumpon
Expand
 Stanley ‏@Golf_Stats 1h
@Cokeeffe1 tbh I expected much better than 4/6 for a major! 1989 was fluke as wet & green slope now changed. But still aces each time here.



That wasn't me by the way. Still think it's value against the stats.

M1

Rock solid 4/6 right across the board.

Not sure how to asess the value though.

If we bet, it would be £60.

When the old guys and a ryder cup produce them you know the odds are on your side. Clearly there is no guarantee but if you had 4 blanks in 4 years i reckon no hole in 1 would be closer to 2/5.

Bookies have no idea how to price hole in ones even after the infamous coup years ago. Remember Castle Stuart. 2 years of 2 hole in ones and still evens and better was available !

Bet or not it's your money after all and i'm not forcing anyone 

Last weeks golf was a disaster but i wasn't on hole in one stats and you were lucky to be sleeping when i posted. 

Sandy

OK Sandy, let's go.

Thanks.

We have £60 @ 4/6, Betfred, HOLE IN ONE @ USPGA.

ON

Bet placed, its reference is 148/158



Bet ref: 148/158 £60.00 Single

PGA Championship - Specials
Will There Be A Hole In One
 Yes 4/6 

Total stake
£ 60.00

Estimated return
£ 100.00

Full stake
£ 60.00

Full estimated return
£ 100.00

[Doobs]

http://www.oddschecker.com/golf/uspga-championship/hole-in-one

Stanley ‏@Golf_Stats 1h
There has been a hole-in-one at each of the last 3 Majors at Oak Hill ('89 US Open, '03 PGA, '08 Senior PGA) as well as the 1995 Ryder Cup.

Colm O'Keeffe ‏@Cokeeffe1 1h
@Golf_Stats 2 hole outs at Ryder cup Howard Clark and Costantino Rocca both Aced
Expand
 Stanley ‏@Golf_Stats 1h
@Cokeeffe1 Yes, didn't have enough characters There were 4 holes-in-one on the 6th hole within 2 hours in '89 US Open: wet + sloped green
Expand
 Colm O'Keeffe ‏@Cokeeffe1 1h
@Golf_Stats so basically ur stats tell us dat d 4/6 on a hole in one is a shoe-in! #Lumpon
Expand
 Stanley ‏@Golf_Stats 1h
@Cokeeffe1 tbh I expected much better than 4/6 for a major! 1989 was fluke as wet & green slope now changed. But still aces each time here.



That wasn't me by the way. Still think it's value against the stats.

M1

Rock solid 4/6 right across the board.

Not sure how to asess the value though.

If we bet, it would be £60.

When the old guys and a ryder cup produce them you know the odds are on your side. Clearly there is no guarantee but if you had 4 blanks in 4 years i reckon no hole in 1 would be closer to 2/5.

Bookies have no idea how to price hole in ones even after the infamous coup years ago. Remember Castle Stuart. 2 years of 2 hole in ones and still evens and better was available !

Bet or not it's your money after all and i'm not forcing anyone 

Last weeks golf was a disaster but i wasn't on hole in one stats and you were lucky to be sleeping when i posted. 

Sandy

OK Sandy, let's go.

Thanks.

We have £60 @ 4/6, Betfred, HOLE IN ONE @ USPGA.

ON

Bet placed, its reference is 148/158



Bet ref: 148/158 £60.00 Single

PGA Championship - Specials
Will There Be A Hole In One
 Yes 4/6 

Total stake
£ 60.00

Estimated return
£ 100.00

Full stake
£ 60.00

Full estimated return
£ 100.00

It is slightly better than 4/5 on Betfair. 

[tikay]

Bugger.

[Doobs]

edit again, you are also going to have to hope that your guys are in the right side of the draw if the weather fcast stays the same too.

The bets are 60/40 weather balanced - I taught doobs all he knows about golf weather 

Then you will probably get roughly 50% of them in the better conditions if there is a bias  

It would be easy to make that figure higher by taking that info into account.

If players that have been backed at 150/1 that are 230 on BF are considered value how much should we be having on Dufner right now at 35/1 a 1/4 the first 7 when he is now 38 on BF. Even if we easily justify that bet from a maths point of view are we going to still want it when there is a more solid fcast to work from?

If you looked at the BF list now and were picking ten selections to bet each way fixed odds using the BF list he is right at the top yet he isn't one of the players that were right at the top 2 days ago when the bets were placed. I'm afraid It is just random time related bet picking.

I wil come back with the rest later, but Dufner WAS profitable on the spreadsheet.  He just didn't make the cut.  I have no idea if he would be top if I ran it now.    

I could have backed pretty much everyone that was less than 100/1 in the Open and still be profitable.  I could get pretty close to backing everyone less than 100/1 even now, but just don't think there is the appetite for it here, so limited it to the 10 best at the time.  I guess if i get closer to backing everyone, then the more likely I/we lose accounts too.

The main reason they were profitable in The Open wasn't because they were 33/1 on the books vs 35/1 on Betfair, they were profitable because the bookies were paying 7 or 8 places when they should only be paying 4 or 5.  Paying 6 or 7 places covers the odd inevitable cock up where I back an injured player.  And for every player I get the wrong side of the weather with, there is another where I have the right side.  

If you were going to pick the bets now tho mate from scratch what would be the top ten using your spready. Appreciate you might be too busy but you must see the point that betting early using an immature market is going to throw up different bets from using a mature market when more info is available. So the main criteria for bet selections at the moment is just the time you do it.

If you really think that the main criteria for bet selction is the time I do the bets, then you are not grasping what I am saying at all.  It is just a complete logic fail.  Of course as time goes by, and prices move, selections will change, but that really isn't the same thing.  Those bets that are good now, were probably fine before, those that are fine now, were probably good before.  

The main driver for the bets is the 6 or 7 places.  Because of this general pricing error, I could stick a pin in the the names at the top of the market and take a best price and get 6 or 7 places and still be more likely than not get a +EV bet.  

no no, the main criteria for your bets is  not the time you place them but the time you place them is now the most important part. That's the point. There is no logic fail and I understand the places add to the value now punters can bet win only exchange prices each way at enhanced terms. The only logic fail seems to be you won't accept that you will have a different list of players depending on when you do the work, so it is pot luck which players your spready comes up with at that time. And you are using the weakest show of the week to base those on. So, again Tony is in the spot of having a load of bets on an event, some value, some not when if you ran the spready today it would give different bets. Easiest way to show that is to run it at the BF prices  now and the list will be different from yesterday and again different from the day before.

As for sharing info why not run it now and we can see what the best 10 are.

Of the 21 bets i made the other night, at least half were gone in the morning.  Before Tony got on, another 2 or 3 changed.   I expect now that very few of the 21 prices will be available.   Even if this didn't happen, the bookies and the Betfair prices would have moved regardless.  So I run the thing now, I clearly won't get the same answer, and I don't need to run the spreadsheet to know that.  Just because it doesn't produce the same answer now doesn't negate the previous results.  Some bets will now look worse, some will look better, but if you put 10 bets on, we can be reasonable certain that the average bet will be close to as much value as it did 2 days ago.  I have 21 bets on, so the mean of those is likely to be even closer to where it was when I put the bets on. 

But none of this means that time is the most important part of the equation.   The enhanced place terms remain the most important part, and it means that most of the bets from the other day will remain value.  Without these place terms the whole thing falls over, so I can run the spreasheet 15 times a day and still not get as much value as I found the other day.
 
Whilst there is some value in running the spreadsheet to find new picks, there is no value in running it to prove either of us is right.  The results will definitely have changed, yet that won't make you right. 

Tony needn't worry, as I said before, you can go through the list, pick random runners, take the best price, back them each way and still get value more often than not.   I accept it isn't perfect, I accept it can be improved, and I accept the results will change over time.  But none of these things mean that the previous results were bad.

[Tal]

Anyone think BetFred's 11/4 on Bale staying at spurs is appetising?

Just read this:

http://www.sportsmole.co.uk/football/real-madrid/transfer-talk/news/bale-pursuit-causing-unrest-at-real_97402.html

The more I hear - the consistent line from spurs, the criticism of Ancelotti, the issue over players in part exchange, the ramifications at Real, Ronaldo possibly signing an extension - the more I think he might stay at WHL for a season.

Hard for me to come across as being objective. FWIW Betfair is 77/29 (like a fraction from the seventies, that - my poor father would have had to work it out with a pencil and paper when someone put L1 2s 6½d on at 77/29).

One of the better spurs blogs (in before oxymoron) reports the irresistible force and the immovable object met in Florida and played their roles with aplomb:

http://www.cartilagefreecaptain.com/2013/8/7/4599772/gareth-bale-real-madrid-tottenham-hotspur-transfer-rumours

What do people think? Are we just guessing like everyone else? Probably

[Doobs]

Tonight's run of the spreadsheet produced the following.

Brandt Snedeker 28/1 Paddy Power (new)
Justin Rose 28/1 general (new)
Keegan Bradley 35/1 PP, Coral (new)
Jason Day 50/1 Coral, WHill, Boyles (new) (carrying an injury)
Steve Stricker 50/1 general (carrying an injury)
Sergio Garcia 55/1 bet365/PP
Bill Haas 60/1 PP (new)
Bubba Watson 66/1 Ladbrokes/Coral
Webb Simpson 60/1 Betfred or 66/1 General (new)
Jim Furyk 70/1 Betfred
Jordan Speith 90/1 PP/Boyles (new)
Hideki Matsuyama 100/1 Boyles/BetVic/PP/Coral (new)
Ryan Moore 110/1 bet365 or 100/1 Betfred

Note I stopped at 100/1 tonight to avoid too many outsiders.

So we have 8 new ones, of which Bobby1 says Jason Day is carrying an injury.  If we ignore Day, we are left with 7 new ones.

I think we should back
Brandt Snedeker 28/1 Paddy Power (new)
Justin Rose 28/1 general (new)
Keegan Bradley 35/1 PP, Coral (new)
maybe a tenner each way each?

Bill Haas 60/1 PP (new)
Webb Simpson 60/1 Betfred or 66/1 General (new)
Hideki Matsuyama 100/1 Boyles/BetVic/PP/Coral (new)
Jordan Speith 90/1 PP/Boyles (new)
maybe a fiver each way each?

IF YOU MISS ANY PRICE, DO NOT BET.

Bobby1 said the following about Jason Day: "Jason Day is the interesting one tho, he wasn't practising much after The Open due to a wrist niggle he had since the US Open, he was playing ok but not great. Last week he was complaining of a shoulder/upper arm niggle on the same side and was talking about a tissue injury there. He played poorly last week too. ".  That sounds like the sort of bet you should possibly avoid, but I mug punted anyway on half stakes.

FWIW Stenson is very close (a couple of percent below the bar I set) at 25/1 in a few places and was tipped up a couple of times earlier (including by Dubai).  For clarity, I backed him at 28/1 the other day.

If you don't want to back these I understand, though I think it is an error.

[Doobs]

and for those that want to punish Ladbrokes, the best bets are
Charl Schwartzel 40/1
Luke Donald 40/1
Bubba Watson 66/1

If you enter the code USPGA you get a refund on the win part up to £25 if Woods or Mickelson win.  This makes these bets great value.  PUNISH THEM if they let you!

[BigAdz]

I am only here at this time of night because of my age and failing body, so I will be quickish.

I am sure the Maths is correct and value with al these guys, and for sure I will get shot down, but to me this process seems soulless.

I love the process of checking if players are in form, like the course, seeing the type of player suits the course, be it putter, driver, approach players. Then we look at time of day the guy tees off, and facto in the weather. Look at playing partners, match bets etc. last season results, peaking or going off the boil, injures, wellness, happiness etc etc etc.

I may well make far less than Doobs, and anyone else that adopts this method of attaining value, but isn't it much more pleasurable to have put in a bunch of hard work and feel that the troops you send into battle are hand picked for the above reason, rather than because a spreadsheet at a certain time makes them a bet.

In essence the final leg of each journey, when I look at oddschecker to get the best price, won't appease the Maths guys too much, but I'm pretty sure I cant be the only one that reads Fred and must think this. I bet most here derive the enjoyment from people like Chompy reasoning his way round BB, or Jaffa watching midnight baseball for years and picking out a player under the radar, or Neil finding the winner of a maiden cos the second fav has an abundance of stamina likely to be optimized by the step up in trip. The list goes on. I agree totally that the Maths has its place, but.........

The day I rely on a spreadsheet to do my betting in this way, may well be the day I actually become the most profitable, but for me it's about finding out those bits of info that people generally ignore and making up my own jigsaw.

I could go on, but you get my gist, and hope it hasn't upset anyone, that wasn't the intention.

Nite all

[TightEnd]

Daily Report

Profit on Month £38.50

Outstanding Bets £2588.50

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aia1Hxq-NDNWdFk3UmlTSXMzTjRBTVNfOWRndVFsZHc#gid=28

A profit of £22 yesterday, with Michael Carberry's T20 powerplay performance producing a profit of £42 offset by Express Master's slightly unfortunate 2nd place in the Sussex Cup Dogs, tipped up a few weeks/rounds ago at 8-1, going off 6/4 in the final and narrowly missing out

In baseball the Rays lost again, and the Red Sox won again, giving the Red Sox clear water at the top of the AL East

In the AL Central the Royals won again but can make no ground on the Tigers who won for the 11th straight time

We are building up to the USPGA with a series of bets

Tonight Essex go to Trent Bridge for the final T20 Quarter finals as under-dogs. The game will have to go some to top last night's with over 400 runs scored and Lancashire failing to chase down 202 by 1 run. The Fourth Test match starts tomorrow at the Riverside Durham. I might spare you the analysis of the River Wear, which runs alongside the ground, water table and how that suits seamers at the ground. Cliffs, I would expect a result in this game.

We have Presburg and Winged Icarus running for us later too, so a big day with a chunk of the near £2600 forward book in play

[TightEnd]

Michael Carberry reaches his T20 hundred, and positively marmalised the fours bet put up by ripple11



Loughteen Blanco upsets Teejay's BlueHawk and Express Master to win at Hove

Click to see full-size image.

The Royals keep winning, but so do the Tigers



Hamish Rutherford is our key man tonight at Trent Bridge



Covering all bases in 2013 Big Brother

Click to see full-size image.

[horseplayer]

I noticed last night Notts County had another centre back sent off

This now means both first choice centre halves are suspended for the visit of Chompy's free scoring mob on Saturday

Does this turn 6-4 from the right price to a good one?


cheers

[horseplayer]

Hugh Taylor has just put up Winged Icarus

Price was already crashing a very rare 2pt bet for him as well

I can be confident the sp will be beaten now on this one!

[henrik777]

http://www.oddschecker.com/golf/uspga-championship/hole-in-one

Stanley ‏@Golf_Stats 1h
There has been a hole-in-one at each of the last 3 Majors at Oak Hill ('89 US Open, '03 PGA, '08 Senior PGA) as well as the 1995 Ryder Cup.

Colm O'Keeffe ‏@Cokeeffe1 1h
@Golf_Stats 2 hole outs at Ryder cup Howard Clark and Costantino Rocca both Aced
Expand
 Stanley ‏@Golf_Stats 1h
@Cokeeffe1 Yes, didn't have enough characters There were 4 holes-in-one on the 6th hole within 2 hours in '89 US Open: wet + sloped green
Expand
 Colm O'Keeffe ‏@Cokeeffe1 1h
@Golf_Stats so basically ur stats tell us dat d 4/6 on a hole in one is a shoe-in! #Lumpon
Expand
 Stanley ‏@Golf_Stats 1h
@Cokeeffe1 tbh I expected much better than 4/6 for a major! 1989 was fluke as wet & green slope now changed. But still aces each time here.



That wasn't me by the way. Still think it's value against the stats.

M1

Rock solid 4/6 right across the board.

Not sure how to asess the value though.

If we bet, it would be £60.

When the old guys and a ryder cup produce them you know the odds are on your side. Clearly there is no guarantee but if you had 4 blanks in 4 years i reckon no hole in 1 would be closer to 2/5.

Bookies have no idea how to price hole in ones even after the infamous coup years ago. Remember Castle Stuart. 2 years of 2 hole in ones and still evens and better was available !

Bet or not it's your money after all and i'm not forcing anyone 

Last weeks golf was a disaster but i wasn't on hole in one stats and you were lucky to be sleeping when i posted. 

Sandy

OK Sandy, let's go.

Thanks.

We have £60 @ 4/6, Betfred, HOLE IN ONE @ USPGA.

ON

Bet placed, its reference is 148/158



Bet ref: 148/158 £60.00 Single

PGA Championship - Specials
Will There Be A Hole In One
 Yes 4/6 

Total stake
£ 60.00

Estimated return
£ 100.00

Full stake
£ 60.00

Full estimated return
£ 100.00

It is slightly better than 4/5 on Betfair. 

Skybet have it on a price boost which i didn't know last night and no use to fred anyway. 5/6.

Suitably punished.

Sandy

[Chompy]

Fk it, left Winged Icarus alone last night. Good shout sir, good shout. 10/1 into 4/1.

Think we need a bit more trading on horses at overnight prices tbh, go for a hundo each-way and then lay some back.

For example, Presburg can now be laid at 9. We are on at 13. If we'd had £100 each-way @ 12/1, we could now lay £80 @ 9 and £80 @ 3.2ish a place, which effectively leaves us with £20 each-way @ over 20/1.

That's a different Sam in the photo gallery...

[a.sparrow]

Lol Pressburg is Hugh Taylor's second selection today! I think TFT might beat the price on both