Tips for Tikay

[Doobs]

Tighty. tut tut.

You mustn't be result orientated.

We have been told that the Free Bets are a must do, no matter how often we lose on them. Just suck it up. If we live to be 1000,or haven't gone skint, we may just see variance level out.

I am not being. couldn't see how those Meydan races, ultra competitve, early season fit the usual method/shape of betting markets of the maths bets

I couldn't post it yesterday on a coach on the M6!

One 11/4 winner plus one free bet = effectively loss of £65 at Meydan, not -£1200.  Cavalryman was the most unlucky of losers and Shea Shea may not have been able to keep up with the pace, but may have finished like a train. 

As Sonour said, where were the people telling you to lay the favourites yesterday?  As I mentioned before, Cheltenham 2013 we crush the offers, we are all brilliant, Cheltenham 2014, a bunch of outsiders win, we are idiots.

We need to be looking at other bets too.  We both know the formula 1 bets were badly placed, and that drop goal betting just looks wrong. 

Shame I feel forced to throw this away here, just when a stream of +EV bets should be what you need at this time.  But we aren't grinding these, we are building a book on the Masters. 

Ofc Jordan wins, I'll be giving it large.  Hopefully we won't have to put up with a truck full of aftertiming.

the F1 bets definitely badly placed, when stale, and we are definitely missing lots of tricks throughout a lot of sports, mainly in bet placement

people seem reluctant to question. I do so, unable to do so yesterday, and get the aftertiming thing thrown my way. I probably get it in the neck if I throw the questions up beforehand too!

I repeat I have nothing against these types of bets, but I don't think the racing yesterday suited the maths bets for the fundamentals I mention above

2013 World Cup results.  All bar 3 of the races won by short priced horses. 

Fundamentals bad there too? 

[TightEnd]

The same factors presumably applied then too. You can't disagree that the shapes of these races differed quite substantially from the races you would usually select, both in terms of market make up and number of runners?

[tikay]

Malayasian GP about to start.

Who & what do we want, please?

[Simon Galloway]

What do we want?  Time travel.

When do we want it?  Doesn't matter.

[Bazzaboy]

Hall v Ward stopped on a cut due to an accidental head clash in the 2nd round so it's a technical draw.  We run bad.

Technical draw my arse. In no other sport would they abandon a match one tenth of the way through and agree a draw. No contest sounds like a much more appropriate term.

Has the bet been settled as a loser?

Yeah it's a loser. Most firms have draw/technical draw listed in the MOV market so despite it being complete and utter bollocks thems the rules. It used to be called a no contest back in the day. To give an idea of how badly we ran in 15 years of punting on boxing that's the first time I've done my money in that manner.

[Doobs]

The same factors presumably applied then too. You can't disagree that the shapes of these races differed quite substantially from the races you would usually select, both in terms of market make up and number of runners?

I have supplied a counter example already. Yesterday was bad , the same meeting last year was probably fine though I haven't got the morning betting shows.  Maybe someone can google Dubai World Cup results sporting life with a year after for 5 years or so, to see if it is really a bad meeting for favourites.  Then we can have a discussion on whether we want to lay them all next year.  If we don't do this, then we are in danger of just observing variance and making bad decisions based on it.  There may be something in it, or there may not, I am open minded on that.

We bet on handicaps, group races, jumps, hurdles, they all have different shapes.  There isn't really a standard shape, though guess we are weighted heavily to the high class races.  I assume if favourites did particularly badly in one or the other, the market would correct.  I'd expect the form in high class races to be reliable than in handicaps because of the lower possibility that horses/jockeys aren't trying.

Now can you give me your thoughts on taking 3/1 on the drop goal, taking into account Sinfield's past drop goal statistics.  

[tikay]

Hall v Ward stopped on a cut due to an accidental head clash in the 2nd round so it's a technical draw.  We run bad.

Technical draw my arse. In no other sport would they abandon a match one tenth of the way through and agree a draw. No contest sounds like a much more appropriate term.

Has the bet been settled as a loser?

Yeah it's a loser. Most firms have draw/technical draw listed in the MOV market so despite it being complete and utter bollocks thems the rules. It used to be called a no contest back in the day. To give an idea of how badly we ran in 15 years of punting on boxing that's the first time I've done my money in that manner.

Seemed to me they were both terrific bets, no regrets here, it is what it is. One of those things. Well, TWO of those things, actually.

A bit of run-bad is good for the character.

[doubleup]

tikay - I've sent you a pm re the masters maiden bet

[tikay]

tikay - I've sent you a pm re the masters maiden bet

Thanks, got it, am trying to get caught up on PM's, got a huge backlog, but will reply shortly.

[bobby1]

Posting Sinfields drop goal totals and then saying they are bad value makes no sense unless you take the individual games into account. Far more likely to kick one in a game with a tight Hcap or unusually low total. Just obvious he is more likely to kick one in games where Leeds are 2,4,6 points favs or small underdogs than when 20,22,24 favs. It's just looking at numbers without any thought.

It might well be that it still isn't value but the sample size being used, which is all his games isn't the number to use. If the Hcap is scratch and the total is 36( say a Grand final) then more likely than when they are playing the Broncos and 44 point favs.

[nirvana]

I think it's time to try punting like I do. When punting variance is against me and I'm down to a few grand on the machine I smash it in the face by going all in.

Recommend £1800 on Valencia at 4/9 on betfair - pretty sure it's not value but it's just gonna win and I don't dine on value pie. Anyway I hope it wins so I can get you out for the month plus Ima be down on my uppers if it doesn't.

I'll only answer questions about this recommend by PM

[tikay]

I think it's time to try punting like I do. When punting variance is against me and I'm down to a few grand on the machine I smash it in the face by going all in.

Recommend £1800 on Valencia at 4/9 on betfair - pretty sure it's not value but it's just gonna win and I don't dine on value pie. Anyway I hope it wins so I can get you out for the month plus Ima be down on my uppers if it doesn't.

I'll only answer questions about this recommend by PM

There we go, problem solved.

Easy game.

[Doobs]

Posting Sinfields drop goal totals and then saying they are bad value makes no sense unless you take the individual games into account. Far more likely to kick one in a game with a tight Hcap or unusually low total. Just obvious he is more likely to kick one in games where Leeds are 2,4,6 points favs or small underdogs than when 20,22,24 favs. It's just looking at numbers without any thought.

It might well be that it still isn't value but the sample size being used, which is all his games isn't the number to use. If the Hcap is scratch and the total is 36( say a Grand final) then more likely than when they are playing the Broncos and 44 point favs.

He is 11/1 or something like that long run.   As alluded to in the OP, he sometimes gets them when the games aren't even that close.  Leeds are going to be playing against what I would consider top sides maybe half their games.  You may be able to make it 6/1 or so on these factors, but 3/1 looks very unlikely.   At least we are getting there even if you instinctively take the other side.

[bobby1]

Posting Sinfields drop goal totals and then saying they are bad value makes no sense unless you take the individual games into account. Far more likely to kick one in a game with a tight Hcap or unusually low total. Just obvious he is more likely to kick one in games where Leeds are 2,4,6 points favs or small underdogs than when 20,22,24 favs. It's just looking at numbers without any thought.

It might well be that it still isn't value but the sample size being used, which is all his games isn't the number to use. If the Hcap is scratch and the total is 36( say a Grand final) then more likely than when they are playing the Broncos and 44 point favs.

He is 11/1 or something like that long run.   As alluded to in the OP, he sometimes gets them when the games aren't even that close.  Leeds are going to be playing against what I would consider top sides maybe half their games.  You may be able to make it 6/1 or so on these factors, but 3/1 looks very unlikely.   At least we are getting there even if you instinctively take the other side.

Sure, it might still be too short and my gut feeling would be it is because that kind of market usually are. But just listing his drop kick per game figures without taking obvious differences in each game is going to give a false impression too.  There was a winning bet earlier in the week on first booking in the Man Utd game and there were numbers given to present value but if you take all Man Utd games and take stats from those it will include a load of matches where Man Utd are a very short price, will have loads of possession % and other teams will be chasing games/pissed off they are losing etc. This was a game that Man Utd were underdogs at home against a team better than them so using numbers from all the games isn't the right way to look at it.

A guy that used to post NFL stuff  he steals from other people used to present them as this team are 20 and 30 away at outdoor teams after a loss of more than 10 etc when playing on a Monday lunchtime, but for example using New York Giants numbers from years when they were terrible mixed in with years when they won the Superbowl isn't correct. So there are a few examples of quoting maths where the events are vastly different to the games the numbers are being taken from.

[TightEnd]

Now can you give me your thoughts on taking 3/1 on the drop goal, taking into account Sinfield's past drop goal statistics.   

no particular thoughts, as I am less attuned to RL than I am RU. As that feels like more of a cop-out of an answer than it should be I will say that i stopped doing RU drop goal stuff after your comments a while ago (Owen Farrell iirc) and that feels like a leak has been plugged. Probably the same applies to backing draws too, even for very closely matched teams

As to the racing, I take the point that it may just be "one of those years" and i might be translating adverse variance into something else . I do think there is a layman's logic to why the fundamentals of Meydan in particular and flat racing right at the start of the season might not suit the maths bets. ii guess the stats are out there (fewer favourites go in on the flat in march/april?) but its a spring sunday and other stuff awaits....!