Tips for Tikay

[arbboy]

All wide at B Vue dogs this morning.  Hammering down with rain and the track is soaking.  Big stayer in t2 in last just led up at first bend and should have won easily but never got home on the rail.

[Sportshead]

anyone want to put me off the Croatia, Poland, Germany treble today?

pays around 9/2


after switzerland and wales yesterday the late Russia equaliser and i quote one compiler, and adjust for hyperbole, "saved the industry a few profit warnings"

Not to put you off, but Turkey are obvious spoilers, they can be very hot and cold but this group of players seem much more adventurous than turkey squads of the past
Actually think if they got on a roll they are potential dark horses and I think both teams will see this as game they can't afford to lose if they are to progress with Spain and the Czech Rep making up a tough group
With Turan and Çalhanoğlu hopefully starting they could be surprisingly attacking ,I'm hoping they start with Tosun up front as he is more mobile but, similar to our situation with Rooney,Yilmaz will probably get the nod

My personal bet is BTTS @ 11/10 which looks on the big side

[DMorgan]

anyone want to put me off the Croatia, Poland, Germany treble today?

pays around 9/2


after switzerland and wales yesterday the late Russia equaliser and i quote one compiler, and adjust for hyperbole, "saved the industry a few profit warnings"

5.76 the treble on the machine, £100 returns an extra £2.20 after 5% commish

[Sportshead]

All wide at B Vue dogs this morning.  Hammering down with rain and the track is soaking.  Big stayer in t2 in last just led up at first bend and should have won easily but never got home on the rail.

Only saw the 1st race in corals this morning the 5 dog absolutely hosed up

[Jono3131]

.

[Peter-27]

Doobs point about the e/w prices on the F1 being far better than the podium prices is exactly why I read this thread.  What's not to like about a free win bet?

Peter clearly knows his stuff on Motorsport, I worked in F1 and usually (but not always) agree with much of his reasoning but I don't always understand his staking suggestions.  

EG: Peter put up this bet earlier.  To Reach Q3 - Carlos Sainz @ 7/5 with the exchange. The Toro Rosso won't be as strong over one lap, but this should be closer to EVS than 7/5. Suggest £10.

If we're getting 7/5 about an even money shot why are we only putting a tenner on?  

In the same post Peter suggested £50 on Lewis to win P3 at 4/5 because it was "considerably overpriced".  Was it really that much more overpriced than the Sainz bet?

Or am I missing something?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm grateful for all the tips I follow on here win or lose but I'm genuinely a bit baffled by the recommended stakes on some of the F1 bets.

I have myself pointed out that deciding my stake size is somewhere that I lack and could improve. I tend to decide my stake through a combination of the amount of value in the bet, and the likelihood of it happening. This does work for the most part (76.57% ROI on motorsport in 2015 for me personally), however there's no reason why that couldn't improve. If you have suggestions, I'm all ears

P.S. Actually, on this specific instance, it was a typo! Personally I bet £20, although it was ultimately a loser. For the record, I didn't say EVS, I said closer to EVS - to be pedantic.

P.P.S Who did you work for? I worked for Williams at one point, albeit predominately in the hybrid power division, rather than F1.

Sorry Peter, I must've missed an earlier post/discussion about staking sizes.  I didn't mean to bring up something that had already been covered on here.  I guess my point was if Sainz and Hamilton were both similarly overpriced then the stakes should also be similar.  It felt by your suggested stakes that you felt the Hamilton bet was 5 times the value of the Sainz one.  "ish" ;-)

It's irrelevant that it was a loser.  If it was value it was a good recommendation imho.

I worked on the marketing side of F1 rather than the technical side.  Spent a few years with Jonathan Palmer's Palmersport operation which meant spending a lot of time with McLaren and Williams and their respective sponsors in particular.  At that time it was Clare Williams and Christian Vine (David & Tim's brother) that I worked alongside on all sorts of deals.

It's good to be betting on F1 again as I lost faith when I had the inside info that the Mclarens were going to be quick in the '98 season.  I was on Coulthard to win in Melbourne at 40/1 only for him to pull over and let Hakkinen take the victory.  I thought I was over this.  Clearly I'm not yet!

Hmm, I do see your point with the Hamilton/Sainz comparison. What I don't understand, and this probably links back to why my stake sizing is weak, is why you wouldn't consider both the value in the price, and the probability of the event happening, in the stake size. For instance, Rio Haryanto is 1500/1 for a podium today. That probably does represent value in as much as if the race ran 1500 times, he probably would get a podium once. However, due to the unlikely nature of this happening, we're not going to bet on it. Or, even if we did, the bet size would be extremely small - wouldn't it. In theory, I would say no driver should be over 1000/1.

Ahh, so we've both worked with Claire then, which is hardly surprising given how close the motorsport community actually is. I'm sure there will be others that we have both worked with also.

You bet on Coulthard to win the 1998 Australian GP? Dude, that's gotta hurt. Very unlucky.

Okay - maybe you are correct.  Away from motor sport and this debate I just think it's easy to pick holes in any 50-1 or 150-1 shot whether it be golf, football, cricket whatever.  I just got the impression from the weekend that Doobs had put up 2 long shots with reasoning and within one or two posts you had immediately shot him down.  I think I could tear up pretty much every tip that is 25-1+ if I wanted to because by definition they aren't likely to happen and there will be shortcomings with the selection.

I guess my feeling was that you didn't take the tips in the "unlikely" realm that they were suggested.  

As you say, if you genuinely think Alonso tip should be 66-1 and Bottas tip should be 250-1 then you are absolutely correct to point that out.  However, I didn't get the impression of that level of consideration from your posts (and after all determining if something is 40-1 or 50-1 is a lot less exact science than determining than if something should be favourite or not).

Hope that makes sense!

Yeah, I can completely understand that.

I do always try to provide justification when I post something, but obviously that didn't come across as well as I would have hoped in these posts. What more could/should I have said? I'm trying to avoid this happening again  

Doobs point about the e/w prices on the F1 being far better than the podium prices is exactly why I read this thread.  What's not to like about a free win bet?

Peter clearly knows his stuff on Motorsport, I worked in F1 and usually (but not always) agree with much of his reasoning but I don't always understand his staking suggestions.  

EG: Peter put up this bet earlier.  To Reach Q3 - Carlos Sainz @ 7/5 with the exchange. The Toro Rosso won't be as strong over one lap, but this should be closer to EVS than 7/5. Suggest £10.

If we're getting 7/5 about an even money shot why are we only putting a tenner on?  

In the same post Peter suggested £50 on Lewis to win P3 at 4/5 because it was "considerably overpriced".  Was it really that much more overpriced than the Sainz bet?

Or am I missing something?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm grateful for all the tips I follow on here win or lose but I'm genuinely a bit baffled by the recommended stakes on some of the F1 bets.

I have myself pointed out that deciding my stake size is somewhere that I lack and could improve. I tend to decide my stake through a combination of the amount of value in the bet, and the likelihood of it happening. This does work for the most part (76.57% ROI on motorsport in 2015 for me personally), however there's no reason why that couldn't improve. If you have suggestions, I'm all ears

P.S. Actually, on this specific instance, it was a typo! Personally I bet £20, although it was ultimately a loser. For the record, I didn't say EVS, I said closer to EVS - to be pedantic.

P.P.S Who did you work for? I worked for Williams at one point, albeit predominately in the hybrid power division, rather than F1.

Hi Peter,

Dekka made a fascinating post as to his motor racing background, & then replied further to a question from me, here.....


http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=56581.msg2135757#msg2135757

Ahh, I remember the post, did not remember the username.

I'm 24 years old, and while I have been gambling since before I was 18,

For some reason I thought you were much older than 24.

Were you confusing Peter with me?

I am older than 24.

In San Diego yesterday (thin...) we got on a bus, & there was half price travel for Senior Citizens, defined as being over 60. Thought I may as well have a bit of that, so presented the Driver with my Passport. He never even looked at it, just cast a quick glance at me & insta said "no need for proof Sir, I can see you qualify".

Bastard.    

You're older than 24? You don't look a day over 16.

I guess what would be useful for me from a selfish point of view would be a comparison of a long shot McLaren tip at (say) 40-1 and a Force India long shot at (say) 20-1.  Both unlikely but I guess a really useful analysis with your knowledge is the comparison?  Why the differential is greater than the odds suggest.  Why is Force India (in our hypothetical example) a bet but McLaren isn't.  I know McLaren are still poor but I guess how many runnings of the race are required before the long shot actually comes in so I can see how much the bookies are taking my pants down with 40-1!  

I would quite strongly suggest that Force India are more than twice as likely to grab a podium today than McLaren. In my opinion, Force India would need around eight races to grab a podium, whereas McLaren would need at least 50. I'm not sure how that translates to the odds you posted above, but I'm sure you'll tell me. I'd be interested to know.

Peter, a couple of links for you about stake sizing

Kelly Criterion Calculator: http://www.albionresearch.com/kelly/default.php

Kelly is a pretty aggro strategy (for example if we could be sure that we are getting 7/5 about a true 11/10 shot then we should be betting 10% of bankroll to achieve maximum growth) so most people go half kelly or even a quarter. The smaller fraction you take the lower your expected growth rate in exchange for smaller variance. It uses estimated probability of winning rather than estimate of true price but you can get to the %age chance by taking the reciprocal of the decimal odds, so if you think that your bet is a true 11/10 shot then estimated chance of winning = 1/((11/10)+1) = 1/2.1 = 0.476 = 47.6%

Have a play around with the calculator and you'll get a decent feel for how various edge sizes should be staked.

Unfortunately we do often encounter trouble getting more than £50 on a lot of things, but even if we can only get on for the full stake amount for a third of our bets, that will greatly increase the £EV of that weekends bets

Kelly Discussion: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/25/probability/3-questions-kelly-criterion-1208498/

This thread approaches Kelly as a model for determining what your stake size should be relative to bankroll in heads up SNGs but the principles are the same.

glgl tomorrow

Thanks DMorgan, that's a very useful post. I will look into this when I get some time - hopefully later today.

I'm 24 years old, and while I have been gambling since before I was 18,

For some reason I thought you were much older than 24.

Yes, pretty impressive in so many ways for 24 years old.

Can't tell if that's sarcasm because I should be better at stake sizing by now - or a genuine comment. I'm going to assume the latter, so thank you very much

One of the problems is that we as humans are terrible at statistics and mathematics.

We have some sharp minds in this thread when it comes to evaluating sport but it's not a mathematical approach mostly.

Arbboy laughs at this a lot as he's been in the game for so long he actually does price things up in his head I think and then looks at prices. Whilst the rest of us have a look at the odds and contrast/compare and figure out if something is worth betting.

From reading Peter's posts, I think this is what he does when he decides whether to recommend a bet or not. He's looking at data but he's not coming up with a tissue and then betting off that I believe. Which is why this 40/1, 50/1 stuff is a bit futile. We simply don't know.

Hector posted up someone winning a set at evens in the French open which he said was 1/3. Markets are wrong but I don't think they're ever that wrong and Arbboy and co scoffed a bit. As DMorgan says, with Kelly we should be putting absolute lumps on if this were the case. I backed the selection and watched the game and think his reasoning was sound as the game was fairly tight but the better player ultimately won in straight sets with 2 tie breaks I believe. If it was a 10/11 shot and we took evens we're making plenty in the long run.

I think people are sometimes a bit concerned about putting up marginal spots so want to sound supremely confident when they do.

We don't have to believe we have a gigantic edge to be betting on something. Getting 7/1 about a 6/1 shot is a fantastic spot.

Ironically, I am actually pretty good at Maths, I use complex mathematics in my day job. However, I haven't really had the time to think about how to apply this to a gambling environment. And, as conceited as this may sound, I haven't felt the need to, because my ROI is pretty high over a decent sample size (currently 54.03% overall across 650 bets).

When I'm looking through the odds; I look at what price the bookie has, think about what price I would have if I were the bookie, and if there's is higher than mine, I know it's a bet. Then to decide stake size, I think about:

- The difference between their price and mine (higher difference means higher stake).
- The likelihood of the event happening (the more likely, the higher the stake).

Whether or not this is the "right" approach or not, I don't know. It does work for me, but perhaps a different strategy could work better?

Peter,

Did you understand Doobs point about the EW betting ?

Perez and Hulkenberg are both 250/1 with WH 1/5 1,2,3.

So if you back them each way you are getting 50/1 to podium.

I think you suggested them to podium at 14/1+.

So it's obviously much better to do it this way.

Yep, completely understand that. However, I'm not sure that Perez/Hulkenberg to win the race was 250/1 when I did the 14/1 podium bet. If they were, then I just quite simply missed the spot.

One of the problems is that we as humans are terrible at statistics and mathematics.

We have some sharp minds in this thread when it comes to evaluating sport but it's not a mathematical approach mostly.

Arbboy laughs at this a lot as he's been in the game for so long he actually does price things up in his head I think and then looks at prices. Whilst the rest of us have a look at the odds and contrast/compare and figure out if something is worth betting.

From reading Peter's posts, I think this is what he does when he decides whether to recommend a bet or not. He's looking at data but he's not coming up with a tissue and then betting off that I believe. Which is why this 40/1, 50/1 stuff is a bit futile. We simply don't know.

Hector posted up someone winning a set at evens in the French open which he said was 1/3. Markets are wrong but I don't think they're ever that wrong and Arbboy and co scoffed a bit. As DMorgan says, with Kelly we should be putting absolute lumps on if this were the case. I backed the selection and watched the game and think his reasoning was sound as the game was fairly tight but the better player ultimately won in straight sets with 2 tie breaks I believe. If it was a 10/11 shot and we took evens we're making plenty in the long run.

I think people are sometimes a bit concerned about putting up marginal spots so want to sound supremely confident when they do.

We don't have to believe we have a gigantic edge to be betting on something. Getting 7/1 about a 6/1 shot is a fantastic spot.

I remember that tennis match as well - was nip and tuck all the way.

Guess your post sums up why I made my original post - Doobs made some "banzai" selections with reasoning so I'm not sure why they were both shot down so quickly.  With the reasoning they both seemed well thought out to me.   It seems a bit nit picking to say they are 50-1 rather than 40-1.  The US Open golf is on this week and I'm sure a couple of 100/1 shots will go up.   I can post "missed last 2 cuts, doesn't drive far enough, missed last cut on this course, should be 125-1" but I'm not sure what that adds?
 
Anyway I'm sure this has been discussed enough!

Dung,

I, like you, winced a little when Peter disagreed with those bets. Sure, you can disagree with a bet put up by anyone, but to do so about £10ew on a 150/1 shot, where we were getting 30/1 to podium, put up by Doobs who is an expert amoung experts on betting and on so many sports too was probably unnecessary.

It's what the prices were at the time that I'm disagreeing with, but perhaps I just missed it.

Anyhow, going to look at the markets now for the race

[Peter-27]

Okay, Canadian GP Race Bets:

Much to my surprise, there's not really much value around today

Podium Finish - Nico Hulkenberg @ 33/1 with various. Going back to our discussion from earlier, I am aware that Nico is 300/1 for the win. However, the EW portion of that bet is two places, not three, which is actually always the case and why I tend not to consider the race winner EW strategy. Forgot this when typing my previous message. Suggest £10.

http://www.oddschecker.com/motorsport/formula-one/canadian-grand-prix/podium-finish

Winning Margin - 11-15.999 Seconds @ 7/1 with beewin. If we do indeed get a wet race, I can see Lewis pulling away at the front causing quite a large gap to second. It is possible that a late safety car could ruin this bet, but 7/1 is worth it in my eyes. Suggest £10.

http://www.oddschecker.com/motorsport/formula-one/canadian-grand-prix/winning-margin

Group C (PER/BUT/SAI/KVY) - Carlos Sainz @ 4/1 with 366. Sergio Perez should win this group. However, with track temperatures looking like they will be sub 10 degrees, that does play into the hands of Toro Rosso more than Force India. 4/1 is too high. Suggest £10.

http://www.oddschecker.com/motorsport/formula-one/canadian-grand-prix/group-c

Leader After First Lap - Sebastian Vettel @ 9/1 with 366. The simulations suggest that there are multiple scenarios where Vettel leads at turn three, price is too high. Suggest £10.

http://www.oddschecker.com/motorsport/formula-one/canadian-grand-prix/leader-after-1st-lap

Nothing standing out on the spreads.

[Doobs]

Okay, Canadian GP Race Bets:

Much to my surprise, there's not really much value around today

Podium Finish - Nico Hulkenberg @ 33/1 with various. Going back to our discussion from earlier, I am aware that Nico is 300/1 for the win. However, the EW portion of that bet is two places, not three, which is actually always the case and why I tend not to consider the race winner EW strategy. Forgot this when typing my previous message. Suggest £10.

http://www.oddschecker.com/motorsport/formula-one/canadian-grand-prix/podium-finish

Winning Margin - 11-15.999 Seconds @ 7/1 with beewin. If we do indeed get a wet race, I can see Lewis pulling away at the front causing quite a large gap to second. It is possible that a late safety car could ruin this bet, but 7/1 is worth it in my eyes. Suggest £10.

http://www.oddschecker.com/motorsport/formula-one/canadian-grand-prix/winning-margin

Group C (PER/BUT/SAI/KVY) - Carlos Sainz @ 4/1 with 366. Sergio Perez should win this group. However, with track temperatures looking like they will be sub 10 degrees, that does play into the hands of Toro Rosso more than Force India. 4/1 is too high. Suggest £10.

http://www.oddschecker.com/motorsport/formula-one/canadian-grand-prix/group-c

Leader After First Lap - Sebastian Vettel @ 9/1 with 366. The simulations suggest that there are multiple scenarios where Vettel leads at turn three, price is too high. Suggest £10.

http://www.oddschecker.com/motorsport/formula-one/canadian-grand-prix/leader-after-1st-lap

Nothing standing out on the spreads.

You missed the value on the each way because you didn't look.  It wasn't because they always only bet 2 places.   Hills were laying a fifth first 3 up until today, as I pointed out 2 weeks ago and yesterday.   2 weeks ago, bet365 did this too.   

Where you were correct is that 250/1 wasn't available earlier in the week on Perez and Hulkenberg.   The original price was 150/1 with Hills.  But that still means I got 30/1 the place rather than 14/1.  As pointed out last night, if I had waited until last night, I would have got 50/1.  But in the real world, that wakting strategy had risks, as Hills could always have moved to 2 places yesterday, or the Force Indias could have qualified much better resulting in lower prices etc. 

Cheers

[Dekka]

In a moment of potential madness and possibly fueled a little by a lunchtime beer and some nostalgia I've just backed Jolyon Palmer to finish in the points in the Canadian Grand Prix @ 12/1 (generally available)

http://www.oddschecker.com/motorsport/formula-one/canadian-grand-prix/points-finish

Despite the difficult start he's had to his F1 career I'm not having it that he's double the odds of his team mate in this spot or that he's considerably less likely to score points than one of the Manor drivers - some firms have priced up Pascal Wehrlein at 8/1!.  

In junior formula Jolyon's been generally pretty quick and reliable in the wet which is forecast for tonight's race.

Comparisons with his team-mate Magnussen have been a little unfair so far imho.  Magnussen's respected as a seriously quick pedaller by his peers, you don't get a drive with Mclaren unless you know the time of day.  "KMag" obviously has much more F1 experience than JP and, crucially, has benefited from circuit knowledge at those tracks that Jolyon has never raced on, including here in Canada sadly!  Magnussen also had the benefit of the upgraded Renault engine for one of the races as I recall.  I see Jolyon closing the gap on him rapidly as the circus moves into the European season.  It's worth remembering that Jolyon was also severely compromised in the first few races this season before his car had the new floor fitted, these tiny margins are what can make or break careers in F1.

JP was a little unlucky not to make Q2 yesterday having found a decent set-up for the car that suits his driving style, I'm hoping that's given him the confidence to finally show us what he's capable of.  I've not forgotten that in his GP2 Championship winning year he dominated the season like no other driver has ever done before - the kid's a much better racer than he's been given credit for so far.

I'm certainly not suggesting the thread follows me in on this but rather than lurking I thought I'd post my thoughts on here.

For the bet to come off we'll almost certainly need some rain, a safety car or two to keep the field bunched, a couple of drivers to visit the wall of champions and a smattering of the traditional Canadian GP brake problems/failures.  We'll also need JP to avoid visiting the scenery himself as he did so pathetically at Monaco.

Is he "likely" to score points?  No, but I'm happy to have a punt at the odds for a fun, potentially race-long sweat at the odds.  

The only thing I am totally sure of is that at 12/1 he's over-priced in this market. At this circuit, with a bit of inclement weather I'd have him scraping into the points at one in seven or eight runnings of the race.

I'm on!

[Doobs]

I will just add the latest weather forecasts for Montreal aren't great for the bets.  It is raining about now, but there isn't that much chance of rain at the start.  Maybe the best we can hope for is just enough of a shower to make it tricky at various points (preferably as the leaders approach the wall of champions).

[Dekka]

I will just add the latest weather forecasts for Montreal aren't great for the bets.  It is raining about now, but there isn't that much chance of rain at the start.  Maybe the best we can hope for is just enough of a shower to make it tricky at various points (preferably as the leaders approach the wall of champions).

Marvellous! 

I always look forward to the Canadian GP more than any race other than Monaco.  It often throws up really exciting races and it won't take much bad weather to have a bearing on the outcome.  Have faith.  GL.

[Dekka]

Five place grid penalty for Carlos Sainz just announced after a gearbox change.

[tikay]

What time (UK) does the F1 Canadian GP start, please?

Am trying to locate a US Channel that is covering it, but no luck so far.

[tikay]

FTAO Peter


Can't tell if that's sarcasm because I should be better at stake sizing by now - or a genuine comment. I'm going to assume the latter, so thank you very much

That was in reply to sonour.

sonour does not really do sarcasm, Peter, & certainly does not "lolzz" the regulars here, so I think you can safely assume she was being genuinely complimentary.

Keep the stuff coming, the debate on bets for this race in the last few days have benefitted many of us.

[Dekka]

What time (UK) does the F1 Canadian GP start, please?

Am trying to locate a US Channel that is covering it, but no luck so far.

7pm UK time, can't you watch it via SkyGo on a laptop?