Tips for Tikay

[tikay]

WBA?

Correct

Wouldn't mind him back at Stoke right now to sort out the defence.

Just get the WBA Chairman to advance him a couple of milly on his end-of-season bonus & he'll be across like a shot.

[hhyftrftdr]

We play them at the Hawthorns on Saturday afternoon, a very happy hunting ground for City in recent seasons.

Assuming the ball is ok, expect a few more goals.

[Longines]

We play them at the Hawthorns on Saturday afternoon, a very happy hunting ground for City in recent seasons.

Assuming the ball is ok, expect a few more goals.

Since 1/4/17 City's stats are W14 L1 F58 A13, averaging over 3 goals a game, mbn.

[bergeroo]

Got another quick tennis spot from Switzerland that has been tipped up in a few places I follow today and I like the reasoning.

Bemelmans to beat Mannarino at anything above 2/1. Not sure if Fred can get on at any of these places but suggest £25 if Fred can and putting it up for general interest.
https://www.oddschecker.com/tennis/atp-basel/ruben-bemelmans-v-adrian-mannarino/winner

Write up from Sean Calvert here
https://www.unibet.co.uk/blog/tennis/atp/atp-tennis-betting-bemelmans-a-lively-underdog-against-mannarino-in-basel-1.955014

paddypower


Ruben Bemelmans Bemelmans v Mannarino Winner
9/4
Total Stake: £20.00
Potential Returns: £65.00

Bemelmans loses in three sets. A shade unfortunate as Mannarino went the first set tie break and went 4/4 on break points in the match

[Tal]

We play them at the Hawthorns on Saturday afternoon, a very happy hunting ground for City in recent seasons.

Assuming the ball is ok, expect a few more goals.

Since 1/4/17 City's stats are W14 L1 F58 A13, averaging over 3 goals a game, mbn.

"It's not Nike, Adidas I don't know, it's a different brand. It's unacceptable to play with the ball."

What lad didn't have a mitre football at home? Another one who thinks football was invented in 1992.

[tikay]

Are Spurs using that useless ball tonight?

They soon went 2-0 up.

[Peter-27]

Overdue? He had enough of those last season.

Lewis only had two DNF's last season, which was very, very good when compared with everyone else.

apart from Nico...  

7/1 isn't even a great price on either of the Mercedes to retire.  Betting on something because it hasn't happened for a while seems like wonky thinking.  

Indeed. Nico had one. Ricciardo actually finished every race, and Perez classified in every race.

Not sure I entirely agree, law of averages suggests every car will have at least one mechanical failure during the season. I think I would always be happy to take 7/1 at this stage of the season on a car which has yet to suffer retirement. Happy to be convinced otherwise though, as I'm not 100% confident in my logic there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_averages


Depending on context or application it can be considered a valid common-sense observation or a misunderstanding of probability. This notion can lead to fallacious thinking when one becomes convinced that a particular outcome must come soon simply because it has not occurred recently

At the start of the season, you can look at all the stats and decide Lewis is going to retire one race in ten (or whatever it is), so the odds on a retirement is 9/1.  If he doesn't retire in the first 9 races, that doesn't mean he is "due one" in the next race.  The odds are still going to be 9/1.  If anything, you could learn that maybe the Mercedes has got even more reliable than you thought, and that 9/1 is now too short.  There are always going to be occasions where retirement is more likely; like if the track is attritional, like Monaco; or the weather is really hot; or maybe the engine is reaching the end of its expected lifespan, but none of those will be because he is "due one".

I would say that the law of averages is right up there with "Momentum" as a bad reason to make a bet.  Will leave the momentum one to Camel, I can't hear that word in a commentary without thinking of The Camel these days.      

I understand the principle of the law of averages, and I can't directly argue with anything you've said. However, I think you've completely skimmed over a key component, cumulative effect. This isn't red/black roulette scenario because car components (at least the ones that are carry over) degrade over time which directly increases the chance of a failure at the next race. Of course I don't know Mercedes' component rotation, but I could take an educated guess, and I would be certain that many components have been on that car since the season began. It's worth noting that the component reconditioning process only happens following a shunt or reliability issue due to logistics.

Perhaps another much simpler way of looking at it is that if you look back through history, it's fairly rare for a driver to go a whole season without a retirement during a circa 20 race season. The last five times this happened was:

Daniel Ricciardo - 2016
Max Chilton - 2013
Kimi Raikkonen - 2012
Nick Heidfeld - 2008
Michael Schumacher - 2002

Although, you could make the argument that reliability on the whole is consistently improving as time passes and technology develops, so who knows. I still feel like 7/1 was value though.

Firstly, it was me that mentioned components might get worn out, but I doubt it is much of an angle.  These things have estimated lifespans and Mercedes have such a lead, they don't need to chance their arm anymore.  Is there any real evidence that cars fail more often late in a season?  My inclination is that it is nore likely early on when there are more new bits going on the car.  

On the full season stats, much as a roulette wheel doesn't know that number 26 hasn't come up for 100 spins, the components of a car don't know that Lewis has gone 16 races without breaking down.  I dare say Lewis isn't going to feel any pressure from this, as though I am sure he loves a reliable car, he isn't going to be stressed that he could be the 6th person to go through a season without a retirement.  

Right now, they need to last 4 races and not 20 right now, so past full season stats are near meaningless.   On a 7/1 race price, he must be about 5/4 to go the rest of the season without a retirement, and I'd happily lay that in decent size.  I'd be absolutely batshit crazy to lay that at the start of the season.  

I think if you looked back through F1 history, the data would show reliability is worse both at the start and ends of the season. Although, I've not actually done the research on this and could be wrong.

I'm not giving humanistic traits to car components here, but they have been stressed and strained for 16 races, and are more likely to fail compared to when they were in Australia (opening race), that is an outright fact.

If there were a market to back Lewis to finish the remaining four races this season, I would want 2/1 at least

Retirements in 1st race of the season vs last race of the season

2014
7 vs 3
2015
4 vs 1
2016
5 vs 5
2017
7 in Australia

So in the new engine era, we have 23 retirements in race 1 at nearly 6 a season and 9 in the last race of the season at 3 a season. So pretty sure it isn't an outright fact. 

Mercedes retirements
2014
5 in 38 races
2015
2 in 38 races though Nico had a classified finish for completing 90% of the race
2016
3 in 42 races (2 of those were when Nico and Lewis hit each other)
2017
1 in 32 races so far.

Mercedes have had no retirements in any of the last 4 races over the last 3 seasons.

But you make it 2/1 Lewis makes it through the next 4? 

Nobody has taken up my offer of 5/4 on a Lewis retirement over the next 4.  Lot of shrewdies about.

Sure he could break down, but you can have bad winning bets and good losing ones.

Very interesting info, there's a lot of variation in just one race though, 1st half of the season vs 2nd half of the season would be more insightful.

Overdue? He had enough of those last season.

Lewis only had two DNF's last season, which was very, very good when compared with everyone else.

apart from Nico... 

7/1 isn't even a great price on either of the Mercedes to retire.  Betting on something because it hasn't happened for a while seems like wonky thinking.   

Indeed. Nico had one. Ricciardo actually finished every race, and Perez classified in every race.

Not sure I entirely agree, law of averages suggests every car will have at least one mechanical failure during the season. I think I would always be happy to take 7/1 at this stage of the season on a car which has yet to suffer retirement. Happy to be convinced otherwise though, as I'm not 100% confident in my logic there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_averages


Depending on context or application it can be considered a valid common-sense observation or a misunderstanding of probability. This notion can lead to fallacious thinking when one becomes convinced that a particular outcome must come soon simply because it has not occurred recently

At the start of the season, you can look at all the stats and decide Lewis is going to retire one race in ten (or whatever it is), so the odds on a retirement is 9/1.  If he doesn't retire in the first 9 races, that doesn't mean he is "due one" in the next race.  The odds are still going to be 9/1.  If anything, you could learn that maybe the Mercedes has got even more reliable than you thought, and that 9/1 is now too short.  There are always going to be occasions where retirement is more likely; like if the track is attritional, like Monaco; or the weather is really hot; or maybe the engine is reaching the end of its expected lifespan, but none of those will be because he is "due one".

I would say that the law of averages is right up there with "Momentum" as a bad reason to make a bet.  Will leave the momentum one to Camel, I can't hear that word in a commentary without thinking of The Camel these days.       

I understand the principle of the law of averages, and I can't directly argue with anything you've said. However, I think you've completely skimmed over a key component, cumulative effect. This isn't red/black roulette scenario because car components (at least the ones that are carry over) degrade over time which directly increases the chance of a failure at the next race. Of course I don't know Mercedes' component rotation, but I could take an educated guess, and I would be certain that many components have been on that car since the season began. It's worth noting that the component reconditioning process only happens following a shunt or reliability issue due to logistics.

Perhaps another much simpler way of looking at it is that if you look back through history, it's fairly rare for a driver to go a whole season without a retirement during a circa 20 race season. The last five times this happened was:

Daniel Ricciardo - 2016
Max Chilton - 2013
Kimi Raikkonen - 2012
Nick Heidfeld - 2008
Michael Schumacher - 2002

Although, you could make the argument that reliability on the whole is consistently improving as time passes and technology develops, so who knows. I still feel like 7/1 was value though.

Firstly, it was me that mentioned components might get worn out, but I doubt it is much of an angle.  These things have estimated lifespans and Mercedes have such a lead, they don't need to chance their arm anymore.  Is there any real evidence that cars fail more often late in a season?  My inclination is that it is nore likely early on when there are more new bits going on the car. 

On the full season stats, much as a roulette wheel doesn't know that number 26 hasn't come up for 100 spins, the components of a car don't know that Lewis has gone 16 races without breaking down.  I dare say Lewis isn't going to feel any pressure from this, as though I am sure he loves a reliable car, he isn't going to be stressed that he could be the 6th person to go through a season without a retirement. 

Right now, they need to last 4 races and not 20 right now, so past full season stats are near meaningless.   On a 7/1 race price, he must be about 5/4 to go the rest of the season without a retirement, and I'd happily lay that in decent size.  I'd be absolutely batshit crazy to lay that at the start of the season. 

I think if you looked back through F1 history, the data would show reliability is worse both at the start and ends of the season. Although, I've not actually done the research on this and could be wrong.

I'm not giving humanistic traits to car components here, but they have been stressed and strained for 16 races, and are more likely to fail compared to when they were in Australia (opening race), that is an outright fact.

If there were a market to back Lewis to finish the remaining four races this season, I would want 2/1 at least

Retirements in 1st race of the season vs last race of the season

2014
7 vs 3
2015
4 vs 1
2016
5 vs 5
2017
7 in Australia

So in the new engine era, we have 23 retirements in race 1 at nearly 6 a season and 9 in the last race of the season at 3 a season. So pretty sure it isn't an outright fact. 

Mercedes retirements
2014
5 in 38 races
2015
2 in 38 races though Nico had a classified finish for completing 90% of the race
2016
3 in 42 races (2 of those were when Nico and Lewis hit each other)
2017
1 in 32 races so far.

Mercedes have had no retirements in any of the last 4 races over the last 3 seasons.

But you make it 2/1 Lewis makes it through the next 4? 

Nobody has taken up my offer of 5/4 on a Lewis retirement over the next 4.  Lot of shrewdies about.

Sure he could break down, but you can have bad winning bets and good losing ones.

hmmmm isn't it possible that a lot of engines are work in progress in the first race?

I would think 1st half of the season vs 2nd half would be the interesting stat

It was presented as an "outright fact" there were more failures later than in Australia.  If you go back in the thread I was saying that my inclination was that "it was more likely early".  I guess you could take out race 1 and Monaco, as it is probably an outlier too.  I just don't think there is any angle here. 

The Mercedes has been reliable over the last 4 seasons and seems to be getting more so.  The late in the season effect would have to be really significant to get over that known reliability and if there is any effect, it just doesn't seem to be anywhere near significant enough.

I am always open to people doing more research here, as it is way better than just guessing.  Last 4 or 5 races vs first 4 or 5 maybe, as 6 is Monaco?  Over to you.

I think you may have read my original message wrong. The outright fact was that components are more likely to fail now compared to the first race in Australia. This is due to wear and degradation. What would be interesting to see is how the bookies price up the percentage chance of a driver not finishing at the first race in 2018, compared to the 7/1 we're being provided with at the moment. In theory, it should be less.

[Peter-27]

The dumbing down of sports presentation continues.

Before tonight's F1 GP in Austin, Texas, Michael Buffer - he of "let's get ready to rummmmmmmbleeeeee" - will announce ALL TWENTY drivers.

In 20th place, from Denmark, it's Kkkkkkevinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn Magnusssssssssssennnnnnnnnnnnn

In 19th place, from Germany, it's Passsssssssssssssssscallllllllllllllll Wehrleinnnnnnnnnnnnnn


And so on. Twenty chuffing times.



I might just about be able to cope with Usain Bolt flagging the cars off for their formation lap, but once Buffer starts with his ridic stuff I'm gonna have to turn off.

God help us & save us from all this shite.  

I misjudged this, apologies.

It is far worse than I suggested.

F1 just devalued itself.

Bring back Bernie.

I found this utterly bonkers and bizarre, not what I was expecting at all. For me, it added nothing whatsoever and was just was waste of time, however some people seemed to really enjoy it for whatever reason - so I don't mind if it stays, don't see a down side I guess.

What I do like is that they made an effort to bring some US culture to the event. Motorsport in one of the few truly Worldwide sports, and I think this needs to be celebrated more. All races should be doing things to add some local flavour to proceedings IMO.

[Tal]

Are Spurs using that useless ball tonight?

They soon went 2-0 up.

Remember when I said wham are usually good value against us?

Yeah, I forgot to back them, too...

My own fault for taking the mickey out of West Ham fans for the last week.

[tikay]

Dodgers 6, Astros 7

Series now tied 1 apiece.



Amazing 11 innings game, apparently.


http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/news/world-series-2017-game-2-astros-dodgers-score-updates-verlander-la-houston/1my83sn9aqz8w1b3zi602n1z7m

[booder]

Unrivalled bokking skills Teeks

[Chompy]

TfT almost fell off the bottom of the screen...retrieved.

I'm self excluding from all Posh-based bets for the forseeable and personally. Such a variety box these days. Goal of the season contender for Maddison though.

Also, Kiiiiiiiieffffffffffferrrrrrrrr!

[arbboy]

If you want to shift the Stoke relegation bet on betfair now it probably the shortest you will get again this season. 

[muckthenuts]

TfT almost fell off the bottom of the screen...retrieved.

I'm self excluding from all Posh-based bets for the forseeable and personally. Such a variety box these days. Goal of the season contender for Maddison though.

Also, Kiiiiiiiieffffffffffferrrrrrrrr!

It was a couple of days ago but i think i read the Ipswich manager wanted to recall Kieffer? What do you reckon?

[Chompy]

FFS, that's ruined my day.

http://itsmillerstime.co.uk/ipswich-likely-to-recall-kieffer-moore-in-january-says-mick-mccarthy/