harry_rag

Back live - I've noted the above and will do a look back on results to date, to flat stakes, net of 2% commission. Will note the results here. 
In the mean time our bank closed at €792 after the 28th & 29th results.
Next stake will be €23.77.
 

On the previews I've followed there is a lot of people thinking along the lines of the course could be easy to play this year with the dry, warm, very little wind conditions that combined with a lot of driveable par 4 holes is probably why PP are being a lot more cautious than unibet.

I had a dream regarding the winner's initials! (Not really, just a coincidence that I've gone for these two). Fancied an interest but will stick to simple e/w bets rather than risk the worst case scenario on spreads. Just a couple of players who've caught my eye in the previews I've looked at.
Fleetwood at 35/1 and Finau at 45/1, both with Lads and 1/5 the odds for 8 places.
Good luck all.

Good luck ?.  I've placed the same bet but not matched so letting it go in play.

Let's try that again! Holland +3 v Portugal! 

Holland v Sweden: Holland still expected to prevail here despite the absence of star striker Miedema due to Covid. In view of that I've had a look at the goalscoring prospects of the remaining players to see if any potential value was lurking. I've taken the following prices, all of which look decent with due regard to the player stats, most would appeal even without Miedema being absent.
Spitse to score at 9/2 Betway
Roord to score at 3/1 PP (had to take some 14/5 Betway to get desired stake on, I wouldn't go any lower)
Buy van de Donk goal rush plus at 5 with SPIN (pushed up to 7 after I placed my bet, they obviously haven't been reading this thread if they respect me that much!) 17/4 with Betway is now the clear best option
Buy Beerensteyn goal rush plus at 8 with SPIN. This is the bet that was most borderline and related to Miedema being out, hopefully she replaces her in the front 3. Equates to better than 2/1 anytime when she's less than that everywhere, pays a bonus if she scores more than once and void if she doesn't start.
(Goal Rush Plus makes up at zero if the player doesn't score, 25 if she scores once, 50 for twice and 100 for three or more. Divide 25 by the price to equate to the fixed odds price, so Beerensteyn is 25/8 = 3.125.)
 

Jordan Spieth 18/1 bet365 win - In good form, has a great Open record including T4 back at St Andrews in 2015.
Rory Mcllroy 10/1 bet365 win - Back in form with a win last month so maybe peaking at the right time.
Xander Schauffele 18/1 ew 9 places Hills - 2nd back in 2018, 1st in GIR on the PGA Tour and won last week.
Dustin Johnston 35/1 ew 8 places bet365 -  Looks a big price, led at half way at St Andrews in 2015, 8th last year and 4 top 10 finishes.
Seamus Power 80/1 ew 9 places Hills - Good form on the PGA tour and in majors, T9 in the PGA, T12 in US Open, 7th GIR and has a great short game too
Tony Finau 45/1 ew 8 places bet365 - 10 top 10 finishes from 25 major starts.

I’m a bit lost as to what you’re still confused at here. I think you may be over-complicating things in your calculations.
It’s simply the odds of that player scoring, multiplied by the odds of Germany winning GIVEN THAT WE KNOW GERMANY SCORE AT LEAST ONE. Effectively, we can use the Germany (+1) odds - I think - or if you want to make it more complicated, the chances of Germany winning, out of all possible results where Germany score at least one. That should boil down to roughly the same thing, as far as I can see.
When I did the calculations on Bet365, it worked out almost spot on - player to score, multiplied by Germany (+1) odds. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Your maths is wrong because you are still calculating them as independent events, rather than dependent!
In your example, you said that Smith fails to score in 2 matches out of 3, (overall). There is no way that someone who fails to score in 2 out of 3 matches overall also fails to score in 2 out of 3 matches when their team wins. That doesn’t make sense. For a start, you’ve just removed all matches when the team didn’t score at all, from the equation. We are now looking at a completely different set of probabilities - those related to England wins only - and that significantly decreases the chances/increases the odds of Smith failing to score. 
In my Harry Kane statistics - taken from his actual England career - he scores in 47% of matches and fails to score in 53%. However, in matches where England win, he scores in 62% of matches and fails to score in 38%. So that’s the significant jump I was talking about. You wouldn’t get the same anytime scorer odds for matches where England win, that you would for England matches as a whole. Two different sets of probabilities, equates to two different sets of odds.
You could just as easily flip it the other way. In Harry Kane’s England career, they have won 62% of matches he has appeared in. However, that figure jumps to 82%, for matches he scores in. These events are clearly and indisputably linked.
 
I’m struggling to follow what you’re asking, or where the confusion lies, in your second example. Yes, the odds would be around 4.5 for the double, the same as the odds for Kane, doubled with England (+1). And yes, that would be the same effect as having the single bet on the goalscorer, that bet coming in within the first minute and then reinvesting that on an England win.
 
I think I’ve thought of a different way to solve/explain this. Correct me if I’m wrong, but what you seemed to be suggesting to Torque yesterday, was that the bookies had just ‘removed’ some potential value from these prop. bets - the value had effectively vanished into thin air, or into the bookies’ back pockets, more likely! If you look at the Germany vs. Spain game tonight. Again, Lea Schuller to score first is 11/2. The match odds are Germany, 9/5; draw, 12/5; and Spain, 29/20. You were saying that these odds should be combined, if you were trying to form a double. However, if we look at the double odds, for Schiller to score first and each of the three potential outcomes, it’s 9/1 Germany; 25/1 draw; and  40/1 Spain. Those aren’t the calculations you suggest. Germany are much shorter than you suggested they should be, but draw and Spain are both now much longer. That is because, as I suggested, the Schiller first goalscorer odds have been combined with the Germany (+1) odds, of Germany, 8/15; draw, 3/1; and Spain 4/1.
Hopefully that makes more sense, to think of it from that point of view. If Spain are 29/20 to win the match, surely you can see that those odds have to be significantly higher, for a match when a Germany player scores first? If you still disagree, then you’re about to become very rich. If you think the bookies have removed a lot of value from the player to score and their team to win market, then I’m bringing you great news - by your definition, all that value now lies on the other side, on a player to score, and their team to draw or lose!

In regards to the first paragraph I can see what you mean but then as you said some things are related such that if one part of a prop looks value there's every chance another part is as well as a result, although I take your overall point and agree with it. From a variance perspective it would be better to take separate bets if you thought a couple of legs in a prop were worth betting on.
For the second part of what you say, again you're correct. Having said that though, props and multiples have the potential to offer exponential value if they're priced wrong which is something that can happen even if rarely. It's a door that swings both ways - negative value on each leg of a treble amplifies the negative value, but positive value on each leg amplifies the positive value, albeit at the expense of a lower probability of success.
As for your last point, I agree as I mentioned before. If it's promoted by the books then that's because they want you to bet on it and as they're not in the business of charity it's fair to say that they consider these bets to be to their advantage.
Lastly, and in response to your final remark about my competency, it's clear that you also know a thing or two about this subject and so it's interesting to read what you post. I only wish what you posted was a little more friendly. I think you'll do well to find anyone who reads what you post who wouldn't say that you come across as incredibly arrogant and patronising. There's just no need for it and it makes no sense to me.

I’m more than happy to have a wager. We only have to check the odds that bookies offer, to see that I’m correct!
 
I think you don’t understand - or have temporarily got muddled - as to what a related contingency is.
 
I’ll use Harry Kane playing for England as an example. Harry Kane has scored in 47% of his appearances for England. From your argument, this would mean we would also expect him to score in 47% of England wins, 47% of England draws and 47% of England defeats, across the matches he has appeared in.
OBVIOUSLY, that is ludicrous. He is far more likely to have scored in matches England have won, and vice versa, England are far more likely to have won in matches he has scored in. And so the stats show: In England wins, he has scored 62% of the time. In draws, he has only scored 24% of the time, and in defeats that figure drops to 18%.
The chances of ‘Harry Kane scoring’ and ‘England winning’ are clearly linked to each other and therefore group together more than if they were independent events. That’s why the bookies don’t give you the odds of multiplying the two separate bets together.
If your ‘Harry Kane to score’ bet is a winner, you now effectively have a one-goal head start on your other bet, ‘England to win.’ Therefore, presumably the actual combined odds for ‘Harry Kane to score’ and ‘England to win’ would be the odds of Harry Kane to score, multiplied by the odds of England (+1) on the handicap betting.
I’ve just checked this now, for the Germany vs. Spain match this evening. Bet365 have Germany to win at 15/8 and Lea Schuller to score first at 11/2. If you combine those odds (as if they were independent events/unrelated bets), by multiplying the odds, you would get close to 18/1. However, the odds offered for the ‘Wincast’, for Schuller to score first and Germany to win, are 9/1 - that is the same odds as if you combine Schuller to score first at 11/2, and Germany (+1) at 8/15. (Schuller scoring first gives your other bet a one goal head start.)
 
I hope that makes sense? Out of all the people on the forum, you would have been the last person I expected to be explaining odds and statistics to. I worry someone has hacked your account - or your brain!

All fair points Harry. I think I'll bow out of the props while I'm ahead 

I'm not saying you could get the combo at better odds, just comparing the multiplied odds of the individual components (which is what I used to do when considering these bets). 
Similarly with your second bet, with the individual components available at 2.35, 1.8 and 1.67 I'd have wanted better than 7 if I was going to consider it. They're not really related contingencies so (for me at least) if the odds you're offered are less than the best odds multiplied out then I'd tend to leave it alone.
I know you don't need me to pose as your metaphorical grandmother but I'd suggest it's extremely hard to beat these prop bets and I'd make sure I specifically recorded these type of bets so I could track their performance.
Bottom line, the vast majority of them will be at shorter than true odds. The only reason you would get value is if the bookies make a rick so big that the edge isn't eroded by the margin they apply or if they do it deliberately as a headline grabbing boost.

Only saw the last 10 minutes or so when it was obvious the Venezuelan ref was not remotely interested in troubling to reach into her pocket despite a couple of agricultural hacks from the N Irish team. Total opposite of Swiss referee Esther Straubli who showed yellow and a red for most innocuous stuff. Definitely a market to play for interest with small stakes.

After washing out with my last two bets, I'll just take one in this match. As you say, it should be competitive.
10pts England to win, BTTS and Ellen White 2+ Shots on Target @ 7.50 365

Fair enough!  I do feel Leeds are my main punt in being out of line with expectations, though some would say Palace and Everton should be higher.  One thing is for sure, there is going to be at least 1 team who do much better/worse than the likes of SPIN's predictions.  
I thought it would be a 5 minute job to to the 1-20 prediction, but actually found it really hard from 6-20 as realistically I think a lot of teams are on a similar level and could be argued to be better or worse than my own rankings.  
All can change with the transfer window still having plenty of time.   I'll be happy with 2 or 3 of these end up being right at the end of the season!

Expecting an Austria win in the first game, perhaps 3-0 or 3-1 but be delighted to see N Ireland upset the apple cart and the odds. I think Billa will probably score but so do the bookies. 10/11 was tempting me despite a reluctance to back at odds on in that market, the trim to 5/6 is enough to stay my hand. Her goal minutes are 42 to buy which is more than double the price of the next player in the betting. Dunst was on my radar but, at 23/10, I'll give it a miss.
One to watch, hopefully enjoy, and try and get a handle on how I see the England/NI final game going.

I'm backing two boosts, again at 365 which are based on Billa scoring. Fingers crossed.
10pts Austria to win, BTTS and Billa 2+ Shots on Target @ 6.00
10pts Austria to win HT-FT, BTTS and Billa to Score @ 7.50

Go on then, i've got some time so i'll have a go at the 1-20 prediction:
 
1. Man City- I think they win quite comfortably with Haaland making a great team even better.
2. Liverpool- Next best but I think they drop back a bit in terms of total points.  Mane is a big loss and Nunez might need some time to hit the ground running.
3. Spurs- best of the rest.  Very pleased with the signings made so far, and with a full season under Conte I will be hoping to push Liverpool close for second
4. Arsenal- I think they have recruited well so far and have a stronger squad than last year when they finished 5th, so up one to 4th for me
5. Chelsea- Not impressed with their business thus far.  The loss of Rudiger in particular will be tough to replace, and I don't think Sterling coming in is going to be the answer to their striker problems.  Maybe Chelsea's time towards the top end of the PL is coming to an end?
6. Newcastle- Still time to spend more money on improving the squad but you have to appreciate what Howe has done since he came in with the squad he already has.  Pope is a solid addition and Botman is highly rated so I think they are going to be defensively solid, but a bit light up front as things stand
7. Man Utd- Still looks like a squad that is not entirely harmonious- Ronaldo wants out but will probably have to stay put, they haven't signed anyone of note yet, and it's tough to know if Ten Hag is all that good when anyone can win the league with Ajax!  7th feels a generous placing!
8. Leicester City- no business done as yet, but they always seem to invest wisely so I expect them to be a strong team once again, and their current team (assuming Vardy is fit and Tielemans stays) is strong
9. West Ham- I have no idea who their big signing (Aguerd) is, but Moyes is a shrewd manager so a top half finish looks likely for West Ham, but not challenging for Europe as they have been in recent years
10.  Leeds- Going to take a punt and say Leeds are going to improve quite a bit on last season.  They lost Phillips but he was injured most of last season anyway.  They look like they have recruited quite well with a few RB Salzburg/Leipzig players and have a stronger squad than last season
11. Aston Villa- Don't see them improving too much on their position from last season.  A good team but still a long way off the top 6.
12. Wolves- Another solid team but until they can start scoring some more goals, they won't get into the top half
13. Brighton- I don't know what to make of Brighton, other than they are surely a worse team for losing Bissouma.  Another team that really need a good striker to push on. 
14. Nottingham Forest- Forest look to have recruited really well.  Henderson in goal is solid, we saw what a difference he made to Sheff Utd in their first season in the PL a few years ago.  The nigerian guy from Berlin has a good goalscoring record in Germany so if he can hit the ground running in the PL, I think Forest will be this season's Brentford and stay up fairly comfortably
15. Southampton- tough to know what to make of their signings so far, they still need a decent striker to replace Ings in my opinion.  But should have enough about them to finish clear of the relegation zone.
16. Brentford- Losing Eriksen will be a blow, but I like the signing of Hickey.  I think they have enough about them (with Toney in particular) to stay up.
17. Crystal Palace- Assuming they don't get Gallagher back, i'm putting Palace as a team to slip backwards from their comfortable mid table finish last season, but just about stay up.
18. Everton- I don't rate Frank Lampard!  Losing Richarlison weakens the team and I think they are struggling financially with the new stadium so probably don't have that much to invest in strengthening a squad that only just escaped last year.  It wouldn't be a massive shock to see them go this time around.
19. Fulham- Classic yo-yo club.  I admit I don't know much about their current team so i've put them here because of that more than anything else!  Mitrovic will have to improve on his last PL efforts if they are to survive.  I think they will be a bit like Norwich- far too naive defensively but capable of scoring a few and will entertain along the way.
20. Bournemouth- Again they don't look to have signed anyone of note as yet.  Clearly a  very good championship team, but players like Solanke have been in the PL before and failed to impress, so I can't see them doing anything other than being relegated.
 
After the top 5, I found this quite a tough exercise, so look forward to seeing a few other opinions on who finishes where.
 
 
 

With Riem Hussein officiating in the England v Norway game this evening I've had to have a small bet on cross-bookings with a buy at 180 (SX). I'm not really convinced this fixture will need much disciplinary intervention so only a small unit stake of 12p.
I'm keener on a bet on Northern Ireland in their make or break match against Austria. For some reason in these European championships there is a Venezuelan referee who is pretty card happy in her domestic leagues but seems more restrained on the international front. However in this fixture Emi Caldera Barrera may be compelled to show a yellow or three. Generally the Austrians seem very well disciplined and receive few cards. I've gone with over 1.5 Northern Ireland cards at 11/8 with Bet 365. 

Place for bets, thoughts and musings on the upcoming and 4th major of the year The Open Championship at St. Andrews
Early thoughts have to be the 'form' player is clearly Xander Schauffele. Not looked at any prices yet though I would imagine he is short enough.
As alluded to on the Scottish Open thread, last year's winner Collin Morikawa finished 71st in the Scottish Open before going onto win so it maybe worthwhile looking for players who played average at the Renaissance Club.
I will be personally looking for players who have played well in the last 9 to 10 weeks (top 6 finish etc.), previous Open Championship form a bonus and look at who has decent Strokes gained approach the green stats as the cherry on top of the cake.

I’m not sure we helped with the winner, other than by getting you looking at the game!
After Katoto there were big differences of opinion between the spread firms on the French scorers. One firm made Renard their second most likely scorer while both rated her better than a 4/1 shot. Not much reliance on set pieces when you go 5-0 up that early!
I’m wary of prop bets involving shots on target, there are a lot less of them than punters tend to imagine and it’s not easy to price up with any confidence. The second bet may well have been value compared to the pre-game prices for the individual elements. I’m multiple times bitten, twice shy now with such footy specials, after some beginners luck my records tell me to steer well clear of them. To be fair, this year that seems to be true of fixed odds bets generally!

Struck out on the former as Katoto only had one shot on target which was her goal, but landed the latter at a nice price. Thanks @Labrador and @harry_rag for the info.

With these posts in mind, I'm backing a 365 boost which is France to win, Katoto to have at least two shots on target and Renard to have at least one shot on target @ 4.33

Bet 9 won. Next stake £185.53