Torque
-
Posts
5,919 -
Joined
-
Days Won
13
Posts posted by Torque
-
-
2 hours ago, Fader said:
the draw has been made then. Initially I think Allen and Williams are my picks. Carter and Gary Wilson would be the outsider picks for me but at 200/1 i'm also going to take a very small bet on Jackson Page. He plays like Brecel did last year. All-out attack. He'll either lose easily or just go on a great run.
3pts Allen 12/1 Skybet
2.5pts M.Williams 14/1 Paddypower
-----------------------------------------
1pt e/w Carter 28/1 Bet365
1pt e/w G.Wilson 33/1 Bet365
-----------------------------------------
0.25pts e/w J.Page 200/1 PaddypowerYou can get better than that for all of those except for Allen on the exchanges - Page is twice the odds there. They're outright prices but you can sort out the each way part if they get that far in the tournament.
-
On 4/16/2024 at 9:04 AM, The Brigadier said:
Hi @Capecross, I'm so sorry to hear about your experience. I'm afraid BetMGM have a very bad reputation for doing all sorts of wrong things and I'm not really sure where you can go with this. You could threaten them with legal action (via small claims court) which from cases I've heard of may force them into paying what you're owed.
Interesting to hear that @The Brigadier as I'd got the impression from @MCLARKE that they weren't too bad. @Capecross you might try a service called Resolver. I've used it before with success, although it did take some time.
-
4 hours ago, harry_rag said:
Lejuene back in action but shorter than previously so maybe one last throw of the dice at 100/1 for the brace with Sky Bet. 10/1 anytime and 22/1 the "screamer".
Why one last throw @harry_rag it could still be a worthwhile bet in future - whether it lands or not this time shouldn't necessarily make any difference to whether you back him again.
-
-
Bet 52. PSV to beat Vitesse Arnhem @ 1.08
-
Derby v Leyton Orient (1) 1.50
Stevenage v Burton (1) 1.53
Bologna v Monza (1) 1.53
10pt treble
-
2 minutes ago, vivaItalia said:
No what's that?
It's 9, 10, 11 or 12 legs with doubles, trebles and upwards covered. Two wins give a return. Could be a way for you to include more matches.
-
Have you ever tried a block?
-
I've hit three before. Never four. Best of luck going forward and it'll be interesting to see whether you can make it pay.
-
-
1 hour ago, daveg said:
I’ve had a right palaver with SkyBet this afternoon which I thought I’d share, mainly to vent my frustrations, also to warn others, but also to ask for a bit of advice - apologies for the length of the post in advance.
I tried to log on to my Skybet account yesterday to find a message saying that my account had been closed down. Strange, so I immediately took to X (formerly known as Twitter) to contact SkyBetHelp to help clarify why I couldn’t access my account. Having received no reply after 12 hours I decided to contact the online chat help.
After going through the various security questions I got to chat to a human. I explained that I couldn’t access my account and they looked into the situation with my account. They informed me that I had closed my account myself, and the funds in the account had been withdrawn to my card ending 4733. WTF, I hadn’t closed my account, and I definitely hadn’t received the funds in my account. I responded in a calm way, but made it clear that it was not me who closed the account, and I didn’t recognise the card number ending 4733. The b*stard on the other end of the chat then said there was nothing else they could do, and promptly closed the chat without giving me the chance to ask any further questions.
I was pretty angry at this point, but got back into the chat queue and eventually got a second human. They could see my previous correspondence and said they would try and help. After a bit of to and fro, they eventually said that as I had closed the account myself, they couldn’t do anything as my 7 day cooling off period had not yet passed. When will these people realise, I didn’t close the account myself. At this point I’m thinking someone has hacked my account and withdrawn the money into their own account. At this point I should say that I had just short of £5k in my account, and was feeling pretty sick that I could be losing a substantial amount of money here.
After mentioning that I would be taking this to the Gambling Commission, the chat person seemed to take the situation a bit more seriously. Over the next 90 minutes I provided the chat person with all sorts of ID, some of which I wasn’t particularly comfortable giving, but I was pretty stressed that I had lost everything in my Skybet betting bank. Eventually the chat person said they were going to restore my account, which they duly did.
So after about 2 hours, I was able to log back into my Skybet account, and what did I find, the £5k was back in my account, and all the open bets I had in the account were also still there. I questioned how the money was still in the account when the first person I spoke to said that it had been withdrawn onto a card ending in 4733. They just said that the account had been fully restored, asked me if I was happy, and was quite keen to close the chat.
I was pretty relieved to say the least, but it left me feeling pretty uneasy about the whole episode. Needless to say I immediately withdrew the majority of the £5k into my bank account, which to be fair landed into my account within 10 seconds.
So what the hell were Skybet playing at, firstly closing my account without any warning, and then telling me the funds had been withdrawn, only to restore the fully funded account 2 hours later? Is it just me, or is there something quite fishy about
And how do others manage their betting accounts? I guess I’ve always tried to keep my betting bank separate from my other outgoings so I’ve tried to limit the amount of money that I transfer between my betting accounts and my bank accounts - so I can keep track of my p/l a bit easier. Does anyone else keep a fair bit of money in their betting accounts, or should I be constantly depositing and withdrawing money into my betting accounts to avoid another situation like this?
Any thoughts?
Seems like you dealt with it the best way you could @daveg and it's no surprise that mentioning going to the authorities about the issue sharpened the bookies focus shall we say. From what you've written I'd say the most likely explanation is your account was hacked and if that was the case I'm not sure why there wasn't transparency about it. I'm with @harry_rag about not having large amounts tied up with bookies and as a rule of thumb I'd only leave in an account an amount you're prepared to lose.
-
1 hour ago, daveg said:
Cheers @Torque - all academic as O’Connor lost in the first round ☹️
Shame. Definitely a price worth playing at though.
-
3 hours ago, daveg said:
Noticed that Coral have priced up O’Connor at 500/1 😁 - not sure if they’ll pay out if he wins, but worth the risk.
Unless they scratch it before the off, they'll have to pay out. They can't take your money at those odds if he loses and not pay out at those odds if he wins.
-
That was quite something to watch. For as well as he played, 7 frames on the spin for Williams just shouldn't happen. Ronnie comes across like a petulant child at the table at times - none more so that when he attempted a cut to the middle pocket after running out of position. He'd have known there wasn't much chance of making it, but by that stage it looked like he didn't care - things weren't going for him, pots weren't going in and so he didn't want to play any more.
It's a shame he's so fixated with perfection, because if he could have just been glad for how good he is he'd probably have been a lot happier over the years and won an awful lot more than he has.
- four-leaf and charliepie
-
2
-
10 minutes ago, Systemight said:
We can fully accept the need to give a slap just to make sure
I don't see why whips aren't banned entirely. They're barbaric even if used to get a horse over the line.
- black rabbit, Yalwen and Bedlam
-
2
-
1
-
There's a dark side to racing there's no doubt. It's sad but it's always been that way and I doubt it'll ever change sadly. That Gordon Elliott episode the other year illustrates it perfectly - horses are assets used to win races and that's what it boils down to. Everything to do with animal welfare in the industry is just window dressing as far as I can see.
-
Portsmouth v Shrewsbury (1) 1.36
Blackpool v Cambridge (1) 1.53
Mansfield v Crawley (1) 1.44
10pt treble
-
Bet 51 won. Next stake £2475.37
-
-
8 minutes ago, harry_rag said:
Table 3:
Edge Bets P/L ROI 1.1 60 £11.23 18.71% 1.09 65 £10.83 16.65% 1.08 69 £12.15 17.61% 1.07 78 £17.83 22.85% 1.06 81 £19.83 24.48% 1.05 87 £20.88 24.00% 1.04 95 £19.68 20.72% 1.03 96 £20.29 21.14% 1.02 112 £16.67 14.88% 1.01 114 £14.67 12.86% 1 119 £13.87 11.65% 0.99 121 £16.40 13.55% 0.98 125 £16.70 13.36% 0.97 127 £16.85 13.27% 0.96 134 £21.55 16.08% 0.95 140 £19.92 14.23% All selections 215 £16.61 7.73% Let's take it as read that I'm going to use the sell price instead of the midpoint to calculate the fair odds, the case for that doesn't really need labouring and was already in my mind based on all my dealings with 1000s of players in the football anytime market. Let's also take it that I'm going to stick with my "no odds on" rule just out of preference and to control bet volumes. (I'm not anti odds on but I'm doing this to such small stakes that I prefer to stick to odds against; this is against a backdrop of me having terrible results betting in this market when trying to find bets by studying player stats etc. so I just want a simple fire and forget system to trial for a bit of interest.)
So this shows the bet volume and ROI for all evens + selections with an edge from 10% down to -5% (i.e. where best price is at least 95% of my target price).
I think I'm going to go with minimum edge of 2% purely because of the similar volume of bets to the current criteria. In reality I've had less bets as I can't always get a good enough price. I'm comfortable with the current bet volume, it's small stakes and experimental just for an interest.
Maintaining a similar volume of selections and (hopefully) returns suits me, while continuing to collect the data to see how the season pans out and compares to past data.
That table, if I've understood it correctly, illustrates perfectly what I mean about needing more bets to validate your approach. If what you're doing works and the rationale behind it is sound, then you'd expect to see a positive linear relationship between edge and return. At the moment, there's no pattern at all although it's encouraging to see positive returns in every row.
-
2 minutes ago, harry_rag said:
Table 2:
Bets P/L ROI Best 215 £16.61 7.73% Fair 215 £1.14 0.53% Back 215 £24.73 11.50% Best > Back 66 £10.33 15.66% No odds on 60 £11.23 18.71% I'm currently basing the fair odds on the midpoint of the spreads but this is what it looks like if I use the sell price instead (entirely logical anyway as the sell price is obviously closer to the true value than the midpoint given the profit to be had from blindly selling in this market). So if a player is priced at 23-27 it's a matter of using 23 instead of 25. The fair odds become far more accurate now which make sense. (There was more sense in using the midpoint when there were 2 firms offering differing prices for a consensus.)
As the fair odds will be higher now we end up with only 66 bets so, if I'm going to make this change, there becomes a stronger case for reducing the required edge to maintain the volume of bets. As I'm tending not to back odds on I've added an extra line for this, but the ROI is consistently better when filtering the odds on shots so I'm happy to carry on with that approach. On to table 3!
I've never understood the fixation some seem to have with not betting odds on. Value is value no matter the odds and even though the return and value is usually lower than odds against, the higher rate of winners can help to smooth the rocky spells that inevitably come when you're betting on things that are less likely to happen.
-
I'm beating the same drum when I say more, more, more @harry_rag
1000 bets in each of those rows will give a much better picture. Exactly how many bets are needed to give a really good idea of how things are going is dependent on the odds - the bigger the odds, the bigger the sample needed to start drawing meaningful conclusions about the reliability of what you're doing.
-
48 minutes ago, Grass Cash said:
Well that was a challenger match that he dropped the match to Gea. He does things like that all the time.. He's not a safe person to back in the slightest, but the read is to against Djere who is with an injury in march davis cup, and is absolutely not in any form this season. Just 3-6 overall, and coming from hard courts in Miami.
I like the fact that Fabio has matches under his belt here, and there could be a huge crowd supporting him.
Best of luck with it.
-
4 hours ago, Grass Cash said:
@CzechPunter any opinion on Fognini today. 3 straight matches all 3 set wins.
I know he's not a trustworthy player, but the price is off on the match. Can go either way.
I'm not @CzechPunter but I'll give my opinion. With all the other matches going on, why bother with Fognini. As you say he's not to be trusted and when a player can blow a 4-0 lead in a set without winning another game - as Fognini did when losing to Gea recently - I don't know why anybody would want him carrying their money.
- CzechPunter and ThunderDan9
-
2
World Championships 2024 (inc QFs)
in Snooker Predictions
Posted
Having checked the prices, I'll have a small bet on Page at 400's. If he beats O'Sullivan then his odds collapse and I can't see why that isn't possible. Ronnie isn't infallible, and if he is to fall then the chances are it's early.