Torque
-
Posts
5,933 -
Joined
-
Days Won
13
Posts posted by Torque
-
-
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.
- Bedlam, Yalwen and black rabbit
-
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.
- ThunderDan9 and CzechPunter
-
2
-
-
On 4/2/2023 at 11:21 PM, Fader said:
I tipped him up at 20/1. Now he's 8/1 I wonder if 8/1 is too skinny. Might just be enough. I haven't had a look at the draw yet really.
Onto the qualifiers tomorrow. A few big priced selections in there I noticed to qualify
Way too skinny for me. I'd want double figures and even then I'd be thinking twice or more. Murphy isn't consistent enough and I don't think he's got the stamina for the slog that is the Worlds.
-
Norwich v Plymouth (1) 1.50
Barnsley v Cambridge (1) 1.50
Real Madrid v Athletic Bilbao (1) 1.53
10pt treble
-
14 minutes ago, harry_rag said:
Wish I could find anyone else to talk about a ratings system for goal (or try/touchdown) scorers but I'm more or less ploughing a solo furrow with that one, barring a guy I used to work with who is effectively my "colleague" in the endeavour.
Slightly obvious question (maybe) but I'll ask it to see if any of you fellow stats nerds think differently.
I've started afresh with my data since the new "one spread firm" era began in November and made a slight tweak to my formula to allow for there no longer being two firms offering prices. T'other fella has carried on as before. Doing it his way gives 573 bets with a profit of 37.27 points and an ROI of 6.5% while my new approach gives 414 bets and +29.26 points with an ROI of 7.07%. Those are qualifying selections from an overall data sample of 2348 players.
So I "win" in terms of having the better ROI but have passed up 159 bets with a profit/ROI of 8.01 points and 5.04%.
Would you start backing those selections immediately or stick to the slightly less bets/better ROI criteria for a while longer and see how the data develops. The 159 bets is still a relatively small sample size.
Generalising massively, and from a purely statistical standpoint, I'd be a lot happier with a 5% return after 1000 bets of one system than a 10% return after 500 bets of another. The figures you mention above suggest there's not much in it between the two systems, at least at this stage anyway. They could very well come together more or less with enough bets.
-
Ipswich v Sheffield Wednesday (1) 1.53
Hibernian v Livingston (1) 1.50
Juventus v Genoa (1) 1.50
10pt treble
-
Stockport v Newport (1) 1.50
Mansfield v Swindon (1) 1.50
PSG v Reims (1) 1.40
10pt treble
-
-
36 minutes ago, four-leaf said:
I agree that Osorio is overvalued, she's not one of those you can trust
There again, neither is Cornet. If Osorio is to break out of her current malaise, this is a good chance for her. Having said that though, I can see the appeal in the prices.
-
Man Utd v Fulham (1) 1.50
Aston Villa v Nottingham Forest (1) 1.44
Wolves v Sheffield Utd (1) 1.44
10pt treble
-
Tottenham v Wolves (1) 1.50
Leicester v Middlesbrough (1) 1.55
AFC Wimbledon v Morecambe (1) 1.50
10pt treble
-
1 minute ago, Fader said:
Anyone had a bet on this?
Only just realised it's on so no. Wouldn't really know how to assess it in any case - Taylor's playing but his averages nowadays are dreadful and there's a couple of ladies playing also. Preference for me would be for the likes of Cameron and Scotty Dog and possibly Ashton - those that still play on the main tour. Thornton probably heads the market - I haven't looked - and Howson is also probably near the top of the betting. Part is playing as well I believe but it's difficult to imagine he'll have much of an impact.
Skybet Shenanigans
in Bookie Chat
Posted
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.