Torque

I saw about the overround. That was some overround. The bookies can't lose when it's like that can they.

Nice one @MCLARKE I took Noble Yeats because of your analysis so that's paid for a few drinks I actually ended up backing it twice as the price drifted like a barge before the off before coming back in - not sure what that was all about.

Possibly why it wasn't offered. I'm sure they don't pick the matches out of thin air.

Can't argue that he's the most talented there's ever been. It's just a shame the circus that's developed around him and you've just alluded to it. Does he practice or not, does he care or not. Who really knows and Ronnie has done nothing to dispel those stories and for me they demean the game. Nobody questioned whether Davis and Hendry practiced enough or cared enough and that's the way it should be.

That's what stops me from calling him the greatest. It's got to be Hendry or Davis for me because I can't remember anybody ever talking about which Hendry or Davis would turn up. They only played one way - relentless, focussed and with a pure hatred of losing. Some will say if O'Sulllivan wins another world title then that closes the conversation on the best player in history but not for me. Achievement is a relative thing in my opinion and O'Sullivan should have won more regardless of whether he's won the most. On the other hand, someone like Dott winning the World Title means he's overachieved in my book and I find players like that more impressive.

The only trouble @Fader with the no player to win 3 frames in a row is that isn't only in opposition to O'Sullivan. I wouldn't be that surprised to see Junxu win 3 in a row.

That last price looks big. Maybe worth a small stake. I'd say all the lines will be skewed in favour of O'Sullivan to the point that level stakes on anything to do with Junxu would have a decent chance of generating a return.

That might be worth a shout. I'm tempted by the handicap also. If I was braver I'd even be interested in the match line as I'm still having nightmares about the Cahill debacle from a few years back. One thing seems fairly certain based on previous results here - either O'Sullivan goes all the way or he goes out early and this isn't an easy match as far as I can tell. Junxu is talented so it's just about whether he can hold his nerve and as Cahill was able to I don't see why Junxu can't as well.

I've only had one bet so far which is for a 147 in the tournament at a boosted 3.00 with 365. Even with the boost I'm not sure it's worth it, but at least it gives an interest in potentially every match.

He's got to be worth opposing in some guise surely. Elbow issues, lack of form, form for early losses here in the past.

Tottenham v Bournemouth (1) 1.44 Man City v Leicester (1) 1.15 Atletico Madrid v Almeria (1) 1.22 10pt treble

I ran a thread for about three years where I had maybe one or two other users post. That's the way it tends to be. Correction it was over four years. There were three posts in total from two other users in that time so by comparision @The Accountant your thread is a hive of activity.

I'm sure there's a check box where you can specify you don't want the bet to stand if the player isn't starting.

I'll be surprised if they do. Time will tell if you keep a record of the bigger odds bets for long enough. As I think I've already mentioned, my guess is that the higher the odds are the worse they are, so that even with the boost applied some bets will remain -EV.

Let's put it this way. If you know nothing about a sport - and I know nothing about horse racing - then it's always going to be better for your pocket to bet at shorter odds. That way you'll lose less and that's always a good place to start when trying to make money betting.

You could be right but it's going to take a lot more than 34 bets to reveal that. You'll need hundreds of bets at those odds before you can say that you're getting value. The 34 bets you've placed so far that have given you a good return could be the result of nothing more than positive variance - better known as good luck.

The trouble is @MCLARKE at those odds the sample size isn't anywhere near big enough to suggest you're on to a good thing. Carrying on at those odds could easily see you giving the 600 quid back plus more on top. 34 bets wouldn't even be instructive if the odds were all below even money.

Southampton v Man City (2) 1.25 AC Milan v Empoli (1) 1.36 Barcelona v Girona (1) 1.28 10pt treble

Appreciate the effort @Fader

Refund or hard lines?

Tony Finau (8.9k) Cameron Young (8.6k) Sam Burns (8.3k) Sungjae Im (8.1k) Min Woo Lee (7.6k) Kurt Kitayama (7.1k) 48.6k in total.

Had to be you that did it @harry_rag

I'm glad you didn't have time. Much more fun the way you did it

My money's on Homer Simpson. Has a great chance this year and the course should suit

Didn't mean it's a silly bet - far from it. Just made me chuckle what you wrote.