Torque

Let's hope he is - at least the Nadal that turned up against Diego - it might give your bet a chance of landing 

No tries for any of the players so a make up of zero for the maximum profit of 44 x stake.
In the interest of transparency I should say that my only other bet on the game was a "routine" sell of Sale substitute try minutes at 39 which made up at 78 for a 39 point loss, meaning I only made a small net profit on the game. That's the nature of these bets though, it's all about sticking to the script and turning a long term profit.

He should care - but Bautista Agut in round one is just about the worst draw he could have got. First round exit this year I reckon.

I can see what you're saying but how many matches do you need to find rhythm - Nadal played two matches before facing Schwartzman, and he played well in both and nobody was talking about a lack of rhythm after those matches. In fact it was the opposite - people were eulogising about how it looked as though he hadn't had months and months without a match, as he was hitting shots with power and pinpoint laser-like accuracy down the line.
I think Nadal just played badly which he sometimes does - just like any other player - and also the conditions didn't suit, and those were the two factors he cited after the match. He did the same last year on the clay against Fognini, where he did well to avoid getting a bagel in the second set of a straight-sets loss. In that match he was too passive and hitting shots way too short, and it was the same against Schwartzman. He played exactly the same way when he played Schwartzman at the French Open a couple of years ago as well, where he went down a set and a break in conditions he didn't like. Luckily for him bad weather forced them off the court and when they came back and conditions had changed he ran out the winner in four sets - if there hadn't been that weather break though and playing the way he was, Schwartzman could have gone two sets up and then a massive shock would have been a real possibility.
The thing I find really strange is why he has these very rare matches where he almost seems to become timid. It's one thing to talk about how you've played badly after a match where you played your usual game but you just missed a lot of shots, but when you're the best player to ever play on clay and you've played badly because the power seems to have gone from your shots and you're struggling to clear the service box that's almost beyond belief. No matter what the conditions are I can't see why he sometimes hits shots so short - even if it's humid and he isn't benefitting as much as usual from his whipped shots surely he can still hit them deep and towards the corners like he would normally do, rather than giving his opponents easy shots from the middle of the court. It's as though heavy conditions affect his confidence, and the idea that he wouldn't have total confidence in his game seems remarkable - as does the idea that as one of the best players in the world he can't adapt his game to suit any conditions.

Shapovalov showing just how bad Nadal was yesterday - breaking Diego almost at will. How on earth Nadal lost in straight sets and struggled so much to break I'll never know. Diego's serve is so weak. I know the conditions didn't suit Nadal but even so he should never have lost like that. He really did play badly and the conditions don't explain hitting the ball so short. Balls hit in and around the service box will get punished against anyone.

Value is definitely on Shapo. Nadal was scary bad yesterday plus Diego can't be relied on to play well again.

Value is definitely on Shapo. Nadal was scary bad yesterday plus Diego can't be relied on to play well again.

Little bit bitter-sweet yesterday as although the 6s bet loses, Chennai Super Kings beat the defending champions which is great for the outright pick. Today's match is Delhi Capitals vs Kings Punjab. I like Delhi here. I think the bowling attack is better and I think despite the price not being the sexiest, it's probably about right for me to take them. I like Maxwell for Kings and I think he has a chance of being top batsman today so that's my second bet.
6pts Delhi Capitals to beat Kings Punjab 4/6 bet365
1.5pts Maxwell kings top batsman 6/1 paddypower

Shapovalov - Schwartzman 
I'm not biting on Schwartzman's performance, Nadal played awkwardly bad, also Diego had maybe one of those days. I don't think it will be the case today.
This is a 50-50% match at most, so I'm taking the value bet here on Shapo for 2.3.

:Deleted:
 
 

Hello Labrador,
Have to agree with you {sort of} about Labrador's, hard for me to discriminate for or against any breed though, I've definitely been a dog man, from a corgi, to our last dog Sam a Lab/retriever that we rescued from a dog pound. Sam was with us for 10 years before he died, neither me nor the Mr's could even mention his name for months after that, and we decided that we couldn't go through that again as we were getting older, so we haven't had a dog since, until we moved back almost 9 years ago, moving in next door to a 3 year old Staffie, not the sort of dog that I would ever have fancied due to their {undeserved} reputation.
Oddly enough though dogs are psychic, Lexie would look through the fence when I was in the garden and melt me with that look that a dog can give you. I finished up walking her for the neighbours, up to 5 or 6 miles a day, sharing a pie somewhere along the way, calories in, calories out, next thing she didn't want to go home when we got back from our walks, what more can a dog ask for, an adventurous walk along the beach, a pie each, then dropping into a pub along the way, a pint for me and a lot of fuss from thowd lads in the pub.
That's gone on for almost 9 years now, to the point that Lexie has two homes now, at the end of each day she decides where she's sleeping and everyone is happy with that, the folks next door are 20 years younger than us, still working, so they can't give Lexie the time we can afford her. Have to say she's been wondering what's going on recently, why all the humans have been muzzled...
I know what you mean about "don't tell the Mr's" about who's yer best friend, every dog that I've had from my Mum's corgi to a Boxer, a mixed breed rescue dog, through Sam and now to Lexie would give their life for me, and they know I would do the same. Do you know how to figure out who is your best friend, your wife or your dog ? put them both in the boot of yer car, leave them there for 20 minutes, open the lid and see who is happiest to see you.
There's something special about dogs, it's hellish when you get to that age where you can't get another dog because you know their grieve for the loss of us as much as we grieve for them, thank Gawd this little beggar next door picked me out through the garden fence.
As for tomorrows Colchester bet, 7/4 seems over the odds, but I'll shy away from it, it would be double jeopardy for me to get involved in a "who wins" bet, but I might be tempted by a BTTS bet, but just an "ale money" bet...
PS: well spotted about the duck sketch !!!
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Good to get a different opinion @AgaRadwanska and welcome to the forum.
As I said in what I wrote earlier I'm more than happy to be corrected if others watched the match and felt that Stan was giving it everything. As far as how can I make a judgement on effort levels without watching, that comes down to experience and lots of it. When you've followed tennis for a number of years you start to notice patterns and develop a feel for what lies behind the results of different players - like a poor result at a small tournament being immediately followed by a strong performance at a big one. Certain players are very stable in their results, others are more erratic. Some are very reliable at big tournaments, but much more inconsistent at smaller ones. I realise Musetti is a top prospect, but at the same time Wawrinka is a former French Open winner and that takes some doing. For me, there's no way he should be getting bagelled by Musetti and I'm almost certain that won't be happening in a set if they meet at Roland Garros and so as I was saying, either Wawrinka was injured or not that interested in the result.

Fair points.
I haven't followed Stan's career that much so unaware if he makes a habit of dips in performance in non-GSs. I will say that Musetti's match vs Nishikori is well worth a watch if you didn't catch the highlights - some absolutely unreal rallies.
I expect his match vs Koepfer to be a bit closer (really rate Dominic) but can't see past a Musetti win again. Looking forward to a Musetti vs. Novak QF. 

Just a bit of additional info to boost the Kovinic campaign. Yesterday Mertens withdrew from the doubles for reasons she gave as sickness. She also had a medical timeout yesterday that had to do with a nose bleed plus considering her recent run at the US Open it would seem about the right time for a change of the guards.

Hi all. First time poster, long(ish) time lurker - especially for the tennis tips and discussion. 
I just wanted to chime in regarding the Stan vs Musetti discussion. if you guys didn't watch the Wawrinka vs. Musetti match, how can you decide based on a scoreline alone that he 'tanked' a match or didn't bother cos Rome isn't a grand slam?
I watched the whole match. Sure, Musetti is only 18 and was an unknown prior to the event. He was also outstanding. Imagine Federer and Djokovic having a tall Italian love-child and you wouldn't be far off.
In the second set Stan battled and had chances to get back into it but lost tie break. Throughout he looked fired up and wanted to win. Maybe he lacked fitness and/or was carrying an injury, idk, but imo Musetti was just way too good. It's for this reason that he beat Nishikori in straight sets. Absolute wonderkid!
Over to the women's tournament and a bet I quite like is Ka. Pliskova to win her Q @2.37 on 365. She faces Blinkova next where she's a huge favorite after looking super comfortable against Strycova, and will face either (most likely) Mertens - who is not in the best form of late, or Kovinic - who is playing solid, but wasn't really tested vs Bencic or Goerges (both so poor). Mertens let alone Pliskova will almost certainly be too much for her. 
 

Aga Radwańska born child few weeks ago so she dont have time for forum. ?

1pt Danka Kovinic to beat Elise Mertens @ 4.33 Bet365
Kovinic is in some really good form just now, and beating Bencic so convincingly in the last round should mean she's full of confidence and believing she can get another big win. Mertens is a top player and her ranking reflects that, and she too has looked good so far at this tournament but she might be getting to the stage now where her focus begins to shift to the French Open. If that happens then Kovinic has the talent to take advantage and momentum on her side - sometimes a player comes from nowhere at a tournament and that could be Kovinic here.

1pt Danka Kovinic to beat Elise Mertens @ 4.33 Bet365
Kovinic is in some really good form just now, and beating Bencic so convincingly in the last round should mean she's full of confidence and believing she can get another big win. Mertens is a top player and her ranking reflects that, and she too has looked good so far at this tournament but she might be getting to the stage now where her focus begins to shift to the French Open. If that happens then Kovinic has the talent to take advantage and momentum on her side - sometimes a player comes from nowhere at a tournament and that could be Kovinic here.

Couldn't agree more, Torque. I didn't see the Wawa match but it wouldn't be the first time he has tanked a match, esp when its close to a slam event.
I would also add Kerber to that list - just saw the highlights of her first round match in Rome and it was disgraceful. In horse racing they call them non-triers or schooling over the jumps. She made absolutely no attempt to go for balls which were simple to reach. Complete waste of an entry, maybe she thought nobody would notice with no crowds, but she should have the book thrown at her for that performance.

By no means want I to attack these stats or something, but they basically don't tell anything, I would not rely on these any day of the year.
 
 

I didn't watch Wawrinka and I didn't have an interest in the outcome, but it's the sort of match and result that I find really frustrating. Years of following tennis tells me the match went the way it did because Wawrinka couldn't be bothered - happy to be corrected if others watched and feel that wasn't the case. I know there was talk of an injury for Wawrinka but even that scenario I find frustrating - if he wasn't fit enough to play then why start the match and if he wasn't fit enough to compete then why complete the match, or the first set for that matter given the way that ended up going. Losing the first set 6-0 should be a professional embarrassment, but it won't be because as I alluded to the chances are Wawrinka just wasn't fussed.
To me, the absolute minimum a player should give is their best effort. Lose by all means - after all tennis is a sport where losing is a regular occurrence for practically every player - but at least try. If you don't feel able to do that for whatever reason then don't play, because it never looks good to see a player tank and it doesn't make the sport look good either. The worst ones and the most blatant ones are at minor tournaments before Slams - Exhibit A for me would have to be Dimitrov last year. Ahead of the US Open he was beaten by Kevin King - ranked at about 400 - in straight sets. I watched that match and he was finishing every rally early with an unforced error and really couldn't have made it more obvious that he didn't want to be out there, and then he goes on a great run at Flushing Meadows and takes out Federer.

I guess the amounts are all relative. Not saying I’m loaded and that I wouldn’t miss £20, but normally I would spend my Saturday/Tuesday night at a game. That would be £25 ticket, £5 food, £10 at the pub beforehand, £5 petrol......and that’s a home game, you could add quite a bit more for an away game.
I’m seeing it as, some of that money I’m not spending, I’ll put on one of these bets so I’ll have the excitement as I sit and watch Jeff on a Saturday rather than going to the game. Personally, if I bag a 100/1 winner I’d be pretty disappointed with £100 returns (greedy ?)......admittedly I did get silly with this one and should have stuck to a tenner. I like to predict odds before I see what the bookies have them as. I had Walsall at 13/10 and saw they were 21/10 and Carlisle at 8/11 but were odds against. In my head the 4 games this Saturday should have been around 14/1 and I was getting 33/1, so got a bit giddy. Should not have put £20 with those Mickey Mouse cup games last night.
I will be back later for my weekend bet....but sticking to a tenner this time.

I didn't watch Wawrinka and I didn't have an interest in the outcome, but it's the sort of match and result that I find really frustrating. Years of following tennis tells me the match went the way it did because Wawrinka couldn't be bothered - happy to be corrected if others watched and feel that wasn't the case. I know there was talk of an injury for Wawrinka but even that scenario I find frustrating - if he wasn't fit enough to play then why start the match and if he wasn't fit enough to compete then why complete the match, or the first set for that matter given the way that ended up going. Losing the first set 6-0 should be a professional embarrassment, but it won't be because as I alluded to the chances are Wawrinka just wasn't fussed.
To me, the absolute minimum a player should give is their best effort. Lose by all means - after all tennis is a sport where losing is a regular occurrence for practically every player - but at least try. If you don't feel able to do that for whatever reason then don't play, because it never looks good to see a player tank and it doesn't make the sport look good either. The worst ones and the most blatant ones are at minor tournaments before Slams - Exhibit A for me would have to be Dimitrov last year. Ahead of the US Open he was beaten by Kevin King - ranked at about 400 - in straight sets. I watched that match and he was finishing every rally early with an unforced error and really couldn't have made it more obvious that he didn't want to be out there, and then he goes on a great run at Flushing Meadows and takes out Federer.

Aye, well, the devil is always in the detail, so it should help folks if you give them the detail, plus an insight into the logic and discipline that I deploy.
Betting is a COLD / HARD game, one that few people manage to break even on, let alone show a profit, and if you do show a profit the algorithms that the Bookies now employ will soon root you out and kick you out. No one runs a tighter ship with their algorithms than Bet365 or Billy Hills, but all the Bookies are at it.
I've served my time betting, had some memorable wins, but over the last 50 years I guess I've burned £250,000 possibly more, does that sound like "betting for fun" to you ?          
Knowing how hard a game betting is I try my best to steer young lads away from it, one of the lads in his 20's that goes in the pub I drink in always asks me if I'm having a bet, ever since I put him onto South Africa to win the RU World Cup, he had 200 quid on at 9/2 and since then always asks if I'm having a bet. I try to slow him down, but when yer young you want it now, patience doesn't run in their race. We walked into Billy Hills yesterday to get a few more quid on the 50/1 shot, I was already well invested on the bet, but I couldn't resist throwing another 20 quid on it, a grand to 20 quid is warth taking, Jim had the same. I'm amazed that the odds are still there. Anyway, as we went in I asked Jim "which one of these ragged assed owd men would you like to be 40 years from now". I think he got the point..
They, like me, were all Jim's age 40 years ago, they started out with nothing and, thanks to Betting Shops they still have most of it left. None of them ever looks back as what this addiction cost them over the last 10, 20 or 40 years, more than their house is worth for some of them, but almost certainly more than they have in a bank account after a life time of grafting.
It's not even as though it's "easy come, easy go" most folks in my generation worked / grafted for their wages, so it never was "easy come" but due to the addiction that gambling is it certainly is easy go, never to be seen again. The Bookies are RUTHLESS those machines they put in their shops they have cost some folks their every penny they had, some even went into debt to continue getting their Fixed Odds Terminal Fix, sadly some lost more than their money, some lost everything and finished up topping themselves.       I wouldn't touch FOBT's with a barge pole, they are the crack cocaine of the Betting Shops, thousands of lives have been ruined due to FOBT's.
Knowing how RUTHLESS Bookies are I put my "work" in where they don't look. When Saturday rolls around I scour the non league games looking on Twitter for teams that are struggling to put a full team out, without having to call on the coach driver to play in goal or the turnstile man to play centre back, and Office Staff just to make the team up, that actually happened one memorable day. You might remember when Merthyr Town couldn't put a team out a couple of years ago, thanks to Twitter I'd picked up on that Friday night when FEW IF ANY folks outside of Merthyr had heard what was going on, I spent 2 hours backing Chesham {WHO ARE YA} who the **** had EVER heard of Chesham !!!
Most of the online Bookies had a £200 limit on the game, but I hammered them all to whatever limit they had. I was up with the larks Saturday morning putting £100 here and £100 there in the shops until the Bookies cottoned on and started dropping their prices from 11/8 Chesham to 1/3 I even bet them at that. It was pathetic for Merthyr, they were 4-0 down in 15 minutes, and 9-0 down by half time, if memory serves me well Chesham were winning 12-0 when the Chesham supporters were shouting "let them get a goal" they did the decent thing the game finished 13-1. The Man of the Match award was given to Merthyr's 15 year old goalkeeper !!!
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/crisis-hit-merthyr-town-humiliated-13921420
That result got my accounts closed with 7 Bookmakers, they were hissed off because I knew what they didn't, that's the only way to win, now and again, but you have to wait for events like that, most folks don't have that discipline, they NEED their FIX.
Good as it was {to get one ore the Bookies} there was a more memorable bet, a three horse race headed by Little Owl the horse that had at one time won the Gold Cup at Cheltenham, race in a 3 horse race, against Venture to Cognac {a good but past his best chaser} and Great Dean, a decent jumper but I could have done 3 miles faster in my day.
The betting was 1/3 Little Owl, 7/2 Venture to Cognac, 150/1 Great Dean, have you any idea what the Computer Straight Forecast would be in Little Owl didn't finish the course, are you ahead of me yet ? a bunch of us put fivers on here, there and everywhere, can't say why ? but here's what happened...
"The 1982 Fulwell Chase at Kempton Park appeared a mundane contest. True, the Gold Cup winner Little Owl was in attendance but he faced only two rivals in Venture To Cognac and Great Dean.  "Venture To Cognac had some useful form to his credit but had become injury-prone and was considered to need the run. As for Great Dean, he had been pulled up at lowly Fontwell and needed a miracle if he was to win such a valuable prize.

"Little Owl was sent off the 4-11 favourite, Venture To Cognac 7-2 with Great Dean appearing for all the world a lost cause at 150-1. "As far as winning the race was concerned, Great Dean was virtually friendless. On the course and in the betting shops it was only the odd `just-for-fun' merchant and habitues of the `outsider-of-three' system who gave him even a moment's consideration. "Or so it seemed. But dotted about the country were a handful of shrewd punters who had spotted the chance to make a killing on the race. A chance, that's all. Those shrewdies didn't expect to pickup but knew exceptional value when they saw it.

"And what a killing! Not only were these punters expecting to receive odds of around 150-1 on their bet, they were also gleefully awaiting the chance to make fools of the big bookmakers. "For once, the bookmakers had made a `rick' and a mighty serious one at that. "The mistake was in the format for the then relatively new Computerised Straight Forecast (CSF), which allowed for inflated dividends should a long-priced outsider make the frame in a small field.

"The Fulwell Chase offered an ideal chance to exploit this loophole. All it needed was for Little Owl to fail to complete the course (as he had done at Cheltenham on his previous start) and this would enable Venture To Cognac to win with Great Dean hopefully putting in a clear round to come second.

"The race went entirely to script for these backers. Little Owl leading by 10 lengths with just 3 to go, then coming to the second last and seemingly going well, he swerved and was pulled up by jockey and part-owner Jim Wilson at the 10th.

"This left Venture To Cognac clear of the already tailed-off Great Dean a full fence behind. The former sauntered round to win by a distance and Great Dean, with forecast backers holding their breath, Great Dean went over the last like a spider, one leg at a time, completed in his own time to earn a place in the history books.

Jim Wilson reported that Little Owl's bit had reportedly slipped, but the bookmakers were not happy, especially when they realised the extent of their liabilities. "Payment was held back while BOLA and the racing authorities carried out an investigation into the race. No evidence of any misdemeanour was produced and the bookmakers, suitably chastened, eventually paid out.

"They also called in their computer people to change the format of the CSF to avoid such inflated dividends in small fields in the future, and the result was what is disingenuously referred to as the `Harmonic formula' for producing CSF dividends. Today, if Venture To Cognac were to beat Great Dean in identical circumstances, backers would receive odds of only 15-1. But on the day the CSF paid £75 to 50p I had 30 quid on the bet, all in all between me and the lads in the White Lion we had £75 on the bets and we cleaned several Bookies out that day. These events are rare birds, but you never forget how sweet the meat was...  
All in all, REMEMBER what Gus Demmy told me, the less often you bet, the more often you win, if you want to get an edge, do yer homework...
Anon.

Hello Stevie,
Am I a Wunderers Fan ? no, is the short answer, having said that I've been to a lot of their games in the last 50 years, more than a lot of  fans have been to. The reason being, I grew up in the midst of them, some avid, or should that be rabid FANatics. If you were born and bred in Westhoughton you were dyed in the wool as a Wunderers supporter. But, due to living next door to Fred "Punchy" Griffiths the full back for Wigan RLFC my wool was dyed in a different colour, I've always been more into Rugby, League and Union. Add to that a lifelong buddy of mine played RL "in the day" is the father of the Best Defensive Coach that Wales ever had, he's now coaching in foreign fields, I'm sure you know who I mean, "Mr Rugby League" in the 1990's.
The thing is, I can watch and enjoy either of the three games, but one thing I learned FAST was that the Fans are different, if you talk to most football fans about the upcoming game you get the standard responses, if Bolton are playing a crap team the fans don't say "we'll mop the floor with them" they say, "well, Stevenage are having a bad run, but they aren't a bad team, AND, they ALWAYS raise there game when they play us". That's JUST to cover their embarrassment IF Stevenage, Rhyll Academicals or some obscure team turns them over, that's bred in the Wunderers Fans, mind you, it's the same with a lot of other football teams.
On the opposite side of that coin is, if you went, in the day, to what was Central Park and asked Wigin's Fan's how they thought the game against St Helen's would go there'd be no precooked excuses offered, the Wigin Fan's would tell you "we'll bury the Saints" that didn't always happen, but when Saints won the Wigin lads took it on the chin, none of that "well, we were the better team, they scored against the run of play, the Ref and the wind and the pitch were against us, on and on that shyte goes".
Add to that, the violent attitude that "some" football fans have against the fans of who they are playing today beggars belief, some of them would prefer to put you in hospital than shake yer hand if your team beat them. You don't want to be stood in the wrong stand with your club colours on at a football match, yet I (and others) have stood in the middle of Saints Fans with my Cherry & Whites on when I couldn't get into the Wigin end, and NEVER had a problem, the worst you got from those surrounding you was a grimaced look when Billy Boston went ore the line for a try and Punchy converted, same grimace that we had when "the Flying Van Vollenhoven" put one down ore our line.
I put that attitude down to football being a game of frustrations, 90 minutes of stress, begging and praying that your team will score, suffering the agony of tuther team putting one over on you. Rugby is different, it's a high scoring game, often with almost what turns out to be a point scored for every minute (or two) played in the game. But as mentioned above, I can watch and appreciate both games.
Turns out that in the 60's I was rubbing shoulders with some illustrious sportsmen, Punchy Griffiths, Francis Lee (ex Man City), I knew Franny well used to have a drink with him now and again.  Franny lived in a thatched cottage in Westhoughton, right next door to Peter James, father of Michael James (now part owner of BWFC). So one way and another I had a foot in both camps, went some weeks to watch the Wunderers other weeks with the Wigin lads to watch Punchy kick more goals (again) than Neil Fox of Saint Helens, they were ALWAYS the top two in the goal kickers league table in the Sunday papers...
One I learned FAST was never listen to what a football team fan has to say about how the game will go, I lost a fair bit of money doing that. My "sport" is having a bet, I don't "bet for fun" it's no fun losing money, you need to know more about an even than the Bookies know, don't bet until YOU have the edge, that don't happen often, you just need the discipline, something that most punters DON'T have, as the old adage says "Bookmakers don't live in Council Houses".
I don't mind waiting weeks or longer before I wade in, lads I know say "I can't afford to bet with the stakes you put on" the truth of it is, they are often loosing £200 to £500 or more a month, but they "can't afford" to put £100 on South Africa to win the RU World Cup at 9/2, I had a grand on that, most of my mates back England (no matter what sport they are competing in), that's just about the worst betting strategy to work with. If you are a FANatic you can't see anything other than your team, the Bookmakers love it...
Betting is a HARD game, the games "may not" be rigged, but the odds are, 12% to 15% in the Bookies favour as soon as you slide your cash over the counter. Here's a RULE that I picked up on from Gus Demmy (Bookmaker & Boxing Promoter, in the day), I knew Gus well too, Gus told me the "secret" of betting, that being "The more often you bet, the more often you lose, the less often you bet, the more often you win". The logic being, if yer only betting a couple of quid a time, you don't really care what the Fav is in the 2:30 at Redcar, you just NEED YOUR GAMBLING FIX !!! you stand there all day sticking that 2 quid needle in until the pain and the money has gone.
If you quit betting in damn near every race, every day, the way the addicted masses do you're halfway there, just bet once a week, you can afford to place bigger stakes, that in itself doesn't guarantee that the horse or whatever will win, but if you've gone from losing a tenner a day, frittered away at 2 quid a time, and you can't even remember what you backed during the day, or WHY you backed it, other than, WELL, IT WAS THE FAVOURITE ?
So if you don't squander a tenner a day away on asking yer mates "what do you fancy in this race" just because you need a 2 quid FIX, soon enough Saturday will come round and you'll have 50 quid in yer ass pocket (itching to get out), but, 50 quid is 50 quid, yer unlikely to be asking what yer mate thinks of the 2 year old selling handicap at Ripon. You might fancy a bet on Saturday, but you have to ask yourself is it worth chancing 50 quid on ? often as not you'll decide it's not, so the sequence starts again on Monday, forget about that "good thing" at Plumpton, stay with the DISCIPLINE, if you can, by the next Saturday there's 100 quid waiting to get out.
The point that Gus was making was, if you're betting 2 quid here and 2 quid there, you WILL get skint, yer addicted to "gambling" and that's gambling against dice that are LOADED against you. But, IF you bet less often, HOPEFULLY you will be more careful on what you bet on, HOPEFULLY you will do your homework, HOPEFULLY you will find something that the Bookie doesn't  know, then the odds will be in your favour, all you need is what most folks DON'T have, DISCIPLINE.
Gus was right, and I learned from him, met Gus at Salford Dog Track in the 60's when he stood the rails there, a character if ever there was one. Bookmakers then were men who would take your bets without "speaking to a Trader" they weren't AFRAID of risk, but this lot now do their utmost to avoid risk, if you win consistently they either Ban you, or limit your bets to an amount they know you can't be bothered with, so you place the bet with someone else, that's exactly what they want, been there done that...
These stuffed shirts aren't even called Bookmakers now, they call themselves Turf Accountants, note the Accountant moniker, anything that an Accountant gets their paws on goes rotten real fast, the less I say about that the better, but it's easy enough to find how these leeches set up Offshore Accounts for the Billionaires who don't fancy paying Tax, anyway, being careful not to digress, I'll stay on track.
Brings me back to "knowing what the Bookies don't know" getting an advantage over them, knowing what I know, being on the inside track re the Wunderers and the folks holding the hot iron right now I was astonished to see that 50/1 was being offered against the Wunderers being relegated into OBLIVION, so I filled my boots with it.
The thing is, the Wunderers AREN'T last years team, they've gone, it's a new team, a Lad's & Dad's team, a team that will take a while to gel, that's IF they ever gel, so on their ability (or lack of it) they could drop through the relegation trap door, but...
We have two horses in this race, the second one being if Football Ventures owners of BWFC can't pay their way. WHERE does the money come from to keep the Hotel and the Club afloat ? they have to find £3.4 Million to pay off existing debts less than 12 months from now, plus £1 Million to HMRC,  plus £59,000 a month / 2,000 quid a DAY interest on the mortgage for the Hotel, how much business do you think the Hotel is doing right now, Bolton is the epicentre of Covid right now, and is likely to be that way for months. The Hotel doesn't seem to be an asset to the Club right now, in fact I'd bet it's a bloody headache. I guess FV (Football Ventures) could sell it, but, who to ? who's looking to buy an Hotel in Bolton right now. Other than that, where is the money coming from to pay for the football side of things ? how long do you think it will be before the turnstiles are clicking again ? would you fancy carrying to Club until the Fans are allowed back ?
It's not often you can find an edge against the Bookies, I don't think they have taken the above into account, so I took a few £1,000 to £20 bets, once I'd "got my money on" I joined Punters Lounge simply to give you guys a heads up, the more folks the Bookies have to pay out the happier I'll be, that's why I'm here... As mentioned, it's not a certainty that the Wunderers will be relegated, but I wouldn't be laying 50/1 I wouldn't lay better than Evens, knowing what I know. It wouldn't surprise me if Football Ventures throw the towel in before Christmas...
As mentioned owning football clubs is a VANITY VENTURE for Billionaires, Millionaires can soon find themselves way out of their depth.
ANON.