Fedar
-
Posts
1,067 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Fedar
-
-
Re: Third qualifying round, 1st leg > 2 August
Totally agree with you. Liverpool are quite impotent up-front anyway, and without Suarez and Bellamy they will have to rely on people like Downing and Henderson...Probably Pool will sneak the win, but I don't see many goals here for sure. I don't know how relevant this is, but two years ago in a similar early encounter Liverpool defeated Rabotnicki Macedonia by 2:0. However, Gomel is stronger, so unders are tempting at this big price.Gomel V Liverpool Under 2.5 Available at evens with Ladbrokes. Price is a little high in my view. A lot of factors point to an unders game. Liverpool lack top quality strikers no Carroll, Suarez, Bellamy and Borini has only just returned from holiday this week as has Gerard. Gerard may not start anyhow. Another major factor in favour of unders is Gomel have an awesome defensive record in the Belarus league they have been under 2.5 in 12 of their last 15 home league games and have only let in 7 goals in 15 games. Also they dont score many either just 19 in 15 games this season. Liverpool last season were very sound defensively and have essentially the same back 4 if they are selected. Reina may start or maybe not. Gomel have their best Defender with the Belarus Olympic side but despite that the weight of the evidence seems strongly in favour of under 2.5. -
Re: Third qualifying round, 1st leg > 31 July - 1 August
I agree with many of your points but not this one. Check the stats for European tournaments for the last five years. Cyprus teams participated three times in group stages (APOEL - twice, Anorthosis- once), and they always played very well there. Check also Europa League. They are doing big progress, no doubt about that.one (one has to say lucky) run by APOEL doesn't change this fact. -
Re: Third qualifying round, 1st leg > 31 July - 1 August My final picks for tonight... Sheriff - Dinamo Zagreb Sheriff DNB 2.00 (bet365) I am surprised to see such price for draw no bet in favor of the home-team, in a tie which I consider very equal (if not Sheriff being even better). I watched both games of Dinamo against Bulgarian Ludogorets and they were close to pathetic. I know maybe two games is not very big sample to draw conclusions, but if Dinamo's opponent wasn't so inexperienced (first year in Europe), the Croatians would have got easily beaten in both legs. Dinamo shows tremendous lack of creativity in midfield and up-front - basically all their goals were caused by "unprovoked mistakes". They are also fragile defensively and let many opportunities for the opposition. Sheriff are much more experienced than Ludogorets, they are also "under-ish" (good defense), and very good at home (I mentioned in previous threads how many very good European teams good beaten in Tiraspol in the last few years). I think it is very unlikely that they lose, and they high chance of winning this game and the whole tie. Cluj - Liberets Cluj @ 1.91 (betfair) Romanian teams are very strong and definitely performing much better than Czech counterparts in the past ten years. Cluj is already very experienced and established itself as the most powerful team in the country in the last several year, above traditional mastodons like Steaua and Dinamo. Liberets, on the other hand, does not usually take part in this tournament, and they quite often miss European tournaments. Last round, they got beaten in Kazakhstan by Shakhtar Karaganda, and managed to qualify only after a last-minute goal in the extra time. Cluj is experienced and strong enough to get home victory comfortably and with class. Anderlecht - Ekranas Anderlecht to Win to Nil @ 1.76 (betfair) The clean sheet and win to nil bets have been performing very well lately, and I intend to try them again. Ekranas is the best team in the country, but the level in Lithuania is way below that in Belgium. However, it is very likely that Anderlecht might have some difficulties against very packed defense of Ekranas, so handicaps are not good option in my opinion. These are some of Ekranas results in European away games: - HJK Helsinki 0:2, La Valletta 3:2, BATE 1:3, Hapoel 0:4, Shamrock 0:0. We see that they are nothing special and not particularly sharp offensively. I see this game most likely as a 2:0 victory for the Belgians. Maribor - Dudelange Maribor win to nil @ 1.98 (betfair) This is my speculative bet for this round. Many people would say I am crazy after what Dudelange did last round. However, I believe that this is the exact reason why Maribor will be very careful defensively and won't show any sign of underestimation. This price is totally influenced by last round, hadn't it taken place, the same bet would have been around 1.40. Maribor are mainly under-ish team both in Slovenia and Europa. I expect them to get 2:0 or 3:0 win. In the end, I would say that I think I might be skipping AEL-Partizan game, and I am surely skipping Fenerbahche - Vaslui. Partizan are actually very good and maybe the price for home win is normal. As to the game in Istabnul, I wouldn't touch it. Romanian teams are really good and Fenerbahche is just starting their season now.
-
Re: Third qualifying round, 1st leg > 31 July - 1 August
A loss and a win. Overall - small profit.After some hesitation and research, I decided to make my picks for both games today. 1. Dynamo - Feyenoord Under 2.5 @ 1.90 (bet365) At first sight, I might look very risky, given the offensive power of Dynamo and the number of goals scored in Feyenoord's games in Erediv. However, my main reason is that I think Dynamo is experiencing some difficulties creating goal-opportunities against packed-up defenses. They have three wins in a row in Ukraine, but two of them were "1-0", and the third was 3:1 with two very late goals against underdogs Zaporojie. I had the chance to watch one of these games - against Metalurh Donetsk, and Dynamo, despite the huge advantage in possession, barely created a single chance for the whole game, and was lucky to escape with a goal in the last minute. Feyenoord do not show particularly impressive defense in Holland, but we all know that this is one of the most goal-scoring leagues in Europe. In CL tie, I am confident that they will approach the game in a very different way than the normal Eredivisie match. I am sure they will be packed up in the back and just sporadically attack. Koeman should know to organize their defense well, and I am pretty sure that he's done his homework after watching Dynamo's three games so far. Feyenoord misses superstar Guidetti and Bakkal, which in turn, considerably reduces their chances of scoring in Kyiv, which is also good for this bet. In the end, trying to take into account team psychology, I think that Dynamo will be more than happy with a small clean-sheet victory like 1:0. And even, in the worst case, they will not be unhappy with a goal-less draw. They know they are very good away and Feyenoord is nothing special at home, so I don't believe Dynamo will be pushing very hard for a big victory. 2. Motherwell - Pao Pao Clean Sheet 2.18 (Betfair) This one is more like a speculative bet. The price for unders is 1.57, meaning that bookies definitely expect one or at most two goals. On the other hand, if we investigate the correct score market, we see that the four most likely scores according to bookies are: 0:1, 1:1, 0:2, and 0:0. Three out of these four, include Pao clean sheet. Maybe I am missing sth, but it looks like 2.18 is a little too big. Analyzing the game itself, I expect Pao to dominate possession, Mwell to be defending for most of the time, but defending in an aggressive fashion, whereas they will press up the Greek midfielders and leave them little space. This could mean an unattractive football with little chances. The Scottish will surely try to get a goal and will have a few chances, but they will be more than welcoming a goal-less draw. -
Re: The reality of sports betting/trading for a living.
Surely there are two types of mug punter though? The type that bets on favourites because they are a "sure thing"' date=' and the type of punter that invests in long shots because the return will be large for much less risk. Both types disregard any notion of value, and both are subjectively described as "mug punters". What constitutes a mug punter though is subjective and a hotly debated term because the person that bets at short or long odds can still turn a profit should they hit the right strike rate. It seems that most people have their own opinion on what makes a mug punter.[/quote'] Very true, Jase. However, in my opinion, the favorite type of mug-punter is the one that is really important and profitable for bookies. These are the people that lump the big money, and the people who play much more regularly. The long-shot mug-punter usually plays with very little amount of money, and actually, very often these types of players are a net-loss for the bookies. These are the people who play with 50 cents - 1 euro once per week, trying to reach 150-200. Whenever any of them makes the lucky strike, then he is most probably a net winner from betting (hence, net-loss for bookies) for the rest of his life. Whereas, favorite type of mug punters are net-winners, only if they stop betting after several hits, which they rarely do. -
Re: The reality of sports betting/trading for a living.
Oh, Dear Lord...... First, forgetting the smart-ass way of thinking, is a great advise, which you can make good use of yourself, Mr. Pinkisntwell. Because the person in this thread who constantly shows attitude, refuses to accept or even read others' arguments, pretends that other people claim something they never said, is You, Mr. Pinkisntwell. Second, I have nothing against mug punters - I have been a mug punter myself in the beginning, as nearly everyone here. And I do some mug bets even now (the last was lumping four digit sum on Mexico and USA combined to beat Guyana and Antilles - a classic mug staff). Third, would you be so kind to give me exact quote where I said or hinted that "I bet against favorites and make money of it"?! If you don't do this, I expect you to apologize like a gentleman, or else I accept that you are just a muppet, not worth talking to. By the way, earlier in this thread, you made the same claim against another punter from this forum - that he was arguing that betting against favorites is profitable, which he obviously had not done, and you did not bother to apologize to him, as well. This speaks of really low manners and culture of communication, Mr. Pinkisntwell. Fourth, what exactly are you trying to prove with your data?!! That 1.20 coefficient is more likely to be a winner than, say, 1.80?!! Then you are a bloody Einstein, sir! Go get your Nobel! Fifth, how do your data and links relate at all to my statement that most of mug punters tend to heavily over-estimate favorites?! Be kind to elaborate on this. My statement refers to behavioral characteristic - "Most mug punters tend to over-estimate favorites". Your data refers to analysis of winning strategies. What do the two have in common?! You seem like a native speaker, I really don't understand how you continuously manage to miscomprehend straightforward concepts...You are, very simply, wrong. Read this http://www.gamblingonlinemagazine.com/gambling-features.php?articleID=35 and this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Favourite-longshot_bias. I also have some data handy, they are from the Greek state bookmaker, they are located here http://www.anendotos.gr/stix/stapodstat.asp (sorry, page is in greek). Here is some examples (all the following concern home teams): Odds of 1.1: won 87.2% of the time, that means your expected return per unit staked was 0.959 Odds of 1.2: won 76% of the time, that means your expected return per unit staked was 0.916 Odds of 1.5: won 59.47% of the time, that means your expected return per unit staked was 0.893 Odds of 2.0: won 44.4% of the time, that means your expected return per unit staked was 0.888 Odds of 5.0: won 15.64% of the time, that means your expected return per unit staked was 0.782 Odds of 10.0: won 4.17% of the time, that means your expected return per unit staked was 0.417 There is more data if you want, but I'm at work right now. Do yourself a favour and forget the smart-ass way of thinking, i.e. mug punters bet on low-odds favorites, I am smarter than them therefore I will bet against said favorites and will make money. -
Re: The reality of sports betting/trading for a living.
Pinkitwell, maybe I am being naive in my reasoning and missing the big picture, but your arguments, despite the beautiful theoretic words and concepts, go against the personal experience of me and many other punters. I apologize if I am saying something silly, but it looks to me like someone using obscure theoretic concepts and terms in order to convince me that the sun is rising from the North, while I see it every day with my own eyes that it rises from the East. I am sorry, but I would rather believe my eyes and ears, unless I see really good and solid argumentation, and "the consistent favorite longshot bias" and "the bookmakers overround" are really not enough to convince me. Especially when I see and hear every day people saying "Lol, United/Barca/Bayern playing against some weak teams - I am gonna lump some money on them", while the old punters in this forum never do this, despite what your theory says. You realize that those mug punters are not familiar with the "longshot bias" and "the bookmakers overround", and they are rather choosing the intuitively easiest way to easy money?! You claim that mug punters would be unlikely to bet 10 pounds to earn 4?! Would be true, only if you replace mug punters with pro-punters. Because that's exactly what mug punters would want to do, probably only in different numbers - betting 100 pounds to win 40 pounds in a "certain victory" for the big team. Do you realize how many times I heard this year the sentence: "Those scum from Liverpool screwed me again with my money"? People were constantly lumping money on them against underdogs and losing. Pinkitwell, I see that your are very theoretically prepared, but could please restrain from using fancy terms and concepts, and stick to more plain language - if what you are saying is so true, then it definitely can be explained also in more popular words.Fedar, Now, on to your "bookies guard against mug bettors" argument. This is a tired old argument, which you should be very careful with as it can cost you lots and lots of money. Let me explain myself: If there is "mug money" on sports betting, it's very definitely on the underdogs, not the favorites. In your example the mug money would be on Swansea. This can be proved by the consistent favorite-longshot bias that is evident on bookmakers' prices, that is, if you blindly bet all favorites with your average high-street bookmaker and then do the same with all the underdogs, you will find out that you will lose much more when you bet on the underdogs. This leads us to believe that "mug money" is concentrated on the underdogs, as "mug punters" would be unlikely to bet 10 pounds to win 4. In short, the bookmakers' overround is distributed unevenly, since it is concentrated mostly on the underdogs. There is no such bias in the exchanges, mind you, as people can back or lay so the overround has to stay close to 0 (and you can't distribute something that doesn't exist). -
Re: The reality of sports betting/trading for a living. Froment and Pinkitwell, about the ROI - I am familiar with this concept, but I think you are missing some points. You define ROI always relative to some frame. In case of betting, this frame could be absolute number of bets, time period, etc. This is very important, because otherwise tomorrow I might put three mug bets at small coefficients and then start bragging that I've got ROI of the enormous 30%. Will this make me a better punter that people with 8% return, achieved over thousands of bets for several years?!! Obviously no. Hence, you cannot just define ROI autonomously, without relating it to a frame. Second, ROI in betting is very different than ROI in other investment, especially financing investment. You keep on making the mistake (and actually not reading my point) to claim that the ROI in betting is constant, while in reality it is more than obvious that it is not. Pinkitwell, for instance, says that you bet your money many times and the 5% ROI is multiplied each time. Not true! When you lose, and when you are on a losing streak, your ROI on the particular investment is negative! Your total ROI is decreasing when losing a bet. In contrast, if you invest your money in a short-term, low-risk investment with a pred-defined ROI, you get basically the same ROI each time your investment expires. Completely different than in betting, where your ROI is fluctuating a lot and is often negative. And to be honest, I don't think that ROI is a stable indicator of betting performance at all, because I don't believe a punter can maintain the same ROI over time and numerous bets - it is just changing all the time.
-
Re: Third qualifying round, 1st leg > 31 July - 1 August After some hesitation and research, I decided to make my picks for both games today. 1. Dynamo - Feyenoord Under 2.5 @ 1.90 (bet365) At first sight, I might look very risky, given the offensive power of Dynamo and the number of goals scored in Feyenoord's games in Erediv. However, my main reason is that I think Dynamo is experiencing some difficulties creating goal-opportunities against packed-up defenses. They have three wins in a row in Ukraine, but two of them were "1-0", and the third was 3:1 with two very late goals against underdogs Zaporojie. I had the chance to watch one of these games - against Metalurh Donetsk, and Dynamo, despite the huge advantage in possession, barely created a single chance for the whole game, and was lucky to escape with a goal in the last minute. Feyenoord do not show particularly impressive defense in Holland, but we all know that this is one of the most goal-scoring leagues in Europe. In CL tie, I am confident that they will approach the game in a very different way than the normal Eredivisie match. I am sure they will be packed up in the back and just sporadically attack. Koeman should know to organize their defense well, and I am pretty sure that he's done his homework after watching Dynamo's three games so far. Feyenoord misses superstar Guidetti and Bakkal, which in turn, considerably reduces their chances of scoring in Kyiv, which is also good for this bet. In the end, trying to take into account team psychology, I think that Dynamo will be more than happy with a small clean-sheet victory like 1:0. And even, in the worst case, they will not be unhappy with a goal-less draw. They know they are very good away and Feyenoord is nothing special at home, so I don't believe Dynamo will be pushing very hard for a big victory. 2. Motherwell - Pao Pao Clean Sheet 2.18 (Betfair) This one is more like a speculative bet. The price for unders is 1.57, meaning that bookies definitely expect one or at most two goals. On the other hand, if we investigate the correct score market, we see that the four most likely scores according to bookies are: 0:1, 1:1, 0:2, and 0:0. Three out of these four, include Pao clean sheet. Maybe I am missing sth, but it looks like 2.18 is a little too big. Analyzing the game itself, I expect Pao to dominate possession, Mwell to be defending for most of the time, but defending in an aggressive fashion, whereas they will press up the Greek midfielders and leave them little space. This could mean an unattractive football with little chances. The Scottish will surely try to get a goal and will have a few chances, but they will be more than welcoming a goal-less draw.
-
Re: The reality of sports betting/trading for a living. I want to return to the previous points made in this long discussion about reality of sports betting. And to particularly emphasize something which I believe is the answer for many questions in this business. Many people, including in this forum and discussion, claim that bookies price events in the big majority of cases at their real value. This is something that I disagree with. I have a theory that bookies price events with a clearly defined favorite and underdog at what I call "MUG PRICE" - this is the price that would fulfill one main objective: - Protect against massive hits from mug-punter bets, and at the same time keep mug-punters in the game. To clarify more this concept I have to define mug punters - these are players who base their picks on stereotypes and popular beliefs, rather than thorough insight and analysis and who, consequently, tend to over-estimate favorites, and underestimate underdogs. You would probably ask yourselves why would bookies try to protect against those types of players, as they are their "wet-dream". I would try to illustrate my point with a case-study example: Liverpool's Overestimation: 2011-12 Those of you, who follow closely Premiership and bet on it, know that there have been consistent value over the whole season in betting against Liverpool in games when the Scousers were the favorite. Despite Liverpool showing continuous and permanent weakness in terms of goal-scoring, creativity, and being vulnerable to set-pieces and quick counter-attack football, the bookies would still continue to over-estimate the team. Why is this?! Think of purely imaginary game between Liverpool and Swansea at Anfield, somewhere in March, when Liverpool's form has been at its lowest, while Swansea have been performing above expectations throughout whole season. The pro-punters and the bookies believe that Liverpool should be priced at around 1.75-1.80. However, mug-punters are willing to lump-up huge money on home win, even at prices of 1.40. What should the bookies do? Price it at real price or at mug-punters price? Let's investigate both options. First, the real price of around 1.75-1.80. At this price, bookies virtually take pro-players out of the game, because they are almost exclusively value seekers. But they attract disproportionate amount of mug-punter money. Which, in turn, leaves them over-exposed in case that Liverpool - still the favorites, win that game. Now, let's investigate what happens if bookies decide deliberately to over-estimate Liverpool and put a price of 1.35 on home win. Now they are totally safe against mug-punters, because even if Pool wins, they will easily recover their money and earn much more than that in the next game if they follow this policy. On the other hand, bookies are exposed in this case to pro-punters, who would immediately explore the value that they spot in betting against Liverpool. So, after investigating both options, we should ask ourselves - against whom bookies would rather want to be protected - pro-punters or mugs?! Although intuitively you will answer "professional betters", I believe that the answer is just the opposite, at least in the scenario of clear favorite and underdog plus very popular market. Mug punters are the ones who comprise the big majority of players in the popular markets. Mug punter money exceed in total those invested by pro-punters by far, and therefore the bookie needs to design the ideal price which simultaneously will protect it from mug-punter winning big time and still keep mug-punter money in the game in huge amounts. Last but not least, let's not forget that bookies dispose of serious weapons against pro-punters: account limits, closed accounts, maximum stake limits etc. To sum it up, I believe that in their pricing policies, bookies do not aim at the real price, but rather at the "popular" price, i.e. the price, as perceived by mug punters, plus a small price premium to attract those mug punters. I will continue my reasoning later, to try to prove that bookies often aim for the popular price even in more obscure markets like the Bulgarian Premier League. I will present you with a small case study about how bookies systematically and deliberately make "pricing errors" in this league, and how they profit from them.
-
Re: The reality of sports betting/trading for a living. Froment, maybe we going a bit off-topic, but I still disagree. Here I come back to my 10K euro example. You are absolutely right that you can at a bet shop you can get your money over two-hours, sometimes over just several minutes, while in bank you need to wait at least six months. But my point is that 5% average yield entails also losses. You may invest 10K in a betting shop and get your 500 bucks in the end of the month, for instance. But, then, when you reinvest in the second month, it may turn out that this has been a bad month for your betting-shop, and now you are left with 9,000 euros. Then, in the following month, they make-up for it, until in the last of the whole term they theoretically reach the average yield of 5%. My point is that this average yield involves many fluctuations over the course of time. So it is reasonable to estimate it over a longer period, like for example one year. Otherwise, it does not make much sense - it might happen even that your first-time investment is a loser. So, 5% average yield is pretty much the same as bank deposit, only that it is much more risky.
-
Re: The reality of sports betting/trading for a living. I think I am missing something here...As far as I understand, 5% is average yield. Average yield naturally includes both winnings and failures. So, if a punter has a 5% average yield, and you give him 10,000 pounds to play with over one year, its expected that he will return you 10,500 euros at the end of term. Which is exactly what you will get from banks, sometimes for even shorter terms, only that they are thousands time more reliable.
-
Re: Third qualifying round, 1st leg > 31 July - 1 August Belgian Punter, I know what you talking about when you say Jovanovic is slowing down the play - I remember him at Liverpool - he looked like playing some 80s football. Anyway, your suggestion sounds tempting at this price, because Anderlecht does not seem to try to humiliate weaker teams in qualifying rounds. And Ekranas are very defensive. But still I am a bit worried, because of the fire-power the Belgians have in front - Gillet and Mbokani. What do you think about "Andrelecht to win to Nil", which is offered at betfair for 1.88 at the moment?! Is Anderlecht's defense prone to doing silly mistakes?! Because I don't think Ekranas will create many chances.
-
Re: Third qualifying round, 1st leg > 31 July - 1 August
I dont think that the 1' date='5 is value... I would not bet on a scottish team because I think that the scottish football is dead.[/quote'] 1.50 will be a value if out of each 5 games b/n Celtic and HJK in Glasgow, Celtic wins at least 4. Which is very likely and reasonable guess in my opinion. I keep on saying it, but value does not lay only at higher prices - (subjective) value is any price which you consider higher than the actual probability would suggest. For example if Barcelona plays those Moroccans in an official game at Nou Camp and you get 1.10 for a Barca win, will you still think it is not value, just because it is so low?! -
Re: Third qualifying round, 1st leg > 31 July - 1 August A little more info on Partizan that I would like to provide, since I like this team and have bet many times on their games. As you can see, they are a complete dominant in their local league in the past five years, leaving their historical rival Red Star lagging way behind. They are far above the level of the other teams in the Serbian league. Partizan are particularly dangerous in front of their crowd at the UNA Stadium (where I had the chance to attend a few times), and the atmosphere there resembles some of the hottest South American arenas. However, the big problem of Partizan is that they are the only horse in the race in the constantly depreciating in class Serbian league (where they used to sell regularly players in Western Europe for millions of euros, and lately the only good export has been Stefan Savic, for whom they "cheated" City in my view). Partizan are usually way ahead of others by Christmas time and take it very easy and relaxed for most of the competition. Being classes above most of the teams in the league, they often don't need to put much effort to win games, and they can easily afford to miss a few victories, knowing the advantage in class and points that they have. All these factors affect negatively Partizan's attitude and fitness, and make the team particularly vulnerable in the starting round of European competition. Last year they got knocked out by Shamrock Rovers, which was accepted as a total shock by fans and media. In contrast, the Cyprus league is very competitive and tight. Almost each game of AEL there is like a derby. I believe their fitness and motivation will be at higher level than Partizan's. However, I support HastGill's advise not to pick the "clean sheet" this time, because Partizan are really dangerous up-front. Nevertheless, as a whole, AEL stands very decent chances of winning this game and even the whole tie. About the weather - i don't think it will have much effect. Here in the Balkans it has been very hot for two months already (almost every day above 30 degrees C, very often 35-40 degrees). So, with respect to weather, I guess the two teams will be on equal grounds.
-
Re: Third qualifying round, 1st leg > 31 July - 1 August
Most of the people in this forum will easily disregard any bet below 1.8, but I actually quite agree with you here. 1.50 should be good price for a home win for Celtic in CL qualifiers against Finns. Of course, surprises are possible, but I think that 1.50 accounts for possible surprise and includes extra premium. By the way, any of the Brits in the forum that could provide info on Motherwell?! At first sight, without any research, a Scottish team, other than Celtic and Rangers, playing vs. Pao seems like an easy bet. But maybe there is something on Motherwell that I am missing here. Any insight would be welcome.Celtic v HJk May be some value in Celtic win at 1.5 with Bet 365 Its a big ask for HJK to go to Parkhead and get anything. Stokes and commons are doubts for Celtic and the South Korean Midfielder is at the Olympics but they have reasonable back up. Seems to me HJK are pretty enthusiastic about punishing the weak in Europe Bangor City last year and then KR Rejkavic this year but when they need to step up a level they are found wanting. They have lost to Dinamo Zagreb and Partizan Belgrade the last 2 seasons pretty comfortably. On paper there is not much in their squad at all they have no current regular Finnish internationals which surprises me. There are a few players with 2 or 3 caps here and there but there thats all. They only have 2 foreign players an Egyptian and Demba Savage (6 caps for Gambia) who probably is their star and scores a bagfull of goals in Finland. Their Only other player of note is Varynen who has 50 Finish caps and was decent ex PSV but never really made it. dont know why but he has only played twice for them this season. Celtic are not world beaters but are different class to HJK so 1.5 is good enough value for me. -
Re: try to get rich by small steps
Bollocks...The only way to win in long terms is to have better knowledge than bookmakers. And while you cannot be more knowledgeable than them across the countless number of leagues and games, you can surely beat their knowledge with respect to few teams and leagues. After all they cannot afford the man-hours to review in close detail every single team and league, and in reality they don't need to do it. But a single punter is totally capable of devoting big analytical resources to two or three leagues, and particularly to five or six teams in each of them. Then he gets an edge over bookies. And they would not care much about that as those types of tipsters are very few, and they don't post a real threat to them (and in the end, they can always limit their account).Well if you think it can be profitable then i would say: "Go for it!" This is a very simple concept and i believe bookmakers will beat you in long term with this because of the Best Price Percentage and the money limits reduces the changes of winning. The only way to win in long term is to have better odds then the bookmakers with some (and/or) luck. You're dealing with bookmakers and not with a few youngsters from the street which you can easily beat. -
Re: £1,000 to £100,000 AdvantageHandicapping, It is your money and risk, bro, but I don't understand why you try to prove something that has been disproved millions of time, starting from the onset of betting science. Don't be offended, but that's mug punting at its best, and the way you do it, it is impossible to work, otherwise the industry will be bankrupt. Theoretically, there is only one way this strategy can be winning - if you are an expert on the teams you are betting on, and you don't pick them randomly (or after a skim on soccerway), but have inside knowledge and insights about the two teams' formation, strengths and weaknesses, attitude and motivation for the game, etc., etc...That's the only way you can create some edge for yourself in order to combat the almighty probability theory. And you obviously don't employ such deep analytical knowledge, otherwise, it won't be possible to post bets almost daily.
-
Re: The reality of sports betting/trading for a living. A very interesting discussion which I read with enormous interest. Some very interesting output from experienced punters. I am a bit confused as to what the actual objective of the author of the thread is, since he did not seem to try to understand and value the input of others - he looked more like trying to exercise his debating skills and imposing his opinion on others, rather than searching for new insights and knowledge. Pretty much most of the points have been covered already, but I am surprised that very few were touching the aspects of the professional and methodological analysis and expert knowledge of the game itself, which could give huge edge for a punter. The discussion was almost entirely centered on prices, mathematics and trading, as if knowledge on the game itself is totally insignificant and it is easily ruled out by the probability theory in combination with bookies giving lower prices. Another point is that very frequently in the discussion winning yields of around 5% have been mentioned. Am I mistaken, or you will readily get similar winning yields if you just deposit your money at a bank? And if this is the case, then why bother talking about this kinds of returns? I check the tipsters competitions posted on this and other forums. What is very curious for me is why those tipsters give like tens of tips per day and often hundreds per week?! It is very unlikely that a man would be able to deeply analyze so many various picks each week (and deep analysis does not include just a look at soccerway, in majority of the cases it should mean knowing the teams you bet on, and having WATCHED them play recently at least a few times). And even if a tipster devotes all his time and is very efficient with his analysis, so that manages to reach the above-mentioned work-rate, then comes the big question: Is it possible that such a great number of decent selections daily and weekly exists?!! I mean you can know each single small details of both teams, you could have watched every their game, but in most of the cases you would not be able to discover a decent bet. I myself have been betting for nearly one year, and sometimes I cannot find a good pick for one or two whole weeks (oh, summer time). And I would never bet good money if I don't value the pick - I could just put some small sum for recreational purposes. That is how I reach the answer of key questions, asked in the discussion. Yes, I believe that there can be tipsters winning in the long term. These are the people with good expert knowledge of some teams and leagues, the people with quick reaction and good investigation of prices. Contrary, it is very unlikely that a tipster can do betting as a profession. The reason is simple and one I disclosed in last paragraph - very often you find just few decent bets over several weeks, while your expenses are constant and regular - rent, leasing, credit, living expenses. Hence, in my opinion, betting is a good option for extra cash, not the main and only source.
-
Re: Testing My New Way of Value Betting Well, this only comes to show once again that so-called value-betting is not really profitable, unless it is applied in the high-likelihood segment. High-likelihood segment means, of course, events that are more likely to happen than not, regardless of price. Which in turn means that real and profitable value-betting is when you search and discover under-priced favorites (e.g. team A quoted at 1.6, when in reality you think it should 1.4). I am thinking of running an experiment to prove the point that value betting on "underdogs" is not worthy. I intend to use the upcoming features in CL and Europa League this week, but I am not yet decided about the exact design. I am going to pick the outsider for each game, take the coefficient given by bookies, and then create an artificial coefficient for this underdog - I will add 25% to the bookie's price. This should clearly mean that the price is exaggerated. Then, I will check experimentally whether this approach will be successful. I am quite sure it should be losing big time.
-
Re: Third qualifying round, 1st leg > 2 August Swindonfan, could you quote the price for your pick, so that we could determine if it is worth it. I personally would not bet, because although Pool are nothing special, they are still many times better than Gomel, and I don't remember them failing to beat in both legs teams like Gomel very often. Also, you didn't take into consideration that this is going to be the first game for Rodgers. Given that, and the very weak performance last season, Liverpool has a lot to prove, and I think they would want to send a message this game. My point is Liverpool are not in a position to settle with a draw and decide the tie at home - they desperately need to start winning and gaining confidence.
-
Re: Third qualifying round, 1st leg > 31 July - 1 August Pg_Yid, seems to me that we are over-exploiting those Cypriots. ;) Just kiddin'... I actually agree with you. There is no reason why they should be underestimated by the bookies. I would also add that in the last few years Partizan and their counter-parts from Red Star Belgrade have several very shameful results in Europe (Shamrock Rovers, last year, for example). And I checked the results of all Cyprus sides in the tournaments in the last several years, and they are notably stable and good at home.
-
Re: Second qualifying round, 2nd leg > 26 July
Final Score: 1-1 Saddest won bet ever.Last week I tipped the "under" for my favorite CSKA Sofia vs. Mura in Slovenia. It came out very easily at very good price. Now there is the return game. Last time I told you that CSKA just sold their one-man forward star - Brazilian J.Moraes, and they are left upfront with just one man - Irishman Kilian Sheridan. Well, he got red-carded in Slovenia, so now basically CSKA will be playing without a striker. In the first game, the situation was the following: Mura staying in defense and rarely crossing the mid-field, CSKA retaining about 65% of possession, nevertheless, they did not manage to get a single good change on goal for the whole game, although they were man up for about half and hour, before Sheridan got his card. I honestly don't see the game in Sofia as being very different than that one. Of course, the home soil and the crowd will make some difference, but I hardly see CSKA scoring more than a goal, at most two. CSKA Sofia - Mura: Under 2.5 @ 1.95 (365) -
Re: Second qualifying round, 2nd leg > 24-25 July
Well, not much to say - a poor pick. Maybe it is not a good idea to use this kind of bet on two-leg tournament ties - they pay off much better at domestic leagues. Thankfully, we have the gorgeous team of AEL Limassol and some of our great colleagues in the forum, so that we can end up the evening with earnings! :D2. Dinamo Zagreb - Ludogorez Highest Scoring Half: Second @ 2.05 (Bet365). I am basing this prediction almost entirely on the reputation of Ludogorez of being slow-starters and pushing the gears later on in the game. In the spring half of the season, this bet would have won in 11 out of 16 games for Ludogorez. I agree that maybe this is a normal percentage, given that it is ex-ante more expected for any game to sport more goals in the second half, but you should be aware that in this figure I include also home games against outsiders where Ludogorets finished their job easily in the beginning and rested later on in the game. If I exclude those game, the stats will be more impressive. The score in the first game 1:1 could also contribute to this bet, because I expect a very careful start for both teams. Dinamo would certainly be a little afraid to open up, after they were outclassed by margin in the first game, and managed to grab a lucky draw in the end, hence, I expect they will respect their guests. Ludogorets will not be pushing early on, knowing them well, I am pretty confident they will not open up as well before the second half.
Third qualifying round, 1st leg > 2 August
in Europa League Predictions
Posted
Re: Third qualifying round, 1st leg > 2 August
I think that Dinamo squad is basically the same, it is even reinforced now. They got Feyenoord star Bakkal. They have top players like Kurani, Dzsudzsak, Misimovic, Kokorin, Semshov, Schildenfeld...Russian league two first game should not be very indicative, because the level there is way above that of Dundee. Having watched how easy Pao got victory vs. Motherwell, I expect something similar tonight.