CJ Mars
-
Posts
112 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by CJ Mars
-
-
Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. The problem I've found with Tournament betting on Betfair is that for all but the biggest events it is very difficult to get liquidity except on the top 1 or 2 in the merket. Last year I baked Paulo Suarez for the Ladies French Open at average odds of 240 for a stake of only 25 Euros but when it came to her semi (which she lost versus) Sharapova I couldn't give her away on the outrights at first 9s then 10s then finally 12s. I ended up getting my stake back with a match bet on Sharapova but didn't have the cojones for a monster punt on the Russian at short odds. I'm ashamed to admit this but I've flirted with a bastardised version of a Martingale strategy for some tennis tournamanets where I oppose certain players that I feel are overpriced on the outrights not by laying them but by opposeing them with rising stakes on the outright. I've opposed Tim Henman twice recntly in this way (not in the Nasdaq) and done a lot better then I would have latying him at 15s and 18s which is what you'd have to do to get any action on Betfair when he's available 2-3 points shorter with a spoortsbook.
-
Re: Paul philips Was rerreading Anthony Holden's "Big Deal" (his account of trying one year as a pro player back in the mid 80s) and he deals with his brief and unpleasant meeting with Hellmuth just after the latter wins the WS (1983 I think). He surfaces briefly again later in the book being again a prize turd. Seems to be one of the most graceless people its possible to meet on a poker table. The contrast with some of the other players such as Bruson / Preston / Johnny Moss who Holden clearly idolises is pretty telling.
-
Re: My Play with JACKS For what it's worth I usually play pocket Jacks aggressively with a raise from late position. From early-mid position I'd call and try to limp in cheaply. I would be reluctant to go all in as like in your case someone with an ace (even with a rag kicker) is likely to call. I'd usually make a raise of at least two / three times the current pot from late position if the pot was unraised. If its raised back to me I'd call. In a raised pot I'd call from late position and hope the flop is not too scary. If the flop comes without an ace I'd probably put 1 player all in (but not more). If after my initial raise pre flop I was in turn put all in I'd have to think about matching it depending on how much I knew about the raiser and how tight / loose they were. I'd play queens pretty much the same way btw.
-
Re: Mentality for being a pro I've read I'd say over a hundred gambling books from sports betting, horses and most recently poker. These have been both theoretical and also anecdotal/autobiographical. There are a few things that have struck me about the professionals. One is that most of them care very little for the money. Its a means to an end for them. If they are down they are down and they seem able to accept the consequences ofdoing without. Even if I had the ability/skill to triumph as a professional gambler I simply couldn't live with the whole hand to mouth nature of the life. I'd suspect that most people who dream of it are the same. Secondly I think there is an obsessve compulsive side to many professional gamblers. If anyone has read any of the great Nick Mordin (horse punters) books he comes across as almost completely engrossed by his punting with nothing else interfering. Even when he worked in an advertising agency half his time seemed concerned with new strategies for picking a winner in the next race. Finally the real gamblers seem to have the highest tolerance for risk there is. Even if you know the odds favour you how many people would shove across EVERYTHING they had on a hand / horse / football team? This would be my interpretation of what I've read but nothing better than hearing it from the horse's mouth I suppose so I'd love to hear Jez's views
-
Not sure if this is the right home for this. Please feel to move mods. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I have been doing some experimenting with set betting and was wondering if anyone knew exactly how the odds were calculated?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
I assumed that the odds are related to the win odds so I took a 2 year sample of data from Joe's tennis data site for various odds ranges (i.e 1.10 to 1.2, 1.2 to 1.3) and then compared the odds to the actual set results. There are 4 possible results in a 3 set tennis match that plays to a conclusion.
Home Player 2-0 Home Player 2-1 Away Player 2-0 Away Player 2-1
I compared the %'s for the results for each band and constructed a model for various odds ranges. I then compared this to Betfair and bookies prices. It seems to hold up pretty well on average so I assume that I am somewhat on the right track.
I then got to thinking that this method assumes that all tennis players are somewhat average in their set winning tendencies. This might not necessarily be the case. I am attempting to break down the records of the top 100 players over the last two years, compare them to their odds and see are there any players who tend to either win their matches 2-0 more than their odds would suggest or else those who get involved in 2-1 slugfests more than their odds would again suggest. If there are players who tend to fall outisde the "normal" parameters maybe there's a bit of value about?
Anyone have any ideas whether this might be a profitable strategy or indeed have tries something similar in the past? -
Re: Tennis Masters Series : Pacific Life Open
That wouldn't be a value bet there by any chance Ed ;) ?4.00 against Clijsters who's just recovered from a long-term injury and is still trying to find a feet is certainly worth a shot -
Re: laying or hedging? Not much in it in that case Bruise. With those prices Betfair a Burnley lay is 1.38 back of the X/2 pre comm which after comm is effectively the same as the X/2 Sunderland combo. Thats a pretty good price on Sunderland incidentally. They're backed down to 2.42 now which is a good bit less than 2.37 with abookies. There's a pretty good back and lay calculator I use. I'll find the link and post it so you can download it.
-
Re: laying or hedging? Maybe I'm misunderstandinG and Betfair is down but if you can lay Sunderland at 2.5 I'd bite of as much as I could if the win and draw prices are right as you have above :eek . A win/draw is odds of 1.37 ...laying their opponents as I presume you mean at 2.5 is backing Sunderland at 1.67. Again Betfair is down so maybe I've picked up the wrong end of the stick here.
-
Re: A football rating system, discussions, ideas I've read axtracts of the Townsend book. Looks interesting. Is it worth getting? Interesting on the difference between supremacy and the windex
-
Re: A football rating system, discussions, ideas
Its actually the other way around I think. I don't have the book ("Racing Post Guide to Sports Bettiong" ) to hand but in a piece by Kevin Pueillin he rates how the firms set the BASE odds by the goal supremacy of one team over another. He has a handy reay reckoner chart in the book for caluclating the odds when you have the match supremacies.I haven't looked into this as of yet but does anybody know how spread firms calculate goal supremacy? The reason being i know that all spread quotes are interlinked and all come off the original match quote as a base. -
Re: 3 in a row This idea is mentioned in one of the Geoff Harvey books. He argues that MOST teams have a psychological threshold of 3 games that they can win or lose before a result goes for / against them. He doesn’t bring any stats to support this view. First view I’d think there was a definite element of the gambler’s fallacy to it. One advantage to it would be that the team on a 3 game win roll or 3 team losing roll might be over or under priced slightly. ffice:office" />
-
Re: ATP tournaments w/c 21/2/05 3rd Loss against Rochus of the week :o . I'll leave off opposeing him tonight :lol Managed to get 7.5 on Monatnes to beat Calleri 2-1 :clap , Only problem being I only managed a whole 7 Euros. To show how poorly the bookies price up set betting the odds were a shocking 5s at Bet365 which just isn't worth it. I'd fancy Ljubic to beat Robredo today in the first semi starts 15.00hrs (1.74 Betfair). I swervved him versus Henman yetserday as I was worried about tiredness but he must be guzzleing something because after 17 matches in 4 countries this month he is still going strong. He beat Robredo in str sets on clay his least favorite surface last year so with the fast surface here the big serve should be out in force. Bets Advised Already During Week : 9 : W5 L4* Proift to Level Stakes +0.30 Units (* thanks Rochus for finding a spine in the US :( )
-
Re: ATP tournaments w/c 21/2/05 Nice Ed. Any chance Montanes might nick it from Calleri tonight? Strikes me as a streaky confidence player and he beat Calleri in 2004. Thinking of a small speculative punt on Montanes 2-1. Curently 7s at Betfair. If it drifts out I'll back him. Agassi's massive value for me too. Davydenko is a solid top 25 player but that's about it at this moment in time. I did an analsyis of his performances versus the current top 10 since 2003 and he has won a miserly 2 from 21 (1 being the most recent victory over Henman). He's 1-7 verus the top 10 on hardcourt with defeats to Federer (3), Roddick (2) Henman and Agassi. Agassi is not the force of old but he demolished a very in form Stepanek and Lopez and he should have far too much firepower for tonight. With last night's bets its getting expensive opposeing Rochus who beat my odds on selection Kim in an easy win. Blake had no trouble versus Salzenstein. I'll be on Sangunietti odds against tonight to beat Rochus. The Italian beat him in their last two hardcourt meetings and has always performed soldidly in the States. I've taken him at 2.20 (Betfair) Bets Advised Already During Week : 8 : W5 L3 Proift to Level Stakes +1.30 Units
-
Re: WTA Bets 24/2 Martinez roundly spanked 6-4,6-1 . Very bad as she led 3-1 in the first set before she managed to lose the 11 of the next 13 games :(
-
Re: Difficulties with Queens (Poker) Good to see you back up and running Jez. Congrats on the recent big wins :clap . Very impressive. Living proof that the saying those who can't do teach is incorrect as you manage to both very well. Thanks for the comprehensive answer. Maybe I'm just not getting the flops but pocket Queens have not been kind to me recently :( . I'm playing them strong but often just catch an A or K on the flop. If its checked to me I'll raise it but more often than not I think its just throwing money away as people will call with almost any A or K flush hole cards for example. I find if I've been playing for a while and an A or K flops with me holding pocket queens I've usually been playing so tight that most players will fold to me as I generally tend to play big hole cards. Haven't played much in the last while. Been busy here but I'm going back home in about 10 days to Ireland to a new apartment, sat TV and hopefully a decent broadband connection so I'll be playing a lot more especially as I'm taking time off before getting work :D . In my last game (about 10 days ago) the Internet connection seized up on me in succesive hands with a full house of Kings and tens and a nut straight so I'm giving it a rest. Losing money to crap play is one thing....to a crap connection is tooooooooo much :\
-
Re: ATP tournaments w/c 21/2/05 2 from Scottsdale tonight Kim to Rochus 1.59 (Betfair) Well Calleri won easily last night but Rochus edged a 3 setter against Morrison. Undeterred I'm going to oppose Rochus again tonight for pretty much the same reasons as I opposed him last night. His opponent tonight is Kevin Kim who looks like he is finally stepping out of the Challenger shadows. He posted some excellent hardcourt Challenge results in 2004 (4 finals and 3 wins) and has some decent 2005 ATP form (beaten who you'd expect him to beat and pushed players like Haas and Spadea hard in recent weeks). Going to back Kim at 1.59 (Betfair). Blake to beat Salzenstein 1.38 (Betfair) James Blake continues his comeback after his netpost freak injury in 2004. He'll be delighted to meet Jeff Salzenstein whom he holds a 4-0 head to head over and who is in dire form (a recent straight sets defeat to Lester Cook a player outside the ATP rankings 500 list in San Jose sums up where he's at right now). Blake is short at 1.39 (Betfair) but this would be a major shock. Bets Advised Already During Week 6 : W4 L2 Proift to Level Stakes +1.92 Units
-
Re: WTA Bets 24/2 Well she's been backed down to 2.55 (from a high of 3.15). Probably a mixture of arbers and value seekers. 2.55 is probably fair enough. If it goes lower Hantchova would look attractive pricewise.
-
Value WTA Bet Today at ffice:smarttags" /><?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
Qatar (QF stage)ffice:office" /><?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
-
Re: ATP tournaments w/c 21/2/05 Well the dog Lee won :D while the favorite Zabaleta lost at odds on :( . Nice little profit on the night. An interesting little bet in
-
Re: ATP tournaments w/c 21/2/05 In Acapcuco Like the look of Zabaleta to beat Volandri (1.64 Betfair). Volandri had a shock loss to Burgsmuller in the first round in Argentina (he was as low as 1.15) a fortnight ago and subsequently retired first round versus Martin last week in Brazil which shows all is not well. He has also traditionally underperformed badly in South and Latin America. Zabaleta is in patchy enough form but won this in 2003 and beat Volandri 6-1,6-2 on their only meeting (on clay) back in 2003 (coincidentally at this event). In
-
Re: Strategy...bet strong favourites on Betfair.
Why don't you just lay the away side ? Or am I missing something deeper here :(On Betfair I BET a level stake on all hot favourites, home or away. (all Eng and Scot ) The favourite must be less than half the odds of the outsider....and I also LAY the draw. -
Re: ATP tournaments w/c 21/2/05
Hernandez is ranked in the mid 200s and plays almost exclusively on the Challenger and Futures circuit. He won 4 Futures events (all in Mexico) in 2004 - 3 hardcourt on one on clay. This is his first clay court match of '05 (last played in November). Although he's operateing at a much lower level than Montanes Montanes's poor form and the good form of Hernandez would make me wary of this one.Montanes v A Hernandez 8/15 WillHill Montanes gave Mello a surprisingly hard match last week in Brazil, so maybe on his way back to some clay court form. His opponent is a Mexican wild card who I don't know much about, but if Montanes holds last week's form, he should win.
It's actually a stomach muscle problem from what I've read. He retired first round in Buenous Aires mid match and also against Corrjeta when ahead in Brazil last week (had a nice bit on Corrjeta on that one). I think Mello although he's probably better on hardcourt is cracking value for this one given doubts over Ferrer's condition. I think Canas will have too much for Massa (even at a skimpy 1.39 on Betfair). He likes this event (made the semis twice and the quarters once on his last three appearances) and his first round exiot in Buenos Aires was his first clay match and was also to the eventual finalist Albert Martin. Massa struggled past Etlis and Armando in 3 sets in the qualifiers and while his recent results on the Challenge tour have been OK he simply doesn't play much against player's of Canas's ability (three top 50 games in two years all of which he lost (Moya and Volandri *2)) Nice to see some tennis bets up. I've also backed Justin Gimelstob at 1.84 to beat Vliegen in Scottsdale. He has some good Challenge results and bar a great run in Adelaide in 2003 Vliegen has nothing to show on hardcourt.Mello to beat Ferrer 5/4 Sporting Odds As discussed last week, Mello is an up and comer. 3 sets v Nadal in the semi at Brazil last week. Ferrer most recently retired from heat problems, so Mexican conditions probably won't help him either. -
Re: Tennis thread. Ancic to beat Federer + 5 @ 1.70 I still think this is a pretty good bet. In 2004/5 Ancic played 9 matches versus players ranked in the top 10 (4 at Slams). In the 5 non slams he won twice and nicked a set in 2 of the other two (versus Roddick and Coria) covering the handicap both times. Only Nalbandian managed to cover the handicap on carpet.
-
Re: A football rating system, discussions, ideas I presume you’re familiar with the various books by Paul Steele Mr.OneMore ? He uses a number of ratings systems chief amongst them being a power ratings system that functions much as you described above. I did a lot of work with two other posters on this for pretty much a season about two year’s ago. Results were mediocre at best. On their own I didn’t manage to turn a profit with them. The biggest single problem that most of these systems don’t address is how you equate a rating to the odds. Its’s all well and good saying that Team A near the top rates 945 and Team B near the bottom 617 so A should win. The question is how likely? Unless you can relate the ratings to an odds line I’m always a bit skeptical. Then again maybe you have collected all the various past ratings to give yourself this info?
Tournament betting, examining strategies.
in Betting Systems & Strategy
Posted
Re: Tournament betting, examining strategies. Hi Data You've nailed my "method" perfectly. The problem is as you point out what happens if the selection wins? I deal with this by createing a stop loss above which I'll stop betting. The stop loss has not been used yet. I've actually done this bet 7 times this year and am up nearly 30% yieldwise. The furthest anyone of my selections to oppose was quarter finals (32 player draw) The absolute profit however has been very small as if you are opposeing a player say at 15s outright in a draw of 32 with a stop loss of 400 then you're not going to make very much if the player s going off at say average odds of around 5/6. There are however a number of players who tend to be overpriced on certain surfaces (Coria on hardcourt for example) that can be opposed in this manner. I think a profitable are for exploration here is actually golf betting. There are a number of players that priced around above 100 that might not win an event but that can definitely be in contention that will contract over the course of an event - for example in the Masters I've backed Howell - 90 KJ Choi - 100 P.Casey - 150 Small stakes but nice interest bets with definite potential for laying off