Jump to content
*** York Ebor Competition: Well done to 1st daveg, 2nd glavintobuy & 3rd Donnyflyer ***
** September Poker League Result : =1st muttley & juanmoment, 3rd McG **
** September Naps Competition Result: 1st Mick33, 2nd BBBC, 3rd Rainbow, 4th Tipsterix. KO Cup Winner: CS333, Most Winners: Alastair **


New Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TheresNoLimit

  1. Re: Champions League T20 2013 I'm totally aware of that fact and I did think about that when the line went to 175.5 but then if I only win one of the two bets, I end up losing money, as they would both be at 5/6.
  2. Re: Champions League T20 2013 No, no, no, no, no!!! 10 from 2 balls in the super over and they can't manage 4 from 4. Pretty disgusting stuff and they've cost me/I've cost myself £1,000. Numb. These guys are supposed to be professionals.
  3. Re: Champions League T20 2013 Have I been sold down the river with this information as well? Looks like it after the first 10 overs.
  4. Re: Champions League T20 2013 What a day I've had of it. Chennai chased down 185 comfortably the other day so for Brisbane to fail to chase down 124 is embarrassing and rather amateurish.
  5. Re: Hungarian Grand Prix What's just happened there? How has Hamilton ended up on pole after being nowhere all weekend? I can't stand the guy at the best of times, even less so when he's cost me hundreds of pounds. Anyone have any clue how that's just happened?
  6. Re: World Matchplay - 20-28 July You have to play the percentage shots and take into consideration the times you WILL get another go. Then you look pretty stupid sat on double 7, which is what happened on this occasion. Do you think going 20, double 14 wins him a higher percentage of legs than going 8, tops for example? I don't. That's down to a matter of opinion and a bit of percentage/statistical work. The one I'd hope you'd agree IS indefensible was his throw at treble 20 with 78 and one dart left. There's NO WAY you should be looking to leave 3 darts at a double which doesn't split when you have a chance (treble 18) to leave one which splits twice (double 12.) That WAS amateurish and inexcusable. Fair enough perhaps with two darts in hand but not with one.
  7. Re: World Matchplay - 20-28 July Come on Kev, I think you're defending the indefensible here. It's all very well having a 'favourite double' but you still have to play the percentage shots and leave yourself doubles which 'split' nicely. In the long run, leaving double 14 or double 9 is just causing yourself trouble. There are plenty of current top players who used to have double 18 as their 'favourite double' but have all moved away from leaving that as it isn't a viable percentage shot in the modern PDC game. We saw the professionalism of Wade in hitting two treble 20s on a 170 checkout and then hitting 10 to set up tops rather than going for the bull, because Whitlock wasn't on a finish. Those are the sort of correct percentage shots the modern professionals should be playing - despite pundits like John Part or Eric Bristow perhaps suggesting otherwise - and that was in complete contrast to the amateurish behaviour of Pipe in trying to leave double 14 or double 9.
  8. Re: World Matchplay - 20-28 July I think that IS me done with darts betting now. I took Justin Pipe at 15/2 to beat Taylor and whilst I didn't think it would be an easy bet to come in, Pipe really didn't help himself. The leg-in-the-air lunges/snatches on his last dart I could live with. The refusal to switch to treble 19, when blocking the treble 20 bed with the first dart I could live with. What I couldn't live with however was the unprofessional and farcical routes to a finish that he took on several occasions (leaving double 14 when completely unnecessary and also throwing at treble 20 when left with 78 and one dart in hand.) We can't expect the players to hit every treble or double they go for but the least we can expect is that they attempt their score in a professional and most-efficient manner. I can't throw a dart to save myself but even I can do the correct counting. That's just a basic.
  9. Re: World Matchplay - 20-28 July Are you serious? They're the two biggest bottlers/chokers I can think of, certainly in terms of the top ranked players. I'm sure plenty of people on here would back that up. As the odds don't account for these games when they can bottle it then I have to remember in future to avoid betting on this pair in particular.
  10. Re: World Matchplay - 20-28 July I thought his name was Jamie CAVEN, not Cavern?
  11. Re: World Matchplay - 20-28 July I genuinely never learn and I'm so disappointed with myself. I've vowed before not to bet on 'bottlers' like Gary Anderson and Raymond Van Barneveld again and there I was again tonight with big money on Anderson. You can't rely on these types of players and the odds only take into account their ability and not the chances of them bottling it. I think we should stick to players like Wade or Whitlock who will give all until the very end. (I don't mean that based on tonight's results, those 4 players were just the best examples I could think of. Andy Hamilton is another good example of a 'trier.') I don't see the point in betting on Barney or Anderson again when there is always the chance of their bottle crashing.
  12. Re: Ashes - In play/Discussion thread Can somebody explain the decision to not enforce the follow-on? You only have to win by one run to win the match, so surely the most efficient way for England to do that is to bowl Australia out for a second time and then set about reaching the necessary target? If you bat first in the second innings like England chose to do then you may be wasting valuable bowling time by setting a target way beyond what is needed to secure the win. What am I missing here?
  13. Re: Tour De France It was just a bit disheartening that's all. I'm not a cycling fan so I was reliant on the commentators to tell me what was going on. So, when a commentator states as a fact 'Cavendish will not be beaten from there' and then a second later he is beaten it's a bit of a let down. Why would you state as a fact something which isn't? It makes no sense for anyone to do that let alone someone who is being paid to commentate on an event.
  14. Re: Tour De France Why was the ITV4 (UK Tour De France broadcaster) commentator saying '....Cavendish won't be beaten from there,' or something along those lines? Not a very helpful or clever comment when people have sums of money invested in the outcome and one which I'm a bit annoyed about.
  15. Re: Wimbledon 2013 Yeah, it was the assumptions you made that were pretty upsetting. I don't just watch the top 10 players in the Grand Slams. I wasn't basing anything on ranking, I didn't even mention it. Please don't make baseless assumptions about people in future. Well done on the Murray tip.
  16. Re: Wimbledon 2013 Just a clue, but the fact you're saying 'look what Youzhny did once in 2007' and 'look what Verdasco did once in 2009' kind of shows that these players are not on the same level as players like Haas, Berdych, Del Potro, who perform to that high standard regularly in this decade, not the last one. There is no point in you and I taking up pages of a public forum by continuing this debate. I'd like to hear some neutral opinions but otherwise we have to leave it because this isn't the place.
  17. Re: Wimbledon 2013 Can some neutral people please step in and help out here because this is getting silly. Haas/Berdych/Del Potro or Youzhny/Verdasco/Janowicz. It isn't even a debate. Go and ask 100 tennis experts and they'll tell you the same thing. I haven't even mentioned ranking, so I'm not sure why that was brought into it. I don't want to get banned from these forums so I don't know what to do here? Someone is writing blatant nonsense as well as twisting my words and misquoting me. It's obviously intended to provoke a reaction. Please can we make sure the right person is taken to task for this, I haven't done anything wrong here.
  18. Re: Wimbledon 2013 You're insulting my intelligence by typing that Haas, Berdych, Del Potro (on grass) is an easier passage than Youzhny, Verdasco, Janowicz (on grass.) You're insulting your own intelligence if you actually believe that. Plenty of people will confirm which is the easier route, I'd hope it should be obvious though. The prices the bookies released were very similar to what they are now. It would be different if they had started Djokovic much shorter and he'd been backed out to 1.6. There's no need to get so worked up about someone having a different opinion. (6 replies in half an hour, all on the same theme.) Calm down, enjoy the game, as I said previously, the proof will be in the pudding.
  19. Re: Wimbledon 2013 Unless I've done my maths wrong, backing at 1.3 means that Djokovic needs to win more than 72% of the time to make a profit. Given the bookies built-in profit margins, 1.3 would suggest Djokovic wins this around 67% of the time, ie 2 times out of 3. I think he does that comfortably. Just my opinion.
  20. Re: Wimbledon 2013 I think you've misunderstood some of what I said. I wasn'tse suggesting your tips were based on Murray's 'Big Four' status, I was suggesting that the bookies' odds for Murray compared to Del Potro were based a lot on one being in the 'Big Four' and one not. Murray and Del Potro BOTH beat Djokovic at the Olympics last year. There's just no way Djokovic should be 1/7 against Del Potro and then 6/10 against Murray, the odds should be far closer to each other than that. During this tournament and several other recent tournaments the bookies have over-estimated 'Big Four' players and their odds don't reflect the fact that the 'Big Four' are no longer the dominant force they once were. So, that comment was aimed at the bookies, not at any of you on here. Moving on, grass is the one surface where the 'Big Four' are all very even - I wish more than one month of the season could be played on this surface. It all comes down to who is playing best on this surface. Last year Federer and Murray found their form but this year Murray hasn't played to that level yet whereas Djokovic's serve looks immense and he is the one in form on the grass. If Murray had Djokovic's route to the final, I don't think he'd be there. Simple as that. Murray could magically find his previous grass court form today but I'd be wanting more than 2-point-whatever odds on that happening. Djokovic rarely loses these big 5 set matches and even more rarely loses them to Murray. The mental side of things is where he has a big advantage, as much as Murray has worked on that side of his game, it just isn't and perhaps won't ever be where Djokovic is. I could write a lot more but I think it's better at this stage to just say 'the proof will be in the pudding.' I can't see past Djokovic and previous history says 3-1 or 3-2. The guy can now compete with Nadal on clay, so competing with and beating Murray on grass is not that big an ask in comparison.
  21. Re: Wimbledon 2013 I think he would have taken out all of the tour except for the ONE player he faced. Don't think there are 2 or 3 players who would have beaten him.
  • Create New...