2022 Golf Tips

[fd1972uk]

6 hours ago, MinellaWorksop said:

To quote the great philosophical Rocky film series: "It ain't over til it's over" has never rang more true than in the sport of golf.

That my friends, was one hell of a kick in the go-nads.

Berger shouldnt have let that slip, never saw Straka at all coming through, only thought Lowry could be a slight danger, Kitayama actually surprised me he held in there. 

Unlucky. 

[harry_rag]

7 hours ago, fd1972uk said:

never saw Straka at all coming through

He was tipped at 100/1 (and 7/1 top Euro) by the email that I subscribe to (but don’t get round to reading)! 

[fd1972uk]

Well done my lot, mostly all free bets and a few small bets. 

Dont think Ive ever backed as many, lol. 

Arnold Palmer

Hovland, zalatoris and scott all win, hoge e/w

 

Kenyan

Was looking at Detry and Camillo, but went all SA. 

Harding, van Tonder, bekker and de jager (probably should have went ew with him) all win. 

Puerto Rico

Bello and Schwaab win. 

[harry_rag]

Last week of the free tips from the service I've been subscribed to; "Thank you for supporting us over the last 12 months and it has been my pleasure advising you to a 32.31% ROI on liquid, Wednesday golf markets. Fictional Monday night prices have never been the modus operandi of this service. This is the last week of Free Golf Betting Tips.  I do hope you join the service as we expand the offering in 2022 and beyond."

Here's his thoughts for this week, for reference.

ARNOLD PALMER INVITATIONAL

Sungjae Im

4pts EW – Outright @ 28/1 (8 places) - William Hill.  Note: 22/1 EW (10 places) with Boylesports is also fine.  

12pts WIN - Top Korean @ 5/6 - Bet365, William Hill and BetVictor.  Note: 888Sport are currently 17/20.

Tyrrell Hatton

5pts WIN - To Miss The Cut @ 3/1 - Bet365, William Hill and MansionBet

Seamus Power

1.5pts EW – Outright @ 66/1 (8 places) - Skybet, Paddy Power, Betfair, William Hill, Ladbrokes and Coral.

2pts WIN - Top GB & Ireland @ 12/1 - Bet365, Skybet, MansionBet and Boylesports.

Sebastian Munoz

1.5pts EW – Outright @ 80/1 (8 places) - Skybet, Paddy Power, Betfair, William Hill, Ladbrokes and Coral.

Aaron Wise

1pt EW – Outright @ 125/1 (8 places) - Skybet and William Hill.

Danny Lee

0.5pts EW – Outright @ 250/1 (8 places) - Skybet.

Trey Mullinax

0.25pts EW – Outright @ 500/1 (1/4, 5 places) - Bet365, MansionBet.

KENYA OPEN

Antoine Rozner

2pts EW – Outright @ 60/1 (8 places) - Boylesports.

2pts WIN - Top French @ 11/2 - Bet365, William Hill and Boylesports.

Zander Lombard

8pts WIN - To Miss The Cut @ 9/4 - William Hill.

Richard Mansell

1pts EW – Outright @ 100/1 (1/4, 5 places) - Bet365.  Note: 80/1 EW (7 places) with Paddy Power, Betfair and Betway also fine.

Garrick Porteous 

0.5pts EW – Outright @ 175/1 (1/4, 5 places) - Bet365.

2.5pts WIN - Top 20 Finish @ 7/1 - Paddy Power and Betfair.

Oliver Farr

0.5pts EW - Outright @ 250/1 (7 places) - Paddy Power, Betfair, Ladbrokes and Coral.

5pts WIN - Top 40 Finish @ 3/1 - Paddy Power and Betfair.

Nicolai Von Dellinghausen

0.25pts EW – Outright @ 300/1 (1/4, 5 places) - Bet365.  Note: 300/1 EW (6 places) with BetVictor and 250/1 EW (7 places) with Paddy Power, Betfair, Ladbrokes and Coral also fine.

2pts WIN - Top German @ 12/1 - Boylesports.  Note: 11/1 with William Hill and BetVictor also fine.

[Torque]

On 2/28/2022 at 9:43 PM, harry_rag said:

He was tipped at 100/1 (and 7/1 top Euro) by the email that I subscribe to (but don’t get round to reading)! 

I've no idea why people use bookies for massive dogs in golf. The prices are nearly always better on the exchanges.

[Xtc12]

@harry_rag @Torque as ye are on ..... what would you recommend Win or EW in golf.

 

[Torque]

Typically I look at the head of the markets. The idea being that everybody is trying to find a massive odds winner which means the favourites are often underbet and so sometimes offer some value, even if it's not much. Trying to find golf winners is difficult enough without trying to find them at three figures. It's always struck me as very similar to throwing darts at a dart board in the dark. You'll hit occasionally but there's lot of misses which means returns are volatile.

Personally, I prefer to focus on all the players in the betting that are lower than three figures and try to find winners there. The margins are smaller but the returns can be more consistent. Doing it that way also drastically reduces the amount of research time. Having said all that, each to their own - there's plenty of people that are successful only betting at three figures.

[Torque]

I also only do straight wins. I'm not convinced there's value in each-way in the long run, especially as fields are getting more and more level.

[harry_rag]

Golf is a sport I've dipped in and out of over the years but never fully engaged with, I used to buy the Elliott's golf form annuals which were ok for information in the pre-internet age. I can see it's appeal in terms of how many angles of attack there are.

I'd say it's one of the better served sports in terms of decent tipsters (obviously plenty of rubbish ones as well) and a lot of casual punters who chuck a few darts every week might do better following a tipster.

As for the win v e/w argument I'd say that the increasingly generous place terms being offered make e/w betting viable, especially with those firms who don't compensate with appallingly short prices. I agree the exchanges will be better if you prefer win only. The optimum approach is probably to be flexible; don't go chasing e/w bets at the expense of a rubbish win price but if you hit enough places at big odds it can be worthwhile.

[Torque]

26 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

Golf is a sport I've dipped in and out of over the years but never fully engaged with, I used to buy the Elliott's golf form annuals which were ok for information in the pre-internet age. I can see it's appeal in terms of how many angles of attack there are.

I'd say it's one of the better served sports in terms of decent tipsters (obviously plenty of rubbish ones as well) and a lot of casual punters who chuck a few darts every week might do better following a tipster.

As for the win v e/w argument I'd say that the increasingly generous place terms being offered make e/w betting viable, especially with those firms who don't compensate with appallingly short prices. I agree the exchanges will be better if you prefer win only. The optimum approach is probably to be flexible; don't go chasing e/w bets at the expense of a rubbish win price but if you hit enough places at big odds it can be worthwhile.

Each way terms are more generous no doubt, but there's a reason for that. Bookies aren't charities - it's because final leaderboards are getting more and more bunched. You might get ten places, but that's no use if t6 is tied between 6 players, for example.

[Xtc12]

In general would there be 46 tournaments on the US PGA every season.

How many of these would YOU be expecting to pick the winner from ?  2 maybe 3 ?

Last week at the Honda classic we had a choice of 146 players to choose from. If we had one selection to win we would have a less than 1% chance of picking the winner, thats if my basic Math's is correct. If we did our selection EW at ten places we would have a 6% chance of a return. Surely better to bet EW than a nearly 80\1 winner or even 12\1 second.

 

 

[harry_rag]

18 minutes ago, Torque said:

Each way terms are more generous no doubt, but there's a reason for that. Bookies aren't charities - it's because final leaderboards are getting more and more bunched.

Agree with bookies not being charities but I'm not convinced that's the main driver; I think it's more about betting on the sport becoming more popular and the competition for punters' money. A few firms started doing it and grabbing the headlines so more followed suit.

20 minutes ago, Torque said:

You might get ten places, but that's no use if t6 is tied between 6 players, for example.

Well, dead heats have always been a factor when it comes to place betting and always will be but I wouldn't say it's no use if you've backed a player who tied 6th at 350/1. They're still paying out on 12 players for the 10 places rather than 4 or 5 players on the old standard terms.

I accept I'm speaking as someone who rarely bets on the sport while you come from a pro-win only perspective. Overall I suspect golf betting is very profitable for the bookies but that there are shrewd punters who do very well from the better e/w terms now available week in week out.

[Torque]

11 minutes ago, Xtc12 said:

In general would there be 46 tournaments on the US PGA every season.

How many of these would YOU be expecting to pick the winner from ?  2 maybe 3 ?

Last week at the Honda classic we had a choice of 146 players to choose from. If we had one selection to win we would have a less than 1% chance of picking the winner, thats if my basic Math's is correct. If we did our selection EW at ten places we would have a 6% chance of a return. Surely better to bet EW than a nearly 80\1 winner or even 12\1 second.

 

 

It's not 6 percent if there's ties. And there are. Lots of them - far more than there used to be.

[Torque]

7 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

Agree with bookies not being charities but I'm not convinced that's the main driver; I think it's more about betting on the sport becoming more popular and the competition for punters' money. A few firms started doing it and grabbing the headlines so more followed suit.

Well, dead heats have always been a factor when it comes to place betting and always will be but I wouldn't say it's no use if you've backed a player who tied 6th at 350/1. They're still paying out on 12 players for the 10 places rather than 4 or 5 players on the old standard terms.

I accept I'm speaking as someone who rarely bets on the sport while you come from a pro-win only perspective. Overall I suspect golf betting is very profitable for the bookies but that there are shrewd punters who do very well from the better e/w terms now available week in week out.

Of course if you place at 350's then that's all good. What I'm saying is the chance to place is smaller than it used to be because there are more ties. Using my example, if there's six players at t6, then the next score on the leaderboard is outside t10 and then that's the end of your each way bet with ten places.

[Torque]

9 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

Agree with bookies not being charities but I'm not convinced that's the main driver; I think it's more about betting on the sport becoming more popular and the competition for punters' money. A few firms started doing it and grabbing the headlines so more followed suit.

Well, dead heats have always been a factor when it comes to place betting and always will be but I wouldn't say it's no use if you've backed a player who tied 6th at 350/1. They're still paying out on 12 players for the 10 places rather than 4 or 5 players on the old standard terms.

I accept I'm speaking as someone who rarely bets on the sport while you come from a pro-win only perspective. Overall I suspect golf betting is very profitable for the bookies but that there are shrewd punters who do very well from the better e/w terms now available week in week out.

You're right it's not just because of leaderboards becoming more competitive - there is an element of competition between bookies leading to better offers to entice punters which means they're eating into their bottom line. Still though, in their estimation the odds remain on their side even if their juice is evaporated somewhat.

[Torque]

The other issue I have with places is they are unquantifiable. It's impossible to know or even guess how many ties their might be at the top of the leaderboard and given that impacts on the chance of an each way return I'm not sure how an each way bet can ever be assessed as +EV.

[harry_rag]

9 minutes ago, Torque said:

The other issue I have with places is they are unquantifiable. It's impossible to know or even guess how many ties their might be at the top of the leaderboard and given that impacts on the chance of an each way return I'm not sure how an each way bet can ever be assessed as +EV.

I kind of get your point, and I recognise that I'm not going to change your mind on the subject of e/w betting but I think you've got a slightly skewed way of looking at it. I'm not sure the number of ties is that relevant. They will pay out on at least 10 players under the place terms, more if ties dictate it. Shoot low enough and you'll be in among that group of players. I wouldn't see getting no return on the player who shot the 7th lowest score as missing out if 12 players shot lower than him. The more competitive fields become, the better chance you've got of your player getting a place return, even if subject to DH rules.

I'd suggest that if you prefer focussing on the top end of the market then win only is the way to go but e/w is valid if you target bigger prices. Whether you gain or lose from DH rules applying is swings and roundabouts (as in one week a dropped shot at the 18th could cost you whereas the next week a birdie could get you a partial return).

I'd also suggest it's eminently quantifiable; surely you could just look back to see how often more than 10 players occupy the first 10 places and work out the average. With the probability of it happening and the average number of players involved you could factor that into your deliberations.

[MinellaWorksop]

Results Roundup;

StrikeRate: 1/16

Bank: -9.50pts

 

Right, dusted myself down from last weeek's event. Onto the next we go!

ARNOLD PALMER INVITATIONAL

Rory McIlroy 12/1

Kevin Na 100/1 (each way)

All prices Bet365 1/4 Top five.

[Torque]

5 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

I kind of get your point, and I recognise that I'm not going to change your mind on the subject of e/w betting but I think you've got a slightly skewed way of looking at it. I'm not sure the number of ties is that relevant. They will pay out on at least 10 players under the place terms, more if ties dictate it. Shoot low enough and you'll be in among that group of players. I wouldn't see getting no return on the player who shot the 7th lowest score as missing out if 12 players shot lower than him. The more competitive fields become, the better chance you've got of your player getting a place return, even if subject to DH rules.

I'd suggest that if you prefer focussing on the top end of the market then win only is the way to go but e/w is valid if you target bigger prices. Whether you gain or lose from DH rules applying is swings and roundabouts (as in one week a dropped shot at the 18th could cost you whereas the next week a birdie could get you a partial return).

I'd also suggest it's eminently quantifiable; surely you could just look back to see how often more than 10 players occupy the first 10 places and work out the average. With the probability of it happening and the average number of players involved you could factor that into your deliberations.

On the contrary, I'm more than happy to change my mind if my thinking about something is wrong. It's never good to hold on to an idea just for the sake of being stubborn. 

I can see what you're saying about the potential for more than ten golfers to get into the top 10 place money and obviously in a situation like that the odds should shift in favour of the punter, but that situation is rare as if I understand correctly it can only happen if there are multiple ties in the final placing position.

As for shooting the 7th lowest score but 12 players shoot better and assuming I've understood you correctly, a loss is a loss. I can't see any consolation because the bet is top 10 places not top 10 scores. Unless you mean that in the long run, if you keep backing the golfer that shoots the 7th best score you'll get placed more often than not and I certainly agree with that.

I think there's a lot of subtleties to this discussion in terms of more competitive fields. I wasn't necessarily meaning the entire field, just the proportion of it with a realistic chance of winning or placing, which still tends to be the golfers at the top of the market. You're right to say that you could use historical data to determine the chances of any given number of golfers placing, but what I was meaning was that the whole placing mechanism just seems so random to me.

I've lost count of the amount of times I've had a player right on the edge of a place, say t10 with another player and then that other player gains a shot and moves up to t8 where there's another two players which means my t10 becomes t11 and I'm out of the money. As you say there are times that can work in your favour which is fair enough, but given it seems to happen so often in comparison with for example tennis retirements going for you or against you, it just doesn't seem worth it to me to bother with.

[harry_rag]

29 minutes ago, Torque said:

On the contrary, I'm more than happy to change my mind if my thinking about something is wrong. It's never good to hold on to an idea just for the sake of being stubborn. 

Agreed and I was acknowledging that I didn't have anything compelling enough to change your view rather than suggesting you were being stubborn in any way.

31 minutes ago, Torque said:

I can see what you're saying about the potential for more than ten golfers to get into the top 10 place money and obviously in a situation like that the odds should shift in favour of the punter, but that situation is rare as if I understand correctly it can only happen if there are multiple ties in the final placing position.

I'd be very surprised if it didn't happen more often than not in full field events. The ties could be for any position if big enough, e.g. a 10-way tie for 5th place would see them pay out on 14 players (10 subject to DH rules). Looking at the last 4 PGA events there were 6 and 3 way ties for 9th and 3 and 4 way ties for 10th. The average number of players finishing in the top 10 (including ties) was 12.5.

Hard to think of a sport where DHs are likely to feature more than in golf, I guess we just differ on how much we think that impacts the merits of e/w betting. I'd say it was neutral (given how relatively fair the DH rules are) but you see it as a negative. From the golf bets I have had, I'm certainly familiar with that sinking feeling when you follow the leaderboard and see your player just slip out of the top 6, 10, 20 or whatever!

[Torque]

54 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

I'd be very surprised if it didn't happen more often than not in full field events. The ties could be for any position if big enough, e.g. a 10-way tie for 5th place would see them pay out on 14 players (10 subject to DH rules). Looking at the last 4 PGA events there were 6 and 3 way ties for 9th and 3 and 4 way ties for 10th. The average number of players finishing in the top 10 (including ties) was 12.5

That's interesting and it suggests my thinking about places has been wrong to date. That's the good thing about discussions like this - you can learn something new.

[Torque]

I wonder what the average number of players in the top 10 including ties is over a statistically significant sample... My guess would be very close to ten, but obviously more than ten as that's the lowest the number can be and as discussed there are times when it's more than ten.

[harry_rag]

11 minutes ago, Torque said:

I wonder what the average number of players in the top 10 including ties is over a statistically significant sample... My guess would be very close to ten, but obviously more than ten as that's the lowest the number can be and as discussed there are times when it's more than ten.

It wouldn't surprise me if that 12.5 was fairly typical. The non-PGA event last week (I just looked at results on BBC sport) had an 11 way tie for 9th place, Events with smaller fields would obviously be likely to bring the average down.

[Xtc12]

Arnold Palmer Invitational 1/5 odds 10 places (free bet if selection finishes 2nd 3rd or 5th including ties)

Going to stick with my usual 

Scheffler @ 14\1

Matsuyama @ 18\1 

Im @ 22\1

Gooch @ 33\1

Hoge @ 60\1

1 Pt E\W

Kenyan Open 1/5 odds 8 places (free bet if selection finishes 2nd 3rd or 5th including ties)

Meronk @ 14\1

Harding @ 16\1 

Jamieson @ 28\1

Lombard @ 33\1

Sharma @ 33\1

Puerto Rican Open 1/5 odds 6 places 

Kurt Kitayama @ 22\1

John Huh @ 28\1

Marh Hubbard @ 25\1

Usual Stakes

[harry_rag]

Having added so much theoretical content to the thread I might as well put up a selection! Based on something I read re course fit I've had an interest in Bezuidenhout in the AP.

66/1 e/w (1/4 odds to 5 places) and a sell of his finishing position at 42.

[fd1972uk]

See de jager has pulled outnso voided. 

Dad has done burns and henley. In Palmer and hansen and rozner in kenyan.

[fd1972uk]

Not having much joy with hoge, lol. 

Should have took notice of my own thoughts on his form probably dipping. 

Mcilroy looking good after 1st round, just didn't like his odds, the odds on rahm are ridiculously low, just no point. 

Still close though and plenty of chances still in all competitions. 

[MinellaWorksop]

Hovland, Gooch, Scheffler all in decent positions going into the final round of the Arnold Palmer. So good luck to @Xtc12 and @fd1972uk respectively in our quest for further golfing glories.

From a personal point of view, McIlroy not completely out of it, though would require a lot of things to go his way for him to lift the trophy.

[harry_rag]

On 3/3/2022 at 12:13 PM, harry_rag said:

Based on something I read re course fit I've had an interest in Bezuidenhout in the AP.

66/1 e/w (1/4 odds to 5 places) and a sell of his finishing position at 42.

Currently in a 9-way tie for 17th place; shame his first couple of rounds were so poor. Profit of 14 x stake on offer if I close out now but think I'll let it run.

[MinellaWorksop]

Well done to @Xtc12 with Scheffler winning the Arnold Palmer. Definitely was a tournament where 'making par is your friend' during the final 3 rounds after easier scoring conditions in round 1.

The Players Championships up next on the PGA tour.