Jump to content
Announcements
** October Poker League Result : 1st avongirl, 2nd McG, 3rd Rhino_Power **
** October Naps Competition Result: 1st internetmails, 2nd Donnyflyer, 3rd vangovin, 4th Peter York. KO Cup Winner mickyftm32. Most Winners waggy: **

World Championships (inc Qualifiers)


Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, Fader said:

Yeah it’s just a fun bet really isn’t it. They could be kinder with the price, really. Should be 10s atleast really 

This popped into my head while I was out and about today for some reason (though I'd previously missed what might be a record for the total number of "reallys" in a one-line post!) ;)

I can understand taking it as a fun bet if you're not sure what the true odds are but think what's on offer is fair at worst but I can't for the life of me reconcile the notion of taking 13/2 when you think the bookies should be offering at least 10/1.

Surely it's a clear swerve if you think that. Bad bets win and good bets lose but I can't see the point (or the fun) in knowingly taking a bad bet. Maybe we see if we can get BF to put the market up next year and I'll lay you next price up from what the bookies are offering.

On a less flippant note I assume it's not possible to back it in each game as an acca and roll the winnings over each day? (maybe getting better odds should it land).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Fader said:

Un nooh should have had a 132 missed the  pretty simple blue ugh

Yeah, should be 6-3 ahead too, missed an even easier "Willie Thorne" blue at 4-2 up.

Hey Harry our resident value man:-) I'm not sure how the acca would have worked out as I didn't look at the prices but if I could have picked a tie to let us down it would have been McGill/Highfield so a 15-timer might well have been a winner!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

This popped into my head while I was out and about today for some reason (though I'd previously missed what might be a record for the total number of "reallys" in a one-line post!) ;)

I can understand taking it as a fun bet if you're not sure what the true odds are but think what's on offer is fair at worst but I can't for the life of me reconcile the notion of taking 13/2 when you think the bookies should be offering at least 10/1.

Surely it's a clear swerve if you think that. Bad bets win and good bets lose but I can't see the point (or the fun) in knowingly taking a bad bet. Maybe we see if we can get BF to put the market up next year and I'll lay you next price up from what the bookies are offering.

On a less flippant note I assume it's not possible to back it in each game as an acca and roll the winnings over each day? (maybe getting better odds should it land).

Didn't even notice that. I don't even use "really" alot, either :D 

to be honest 10/1 is just a shot in the dark. You couldn't really add up the true value of that bet, could you? Because they're so many variables. Not just every match to have a century (which to be honest, shouldn't be too unrealistic) but also, you're factoring in how potentially amateurs handle the event. 

I'm happy to take it at 13/2 because it's the kind of bet you can follow along on each match and "in general" the amount of centuries get bigger every single year and so the likelihood "in general" gets stronger each year, by default.

I've not checked over the stats but I think (without checking) that every match apart from McGill one has had a century...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Fader said:

You couldn't really add up the true value of that bet, could you? Because they're so many variables. Not just every match to have a century (which to be honest, shouldn't be too unrealistic) but also, you're factoring in how potentially amateurs handle the event. 

I suppose you could have a stab. I've no idea how many matches there are each year but you could go back x years and say how many matches there were in total and how many didn't have a century.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

I suppose you could have a stab. I've no idea how many matches there are each year but you could go back x years and say how many matches there were in total and how many didn't have a century.

but it's not the same players every year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Fader said:

Robertson will finish off Hugill this morning but in the other match, Yan Bingtao takes on Wakelin. I'm going to go with Wakelin to hit the highest break. Bingtao is a great player and is pretty consistent because he has a safety game but he doesn't score like the top players. Has a highest break of 119 of his last 11 matches. Wakelin scored a 131 in his win over Robertson and has hit centuries in every round so far. Chance at 7/4

4pts Wakelin (Highest break) Vs Bingtao 7/4 paddypower

Happy to see this come in. Wakelin played some good stuff early on and faded abit later in the match. Bingtao will be a real handful for Selby. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, that was a cracking spot there as Bing isn't a big centuries man partly due to his break-building style. I was expecting it to be closer when it got to 5-5 but Chris did fade away after that. 

Regarding the centuries bet it's probably more than 10/1 but that price will shorten each year as it gets more likely to happen because of the upward trend in scoring. I think there has been a century in every other match, the only other doubtful one for me would have been Luca vs Noppon so I would have done a 14-timer if I'd thought about it beforehand:-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just looking at tomorrows matches. In the morning session, Higgins and Un-Nooh finish off, but I'll be watching the other match as Kyren Wilson takes on Ding Junhui. In the afternoon, Lisowski and Stevens finish off and Trump takes on Vafaei and in the evening Wilson/Ding finishes off and Saengkham kicks off with Brecel.

I see value in both Saengkham and Vafaei tomorrow. I think Trump will feel alot of pressure tomorrow and he doesn't look so sure when he gets that pressure on his shoulders, recently. Vafaei has a good record against him and has won 3 of the last 4. Trump won the last one but it was on a deciding leg and was 3-1 down. 

Saengkham comes into this by knocking out Robert Milkins in qualifications. 2 centuries in that match for Saengkham, along with 5 50+ breaks. He also hit a century against Wells in the previous match. However, in the last 3 head-to-heads, Brecel has beaten Saengkham 6-1, 5-1 and 5-1. It does put me off abit and so it's one I'm going to look deeper at tomorrow but in the meantime, I will take Vafaei, both on the handicap and a punt on the outright.

5pts Vafaei (+3.5 frames) to beat Trump 11/10 paddypower
2pts Vafaei to beat Trump 7/2 paddypower

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Fader said:

Finally, looking at the evening matches, Bingtao and Wakelin will finish up and the start of an intriguing one between Lisowski and Stevens. I think Stevens has a good chance in this but I'm going to look at a bigger price for both players to hit 2+ centuries. Which is boosted to 13/2 with Paddypower.

Stevens has been excellent in qualification and has got better round-by-round. He scored a century in his win over Craigie and then he banged in 3 centuries against Ali Carter. Lisowski tends to hit centuries in alot of his "first to 5 matches" even let alone a "first to 10". He got the last 16 of the worlds last year and along the way, he hit a century in both matches. 2 isn't inconceivable. Especially if it's a close match, which I can't see it not being.

2pts Both players to hit 2+ centuries (Lisowski/Stevens) 13/2 paddypower

Lisowski leads first session 6-3.  2 centuries completed for Lisowski and a nice century for Stevens in the final frame. We need one century tomorrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, harry_rag said:

This popped into my head while I was out and about today for some reason (though I'd previously missed what might be a record for the total number of "reallys" in a one-line post!) ;)

I can understand taking it as a fun bet if you're not sure what the true odds are but think what's on offer is fair at worst but I can't for the life of me reconcile the notion of taking 13/2 when you think the bookies should be offering at least 10/1.

Surely it's a clear swerve if you think that. Bad bets win and good bets lose but I can't see the point (or the fun) in knowingly taking a bad bet. Maybe we see if we can get BF to put the market up next year and I'll lay you next price up from what the bookies are offering.

On a less flippant note I assume it's not possible to back it in each game as an acca and roll the winnings over each day? (maybe getting better odds should it land).

Good points @harry_rag 

From my side I had absolutely no idea what the fair odds should be and just took it for interest, so in that sense it could be classified as a mug bet. As for what the true odds should have been - who knows. @charliepie found some good stats from previous years but I'm not sure how informative they are about the chances of the bet hitting this year, although of course they offer a yardstick to refer to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Fader said:

but it's not the same players every year. 

It wouldn’t really make much difference if it was given form can change and some players would be getting better and some on the wane. Past runnings of the same event would still be the best starting point for arriving at a price though. Happy to agree it’s not the easiest market to price up though.

From a quick stab on the calculator I make it that 13/2 roughly equates to 15/1 for each individual game not to have a century. If it’s more common than that then 13/2 starts to look like a poor price, less common and it could be value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Torque said:

Not the same players, not the same standard and as you said scoring tends to get better with each year.

All easily factored in, just weigh up the century scoring form for each player against the average and project the improving trend! :)

Sounds like a great project for an academic paper! No doubt 2 different universities would come up with vastly differing results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

All easily factored in, just weigh up the century scoring form for each player against the average and project the improving trend! :)

Sounds like a great project for an academic paper! No doubt 2 different universities would come up with vastly differing results.

Yeah, no doubt because for example look at Mark Allen…. Last three years, R1/R1/R2 for a player of his quality. So hard to know which Allen turns up after that. 

Robertson. Wins once and then poor performances but away from worlds he is tearing it up and winning everything. Which one turns up this year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still hopeful of getting another 2 or 3 qualies through to round 2 but there's only 5 matches left. Matthew might have blown his chances so I'm rooting for Ding/Theppy/Noppon and Hossein tomorrow!

Your dream may yet happen, maybe do another line too with Ding instead of Kyren?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just read an interview with a disconsolate and burnt-out Trump. Based on that, Vafaei must have an even better chance than in normal circumstances. Trump was talking about coming to this tournament with no expectations after a mediocre season by his standards, and saying that he needs to take some time away from snooker once the tournament is over. Also complaining about the venues and tournaments this season, including the Crucible and how it's too cramped in the early stages. Sounds to me like he's got his excuses lined up already in case he loses to Vafaei and so I'm going to back the Iranian.

25pts Vafaei to beat Trump @ 5.00 365

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quick look back over last 10 years on Cuetracker; last year's 108 centuries was the highest but the 79 the year before was a big fall back after 100 in 2019. The average is 80.1. You'd want to see >100 this year to be truly persuaded of a strong upward trend. The 2 games last year that drew a blank is pretty close to that 15/1 from my calculator stabbing (small sample obviously).

Assuming we can expect >100 centuries most years from now on I'd say that 13/2 is in the vicinity of being a fair price. If someone did chalk up that 10/1 I think I'd be persuaded to stick a tenner on it!

Literally back of an envelope stuff rather than a "deep dive" but it would make me think that this year's bet was more a legitimate fun/interest bet than a mug bet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, harry_rag said:

Quick look back over last 10 years on Cuetracker; last year's 108 centuries was the highest but the 79 the year before was a big fall back after 100 in 2019. The average is 80.1. You'd want to see >100 this year to be truly persuaded of a strong upward trend. The 2 games last year that drew a blank is pretty close to that 15/1 from my calculator stabbing (small sample obviously).

Assuming we can expect >100 centuries most years from now on I'd say that 13/2 is in the vicinity of being a fair price. If someone did chalk up that 10/1 I think I'd be persuaded to stick a tenner on it!

Literally back of an envelope stuff rather than a "deep dive" but it would make me think that this year's bet was more a legitimate fun/interest bet than a mug bet.

I appreciate the math on this one, harry. Interesting stuff. I do think we'll see 100+ this tournament and so perhaps next year if we get the 13/2 again then we'll have more following :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/19/2022 at 2:08 PM, Fader said:

Finally, looking at the evening matches, Bingtao and Wakelin will finish up and the start of an intriguing one between Lisowski and Stevens. I think Stevens has a good chance in this but I'm going to look at a bigger price for both players to hit 2+ centuries. Which is boosted to 13/2 with Paddypower.

Stevens has been excellent in qualification and has got better round-by-round. He scored a century in his win over Craigie and then he banged in 3 centuries against Ali Carter. Lisowski tends to hit centuries in alot of his "first to 5 matches" even let alone a "first to 10". He got the last 16 of the worlds last year and along the way, he hit a century in both matches. 2 isn't inconceivable. Especially if it's a close match, which I can't see it not being.

2pts Both players to hit 2+ centuries (Lisowski/Stevens) 13/2 paddypower

Stevens just hit 99 and only needed the pink which he decided to BLAST and miss. UGHHH! add that to Un-Nooh who missed a stupid ball too. I get the feeling that was the chance for Stevens to get the 2nd century. Although I do feel like Stevens is the likelist winner right now. 99!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought he was just going to drop it in for the century, what a mug! Hope he can muster up another one the way he's playing now. Hossein has no chance now unless he picks himself up.

Edited by charliepie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, charliepie said:

I thought he was just going to drop it in for the century, what a mug! Hope he can muster up another one the way he's playing now. Hossein has no chance now unless he picks himself up.

just do not see the point in hitting it that hard? mental.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...