edtkh Posted July 11, 2004 Share Posted July 11, 2004 Well, not sure if many still believe in McLaren being able to do a decent job these days, but for those who do and believe Raikkonen could nick today's race, there's a fairly good deal to be had IMO. :b As a McLaren fan and pretty much a believer that McLaren have finally gotten things right for once, I'd get on a few quid just for viewing pleasure. Raikkonen was looked awesome during the whole of pre-qualifying and qualifying for yesterday and if he can keep his position for the start, there's every chance he can go all the way - so long as his machine doesn't let him down and Ferrari don't beat him at the pits(can't see this happening much as Schumi just looks too far back to mount a serious challenge via this method). Now, Raikkonen is available at 6.00 to win the race and 4.00 to win the race w/o Schumacher. Just thought I'd point you guys to a mistake by Ladbrokes which could nick you a massive 9.00 if Raikkonen wins. For the 'Race Dual Forecase'(where you predict the eventual winner and runner up), they have the 'Any Other'(effectively all combinations besides those listed) selection prived up at 9.00 - none of those they covered have actually included Raikkonen as a win which is ridiculous IMO when you consider they had actually done up permutations for even drivers like Sato to win the race! :b Massive, massive value for someone who starts on pole position IMO and for a driver of Raikkonen's class, it's certainly worth a shot. :nana PS : In fact, you do not exactly need a Raikkonen win to win this bet as most of those permutations priced up are tilted towards either Ferrari winning - so you've got more than a decent chance of getting something should one of those cursed scarlet cars retire... 8) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest azton Posted July 11, 2004 Share Posted July 11, 2004 Hang on! It doesnt matter in what order the two drivers finish. That's why Schumacher/Barrichello is only 2,00 when you can get 2,25 on Schumi alone other places. So a Raikkonen win is covered in for example Schumacher/Raikkonen, Barrichello/Raikkonnen and so on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edtkh Posted July 11, 2004 Author Share Posted July 11, 2004 Re : Hang on! Cheers, mate. :b You got that spot on. Ignore my original post then... :\ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edtkh Posted July 11, 2004 Author Share Posted July 11, 2004 Re : Hang On! Seems like you got it wrong mate. :\ According to a reply from Ladbrokes with regards to the "M Schumacher/R Barrichello selection", their customer service officer states that "I can confirm, in order to win this bet M.Schumacher would have to win and Barrichello would have to come second.". Now, that's got to be value. Get on it if you still can, guys! :drums Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorkingForTheEnemy Posted July 11, 2004 Share Posted July 11, 2004 British F1 Grand Prix at Silverstone : Raikkonen Clanger Dont know who gave you that reply. I worked for Ladbrokes for 2 years and what azton stated is very much the case. They leave out lots of drivers to win because of this reason. Its why its called a dual forecast not a forecast. Like I said, really dont know what the person who responded was on about but their rules state that its a winner either way round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edtkh Posted July 12, 2004 Author Share Posted July 12, 2004 British F1 Grand Prix at Silverstone : Raikkonen Clanger There was no specific explanation on how bets would be settled for 'Dual Forecast' under the bet rules for motor sports at Ladbrokes. However, for football they do have a similar explanation for goalcast whereby the order of the goalscorers does not matter in an identical scenario. On that logic, azton should be right - which I fully agree with given the numerous permutations it wouldn't have covered otherwise. Funny how that chap responded and said that it had to a Schumi-Barrichello(rather than it being either way) order for that bet to win. WorkingForTheEnemy, from your experience with Ladbrokes, if I had got an 'any others' bet on and the race had finished Raikkonen-Schumacher(which I would have lost since the Schumacher-Raikkonen was a permutation covered) would I then have a legitimate reason to have that bet voided rather than losing that bet on the grounds of what the staff wrote to me in an email? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorkingForTheEnemy Posted July 12, 2004 Share Posted July 12, 2004 Re: British F1 Grand Prix at Silverstone : Raikkonen Clanger Possibly. If you'd recieved an email telling you tha then I suppose it would be worth putting your case foward but I really wouldnt know for sure. All I know is that as a manager I would have settled it as a loser and if you'd asked me in-shop before hand I would have explained it the same as azton did. Seems Ladbrokes should clear up their rules because it sounds like their football rules are wrong too. By goalcast, do you mean correct score and goalscorer(scorecast)?? If so then of course the order matters, has to be first goalscorer unless stated that you want last goalscorer.(obviously ignoring any own goals) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edtkh Posted July 12, 2004 Author Share Posted July 12, 2004 Re: British F1 Grand Prix at Silverstone : Raikkonen Clanger Nope, it's not scorecast - it's goalcast. I've personally never seen Ladbrokes offer any Goalcast, but Goalcast is a type of bet explained under football section of its rules. Thanks for the info anyway... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.