Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Movember)
    sports betting is a mugs game and -EV long term.
    No it's not.

    Dimitrov looked superb at Queen's but I didn't expect him to beat Murray, especially so easily. While Dimitrov was good yesterday, Murray was absolutely terrible and I expect Djokovic to see him off.

    I worry for Federer against Raonic, who has the best serve I've ever seen.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pane123)
    No it's not.

    Dimitrov looked superb at Queen's but I didn't expect him to beat Murray, especially so easily. While Dimitrov was good yesterday, Murray was absolutely terrible and I expect Djokovic to see him off.

    I worry for Federer against Raonic, who has the best serve I've ever seen.
    I see what you mean but Federer himself is also serving well and Raonic isn't the best of returners either. Remember also that Federer has the best tiebreak record in ATP history: http://www.atpworldtour.com/Performa...reer-List.aspx
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Is it just me or was Sheldon from bbt in Bouchards player box

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Pretty gutted for Halep (plus my bet), easy to say now but I do think she would have won had she not injured herself. Wasn't the same since that point onwards. Should be a good final though.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pane123)
    No it's not.

    Dimitrov looked superb at Queen's but I didn't expect him to beat Murray, especially so easily. While Dimitrov was good yesterday, Murray was absolutely terrible and I expect Djokovic to see him off.

    I worry for Federer against Raonic, who has the best serve I've ever seen.
    It is -EV, unless you do matched betting or arbitrage betting. All the sports bettors I know who claim to be experts are net lifetime losers.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Movember)
    It is -EV, unless you do matched betting or arbitrage betting. All the sports bettors I know who claim to be experts are net lifetime losers.
    It's not and I'm not a net loser. You obviously just don't understand it. Surely you don't think literally every gambler is a loser.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Movember)
    It is -EV, unless you do matched betting or arbitrage betting. All the sports bettors I know who claim to be experts are net lifetime losers.
    I don't claim myself to be an expert, but I have managed a positive return this year on tennis alone over a sizeable amount of bets. There are definitely winners out there, just because the average gambler gives themselves no chance of winning doesn't mean everyone that bets on sports is a mug.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pane123)
    It's not and I'm not a net loser. You obviously just don't understand it. Surely you don't think literally every gambler is a loser.
    The only way it is +EV (over a large sample) is if you combine it with bonuses the bookies give you (matched betting) or you exploit differences in odds between bookies (arbitrage). Even with expert knowledge of a particular sport, you're going to come out a loser in the long run if you don't use bonuses or arbitrage. Sport is far too unpredictable, with far too many variables, that no one can ever predict the winner often enough to show a profit over a large sample. If you were really that good at predicting winners, you'd be rich by now, but you're not.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Movember)
    The only way it is +EV (over a large sample) is if you combine it with bonuses the bookies give you (matched betting) or you exploit differences in odds between bookies (arbitrage). Even with expert knowledge of a particular sport, you're going to come out a loser in the long run if you don't use bonuses or arbitrage. Sport is far too unpredictable, with far too many variables, that no one can ever predict the winner often enough to show a profit over a large sample. If you were really that good at predicting winners, you'd be rich by now, but you're not.
    I am quite rich.

    Unfortunately this is a guy who knows what he's talking about (me) talking to a guy who's clueless (you).

    Also, why is the perception that all pro gamblers are hugely wealthty? A 10% ROI over 1,000 bets is exceptional, but you would need to be rich to begin with to make big money from that instantly.

    Bouchard was priced at 2.55 today, which indicates roughly a 39% chance of her winning the match. I thought this was way off, so backed her. I'm not going to win every bet, but I have been very successful for a long time making bets like this.

    Until you understand that betting is about backing odds which don't accurately reflect the chance of a particular outcome, rather than predicting winners, then you are talking about a subject of which you have no knowledge.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WriterOfWrongs)
    Is it just me or was Sheldon from bbt in Bouchards player box

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Yep that was him he's been in her box for the last few matches.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pane123)
    I am quite rich.

    Unfortunately this is a guy who knows what he's talking about (me) talking to a guy who's clueless (you).

    Also, why is the perception that all pro gamblers are hugely wealthty? A 10% ROI over 1,000 bets is exceptional, but you would need to be rich to begin with to make big money from that instantly.

    Bouchard was priced at 2.55 today, which indicates roughly a 39% chance of her winning the match. I thought this was way off, so backed her. I'm not going to win every bet, but I have been very successful for a long time making bets like this.

    Until you understand that betting is about backing odds which don't accurately reflect the chance of a particular outcome, rather than predicting winners, then you are talking about a subject of which you have no knowledge.
    And that's all it is - a subjective opinion. Everyone will have a different opinion on the odds. Until you can objectively calculate your EV, it is no more than speculation based on nothing more than gut feeling. Eventually you will go bust and the house wins everything.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Movember)
    And that's all it is - a subjective opinion. Everyone will have a different opinion on the odds. Until you can objectively calculate your EV, it is no more than speculation based on nothing more than gut feeling. Eventually you will go bust and the house wins everything.
    Why the assumption that the house always wins? If that were the case I wouldn't be banned by every UK bookmaker. Surely their opinion can be wrong.

    Being an expert on certain sports and leagues gives you an advantage over bookmakers, as well as the vast majority of other bettors.

    You are going to embarrass yourself if you keep going with this.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Might have been mentioned already but apparently Murray's defeat will see him drop out of the Top 10 on Monday. He could be in for a rough ride at the US Open.

    This is the first time since Stosur vs Na at the French a few years ago I've genuinely been looking forward to the Women's final at a GS, shame I'll be at a wedding for it. Still think Bouchard will win it but it should be a good game regardless.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kado)
    Might have been mentioned already but apparently Murray's defeat will see him drop out of the Top 10 on Monday. He could be in for a rough ride at the US Open.

    This is the first time since Stosur vs Na at the French a few years ago I've genuinely been looking forward to the Women's final at a GS, shame I'll be at a wedding for it. Still think Bouchard will win it but it should be a good game regardless.

    Yeah it should be a great match! I hope Bouchard doesn't get overwhelmed by the occasion like Lisicki did last year. I think Kvitova will edge Bouchard in 3 sets but Bouchard may sneak it
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    First set to Djokovic, Dimitrov a break down in the second.
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Djokovic wins the tie break to lead 2 sets to 1.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Three straight double faults from Dimitrov there to get broken by Djokovic at the start of the fourth set.:laugh: A talented player for sure but this semi-final is just one step too far for him I think.

    Edit: ...and then Djokovic gets broken straight back. Absolutely criminal for him to let his opponent back in the match like this.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Djokovic up a break in the fourth, 2 sets to 1 up. Come on Grisha!
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    He broke back?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    He broke back?
    Yes. On serve at 2-3 in the fourth now; Djokovic about to serve.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

4,841

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?
Useful resources

Quick link:

Unanswered sport threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.