I see what you're saying and i agree to a point Mr Pants. No point chasing short priced favourites, however for me if the price is too short then = No Bet. I will not and can not justify backing the opposition on price alone is my point. Ultimately it is the performance on the park that determines the winner and as such i can and will only back the most likely winner, in my estimation that is.

Floydy, i get ya now mate - bit slow i am.
You say lay Villa and Sunderland rather than back Liverpool and Man U. Price is too short on Man U and Liverpool. Therefore better value on the opposite side of the ledger, so to speak. Am i getting closer?
At the moment there is plenty monies for Man U to win, some money for Aston Villa to win also at 17's - might be one for P57. Not much available for Villa to lay $150 @ 17's.
Similarly plenty $$$$$ for Liverpool to win, not as much Sunderland. Lay Sunderland for $550 @ 16.5, bit better, still not great.

Now I can see where you get all those teams with names I've never heard of and can hardly pronounce. :)

NO NO NO hahaha I was just saying when the match gets closer have a look at the difference between the WIN price and the LAY price .....if you back them you might get say $9 but if you want to lay them you are going to give odds of probably(without looking id say) about $12or $13. I was saying it was a good EXAMPLE of the difference .I wouldnt tell you to back anything .

yep sportz they cover a few leagues ......everynow and again I sit and reflect and wonder what it would be like without the internet .........I d have to start socializing with people in person again hahaha

MAD
Once again SODS LAW at work ....theres only fifty cents difference in the win and the lay price of both Sunderland and Villa .Its unusual at that price but there you go .
In my own defence most bookies will have the outsider at say11.00 while Betfair will have them longer as in this instance about $16 so if your LAYING your still risking paying the bigger odds (thats where Gamebookers P2P may be better for laying the outsider )

The statistical certainity but unbettable tennis system has 7 selections for the US OPEN.

It takes Federer in Round 1 & 2 (seed1)

It takes Nadal Round 1 & 2 (seed2)

It takes Hewitt Round 1 & 2 (seed3)

It takes Roddick Round 2 only (seed4)

Interestingly seed 3 has not lost since 1978 (when my stats start) in the first round. so a 100% statistical certainity???

This system is presented for entertainment purposes only and is not intended as a betting guide. The author does not bet it. The purpose is to see if a system that occurs regularly actually produces a profit.

What about England over Northern Ireland in the soccer. That was surely a statistical certainty. England hadn't lost there for 8 decades......

Hadn't.......

Yes, but they were about $1.12 or something. That's terrible odds in a Soccer game (especially on England).

the statistical certainity but unbettable tennis system won all 6 selections in the US open with Federer, Nadal and Hewitt all winning their rd 1 and rd 2 matches. The 6 wins were at .01, .03 .02 .02 .04 and .07 for a grand total of .19.



Since first write up I think we are 11-0 for .49.

No selections at Bucharest or Bejing next week

Could have just backed Federer to beat Hewitt. Didn't pay a lot, but it was easy money.

The thing is that Hewitt showed in the 2nd and 3rd sets that he COULD beat Federer if he would only decide to attack more, come into the net and take the initiative. But as soon as he won the 3rd set, he went back into his shell and that was that.

Couldn't agree more SPortz. Newk said he only came in once in the 4th set. But I think Federer had another gear and Hewitt probably couldn't keep it up in a 5th set. Still it is fustrating that a player with Hewitts ability insists on playing backhand backcourt tennis, no matter what. Plus those foot faults were just stupid for that level of tennis.

It was a great match and I picked up a tiny bit by backing Hewitt to win 13+ games. Won 1.75 units for the tourny so got be smiling.

How did u go.

I only caught the last set of the match. Just looked like hewitt had to fight to keep up with federer, while federer was just cruising (hewitt looked slow & tired). He makes everything look so smooth and effortless. Hard to imagine that there will be a day he won't be the best.

The statistical certainity but unbettable tennis system has 1 pick this week being the #1 seed in Palmero.

Therefore Ferrer is the pick over Aldi in round 1.

Remember this system because of the very low prices is presented for amusement and educational purposes only.

AH ah


The statistical certainty but unbackable tennis system finally had a loss with Ferrer putting in a listless effort in losing to Aldi 2-6, 2-6.

Now 11-1 for a loss of .51 since started posting although I think it is profitable on the year. I will have a complete wrap by Xmas.

This week it picks #1 seed Puerta and #2 seed Stepanek to win their first match which will be in round 2.

This system is for amusement purposes only.

The statistical certainity but unbackable tennis system bounced back with both Stepanek ($1.25) & Puerta ($1.22)recording 2nd round wins.

Now 13-1 for a loss of .04.

No selections for this week.