This probably won't be popular with people who can't help themselves and like to have lots of bets all over the place. But if you want to cut down on bets and increase your strike rate and profit, then you could think about sticking to what I call "Statistical Centainties". By that, I mean matches or events, that going by past results and head to head records, can only really go one way. Each year, there are several games/events that I pick out as 'statistical certainties' and these are the ones I like to concentrate on the most. The thing with these bets is that sometimes the price is quite a bit more than you'd expect. Last night was a good example. The Australian rugby team haven't beaten Sth Africa at Ellis Park since 1963!!! They simply can't win there. Yet, they were favourites and you could get $2.00+ on Sth Africa!!! Why??? As a punter, this was just brilliant value!

Here's some other examples from this year:

AFL - West Coast to beat Brisbane. In recent years, West Coast have totally had the measure of Brisbane. Even when Brisbane were the top team and West Coast were just a fringe top 8 side, they still beat the Lions. This year, the roles are reversed, so why should the Lions win this year? And the Gabba holds no fears for West Coast, so they were just as good a thing to win there as at Subiaco.

R.League - NSW to beat Qld in 2nd S.O.O in Sydney. Qld have NEVER beaten NSW at Stadium Australia. Why should they start this year??? $1.50 was great value. I will continue to back NSW at Stadium Australia until Qld can somehow learn how to win there. Can't see it happening soon.

Wimbledon - Federer to win. Thought he was as close as you're possibly going to get to a certainty in a Grand Slam and the $1.60-$1.65 which was available was a great price. He has proven to be virtually unbeatable on grass and I reckon he will challenge Sampras's record.

Wimbledon - Federer to beat Hewitt. Hewitt simply CAN NOT beat Federer. Roger had won their previous 7 matches, yet there were still some people who thought Hewitt could win this. He was no chance. $1.20 was available before the match and that was a luxury.

British Open - Tiger Woods to finish top10/top5. I wouldn't be so bold as to suggest that Tiger was a certainty to win the event, but he was always going to go close. A first and a second at the two previous majors this year and consistent top 5 form on the PGA tour, playing a course that suited him where he'd won by 8 shots the last time. Sportingbet offered $1.33 on him finishing in the top10 which was a wonderful price, and $1.70-$1.75 was generally available about him making the top5, again great value in my books.

There's been a few other examples that people could look at throughout the year for value. Like Essendon to beat Collingwood. Prior to this year, the Bombers had won 11 of the past 13 matches between the two. Now it's 13 of the past 15.

i agree with u my mate. u make a very good case. are u a lawyer by profession? very good info there.

I will pay more attention to things like this in future.

Sometimes odds are just not worth backing though, like 1.01-1.10. I'd rather back a 4/1 tennis player with a stake 10 times smaller.

Make a lot of sense,however this year we have seen some "certs" rolled ,

eg australia/bangladesh - but doubtful you would have snapped up 1.01 anyway!!

and too many upsets in afl to talk about.

An extension of this theory would be the use of betfair. For example you could have backed woods at 4.50 at start of british open and then laid him at 2.00 after 2 rounds, or alternative have a gorilla on federer at the 1.90 and then lay him at 1.25 odd going into semis.Federer would have to break down to not make semis at moment.


I am seriously thinking of backing west coast for flag, expect 3.00 ish after losing to sydney for maybe a couple large and then laying them before prelim finals, expect them to be 2.30 ish .

as always discipline is the key !!! and most of us dont have enough !!!

Yeah, I'd certainly never even think about taking $1.01, DP. Anybody who lost money backing Australia that day, got all they deserved. I reckon $1.15-$1.20 should be the minimum price for a single bet, but I prefer to wait for those at $1.40+.

By the way, the Australian cricket team was pretty much a 'statistical certainty' against England in the first test, but I actually use a different betting strategy when it comes to Cricket, so I'm not counting that one. Australia simply do not lose at Lords!

sportz, i also think that the swans stats against the w/coast in sydney are a standout, 10/13 at the S.C.G, [plus the E/F last year at stadium aust by 41], couldnt believe it when the prices went up they they were not fav's,not that my wallet is complaining as i had them rated @ $1.65.

Exactly. That was a good example of what I'm talking about. West Coast hadn't won at the SCG for 6 years. Now, when a team has won 15/16 so far this year, you certainly can't say their opponents are any sure things, but I think the Swans were very good value at their opening price.

Statistical certainties are what prompted me to have a multi bet on the weekend.

Dragons 1-12 to beat Sharks at Oki Jubilee - Sharks haven't won there in over 6 years. 3.35
x
Swans 1-39.5 to beat West Coast at the SCG - As stated above. 2.35
x
Rossi to win Moto GP at a rain soaked Donnington - Rarely ever loses and always goes well in the wet. 1.35

Odds: $10.62

It was a bit of a gamble with the margin bets on the first two. But in the end they paid off and at 10/1 I was very happy.

I was going to throw in the Ashes result. But decided against it given the weather that was bucketing down in England. I couldn't have stood it if I had lost the bet due to a draw to England due to bad weather.

JD,i know we can find a lot of stat cert's [to a lesser extent],but i think sportz was picking out more high profile one's on the world stage, but thats not to say we cant profit on the others,every week on the footy we will find something,next week will be no different,Well, the Roosters havent lost 4 straight since early 2002, sadly i think they will equal it next week against the dragons, and 5 straight since 2001, when they play the panthers[what a non existent game that will be]

I know there going better than their opposition at the momemt, but how would you like to take $1.25 - $1.35 St Geoge against the Roosters, in their last 9 games :

the saints have:

lost by 8
draw
lost by 13
lost by 4
lost by 16
won by 4
lost by 3
lost by 4
won by 2
?

How about Lance Armstrong being on the cover of TIME magazine