Hmmm, I know a lot of people are saying it is too big a risk to use people in 100% of multis but is it?? By putting say Watson in 70-80% of multis, you are giving yourself a hope of winning something, or at least getting something back if he loses. But I have tried a few potential multis, and it seems a lot of trouble including a player in MOST mutlis, and not all of them- it leads to more bets, and less reward; the win wont be as big. So for me, I am probably going to be using Judd/Watson as genuine anchors and putting them in every bet. If both get up, as they most probably should I will be in a great position for the night. I feel as though I have got to take the risk, as small as that is imo, and use the 2 players I feel as most likely, to take out their teams most votes.
After this, I will be using Thompson / Goodes as secondary anchors, and Riewoldt / Brown as just semi anchors. Multi these with your value players, and hopefully you end you end up with $$$$$
I've been trying to tease out a system and have arrived at the same spot, can't find an economical way to cover the possibility of one anchor losing without sending my total outlay through the roof (and risking much more in the case of a total shock). Will probably adopt a system like this and take a chance of a total loss in return for smaller outlay and better returns. Won't be using Judd though at $1.07, just too short for my liking
I guess they should all win but it's a tad daunting!
