Brownlow Medal 2010 (Part 2)

[AjsGuns]

Phew, well I'm done.

Have Watson in about 95% of my bets, Thompson/Brown in about 80%, one of Hayes/Monty in about 75%, & one of Sylvia/Green in about 65%. Here's hoping these boys get up.

Have slight cover with player not listed at Melb which was 11-1. Also have Swallow/Harvey, Riewoldt/Deledio, Goodes/Jack & Boak/Cassisi (slight Rodan cover) in quite a few too. Little nibbles on Pabvlich, Pendlebury & Boyd/Cooney. Best of luck to everyone.

Mind me asking how much $$ you invested? just out of curiousity as we seemed to adapt a similaur stragery, although i prob only have watson in around 70%

 

[premiers06]

Starting to regret putting riewoldt in about 20 of my multis (have about 50).

Its starting to worry me in which im thinking that i may put some more multis on.

 

[AhSteveSteve27]

Here's my report for the year, now that my bets are on. Good luck everyone, I'm with the consencious here, GO JUDDY!

Would be pretty happy with those results bpg. Hoping Cooney/Deledio fail.

 

[WeetBixKid]

Really like your count BPG, hope you're on the money...

 

[WeetBixKid]

Mind me asking how much $$ you invested? just out of curiousity as we seemed to adapt a similaur stragery, although i prob only have watson in around 70%

Around 5k, about 110 bets. Won a touch over 40 grand last year, so happy to give them back ~15% of their money if I flop this year.

 

[DT_35]

Personally, my anchors are:
Adelaide: Scott Thompson @ $1.35
Brisbane: Jonathon Brown @ $1.55
Carlton: Chris Judd @ $1.02
Essendon: Jobe Watson @ $1.60
Geelong: Gary Ablett @ $1.22
= $4.16

Not gonna risk Swan, Pendles will be there abouts.

Swallow is great Value at $4.00, have him beating Harvey by 1 vote.

I can see Jack troubling Goodes, and at $7 is worth a punt.

Hodge should get up but Mitchell is always a worry.

Can't believe Frawley is Favourite for Melbourne...Expect Green & Sylvia to get close to double figures, with Green just nipping Sylvia.

Either Deledio or Riewoldt will take Richmonds. toss of a coin, but I'd probably go Lids.

Port, take the $4.50 on offer for Boak, only concern is Cassisi and I have them finishing around the same total but Boak edging him out.

West Coast, probably Priddis but can't be bothered checking it out.

Fremantle, St.Kilda, Western Bulldogs are tough ones. I reckon Sandilands/Hayes/Boyd to get up but won't be betting on them.

 

[echelon22]

No dramas - I thought that might have been the case but couldn't remember and didn't want to trawl through the whole thread.

Beginning to think this thread needs it's own board independent of the stats one, then we could sticky things like betting accounts, who's offering and allowing what, overall counts, specific player breakdowns etc

Might be a little more difficult to follow everything but it would stop the repeated questions

 

[WeetBixKid]

Yeh, the OP (not sure if it's Fred or S1bald) should edit the first post & add the answers to some common questions.

 

[s1bbald]

Pretty sure Fred took my post in the original thread as the starting point for this one. I certainly didnt make this thread.

 

[Vapor]

Getting through placing most of my bets online right now, and I'm noticing this error message coming up for a few specific combinations (for example - Pendlebury/Boak/Hayes/Harvey/Jack)

There are too many selections for the current Bet Type. Please review your selections and try again.

What does this error mean? Too many other people loaded up on it?

 

[bombersaway]

Pendles. I was just going over some analysis of last year vs this year.

2009 :
I had Swan on 25.75 = 12 votes
Pendlebury on 14.7 = 13 votes

2010 :
I have Swan on 23.9
I have Pendlebury on 22.45

Based on this Pendles is amazing value to knock him over. I've rated Swan harsher this year and probably Pendles easier ( due to how they both polled in 09 ) but the numbers talk.

gee your votes for those 2 almost mirror mine last year i recon pendles 23
swan 20 this year

 

[stretcharmstrong]

Getting through placing most of my bets online right now, and I'm noticing this error message coming up for a few specific combinations (for example - Pendlebury/Boak/Hayes/Harvey/Jack)

There are too many selections for the current Bet Type. Please review your selections and try again.

What does this error mean? Too many other people loaded up on it?

Yeah I'm pretty sure that's it mate. I was getting the same for (I think):

Thompson/Pendles/Boak/Hayes/Jack

I think it's the Pendles/Boak/Hayes/Jack combo that they've frozen.

 

[KENT2008]

have sportsbet.com.au actually given a reason for no multis on the brownlow this year?

"sportsbet,for people who want their bet...declined on the net!"

 

[AjsGuns]

have sportsbet.com.au actually given a reason for no multis on the brownlow this year?

"sportsbet,for people who want their bet...declined on the net!"

They got smashed last year.

 

[WCE92_94_06]

OK so its taken me a while but this is what i got.

Basically, im locking Thompson, Brown and Judd whilst i see it as goodes vs. Jack, Harvey vs. swallow, Green vs. Sylvia, Swan vs. Pendles, Selwood vs. Ablett.

Than for the multis with lower odds (eg. goodes, harvey, green, swan, ablett) i've added on Watson, Stanton or Winderlich. If it is added on with Watson i then add on one of Barlow, Pavlich or Sandilands to further increase the value.

So what does everyone think?


Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Green. Swan. Selwood
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Sawllow. Green. Swan. Selwood
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Sylvia. Swan. Selwood
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Sawllow. Sylvia. Swan. Selwood
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Green. Pendle. Selwood
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Sawllow. Green. Pendle. Selwood
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Sylvia. Pendle. Selwood
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Sawllow. Sylvia. Pendle. Selwood

Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Green. Swan. Ablett. Watson. Sandi
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Green. Swan. Ablett. Watson. Barlow
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Green. Swan. Ablett. Watson. Pav
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Green. Swan. Ablett. Winder
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Green. Swan. Ablett. Stants
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Sawllow. Green. Swan. Ablett
Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Sylvia. Swan. Ablett. Watson. Sandi. Pridis
Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Sylvia. Swan. Ablett. Watson. Sandi. Lecras
Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Sylvia. Swan. Ablett. Watson. Barlow. pridis
Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Sylvia. Swan. Ablett. Watson. Barlow. Lecras
Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Sylvia. Swan. Ablett. Watson. Pav. Pridis
Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Sylvia. Swan. Ablett. Watson. Pav. Lecras
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Sylvia. Swan. Ablett. Winder
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Sylvia. Swan. Ablett. Stants
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Sawllow. Sylvia. Swan. Ablett
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Green. Pendle. Ablett
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Sawllow. Green. Pendle. Ablett
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Harvey. Sylvia. Pendle. Ablett
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Goodes. Sawllow. Sylvia. Pendle. Ablett



Judd. Thompson. Brown. Jack. Harvey. Green. Swan. Ablett
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Jack. Sawllow. Green. Swan. Ablett
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Jack. Harvey. Sylvia. Swan. Ablett
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Jack. Sawllow. Sylvia. Swan. Ablett
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Jack. Harvey. Green. Pendle. Ablett
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Jack. Sawllow. Green. Pendle. Ablett
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Jack. Harvey. Sylvia. Pendle. Ablett
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Jack. Sawllow. Sylvia. Pendle. Ablett

Judd. Thompson. Brown. Jack. Harvey. Green. Swan. Selwood
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Jack. Sawllow. Green. Swan. Selwood
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Jack. Harvey. Sylvia. Swan. Selwood
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Jack. Sawllow. Sylvia. Swan. Selwood
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Jack. Harvey. Green. Pendle. Selwood
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Jack. Sawllow. Green. Pendle. Selwood
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Jack. Harvey. Sylvia. Pendle. Selwood
Judd. Thompson. Brown. Jack. Sawllow. Sylvia. Pendle. Selwood

 

[FootyStar#1]

Fantastic analysis bpg1986, really enjoyed reading that

 

[stuziman]

Really like your count BPG, hope you're on the money...

Bpg how you going mate?

Like the look of your count too!

 

[sgnl00]

All finished up, did anchors of Hodge/Thompson/Watson @TAB and Brown/Thompson/Watson @Luxbet. Murdered the **** out of the Green/Sylvia combo when it was at nice value, and put Boak in plenty. Didn't touch Richmond, unlike some here, personally think it might be too close to risk Riewoldt @ ~1.90 and Deledio@ only ~2.70. Did some nice expansive multis with Boyd/Hayes... And if either Risci or Jack gets up... hello money!

 

[Athomas]

All finished up, did anchors of Hodge/Thompson/Watson @TAB and Brown/Thompson/Watson @Luxbet. Murdered the **** out of the Green/Sylvia combo when it was at nice value, and put Boak in plenty. Didn't touch Richmond, unlike some here, personally think it might be too close to risk Riewoldt @ ~1.90 and Deledio@ only ~2.70. Did some nice expansive multis with Boyd/Hayes... And if either Risci or Jack gets up... hello money!

Nice, I am getting a bit worried about JVolt now too. Shame Deledio is so short. I'm still 70% sure Jvolt will hold on!

Green into $3 is crazy, wonder if TAB have taken any bets on Frawley at all.

 

[PatrickBateman]

WCE92_94_06 - Replace Judd with Hodge.

 

[Athomas]

WCE92_94_06 - Replace Judd with Hodge.

Don't do this.

 

[brent-83]

My main bets are..

Thompson + Brown + Sylvia/Green + Harvey/Swallow + Boak/AnyOther/Cassisi + Boyd/Cooney. Minimum collect of 3x my total outlay for the night if that gets up. If Thompson or Brown go down, I go down, but I am happy to risk it.

Also have worked around the above with a number of combos of Hayes/Riewoldt/Boak/Pavlich/Barlow.

 

[PatrickBateman]

Don't do this.

Both Judd/Hodge are probably 95%+. I'd assume if he's having one, may as well be Hodge. Safety is leaving both out for minimal loss.

 

[stuziman]

I'm not too concerned with jvolting

When they started winning the media got all over him and the umpires surely got caught up in the hype...

Expect him to poll like crazy from rd 10 if not 12 onwards

 

[Athomas]

Both Judd/Hodge are probably 95%+. I'd assume if he's having one, may as well be Hodge. Safety is leaving both out for minimal loss.

Fair call, I would leave both out. I'd say Judd is 100% and Hodge is 95% though.