English Premier League - 2011/12

[IDIG]

Tonight -
Barcelona v Villarreal o3.5 goals @ 1.83 (2x)
Shamrock v Dublin o3.5 goals @ 1.96 (1x)

+2.62U

My other leans failed but my plays got up so can't complain with that

YTD: +10.12U

 

[IDIG]

The second goal came in the 94th minute which made me do a jumping fist pump clap. Can't say I've done that at 7.30am before.

Haha know that feeling. I had Stoke get up for me late the night before but with the misses next to me in bed, i just gave a relatively quiet 'yes!'

 

[IDIG]

Toulouse @ 1.99 v Nice (1x)

Played a draw on Nice's pitch a couple of weeks ago so going with the new and improved team at home this time.

 

[N1k0s287]

Transfer action -

Arsenal - Arteta, Benayoun, Mertesacker, Santos
Aston Villa - Hutton, Jenas
Blackburn - Dann, Yakubu
Bolton - Kakuta, Ngog
Chelsea - Mereiles
Everton - Drenthe, S'qualursi
Liverpool - Bellamy
Manchester City - Hargreaves
Manchester United - Young,Welbeck, Jones
Stoke - Jerome, Palacios,Crouch
Sunderland - Bendtner (On loan)
QPR - Wright-Phillips, Barton, Traore
Tottenham - Parker
West Ham - Bentley, Demel, Lansbury
Wigan - Maloney
Lille - Joe Cole


Some nice transfers in their...Everton got hit hard losing Yakubu, Arteta and Beckford and picking up some loaned striker from Argentina.

Hargreaves for City is stupid...more injury prone then a crash dummy.

Stoke 3 quality signings aswell..liking them.

Forlan also moved to Inter Milan and Eto moved to a russian club (which happened last week) becoming the most payed player in football. Here are his wages -

Anzhi striker Samuel Eto'o's salary: Per Month - £1,458,333, Per Week - £364,583, Per Day - £52,083, Per Hour - £2170, Per Minute - £36,16, Per Second - £60p

Goodluck punting

 

[yamahamoto]

Anzhi striker Samuel Eto'o's salary: Per Month - £1,458,333, Per Week - £364,583, Per Day - £52,083, Per Hour - £2170, Per Minute - £36,16, Per Second - £60p

Goodluck punting

and thats after tax as well...madness

 

[Donkson]

I think Arteta is a good sale by Everton, except for the fact the didn't really replace him. He's pretty injury prone, 29, and past his prime. No doubt he's still a quality player but good business I would say.

 

[Ron]

Heaps of internationals on tonight.

Sportingbet have a couple of bonuses for the Aussie game, 50% on correct score, and 25% on first goal kicker

So i have gone Aussies 4-0 and 5-0 (despite the crazy money the Thai board are offering their players), and Holman for first goal.

Also a multi to keep me interested

Australia/Australia
Japan/Japan
South Korea/Lebanon over 3.5
China
Belgium
Russia
England
Germany/Germany
France

@ $16.98

 

[N1k0s287]

3 x Argentina by 2+ goals @ 1.90 LOSS

Had enough chances to win 5-0...bloody hell!

YTD +8.5

 

[Trojan Pies]

I'm guessing no EPL this weekend because of Euro qualifiers?

 

[Donkson]

yep

ppp

 

[IDIG]

Toulouse @ 1.99 v Nice (1x)

Also had Germany -2 v Austria the other night @ 2.20 (1x) that got up

Nacional @ 2.11 v Guimaraes (1x)

On home ground Nacional has won 11, drawn 3 and lost 2 matches. On away ground Guimaraes has won 5, drawn 1 and lost 9 matches.

YTD: +10.32U

 

[Clash Hendrix]

While it's not just about the EPL, found this article about the value of short priced favourites in soccer leagues in Europe. Kind of goes against what I always thought about betting on anything or any team with those sort of slim odds. It looks at soccer teams that have been priced 1.20 or under.

http://www.bettingexpert.com/blog/how-often-do-short-priced-favourites-lose-in-football

 

[Borgsta]

4% profit over 10 years confirms to me that it is shit. What did you gain from it?

 

[Clash Hendrix]

4% profit over 10 years confirms to me that it is shit. What did you gain from it?

I think that article is just making the point that favourites of slim odds like under 1.20 have actually done well in soccer leagues. The fact that just betting on them all straight up would have made a profit is interesting because normally all I have heard is that theres no value in those sorts of slim odd favourites.

But a related question or you, what sort of % return on investment would interest you if 4% is rubbish? Alot of pros would be happy to get 4% ROI long term. Rolling that over into your bankroll over a 10 year period would generate alot of growth.

Interested to know your opinion on this.

 

[Donkson]

Yeah I think the article is fine, it wasn't advocating taking every short priced team you see.

+EV is +EV, but you can't just bet on all teams <1.20.

 

[Borgsta]

But a related question or you, what sort of % return on investment would interest you if 4% is rubbish? Alot of pros would be happy to get 4% ROI long term. Rolling that over into your bankroll over a 10 year period would generate alot of growth.

Interested to know your opinion on this.

Serious??? Any bank will happily give you 7% ROI atm. Why bother gambling to make less money.

Interested to know your opinion on this.

 

[Dougy85]

Banks have lowered the rates on term deposits of late. I haven't really seen any savings accounts with higher than 6.5% other than promos for a few months tops.

You also have to pay tax on any interest you earn from these accounts.
Having said that, I'd imagine this option would still be slightly ahead of 4% ROI.

 

[IDIG]

Nacional @ 2.11 v Guimaraes (1x)

Fail, ended up 1-3


Tonight -
Brazil -1 v Ghana @ 2.20 (1x)
Ronaldinho comes back into the squad with a bit of form so hopefully he'll be playing with something to prove. Brazil have also won their last 5 matches on English soil.

YTD: +9.32U

 

[Clash Hendrix]

Serious??? Any bank will happily give you 7% ROI atm. Why bother gambling to make less money.

Interested to know your opinion on this.

Understand your point about banks offering 7% on a term deposit. But this is the beauty about sports betting. 7% ROI would be excellent, but you can build your bankroll with an even lesser average return.

Why? Because unlike a bank term deposit, with betting you are turning over your investment with each bet you make rather than just at the end of each fixed term.

For example, let's say you place $1000 in a bank for 10 years at a return of 7% per year. Rolling over the 7% each year will give you about $2000 at the end of the 10 years.

But let's say you make 300 bets a year for 10 years. Lets also add that you have a starting bankroll of $1000 and bet even just 1% of your total bankroll each bet, which means you would start with a unit size of merely $10. Even averaging a 4% return, your bankroll will steadily build and as it builds so will the size of your 1% stake. Over the 10 years you make 3,000 bets and by the end of those 3,000 bets you will have a bankroll of around $3,300 depending upon the consistency of your wins.

So it's all about rolling over your winnings into your bankroll, building the size of your unit stake. If you don't do this and merely bet at a fixed unit stake, then yes, you are better off depositing into a bank.

 

[Borgsta]

7% ROI is time to find a new hobby. 4% is absolutely pointless and I dare say that your maths are way off on this. Even giving you odds of $1.15 flat rate you will go nowhere with anything < 85% win rate.

You also can't logically change the size of your unit with every bet.

 

[Donkson]

lol.

4% ROI on 100 bets is more than 7%pa interest provided you risk 2-3% of your BR per selection.

Also lol at suggesting 7% ROI is poor.

 

[Borgsta]

lol.

4% ROI on 100 bets is more than 7%pa interest provided you risk 2-3% of your BR per selection.

Also lol at suggesting 7% ROI is poor.

Upping it to 2-3% is changing it dramatically.

Sorry ROI is a wrong choice of words and going way off the original argument.

7% profit over a year (or Return on Initial Investment) is time for a new hobby.

 

[Donkson]

Oh well yeah of course, carry on.

 

[Clash Hendrix]

Upping it to 2-3% is changing it dramatically.

Sorry ROI is a wrong choice of words and going way off the original argument.

7% profit over a year (or Return on Initial Investment) is time for a new hobby.

Depends.

Even if you're not rolling over your winnings into building your bankroll, getting 7% return on your investment betting on sports is still better than a 7% term deposit.

Here's why. Let's say you begin the year with $1000. You put it in a term deposit for a year to get 7%. You make $70 on the year. So what. Big deal.

But let's say you start with $1000 to bet with and you choose to bet $10 units all year long. Let's say you bet 300 bets over the year. You've then invested $3,000 in bets over the course of the year. You get your 7% return and you've made $210. 3 times what you would make just investing the $1000 in a term deposit.

Let's ramp it up and say you make 1000 bets at just 3% return betting $10 a unit. That's an investment of $10,000 over the year. 3% return on that gets you $300. Again, far better than the bank term deposit. If you get your 7%, then you're killing it with $700.

This is the beauty of betting. You can continually invest. You're money isn't locked in. It's always working.

Also, yes, you can change the size of your unit with each bet. If I decide that I will always bet 1% of my bankroll, then as my bankroll grows (or diminishes), my 1% unit size will change with it. You're not changing the % of the bankroll you bet. Not sure if I made that clear enough. My mistake.

 

[Borgsta]

try doing that at sporting....