Bikes and Boks
Well f**k me. Favourite blows up in the Alps and is a goneburger. Next day comes out like a man possessed (or on drugs - joking) and earns complete redemption. I stayed up and watched Le Tour last night and it was a fairly awesome sporting performance, to say the least.
As 2 of my 4 regular readers have pointed out, on the surface it may seem I'm glad I didn't go against Landis after all. Far from it, I'm even more depressed. Why?
Landis to win TDF after first day in the Alps: $1.30
Landis to win TDF after second day in the Alps: 100/1+
Landis to win TDF after third day in the Alps: $1.30
Catching such price swings are what you dream about. Say you laid Landis at $1.30 for 1000 quid - your book reads -300 Landis, +1000 the (rest of the) field. Next day at 99/1 you back Landis for 50 quid at 100's and your book now reads +4400 Landis +950 the field. And then the dream second seismic shift occurs and you can lay Landis again for e.g. 3000 quid at $1.30 and your book ends up +3500 Landis +3950 the field. You've now got a guaranteed profit of 3500 quid by risking only 300. Now where's my valium?
These don't happen very often, and you catch them even less. So yes, it's depressing to see it happen in a situation where you seriously thought about betting - in such situations, you are analysing whether to bet not on whether you think the outcome may or may not happen (in this case Landis winning the TDF), but whether you believe there is sufficient likelihood there will be a significant price movement at some point between the placing of the bet and the conclusion of the event to make the bet worthwhile. And after mulling on it, I thought there wouldn't - and now I have a sore backside from the kicking I have given myself.
No-one in their wildest dreams would predict Landis would lose 10 minutes in the Alps and then get it back the next day. But that is what makes sports, and sports betting, interesting (and at times frustrating).
The unpredictability of sporting performance leads on to the next topic, the South Afican rugby team. All Blacks beat Wallabies by 20, Wallabies beat Springboks by 49 ... must mean an absolute thumping is on the cards tomorrow night.
Far from it. Obviously the Boks have problems (on and off the field) and yes, I have more chance of winning lotto than the Boks have of beating the ABs, but it is not impossible. More to the point, I don't think a 50-point thrashing is on the cards; 8 changes to the ABs, 5 to the Boks - what happened in the last fortnight starts to lose its relevance. Despite the obvious dangers of complacency, can the ABs really convince themselves to take the Springboks seriously? I believe there is more chance of this being a muddling game and a 15-20 point win a la the Irish tests earlier this year than a complete bollocking, esp. as NZ have stuffed up their backline by putting Sam T at 12.
The changes the Boks have made are positive (but they needed to make one more, to get rid of Olivier at 12) and will play better than last weekend (as obviously they can't play worse). I'm seriously considering backing them with the 21.5 point start at evens.
As 2 of my 4 regular readers have pointed out, on the surface it may seem I'm glad I didn't go against Landis after all. Far from it, I'm even more depressed. Why?
Landis to win TDF after first day in the Alps: $1.30
Landis to win TDF after second day in the Alps: 100/1+
Landis to win TDF after third day in the Alps: $1.30
Catching such price swings are what you dream about. Say you laid Landis at $1.30 for 1000 quid - your book reads -300 Landis, +1000 the (rest of the) field. Next day at 99/1 you back Landis for 50 quid at 100's and your book now reads +4400 Landis +950 the field. And then the dream second seismic shift occurs and you can lay Landis again for e.g. 3000 quid at $1.30 and your book ends up +3500 Landis +3950 the field. You've now got a guaranteed profit of 3500 quid by risking only 300. Now where's my valium?
These don't happen very often, and you catch them even less. So yes, it's depressing to see it happen in a situation where you seriously thought about betting - in such situations, you are analysing whether to bet not on whether you think the outcome may or may not happen (in this case Landis winning the TDF), but whether you believe there is sufficient likelihood there will be a significant price movement at some point between the placing of the bet and the conclusion of the event to make the bet worthwhile. And after mulling on it, I thought there wouldn't - and now I have a sore backside from the kicking I have given myself.
No-one in their wildest dreams would predict Landis would lose 10 minutes in the Alps and then get it back the next day. But that is what makes sports, and sports betting, interesting (and at times frustrating).
The unpredictability of sporting performance leads on to the next topic, the South Afican rugby team. All Blacks beat Wallabies by 20, Wallabies beat Springboks by 49 ... must mean an absolute thumping is on the cards tomorrow night.
Far from it. Obviously the Boks have problems (on and off the field) and yes, I have more chance of winning lotto than the Boks have of beating the ABs, but it is not impossible. More to the point, I don't think a 50-point thrashing is on the cards; 8 changes to the ABs, 5 to the Boks - what happened in the last fortnight starts to lose its relevance. Despite the obvious dangers of complacency, can the ABs really convince themselves to take the Springboks seriously? I believe there is more chance of this being a muddling game and a 15-20 point win a la the Irish tests earlier this year than a complete bollocking, esp. as NZ have stuffed up their backline by putting Sam T at 12.
The changes the Boks have made are positive (but they needed to make one more, to get rid of Olivier at 12) and will play better than last weekend (as obviously they can't play worse). I'm seriously considering backing them with the 21.5 point start at evens.
Labels: post mortems, previews
posted by Rob Crawford at 2:39 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home