Chaos

Last night's cricket match between West Indies and India shows just how lucrative - and dangerous - betting exchanges can be. With WI seemingly cruising to the win and paying $1.05, the fun and games began with the loss of Morton's wicket with 13 balls to go. Their price drifted to around $1.10 with Brian Lara striding to the crease. A wide and a run later, WI required 10 runs off the final 2 overs with 6 wickets in hand.

Off the third ball of the penultimate over, Lara struck a boundary and WI were $1.03 to win requiring 6 runs off 9 balls. Fourth ball - Lara out; 6 from 8 and WI paying $1.10. Fifth ball nothing, and last ball a dropped catch becomes a runout and Sarwan - the mainstay of the WI's batting effort - departs.

So 5 runs off the last over; two new batsmen at the crease and WI have shot out to $1.35 or thereabouts. First ball - wicket! - and now WI are over $1.50. Nothing off the second, a single from the third and West Indies are still paying over $1.50 when the boundary to win the game is hit off the fourth ball.

Occasionally I wonder about the efficiency of betting exchange markets. 4 runs required off 3 balls - one hit can do it - and the market assesses a team can only do it 2 times out of 3. Mainly I suspect because of what people term "momentum" in sports - if things are going one team's way they expect it to continue to do so and betting prices reflect that.

But is it the right price? There is no doubt betting exchange markets are improving their efficiency during a sporting event - a few years ago I can recall Australia despite being the best ODI side in the world paying $1.51 to beat New Zealand when NZ still required 17 runs to win with only 1 wicket left (again, because the "momentum" was with NZ) - but to me $1.50+ seems a helluva price for a team one hit away from winning a game and three balls to do it.

Weekend thoughts will be up in a few hours.