In Recess

For anyone who cares, I suppose it is fitting a Super 14 season punctuated by one point and last minute victories had a final end the same way. Not great if you were Sharks backers - luckily I didn't post on Friday as I thought the prices were slightly wrong (I had the game closer to evens).

Unfortunately, some family problems means I'm unable to devote much time to the blog at the moment so it's going into recess (again) for a while. Dunno when I'll be back - depends how long it takes to sort the mess out.

Ciao.

Get the flannels out

OMFG.

A game of TEST cricket starts tonight. Now this game will be unfamiliar to many Kiwi readers, as we play fuck all of it, but it involves white clothing and a red ball. They play for five, yes FIVE days.

Although the game coming up (England v West Indies) might not last that long. To tell you the truth, staying up for the next five nights dozing through this contest does not exactly fill me with joy, but one must make moolah when opportunities present themselves.

And despite a Lords test in May providing draws for the last two seasons, unsettled weather in the lead-up and a not too shabby forecast (but remember we are talking England in spring here) suggests to me the traditional golden egg of test cricket betting - going against the draw - is the right play here.

Current prices (Betfair):

England 1.65
West Indies 10.0
Draw 3.3

England have a terrific home record in tests; West indies a horrific away record - and no Lara. Forget about ODI form - Harmison and Hoggard didn't play at the World Cup, instead getting into the swing of things on a staple diet of domestic cricket. It all points to an England win, especially with the crap preparation the Windies have had, but find the England price of 1.65 unbackable.

Far better to lay the draw, and hope for a few England early wickets to get some value on the Poms.

Wrap Postscript

Before we move off the weekend, let us congratulate the most outstanding NZ sporting achievement: No, I'm not talking about the NZ women's hockey team win over Australia (pretty bloody impressive), nor my stepdaughter's continuing hot hand at the netball courts (7 out of 8, also pretty bloody impressive) ...

Yes, of course I am talking NZ Tennis and the marvellous news that Simon Rea won his second "career title" at a futures tournament in China. I love the last line - "Rea, 24 (marvellous potential that - a 24 y.o. on the futures circuit) ... should see his world ranking go inside the top-600 now"

Wow, that's sensational. At this rate, by the time he is 40 he may be knocking on the door of the top-200 and then we have a real future star on our hands that may even get the boffins at SPARC excited.

FFS. I wish I was rich and retired as I would go through the 100-odd sports there are and compile a list of New Zealanders ranked in the top 600. It would take a fkn long time; christ even at the height of my sporting prowess I was ranked inside the world's top 600, and it's not something I even mention to my neighbour, let alone expect to be published in a newspaper.

Why do our sporting media have such an obsession with our semi-amateur tennis players winning third-tier tournaments? We suck at tennis, and there are some other sports out there with purely amateur sportspeople who do a hell of a lot better than make the top 600 who never get a column inch. Stop being so lazy journos - get off ur arse and discover the wonderful diverse nature of sports and the New Zealanders who participate in it rather than tell us what Leanne Baker, Dan King-Turner, Simon Rea et al are doing every week.

Weekend Wrap

Semi-final rugby is sometimes not a pretty beast. Watching the Bulls and Crusaders trading penalty kicks brought back some of my earliest sport-watching memories – watching NZ and SAF trade penalty kicks in the 1970’s. And just like then, the Saffers seemed to get more shots at goal than we did.

No, I’m not blaming the referees. Mr Dickinson was largely invisible thank God, but if Matt Goddard is the No. 2 ref in Oz then the front row is not the most pressing problem in Australian rugby. Our teams got beaten fair and square by their slightly better ones, which seems to be widely acknowledged. Messrs Flavell and McCaw were very gracious in defeat, Troy even thanking the Durban crowd which was very nice of him, and over at Keo they’re gushing at how well we’ve taken the beatings.

Well I’m not. Before I get accused of talking thru’ my wallet, I needed a Crusaders loss more than a rabbit on Viagara needs sex – so even though it’s roast lamb rather than noodles for dinner for a wee while, I’m not a happy chappy.

Our teams lost. This is our national sport. Our teams aren’t supposed to lose. For only the second time in 12 years, no NZ side in the final. Are you getting angry yet?

What gets up my nose is in our SPARC-led sport and recreation system where winners are grinners and the rest can go and jump, there should be widespread anguish and a public inquiry into these unacceptable losses. If our sports leaders publicly declare failure and question mental toughness when we come 3rd or 4th in tin-pot sports like shooting and lawn bowls, where is that hard-nosed mentality now when we finish 3rd and 4th in the Super 14? Even though it’s essentially a provincial competition, surely the Super 14 is more important to the mood of the nation than shooting flying discs of clay?

Instead, we are getting excuses. Our AB’s aren’t up to scratch yet from their reconditioning programme. Apparently the South Africans will find it very hard to continue such fine form through to the World Cup. What a load of poppycock. Wake up and smell the roses people – the Jaapies have caught up and this cosy “she’ll be right come September” attitude needs to be immediately extinguished.

Compare this to the Australian cricket team – you didn’t hear them complain when they lost the Commonwealth Bank Series that they were in the middle of a large training load. Apparently we want to be more “Australian” in our sporting approach – so can sporting journos lead the charge and stop writing crap such as this:

The defending champion never stopped trying but it was clear key players, including sin-binned skipper Richie McCaw and first five-eighths Dan Carter, were still short of a gallop after sitting out the first half of the campaign during the All Blacks' conditioning period. (ChCh Press)

FFS, how many games do players need??? Earth to Tony Smith - a first-five does not need a truckload of games to get into gallop; go and rewatch Carter's (fine) performace in his first game back against the Stormers. I can see it now, if we lose to SAF at RWC it will be because their players have had 23 games of rugby compared to our players only playing 16.

Despite the respect being shown South African rugby, I fear complacency is alive and well – the excuses and peaking in September bullshit shows that. Instead of saying “We weren’t good enough but it’ll be ok come September”, we should be saying “We weren’t good enough and THAT’s not good enough”.

Super 14 Semis

Two mouth-watering clashes are not too many hours away - one sleep as a kid on Xmas Eve would say, and to be honest I can't wait to see how these two semis pan out. Not because I have money riding on them; while on the balance of probabilities the two home sides should get home, the one constant in sport are the surprises that get thrown up - so don't be surprised if the Blues and Crusaders are on the plane to Christchurch come Monday to play another game.

Just don't bet on it. The press I've been reading are the Saffers are more nervous about the Sharks advancing than the Bulls, even though they are at sub-$1.50 compared to the Bulls $1.75-ish for winning in the weekend. Honestly, I can't see what they're worried about. The Blues looked good last week because (a) the Force played poorly, and (b) McAlister made a large difference to the backline functioning, and he ain't there. With the caveat that the referee is Mr S. Dickinson and he has been known in the past to fk up an otherwise promising game of rugby, as long as the Sharks handle the nerves and don't partake in too many brain explosions (Francois Steyn is a good candidate for one or two), the game is theirs for the taking.

And so we move onto the Bulls v Crusaders. The way the Bulls have been playing you would think they should walk into the final but if there is one team that can pull off a semifinal visit to Loftus with a win, it would be the red and blacks. Except for one thing - their lineout has been at times as dysfunctional as bowel movements after a hot curry. There is the possibility that Corey Flynn will be named the Bulls' man of the match if he has one of his off nights.

Yes, the Crusaders have been famed in the past for winning games without not too much pill but that mojo seems to have worn off if you view the evidence from the last two weeks. Therein lies the problem - they need ball, they won't get it from lineout time so they will be reliant on turnovers from breakdowns and Bulls' mistakes to get a reasonable share of possession. Rather ironic - we bang on here in NZ about how Saffer teams feed off opposition mistakes to be effective yet that is what the Crusaders will be relying on (plus McCaw at the breakdown) to have a shot in this game.

This game is in the Bulls' hands - turn up and play the way they have and they should win. But this is sport - anything can happen.

Betting-wise there's not much on offer; the Sharks and Bulls are at skinny odds at the NZ TAB while I don't think backing the NZ teams would be the smartest move in the world. Personally I think these games are a sit and watch, but if you have $10 burning a hole in your wallet the bet to me is the Bulls at the handicap - it's only 3.5 points which I think if they do turn up to play they'll cover quite easily.

Have a good weekend.

What's wrong?

Super 14 previews will be up later in the day/early evening, but on my mind at the moment is what is wrong with Roger Federer?

One of the most dominant sportspersons on the planet looked like rolling through 2007 as he did in 2006 (with the exception of a few clay finals against Nadal). Another Australian Open crown without dropping a set, and then off to the US Hardcourt swing where a couple of losses to Canas did not raise too many eyebrows.

But his overnight loss to Volandri (who?) certainly will. While Volandri is a reasonable tennis player on clay, perhaps a bit better than his ranking of 53 would suggest, the FedEx should be able to beat him with one arm.

All we need now is Nadal to pick up an injury and the European clay season will suddenly get interesting.

Oh Yeah!

Yes I know the America's Cup is a playground for rich boy's toys. Yes it is a huge waste of money. Yes there are more Kiwis on the Yank boat than the NZ one.

BUT

When the Yank media proclaim the Loius Vuitton series a one-horse race after Round 1, when I wake up this morning and find little ol' NZ gave Oracle the full 6 inches up the rear - or 94 seconds, take your pick, in the words of Frankie Stevens (NZ Idol) ....

Oh Yeah!

94 seconds is a thrashing. About the same as a 92-3 scoreline in rugby. There ain't nothing I like better than seeing Americans failing in sport when their public expect them to win (which is why I love the World Basketball Champs) - except maybe a Crusaders loss in the weekend.

Market Madness

Sorry for the lack of a post yesterday - a morning spent at the Frankin Primary Schools Orienteering Championships helping 600 kids have a morning out in the sunshine followed by some personal issues meant updating the blog was down the list of priorities.

But I've been spending most of my waking hours thinking about the next 2 weeks of the Super 14 as the betting markets are showing some of the most unusual behaviour I've seen in a very long time.

Basically many bookmakers have under-reacted to the surprise location of one of the semi-finals - that being Pretoria. Not the NZ TAB, who opened up on Monday with what I thought were reasonably sensible prices in both the winner's market and for the two semi-final games, being:

Winner's Market

Bulls $2.75
Sharks $2.75 (since amended to $2.90)
Crusaders $3.50 (since amended to $3.25)
Blues $7.50

Semi Finals

Bulls $1.60 Crusaders $2.25
Sharks $1.45 Blues $2.60 (now $1.40 - $2.80)

However a troll of the internet shows others taking a different stance - e.g. Centrebet in Australia had (past tense, a check of their prices and they seem to have disappeared) the Crusaders and Bulls joint favourite to win the competition at $2.85 while William Hill (UK) really don't rate the Bulls at $3.75.

If you do the maths, the prices in the winner's market and for the individual games are seriously out-of sync; for example on Betfair the Crusaders are $3.30 to win S14 and $2.30 to beat the Bulls. That is saying if the Crusaders win their semi-final they will be $1.43 to win the final. Oh really? Maybe if they're playing the Blues at Jade but certainly not if they're playing the Sharks at Durban. And which of those scenarios is the more likely of the two?

The discrepancies can be partly explained by some bookmakers will have some liability on the Crusaders winning the competiton, thus keeping the price short. But the puzzling thing is the bookmaker most likely to be in the shit if the Crusaders win the S14 - the NZ TAB - are the ones offering the highest price! (on both the winner's market and for the semi-final games)

To cut a long story short, there is some unbelievable value on the Bulls and Sharks to either win the S14 or win their semi-final - unfortunately for NZ readers not at the local TAB - and as these situations don't arise very often I'm like a kid in a lolly shop. Get on!!!

Weekend Wrap

So, is everyone STILL looking forward to a Blues-Crusaders Super 14 final in 2 weeks time? While I’ll grant you it may still happen, anyone who happened to catch the Bulls runs riot against the Reds yesterday morning won’t be in a rush to join the queue to bet on it. Pretoria should be renamed Pamplona after that effort.

Their unlikely march to a home semifinal (so unlikely that the Sunday Star-Times had no problem talking about a home game for the Crusaders – gotta love those newspaper deadlines) has caused a bit of an upheaval in the S14 winner’s market on Betfair – prices as of last night being:

Crusaders $3.40
Sharks $4.10
Bulls $3.00
Blues $7.40

What these prices are telling us is whoever wins the Bulls/Crusaders semi will then in all likelihood travel to Durban and be favourites for the final. Dream on. Both the Bulls and (an admittedly AB-less) Crusaders played the Sharks in Durban during the round robin and the Sharks were favourites both times. Why will it be any different for the final? I’m waiting to see with interest what the TAB will put up for the winners market and also the prices for the two semis which I’m finding hard to guess what they’ll be.

Also in the SST noticed Tiddlywinks Tana came out blasting the standard of refereeing. He has a point, and it’s something to note for next weekend – two SAF/NZ semis means two Australian referees (who have been the worst of the lot) – so Stuart Dickinson and A.N.Other will have the chance to potentially fuck up two rather important games. Christ, I’d think I’d prefer a Saffer ref from 1976 than the clowns we’re going to get.

Enough about the rugby – back on Friday for previews. I won’t mention the Warriors (damn, I just did) – suffice to say such form turnarounds make NRL more frustrating than S14 for betting, which is why I avoid it like the plague.

However the highlight of the sporting weekend has to be watching my stepdaughter sink 11 goals from 13 attempts. She’s only just starting her second year of netball, but Irene Van Dyk better watch out!

Oh, and my Orienteering friends will be interested to know I suffered a physical exertion injury. A sprained foot on Saturday night kicking my stepson up the arse had me on the couch with an icepack on – brought back some fond memories of the distant past.

Have a good week everybody.

Super 14 Week 14

The final round sees some juicy match-ups with semifinal implications, none more so than the games tonight ...

CRUSADERS ($1.29) v CHIEFS ($4.60) (NZTAB $1.20 - $4.20)

Forget the Chiefs' insipid display last week. Rewind back to their first-half performances against the Blues and Sharks to get a taste of what you'll see - a titanic forward battle full of bone-crunching hits that'll keep the blood-thirsty happy.

I love it when the media start mentioning records - so the Crusaders haven't lost at Jade Stadium for 26 matches. Good - they're due for one then :-). Yes, my water is telling me the Chiefs have a good sniff of an upset here - certainly they are overpriced but perhaps the best bet is backing them with the points start. The line is at 10.5; same as Crusaders/Hurricanes which the Canes covered by half a point and given the Chiefs haven't lost by more than 7 points all year I feel it's a comfortable bet if you can get close to evens (which you can't at the TAB - it's $1.87). Factor in there may be dew around after a fine day down in ChCh and the Chiefs +10.5 will do me. I may even have a nibble at the match odds.

If, unlike me, you're more bullish about the Crusaders chances, the $2.70 for winning by 12 and under ($2.96 on Betfair) seems a helluva lot more playable than the skinny match odds.

FORCE ($2.52) v BLUES ($1.66) (NZTAB $2.25 - $1.60)

Of the 84 matches so far, 20 have involved the home team starting as the underdog. They've won 8 of them, which is less than 50%, but at average odds of $3.40. If you look at underdog teams starting at odds of $2-$3, they're 5 out of 10.

While the sample size is too small to draw conclusions, it does possibly suggest the bookmakers overvalue the ability of a better away team to get past a (slightly?) inferior home team. So in this case, especially given the way the Blues have been travelling, I wouldn't touch $1.66 for the Blues with a barge pole. So it becomes a question of whether to back the Force and that is today's job for the subconcious (i.e. I haven't decided yet). The handicap is 4.5 and unplayable.

HIGHLANDERS ($2.56) v BRUMBIES ($1.68) (NZTAB $2.35 - $1.55)

I'm waiting for the results of the previous two games before doing anything here - the Brumbies need both the Chiefs and Blues to lose to have any hope of making the semis. If one of them win, they're pretty much gone and if it turns out to be a meaningless game I'd expect the Highlanders to be far more interested as they farewell Anton and Carl.

Even without considering the scenarios, it's another case where the home team doesn't deserve to be a $2.50 underdog and as I've stated before I always think the Highlanders are overpriced by the bookmakers. I'd price this game close to evens, so even the $2.35 at the TAB I'd take.

HURRICANES ($1.35) v WARATAHS ($4.10) (NZTAB $1.30 - $3.30)

Another farewell party and a game that holds no interest, although I guess if the Tahs look back to last year they might turn up motivated. I'm staying out of it.

LIONS ($1.82) v CHEETAHS ($2.22) (NZTAB $1.65 - $2.15)
STORMERS ($3.40) v SHARKS ($1.46) (NZTAB $2.60 - $1.45)
BULLS ($1.06) v REDS ($14.50) (NZTAB $1.03 - $10)

The three games in South Africa hold little appeal from a betting point of view (also from a staying up all night and watching point of view) - the prices aren't too much different from what I'd have so I'll pass on all three.

Killed by Cowboys

Anyone who has watched poker on TV might be excused for thinking it's a reasonably entertaining thing to do; but of course heavily-edited TV shows cannot portray the hours of complete boredom punctuated by five minutes of chaos that tournament poker usually is.

And it ran true to form (for me, at least) last night on my first trip to the casino for a while; certainly the first tournament I've played up there since Labour Weekend. So after 3 hours of fold, fold, fold (actually I think I did play 2 pots - yes the deck was cold), I wake up with pocket Kings ("cowboys") and first to act.

Now it was at a time when people would be starting to get desperate - there were still 20 left out of 35 starters but a lot of them, like me, hadn't made much progress and it was time to move or die. So I did the sneaky thing - limp in for the minimum bet (200 chips).

HA! It worked! "Doc", an Asian guy who usually cleans up at the cash tables and had amassed a big stack in this tournament, raised up to 800 chips and I have my victim. But then fuck me, another wants to come to the party and reraises to 2000 chips.

Hell I've only got 3000. Immediately my gut screamed to me, the dude's got aces, lay it down. But then I did a stupid thing - I thought about it. We all know Doc's been playing a lot of pots and this guy could be trying to isolate him and swat me (a shortish stack) out of the way like an annoying fly. Yeah I thought, he doesn't HAVE to have aces, he could have AK, even QQ or JJ.

So yeah baby, I'm all in. I shove my 3000 into the middle and good, I get a call from Doc. But then the other guy pushes allin over the top of him and he does have a decent stack - 7000 or so, so my gut kicks me in the arse for being a dumb mo'fo as it now really looks like I'm up against the dreaded bullets.

While Doc takes an eternity to decide to call, me and the other dude stand up and I ask him what he's got. No prizes for the answer. In the end, Doc calls and turns over QQ (!) and I wish this story had a happy ending but it doesn't - with AA v KK v QQ, the board fails to produce anything above a 10 and I'm out.

Just like in real life, bullets take out cowboys but I honestly did for a brief second think about folding them. I guess that's what separates good poker players from mediocre ones like me - the ability to lay down really good hands when you think you're beat.

Punt.Com

One of the links I've added to the left is Punt.Com , a gambling blog by Matt who makes his living in the main trading tennis games on Betfair. Tennis is probably the most mature market for in-play betting; a sport to avoid unless you know what you're doing (why I might explain another time). Most gambling blogs I've come across are of the "what I did and how much I made/lost" variety, which after a while gets a bit boring - and something I try to avoid doing here (I might explain what I did, usually for humour value when I've cocked something up - but how much I made/lost? Forget it, none of your damn business!)

However, Matt's blog is different and talks often about the psychology of gambling from a professional's point of view - something that resonates here as his thoughts echo what goes on between my ears from time to time.

Despite being around professional gamblers for 10 years, I've probably learned more in the last 6 months than the previous 10 years - partly because I'm in a different environment (sports as opposed to horse racing), but mainly because earning a living from betting is a universe apart from doing it for fun, and a lot of the difference resides in the head.

So if you have half an interest in professional gambling, Matt's blog is worth a look - check out the Gambling Psychology and Professional Gambling categories. Hopefully he'll continue it long-term.

OK OK

- I've got rid of the poo brown and pink (I'm just bored with black - not good when I'm in a shit of a mood)
- LB you know you're more than welcome to rip off anything from here at any time
- Good to hear from you Ray; I'm making enough to keep the wolves from the door :-)

How Low Can It Go?

Although the Rugby World Cup is still 4 months away, there has been tremendous activity on the winner's market at Betfair where the general consensus is some large punter has been dripfeeding a monstrous bet on the All Blacks to win. Already over 2 million quid has been matched, although this is a slightly misleading figure - pulling up the amount bet on the ABs you see about 900,000 pounds has been wagered on NZ to win at prices ranging from 1.39 to 1.43.

Exactly who has been doing this is of course a mystery, although one candidate is larger than life UK punter Harry Findlay who has already publicly advised to mortgage your house and put it on the All Blacks. The interesting point about these bets is they were been placed around the 1.40 mark at a time where most bookmakers still had NZ to win RWC at around 1.50. It's not often that a price on Betfair is shorter than what is freely available at bookmakers, but understandable if a large punter is wanting to get set as bookmakers get nervous accepting a 900 pound bet, let alone a six figure one. Recently the bookmakers have fallen into line, most now offer NZ at 1.40 (including the NZ TAB).

While there is no argument that the All Blacks deserve to be warm favourites to win the William Webb Ellis trophy, the question on most people's lips is what will happen to their price between now and September? There have been many people, myself included, getting involved in the winner's market as NZ's price has freefalled from 2.25 when the market opened to it's current level of 1.40.

The logic goes like this - 1.40 to win RWC represents an average price of about 1.12 to win the quarter, semi and final, with the group thrown in for free. While NZ does have an easy group and will be unbackable to qualify from it, on current form they will probably face Ireland, Australia and one of France/South Africa in the knockout stages. Will they really be an average of 1.12 to win these matches?

To cut a long post short, 1.40 represents IMHO incredibly poor value and there are some of us who are quite happy to provide such a price at this stage. There is not much downside (surely the price cannot go much lower) and a Tri Nations loss or an injury to Dan Carter or Richie McCaw will probably see the ABs on the drift. But not as much as people think - with the large amount already wagered, there will be a long queue wanting to back the ABs on any price drift.

Finally some advice to anyone wanting to back NZ to win RWC - WAIT! There is a high probability you will be able to get a better price sometime between now and September; anyone taking 1.40 four months out needs serious help.

Betfair Prices to win RWC at 1 May 2007:

New Zealand 1.40
South Africa 13.0
France 13.5
Australia 19
Ireland 21
England 38
Wales 95
Argentina 110
Scotland and Italy 550
All Others 1000

Facelift

A week off means I've got time to piss around and do odd jobs - one of them was to give this site a fresh coat of paint and update it a bit. Amazingly I still get new visitors so there's an updated welcome and other tinkering.

Welcome

Welcome to my blog. Here you’ll find a little bit about me, why I have a blog and other assorted crap.

My name is Rob Crawford, married with two stepchildren and as from 1 April 2007 officially earning a living through sports betting and trading. Prior to 2007, I had worked for 7 years providing ratings to a syndicate betting on Hong Kong horse racing. During that time I became aware of betting exchanges and Betfair, and over the last few years have had a bit of fun sports betting in my spare time.

Fun has now become an income and while I’m not the world’s (or NZ’s) biggest sports better I gamble enough and win often enough to be able to put food on the table and have a roof over my head. I both bet in the conventional sense, and “trade” (betting exchanges allow you – if you don’t live in Australia! - to place bets during a sporting event right up to its conclusion, allowing you to take advantage of fluctuating prices much like a short-term stock trader does), with my main choice of poison being cricket, and I also dabble in rugby union and tennis.

So that gives you a rough idea of how I spend my waking hours. It involves countless hours in front of a computer screen on the internet and with the TV boring the rest of the household with some sports event on. A solitary existence in many respects (but working for yourself from home lying on the couch has its advantages) which introduces some of the reasons for having this blog.

It’s really a pathetic attempt to somehow communicate with the rest of the world. Actually it’s a place where I can put up my thoughts on whatever I choose, although obviously its sport and betting dominated. But not always. When something pisses me off there is some therapeutic value in banging away on the keyboard. It’s better than kicking the cat.

So have a look around, and read some of the archives. If you’re offended by strong language, piss off because there is a bit. Some of the categories might need a bit of explaining – in a former life I used to be fit and quite good at a sport called Orienteering, so sometimes it gets a mention on here and my current spare-time activity is getting better at Poker. And my favourite subject to rant off at is SPARC – short for Sport and Recreation New Zealand who is supposed to be providing leadership for sport in NZ, and in my humble opinion are not doing a very good job. Having spent close to 7 years as President of the NZ Orienteering Federation, I believe I’m allowed to publicly air my concerns about the direction they’re taking NZ sport, even if it is not of much interest to my 4 regular readers.

So I hope you enjoy, and come back and visit. I generally post most days Monday to Friday, except during busy times for me (like the recent Cricket World Cup). If you’re here for betting tips, I generally provide my thoughts on cricket and rugby union prior to contests, although sometimes for obvious reasons I may choose not to do so. And if you’re stupid enough to bet on another person’s opinion, don’t blame me if you lose your shirt.

Finally if I have one wish for this blog, it’s for people to start leaving comments. As I said, it’s one avenue for me to ensure I don’t become a social outcast so please drop me a line from time to time, even abusive ones are welcomed (as I can talk trash with the best of them) - I will generally reply depending on workload.

Ciao for now.

P.S. Oh yeah, linking policy. I don’t have one. If you think this blog is worth the bandwidth it wastes, feel free to link to it, but don’t ask for one in return. The links I have are sites I use, read and/or admire and I’m not into exchanging links just for the hell of it.