Since we have a slow board here in the run-up to another great round of footy, I am curious to see if anyone has ever played or multi'ed a 1.01 wager?
I haven't, but I am sure some of you have!
You would think it wasn't worth the risk to
take $1.01 anything in a sporting contest. Some TAB Sportsbet customers
are having a picnic in laying it on during the week.
In a Rugby Union International last week a
customer placed a total of $250,000 on the Springboks to win $2500 while
another risked $130,000 to win $1300 on Roger Federer in his 2nd round
match at Wimbledon.
Smiles all round for the customers after
both were successful and a nice dinner and bottle of wine were probably on
the agenda coutesy of TAB Sportsbet.
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
Since we have a slow board here in the run-up to another great round of footy, I am curious to see if anyone has ever played or multi'ed a 1.01 wager?
I haven't, but I am sure some of you have!
You would think it wasn't worth the risk to
take $1.01 anything in a sporting contest. Some TAB Sportsbet customers
are having a picnic in laying it on during the week.
In a Rugby Union International last week a
customer placed a total of $250,000 on the Springboks to win $2500 while
another risked $130,000 to win $1300 on Roger Federer in his 2nd round
match at Wimbledon.
Smiles all round for the customers after
both were successful and a nice dinner and bottle of wine were probably on
the agenda coutesy of TAB Sportsbet.
I think if you have $250,000 to throw on the Boks to beat Italy, $2500 is like pocket change to you. Smiles all around? Yeah, maybe....but it's not like that person is going to get all excited for it!
Who knows....people have to get their thrills somehow.
0
I think if you have $250,000 to throw on the Boks to beat Italy, $2500 is like pocket change to you. Smiles all around? Yeah, maybe....but it's not like that person is going to get all excited for it!
Who knows....people have to get their thrills somehow.
Risking 250,000 to win 2500. You got to win 100 for every 1 you lose to break even. Over time, the spread gap will eventually overtake and kill you........THAT is a stone cold lock guarantee.
-110 spreads are rough enough with the 20 cent gap. It's just not mathematically sound to give up huge gaps........hell, it's even stupid to give up 20 cent gaps, but that is the "entry fee" into the arena.
Best way to make money gambling, especially if you like to fade the public..............BOOK.
Risking 250,000 to win 2500. You got to win 100 for every 1 you lose to break even. Over time, the spread gap will eventually overtake and kill you........THAT is a stone cold lock guarantee.
-110 spreads are rough enough with the 20 cent gap. It's just not mathematically sound to give up huge gaps........hell, it's even stupid to give up 20 cent gaps, but that is the "entry fee" into the arena.
Best way to make money gambling, especially if you like to fade the public..............BOOK.
Risking 250,000 to win 2500. You got to win 100 for every 1 you lose to break even. Over time, the spread gap will eventually overtake and kill you........THAT is a stone cold lock guarantee.
-110 spreads are rough enough with the 20 cent gap. It's just not mathematically sound to give up huge gaps........hell, it's even stupid to give up 20 cent gaps, but that is the "entry fee" into the arena.
Best way to make money gambling, especially if you like to fade the public..............BOOK.
Well, on the 1.01 bets, you are just hoping that the one game you are wagering on is not the one game where the miracle occurs and the huge upset takes place.
Sort of like betting that in a can of 100 straws, where 99 are winners, you don't get the one loser.
Risking 250,000 to win 2500. You got to win 100 for every 1 you lose to break even. Over time, the spread gap will eventually overtake and kill you........THAT is a stone cold lock guarantee.
-110 spreads are rough enough with the 20 cent gap. It's just not mathematically sound to give up huge gaps........hell, it's even stupid to give up 20 cent gaps, but that is the "entry fee" into the arena.
Best way to make money gambling, especially if you like to fade the public..............BOOK.
Well, on the 1.01 bets, you are just hoping that the one game you are wagering on is not the one game where the miracle occurs and the huge upset takes place.
Sort of like betting that in a can of 100 straws, where 99 are winners, you don't get the one loser.
Yep, and the odds of drawing that loser straw are much better than not drawing it when you look at the prices.
Some love dog moneylines, but in the world of math, you're pretty much getting ripped off by the book any time you give up more than a 20 cent gap.
A +300 ML with a -340 comeback for the house is robbery. A goddamn 40 cent gap.
Show me a +1500 ML with a -1520 comeback, and then it can be "sort of" justified.
Another thing, while we're on the subject of this stuff........
Parlays-
A two teamer pays +300, at most. Rubbish. Take 1 unit and roll it all the way two times in a row, and you get more than +300. The gambler is paying the f---ing book to place a bet for him/her.
So basically, anything more than -110 (20 cent aggregate gap), and the book is killing you.
Yeah, Head, you're right. "Smartest" thing to do if betting that 1.01 is do it once, pray like there's no tomorrow that you win, and then if you are lucky enough to win, NEVER do it again. Let's face it, the house is begging the gambler to take on that risk.......on their knees BEGGING.
0
Yep, and the odds of drawing that loser straw are much better than not drawing it when you look at the prices.
Some love dog moneylines, but in the world of math, you're pretty much getting ripped off by the book any time you give up more than a 20 cent gap.
A +300 ML with a -340 comeback for the house is robbery. A goddamn 40 cent gap.
Show me a +1500 ML with a -1520 comeback, and then it can be "sort of" justified.
Another thing, while we're on the subject of this stuff........
Parlays-
A two teamer pays +300, at most. Rubbish. Take 1 unit and roll it all the way two times in a row, and you get more than +300. The gambler is paying the f---ing book to place a bet for him/her.
So basically, anything more than -110 (20 cent aggregate gap), and the book is killing you.
Yeah, Head, you're right. "Smartest" thing to do if betting that 1.01 is do it once, pray like there's no tomorrow that you win, and then if you are lucky enough to win, NEVER do it again. Let's face it, the house is begging the gambler to take on that risk.......on their knees BEGGING.
BTW, Demons getting 31.5 at MCG this afternoon vs Lions.
I'm big on Brisbane ML.
Need some excitement (hopefully the dull, boring, big Brisbane lead from start to finish kind of excitement) and wasn't too thrilled by any of the lines this round.
0
Quote Originally Posted by claycourtlesson:
BTW, Demons getting 31.5 at MCG this afternoon vs Lions.
I'm big on Brisbane ML.
Need some excitement (hopefully the dull, boring, big Brisbane lead from start to finish kind of excitement) and wasn't too thrilled by any of the lines this round.
Yep, and the odds of drawing that loser straw are much better than not drawing it when you look at the prices.
Some love dog moneylines, but in the world of math, you're pretty much getting ripped off by the book any time you give up more than a 20 cent gap.
A +300 ML with a -340 comeback for the house is robbery. A goddamn 40 cent gap.
Show me a +1500 ML with a -1520 comeback, and then it can be "sort of" justified.
Another thing, while we're on the subject of this stuff........
Parlays-
A two teamer pays +300, at most. Rubbish. Take 1 unit and roll it all the way two times in a row, and you get more than +300. The gambler is paying the f---ing book to place a bet for him/her.
So basically, anything more than -110 (20 cent aggregate gap), and the book is killing you.
Yeah, Head, you're right. "Smartest" thing to do if betting that 1.01 is do it once, pray like there's no tomorrow that you win, and then if you are lucky enough to win, NEVER do it again. Let's face it, the house is begging the gambler to take on that risk.......on their knees BEGGING.
In this case, you only get +300 or whatever because your initial stake is lower. If you roll your first winning game into the second bet, your also rolling your winnings into there as well, increasing your risk. Although the additional risk is the house's money....or was before you bet it anyway.
0
Quote Originally Posted by claycourtlesson:
Yep, and the odds of drawing that loser straw are much better than not drawing it when you look at the prices.
Some love dog moneylines, but in the world of math, you're pretty much getting ripped off by the book any time you give up more than a 20 cent gap.
A +300 ML with a -340 comeback for the house is robbery. A goddamn 40 cent gap.
Show me a +1500 ML with a -1520 comeback, and then it can be "sort of" justified.
Another thing, while we're on the subject of this stuff........
Parlays-
A two teamer pays +300, at most. Rubbish. Take 1 unit and roll it all the way two times in a row, and you get more than +300. The gambler is paying the f---ing book to place a bet for him/her.
So basically, anything more than -110 (20 cent aggregate gap), and the book is killing you.
Yeah, Head, you're right. "Smartest" thing to do if betting that 1.01 is do it once, pray like there's no tomorrow that you win, and then if you are lucky enough to win, NEVER do it again. Let's face it, the house is begging the gambler to take on that risk.......on their knees BEGGING.
In this case, you only get +300 or whatever because your initial stake is lower. If you roll your first winning game into the second bet, your also rolling your winnings into there as well, increasing your risk. Although the additional risk is the house's money....or was before you bet it anyway.
Yeah, Head, but that is what a parlay is.......you got to hit both, so essentially, the risk is the same, but the payout isn't.
Look it..........
Let's say you got a 2 teamer, both at -110, risking 110 rocks, and the "parlay" pays 3 to 1 (some crooks only pay +280/3.80) on your stake. After hitting bet 1, you now have 210. You roll 210 into bet 2, win, and now have 400.91, which is MORE THAN 330.00, which is what you got on the parlay.
Parlay risk was 110, and the rollover risk was 110.
Books are crooks.
0
Yeah, Head, but that is what a parlay is.......you got to hit both, so essentially, the risk is the same, but the payout isn't.
Look it..........
Let's say you got a 2 teamer, both at -110, risking 110 rocks, and the "parlay" pays 3 to 1 (some crooks only pay +280/3.80) on your stake. After hitting bet 1, you now have 210. You roll 210 into bet 2, win, and now have 400.91, which is MORE THAN 330.00, which is what you got on the parlay.
Parlay risk was 110, and the rollover risk was 110.
Demons are just putrid. Have viewed 15 minutes of this match since end of Q1 and already "know" my Demons +31.5 is dead.........and the f---ing Demons are up by 8 right now!!!!!!!!
0
Chalky, but you're gold with Lions' ML.
Demons are just putrid. Have viewed 15 minutes of this match since end of Q1 and already "know" my Demons +31.5 is dead.........and the f---ing Demons are up by 8 right now!!!!!!!!
Demons are just putrid. Have viewed 15 minutes of this match since end of Q1 and already "know" my Demons +31.5 is dead.........and the f---ing Demons are up by 8 right now!!!!!!!!
Hey mate, if it makes you feel any better, gun to my head, I would have taken the Demons with the points. The Swans only beat them by 40, which was really 34, as the Swans goaled at the final siren.
Let's just hope for a happy middle for us.
A lot of people on the Brisbane line though so farque it will be hrd to make everyone happy.
0
Quote Originally Posted by claycourtlesson:
Chalky, but you're gold with Lions' ML.
Demons are just putrid. Have viewed 15 minutes of this match since end of Q1 and already "know" my Demons +31.5 is dead.........and the f---ing Demons are up by 8 right now!!!!!!!!
Hey mate, if it makes you feel any better, gun to my head, I would have taken the Demons with the points. The Swans only beat them by 40, which was really 34, as the Swans goaled at the final siren.
Let's just hope for a happy middle for us.
A lot of people on the Brisbane line though so farque it will be hrd to make everyone happy.
Feel bad for you that Brissy didn't come in on ML. I stopped watching at HT cause I was getting too pissed off. Dees are horrible. Must've been fixed for them to win yesterday. Worst outfit around.
0
Head-
Yep, tried to jinx it the other way. You got me.
Feel bad for you that Brissy didn't come in on ML. I stopped watching at HT cause I was getting too pissed off. Dees are horrible. Must've been fixed for them to win yesterday. Worst outfit around.
Feel bad for you that Brissy didn't come in on ML. I stopped watching at HT cause I was getting too pissed off. Dees are horrible. Must've been fixed for them to win yesterday. Worst outfit around.
Well, I was going to take the +31.5, as I said if the Swans only beat them by 34 (40 with goal on the siren), how in the world is Brisbane going to beat them by 32+ at the MCG?
However, I couldn't possibly put my money on the Dees. Even if they were the right play. So, I went money line on Brisbane, figuring a 20-point Brisbane win.
Got moosed hard, especially being up 11 at the end. When I saw it was 11 at the end, I just knew I would lose by one as it sets up the perfect moose. Add in the two 50m frees for the interchange boffo and Brisbane doctor running over the mark, each gave Melbourne one point. And then the behind by Bradshaw in the 3rd, which was a clear point, was rules out on he full by the goal judge? WTF?!
Your only job is to watch where the ball goes and you can't even do that properly!
That cost me right there. Count Bradshaw's rightful one-pointer and it's a draw at worst.
Hardcore moose at its finest.
0
Quote Originally Posted by claycourtlesson:
Head-
Yep, tried to jinx it the other way. You got me.
Feel bad for you that Brissy didn't come in on ML. I stopped watching at HT cause I was getting too pissed off. Dees are horrible. Must've been fixed for them to win yesterday. Worst outfit around.
Well, I was going to take the +31.5, as I said if the Swans only beat them by 34 (40 with goal on the siren), how in the world is Brisbane going to beat them by 32+ at the MCG?
However, I couldn't possibly put my money on the Dees. Even if they were the right play. So, I went money line on Brisbane, figuring a 20-point Brisbane win.
Got moosed hard, especially being up 11 at the end. When I saw it was 11 at the end, I just knew I would lose by one as it sets up the perfect moose. Add in the two 50m frees for the interchange boffo and Brisbane doctor running over the mark, each gave Melbourne one point. And then the behind by Bradshaw in the 3rd, which was a clear point, was rules out on he full by the goal judge? WTF?!
Your only job is to watch where the ball goes and you can't even do that properly!
That cost me right there. Count Bradshaw's rightful one-pointer and it's a draw at worst.
Been good had the Lions won......like they should have.
Dees are hideous. I don't care what their spread is the week after the upcoming bye..........will NEVER bet them until I see something different in their level of play.
0
Yeah, man, you took it hard, for sure.
Been good had the Lions won......like they should have.
Dees are hideous. I don't care what their spread is the week after the upcoming bye..........will NEVER bet them until I see something different in their level of play.
$10,000 on Wallabies to beat up France tonight at $1.06. Better than interest
Gun-
You might want to not ever do this again. You know as well as I that a test match like that could easily be fixed......it means nothing-----it ain't 3N.
Laying ML chalk like that is sheer lunacy.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Gun7:
$10,000 on Wallabies to beat up France tonight at $1.06. Better than interest
Gun-
You might want to not ever do this again. You know as well as I that a test match like that could easily be fixed......it means nothing-----it ain't 3N.
Yeh, not necessarily the best investment strategy but I find it hard to believe that there is much fixing going on involving the ARU or players representing Australia - having grown up around the organisation my whole life, I just don't think it is that sophisticated. Anyway, Wallabies win 40-10.
0
Yeh, not necessarily the best investment strategy but I find it hard to believe that there is much fixing going on involving the ARU or players representing Australia - having grown up around the organisation my whole life, I just don't think it is that sophisticated. Anyway, Wallabies win 40-10.
Hot Forum Topics
