BoxRec

Riddick Blowe wrote:tell me about it. I don't understand one bit how the odds affect laying.

You just win the backer's stake!!!! WHY LAY AT ALL IF YOU CAN'T GET BETTER ODDS?????? And AT THE SAME TIME the fecking site tells you that the return is at the odds YOU SET!

Somebody PLEASE clear this up for me.

Is best to lay when odds are low eg 3 or under therefore loss wont be so bad. Test Cricket is best to lay the draw.....i know absolutly nothing about cricket but done very well on this. All depends on the weather with cricket though.

Lay Tarver......you know it make's sense

right, in the little box for odds 1.63 TARVER LAY there is £1354.

Does this mean that a punter wants me to back Tarver at odds of 1.63 (great odds) and stake £1354?????

If so, this person would have to pay me 1354 X 1.63 if he loses? If this is true, he must be pretty confident in Jones pulling it off. This is so tempting but now I know the limitations, if you want those odds you have to stake the full price. There is £567 on 1.64 incidentally, this may interest me more...

Riddick Blowe wrote:right, in the little box for odds 1.63 TARVER LAY there is £1354.

Does this mean that a punter wants me to back Tarver at odds of 1.63 (great odds) and stake £1354?????

If so, this person would have to pay me 1354 X 1.63 if he loses? If this is true, he must be pretty confident in Jones pulling it off. This is so tempting but now I know the limitations, if you want those odds you have to stake the full price. There is £567 on 1.64 incidentally, this may interest me more...

NO That is the amount of money which is available at that price.....you will see the different amounts under each of the odds. That is how much money is on the market at those odds

I have just stuck £100 on Tarver at BEtfair.

Odds were 1.57.

IE I get back 157 quid including stake if I win.

Riddick Blowe wrote:right, in the little box for odds 1.63 TARVER LAY there is £1354.

Does this mean that a punter wants me to back Tarver at odds of 1.63 (great odds) and stake £1354?????

If so, this person would have to pay me 1354 X 1.63 if he loses? If this is true, he must be pretty confident in Jones pulling it off. This is so tempting but now I know the limitations, if you want those odds you have to stake the full price. There is £567 on 1.64 incidentally, this may interest me more...

To echo exile NO I'm pretty sure now that 'Tarver Lay at 1.63' (£1365) means that someone wants to bet £1354 at odds of 1.63 that Tarver will win. By laying that, you would be taking the bet - acting as the bookies. So you'd have to pay him whatever £1365 x 1.63 is. If Tarver wins, you get the guy's £1365

jomothepure wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:right, in the little box for odds 1.63 TARVER LAY there is £1354.

Does this mean that a punter wants me to back Tarver at odds of 1.63 (great odds) and stake £1354?????

If so, this person would have to pay me 1354 X 1.63 if he loses? If this is true, he must be pretty confident in Jones pulling it off. This is so tempting but now I know the limitations, if you want those odds you have to stake the full price. There is £567 on 1.64 incidentally, this may interest me more...

To echo exile NO I'm pretty sure now that 'Tarver Lay at 1.63' (£1365) means that someone wants to bet £1354 at odds of 1.63 that Tarver will win. By laying that, you would be taking the bet - acting as the bookies. So you'd have to pay him whatever £1365 x 1.63 is. If Tarver wins, you get the guy's £1365

Yes but you can still bet anything you want under the amount that is on the market at those odds. The amount under the odds is how much money is on the market-could be hundreds of people who have put money at those odds

So say the Tarver lay was 1.5, and say there's £1000 to be backed at that price, you wouldn't have to accomodate that much eg. you could and would only have to lay £200 worth if you had £300? Is that what your saying?

jomothepure wrote:So say the Tarver lay was 1.5, and say there's £1000 to be backed at that price, you wouldn't have to accomodate that much eg. you could and would only have to lay £200 worth if you had £300? Is that what your saying?

Exactly....you can bet under the amount but not over

i think i'll just stick to backing tarver...and on early rounds

right gang- this may sound really weird but if I ring up willhill would they give me last minute odds on a NC? I need to hedge my bets against what would be an unbearable concept...

EDIT: Right, i've gone for just round bets

Tarver rd 1 £30 at 20/1
rd 2 £35 at 16/1
rd 3 £30 at 14/1
rds 4 and 5 £8 each at 14/1 (Hedge)

I was tempted to empty the rest of my online account on tarver but i figured this is less risk and more return.

Riddick Blowe wrote:right gang- this may sound really weird but if I ring up willhill would they give me last minute odds on a NC? I need to hedge my bets against what would be an unbearable concept...

EDIT: Right, i've gone for just round bets

Tarver rd 1 £30 at 20/1
rd 2 £35 at 16/1
rd 3 £30 at 14/1
rds 4 and 5 £8 each at 14/1 (Hedge)

I was tempted to empty the rest of my online account on tarver but i figured this is less risk and more return.

Good luck to you old bean. I'm going to hold it out until today's football is over - one or two absolute ricks which I'm going to punish the bookies mightily for

I'm getting nervous like you though - What odds for a TD in the 3rd after an accidental clash of heads

Edit comes in here - just had a look at what the Racing Post was saying - the guys siding with Jones more due to what he thinks is long odds at 2/1. Anyway the main point is - for the fight to go the full 12 rds (ok, probably won't happen) but for it to do so, it's a general 33/1 to side with Tarver and 50/1 with Jones. Is that not massive even taking all things considered?

jomothepure wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:right gang- this may sound really weird but if I ring up willhill would they give me last minute odds on a NC? I need to hedge my bets against what would be an unbearable concept...

EDIT: Right, i've gone for just round bets

Tarver rd 1 £30 at 20/1
rd 2 £35 at 16/1
rd 3 £30 at 14/1
rds 4 and 5 £8 each at 14/1 (Hedge)

I was tempted to empty the rest of my online account on tarver but i figured this is less risk and more return.

Good luck to you old bean. I'm going to hold it out until today's football is over - one or two absolute ricks which I'm going to punish the bookies mightily for

I'm getting nervous like you though - What odds for a TD in the 3rd after an accidental clash of heads

Edit comes in here - just had a look at what the Racing Post was saying - the guys siding with Jones more due to what he thinks is long odds at 2/1. Anyway the main point is - for the fight to go the full 12 rds (ok, probably won't happen) but for it to do so, it's a general 33/1 to side with Tarver and 50/1 with Jones. Is that not massive even taking all things considered?

Well, it's worth a couple of quid I suppose. Literally, £2.

Good luck to you too let me know what your final betting plan is.

I noticed the odds coming in on Tarver too - I find it hard to beleive Jones will win. As great as RJJ is, the fact is I am very, very reluctant to back a fighter to beat an opponent who has (relatively) recently stopped him.

On a completely different note with this Betfair backing and laying stuff, exchanges are, imo, the way of the future for betting, and there are some pretty interesting tactics that can be applied to this.

For example, when watching live footy easy money can be made if you back a team to win and then lay this team as soon as they take the lead and the odds on them to win shorten. You can then make a guaranteed profit regardless of whether they win or lose. This worked nicely for me during the Spurs-Fulham game last Monday, but when Boro disgraced themselves last weekend I lost because I assumed we'd win.

I'm not sure I'd lay someone or a team I think will win because there could be too much liability. In footy I'd rather simply back a win and a draw rather than laying to reduce my liability. Anyway, a good book about this sort of thing is by Iain Fletcher - Game, Set and Matched I think it's called.

PS Nice to see another Boro fan on Boxrec Ian!!

If I was to ask for odds of 5. on Betfair, on Roy Jones to win and I put a £20 stake, do you think someone will accept it?

I'm new to Betfair

Well I've ended up with a mottly collection of bets

Tarver any time £200 @1/2 Willie Hills
Tarver 4th £10 @ 18/1 bet365
Tarver 6th £10 @ 18/1 bet365

I then found bet365 offering evens that Tarver wins by KO, TKO or DQ at any time, so I did £75 on that

Remaining £2.11 in the bet365 account went on the draw at 2/1. So there we go. Best outcome would be Tarver win in the 4th or 6th, which would give me £640 I think. Which isn't that good really considering a £300 outlay overall

Oh well, considering my last boxing bets have been on Golota vs Byrd and Eastman vs Hopkins it can't really get much worse.





It can?

I'll have my fingers crossed for you in the 4th then.

Although I keep getting an image of Roy Jones winning TKO 11

I hope I'm wrong for your sake, as I'm not betting tonight.

Good luck and enjoy the fight!

dandantheweatherman wrote:I noticed the odds coming in on Tarver too - I find it hard to beleive Jones will win. As great as RJJ is, the fact is I am very, very reluctant to back a fighter to beat an opponent who has (relatively) recently stopped him.

On a completely different note with this Betfair backing and laying stuff, exchanges are, imo, the way of the future for betting, and there are some pretty interesting tactics that can be applied to this.

For example, when watching live footy easy money can be made if you back a team to win and then lay this team as soon as they take the lead and the odds on them to win shorten. You can then make a guaranteed profit regardless of whether they win or lose. This worked nicely for me during the Spurs-Fulham game last Monday, but when Boro disgraced themselves last weekend I lost because I assumed we'd win.

I'm not sure I'd lay someone or a team I think will win because there could be too much liability. In footy I'd rather simply back a win and a draw rather than laying to reduce my liability. Anyway, a good book about this sort of thing is by Iain Fletcher - Game, Set and Matched I think it's called.

PS Nice to see another Boro fan on Boxrec Ian!!

So the principle is: (I'll do an example with tennis as there's no draw involved therefore less chance of my small and fragile brain imploding)

Federer v Murray tomorrow.

Federer is currently 1/20 best price. Murray say 10/1. You would then wait, and assuming Federer wins the first set or whatever, you lay him off at 1/40. If he wins, say you backed him at £200, you make £10. You then layed him (eh, unfortunate phrase alert) for £200, losing £5. So you make a fiver, which only = 1/80 considering you had to use £400 in total, but it is guaranteed assuming you get the 1/40 (or even shorter) to lay off.

(I do apologise, I'm doing nothing more than think aloud here, and even worse I'm only half way through, so do please go for a slash or make a coffee. When you come back I'll have finished and you can click back to the British forum.)

If, on the other hand, you put £200 on Federer at 1/20, and then he starts losing to Murray, then what? If you lay him off at 1/10, then if he wins you'd lose £10? The only up side to that would be that if he's a set down he will (for arguments sake) go on to lose, so you'd recoup the £200 that you layed off?

jomothepure wrote:Well I've ended up with a mottly collection of bets

Tarver any time £200 @1/2 Willie Hills
Tarver 4th £10 @ 18/1 bet365
Tarver 6th £10 @ 18/1 bet365

I then found bet365 offering evens that Tarver wins by KO, TKO or DQ at any time, so I did £75 on that

Remaining £2.11 in the bet365 account went on the draw at 2/1. So there we go. Best outcome would be Tarver win in the 4th or 6th, which would give me £640 I think. Which isn't that good really considering a £300 outlay overall

Oh well, considering my last boxing bets have been on Golota vs Byrd and Eastman vs Hopkins it can't really get much worse.





It can?

I've gone for the £200 at 1/2 with WHILL as well. I just can't see Jones winning by stoppage or points

I feel it will be a night for the underdogs
I have gone with Roy £100 @ 3 and Williamson to beat Byrd £100 @ 4.1

I put all of my willhill balance on Roy to win round 11 at 50/1


Only had £2.68 left in there

I just signed up for that PlayBetFair at playbetfair.com

You get $1000 of play money to start with and the person with the most cash at the end of each weeks wins a £50 bet :p


I just stuck the whole $1000 on Liverpool to beat Chelsea tomorrow

Well. What can I say.

Riddick. It was you who brought out the interest in this one, and after the fantastic sicknote tip, you seemed to have the right bets. Really bad luck

Dve3333 Bad luck to you too.

Weel done to those who backed Tarver, and to you dillusionals who backed the Jones KO in 4 etc. your winnings are on their way in the shape of a large white thing with four wheels and blue flashing lights.

I checked the Racing Post again this morning - it definitely has points win as a 33/1 general with Tarver and 50/1 with Jones. But when I was checking the Willie Hills website I think it was they had a pts win around 3/1 + 7/2. I have to admit I really couldn't be arsed checking who was in the right or wrong over those prices, but in the blurred light of day - 33/1!!!! - yes please I could've done with that.

jomothepure wrote: Well. What can I say.

Riddick. It was you who brought out the interest in this one, and after the fantastic sicknote tip, you seemed to have the right bets. Really bad luck

Dve3333 Bad luck to you too.

Weel done to those who backed Tarver, and to you dillusionals who backed the Jones KO in 4 etc. your winnings are on their way in the shape of a large white thing with four wheels and blue flashing lights.

I checked the Racing Post again this morning - it definitely has points win as a 33/1 general with Tarver and 50/1 with Jones. But when I was checking the Willie Hills website I think it was they had a pts win around 3/1 + 7/2. I have to admit I really couldn't be arsed checking who was in the right or wrong over those prices, but in the blurred light of day - 33/1!!!! - yes please I could've done with that.

Nah, that points quote is a misprint rather than a rick, surely. On another thread seems like RJJ was a bit heartless. Shame. In his prime, Tarver would have been staring at the lights...

you're probably right Ian, they may have accidentally repeated rd 12 or something. Anyway, sleeping dogs and all that

........................


So back to the tennis

Having won the first set, Federer can now be layed at 1/100, which is fantastic if you'd backed him at 1/20. Still can't grasp what would happen if Federer had lost the first set though

jomothepure wrote: Well. What can I say.

Riddick. It was you who brought out the interest in this one, and after the fantastic sicknote tip, you seemed to have the right bets. Really bad luck

Dve3333 Bad luck to you too.

Weel done to those who backed Tarver, and to you dillusionals who backed the Jones KO in 4 etc. your winnings are on their way in the shape of a large white thing with four wheels and blue flashing lights.

I checked the Racing Post again this morning - it definitely has points win as a 33/1 general with Tarver and 50/1 with Jones. But when I was checking the Willie Hills website I think it was they had a pts win around 3/1 + 7/2. I have to admit I really couldn't be arsed checking who was in the right or wrong over those prices, but in the blurred light of day - 33/1!!!! - yes please I could've done with that.

lol. I did the 'walk of nerves' downstairs to check ceefax, hoping for the inevitable 'Tarver stuns Jones' headline, only to find 'Tarver/Jones do battle' and I knew that meant there was no chance of an early one.

Damn, shoulda just stuck it on tarver, it was always going to be an easy £50, but got greedy with those rd bets. I really thought Jones would come in totally shot, ready to take the paycheck and get dismantled by a Tarver who could see he was ripe for the demolishing.

Oh yeah jomo, just remembered your suggestion of the points decision, I think I flippantly dismissed that one... damn this unpredictable sport! congrats on the win btw.

At least I didn't persuade people to take the round odds in my original post, i guess.