| Raducanu update - French Open 15:34 - May 25 with 9599 views | Dr_Parnassus |
Second Grand Slam of the year.
She was very fortunate to navigate past 184 rank Linda Noskova in the first round, who was a set and a break up before choking completely… she today gets obliterated by Aliaksandra Sasnovich in round 2 who is only just in the top 50.
Losing 6-1 6-1 after winning the first 6-3. Wasn’t even a contest after Sasnovich settled.
She was also knocked out of the first round of Rome in the last tournament.
I wonder if there is anyone left still claiming she is the second coming of Serena… |  |
| |  |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 19:18 - Jun 8 with 762 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 19:15 - Jun 8 by trampie |
You haven't answered what odds did you get on Watson with 4.5 and 5.5 games start ? |
I have, it may not be the answer you were hoping for - but it’s been answered all the same. Again it’s not up to me to help you with catching up on your homework.
Pay attention at the time, no use trying to learn after it’s over. Put it down as a lesson maybe? | |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 19:33 - Jun 8 with 735 views | trampie |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 19:18 - Jun 8 by Dr_Parnassus |
I have, it may not be the answer you were hoping for - but it’s been answered all the same. Again it’s not up to me to help you with catching up on your homework.
Pay attention at the time, no use trying to learn after it’s over. Put it down as a lesson maybe? |
You are betting massive odds on accepting a 4.5 and 5.5 games start in a 3 set match on grass and you still lost, you are too embarrassed to say exactly how much odds on your selections were. |  |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 19:42 - Jun 8 with 727 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 19:33 - Jun 8 by trampie |
You are betting massive odds on accepting a 4.5 and 5.5 games start in a 3 set match on grass and you still lost, you are too embarrassed to say exactly how much odds on your selections were. |
My word.
Again, do you understand the concept of value? It doesn’t matter how short or long something is, as long as the price is inflated above the actual probability.
For example.
Man City first team to beat Walsall being offered at 3/10. The price should be 1/33. If you take the 3/10 every single time then you win long term, by taking that price you also expect to lose along the way too - it’s the nature of probability.
If you price that up at 1/33 that means that Man City will fail to win 1 time in 34 attempts. So when they do lose that one, it’s nothing to do with you getting it wrong, and it certainly isn’t embarrassing - it’s the plan.
I know you have struggled with this concept for years but it really should be starting to sink in. I literally can’t have explained it any better than I have. | |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 19:51 - Jun 8 with 714 views | trampie |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 19:42 - Jun 8 by Dr_Parnassus |
My word.
Again, do you understand the concept of value? It doesn’t matter how short or long something is, as long as the price is inflated above the actual probability.
For example.
Man City first team to beat Walsall being offered at 3/10. The price should be 1/33. If you take the 3/10 every single time then you win long term, by taking that price you also expect to lose along the way too - it’s the nature of probability.
If you price that up at 1/33 that means that Man City will fail to win 1 time in 34 attempts. So when they do lose that one, it’s nothing to do with you getting it wrong, and it certainly isn’t embarrassing - it’s the plan.
I know you have struggled with this concept for years but it really should be starting to sink in. I literally can’t have explained it any better than I have. |
What were these marvellous value odds (although the bets lost) you had on Watson with 4.5 and 5.5 games start then ? | |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 19:57 - Jun 8 with 703 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 19:51 - Jun 8 by trampie |
What were these marvellous value odds (although the bets lost) you had on Watson with 4.5 and 5.5 games start then ? |
Again, it doesn’t matter if they lost on this occasion. I once again take you back to the coin flip example.
If my aim is to take the value price every single time, which is tails are 11/10 - what the outcome of one flip in isolation is - is completely meaningless and irrelevant. You expect to lose 50% of the time, it’s in the calculation that this will be the case.
As for what the odds were, this has been answered. You need to pay attention at the time, not retrospectively after the event. It’s not up to me to help you catch up with your homework.
Next time I post my profitable selections on here then you should keep a record. Then you may understand that at the end of the year, despite some selections losing - the profit is obvious. Then you may understand value and have at least some sort of position to take on a discussion. | |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 20:02 - Jun 8 with 688 views | trampie |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 19:57 - Jun 8 by Dr_Parnassus |
Again, it doesn’t matter if they lost on this occasion. I once again take you back to the coin flip example.
If my aim is to take the value price every single time, which is tails are 11/10 - what the outcome of one flip in isolation is - is completely meaningless and irrelevant. You expect to lose 50% of the time, it’s in the calculation that this will be the case.
As for what the odds were, this has been answered. You need to pay attention at the time, not retrospectively after the event. It’s not up to me to help you catch up with your homework.
Next time I post my profitable selections on here then you should keep a record. Then you may understand that at the end of the year, despite some selections losing - the profit is obvious. Then you may understand value and have at least some sort of position to take on a discussion. |
I don't want to know about coin flips, I want to know what odds you had on Watson with 4.5 and 5.5 games start ? | |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 20:05 - Jun 8 with 680 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 20:02 - Jun 8 by trampie |
I don't want to know about coin flips, I want to know what odds you had on Watson with 4.5 and 5.5 games start ? |
If you don’t understand the coin flips then you won’t have a clue on decimal implied odds.
If you wish to know that, then you need to speak to your bookmaker and ask if they can help you. | |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 20:08 - Jun 8 with 671 views | trampie |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 20:05 - Jun 8 by Dr_Parnassus |
If you don’t understand the coin flips then you won’t have a clue on decimal implied odds.
If you wish to know that, then you need to speak to your bookmaker and ask if they can help you. |
Oh I understand the coin toss alright, that is why I want to know what odds you had on Watson to win with 4.5 and 5.5 games start ? | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Raducanu update - French Open on 20:12 - Jun 8 with 665 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 20:08 - Jun 8 by trampie |
Oh I understand the coin toss alright, that is why I want to know what odds you had on Watson to win with 4.5 and 5.5 games start ? |
If you understood the coin flips then you wouldn’t be asking that question, you would understand that it would be irrelevant what the odds were. Hence why you have no idea about the concept you have just been taught about.
If you want to know odds retrospectively in some misguided belief they will help you understand, then you will have to ask your bookmaker to help you. I won’t be enabling your slowness with this concept. | |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 20:14 - Jun 8 with 652 views | Gwyn737 |
Some posters are making themselves look really daft on this thread.
I may not agree with Dr. P on a few issues but he’s clearly an expert in this area and knows exactly what he’s talking about. |  | | |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 20:15 - Jun 8 with 648 views | trampie |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 20:12 - Jun 8 by Dr_Parnassus |
If you understood the coin flips then you wouldn’t be asking that question, you would understand that it would be irrelevant what the odds were. Hence why you have no idea about the concept you have just been taught about.
If you want to know odds retrospectively in some misguided belief they will help you understand, then you will have to ask your bookmaker to help you. I won’t be enabling your slowness with this concept. |
The question I'm asking is what odds did you have on Watson to win with 4.5 and 5.5 games start ? | |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 20:18 - Jun 8 with 641 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 20:14 - Jun 8 by Gwyn737 |
Some posters are making themselves look really daft on this thread.
I may not agree with Dr. P on a few issues but he’s clearly an expert in this area and knows exactly what he’s talking about. |
I think the ones you are referring to are actually trying to learn, but doing it in such a way where it appears they are somehow disagreeing with me.
It’s their way of asking me to explain things without having to ask me…  | |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 20:24 - Jun 8 with 623 views | trampie |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 20:14 - Jun 8 by Gwyn737 |
Some posters are making themselves look really daft on this thread.
I may not agree with Dr. P on a few issues but he’s clearly an expert in this area and knows exactly what he’s talking about. |
He has bet big odds on selections and lost and won't say what odds he had on these losing bets, why won't he say what odds these losing selections of his were ? | |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 20:29 - Jun 8 with 610 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 20:24 - Jun 8 by trampie |
He has bet big odds on selections and lost and won't say what odds he had on these losing bets, why won't he say what odds these losing selections of his were ? |
- What has them losing got to do with anything?
- How do you know they were big odds on when you don’t know what the odds were?
- Why do you believe the odds matters to any point you have tried to make?
Again, a value bet with no return on that particular selection is not a “losing bet”. Just like tails wouldn’t be a losing bet at 11/10 if it landed on heads. It would be an expected part of the process to be able to guarantee profit with value plays.
You say you understand the coin concept, which is the easiest way to explain long term value - yet you still call them “losing” and still ask for the odds. Neither question would be asked if you understood even 1% of this discussion, let alone both. [Post edited 8 Jun 2022 20:39]
| |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 20:33 - Jun 8 with 602 views | Dr_Parnassus |
Scenario: there is a raffle at Trampies work every Friday. Each person puts their name in a hat and the winner is pulled at random. The winner gets £100.
Trampie comes to Dr P and wants to improve his chances of winning.
Dr P shows him a way where he can manage to put his name in 10 times each week, essentially becoming 20% of the names in the hat.
The very next Friday his boss pulls out Janice from accounts and Trampie is furious.
Dr P assures him that it’s impossible to win every week and that at the end of the year he will likely have 10X more prizes than anyone else. We know for a fact you won’t get your name drawn every single time and not having your name drawn 80% of the draws is entirely expected - doesn’t mean you lose when your name isn’t drawn, far from it because it’s part of the strategy- you in fact win.
Trampie scratches his head and replies “but we lost this week!?”….
Dr P puts his head in his hands. [Post edited 8 Jun 2022 20:43]
| |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 21:01 - Jun 8 with 569 views | trampie |
Seems like it's not only Dr P that won't answer a straight question, but Gwyn doesn't seem to want to answer a posters question either. | |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 21:05 - Jun 8 with 559 views | Gwyn737 |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 21:01 - Jun 8 by trampie |
Seems like it's not only Dr P that won't answer a straight question, but Gwyn doesn't seem to want to answer a posters question either. |
I didn’t think it was a question.
Unless you’re Biff in Back to the Future 2, you’re going to lose a bet regularly no matter what the odds. | | | |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 21:10 - Jun 8 with 549 views | trampie |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 21:05 - Jun 8 by Gwyn737 |
I didn’t think it was a question.
Unless you’re Biff in Back to the Future 2, you’re going to lose a bet regularly no matter what the odds. |
Why do you think that Dr P won't answer what odds he took on Watson with 4.5 and 5.5 games start ?, Why is that ?
Losing bets regularly you say, that depends if you are a favourites backer or not. | |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 21:18 - Jun 8 with 545 views | Gwyn737 |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 21:10 - Jun 8 by trampie |
Why do you think that Dr P won't answer what odds he took on Watson with 4.5 and 5.5 games start ?, Why is that ?
Losing bets regularly you say, that depends if you are a favourites backer or not. |
I don’t know.
But there doesn’t seem to be any point if the reasoning you’re trying to make is that he doesn’t win every bet - that would be daft.
Betting on favourites doesn’t guarantee wins over time, does it? | | | |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 21:44 - Jun 8 with 524 views | trampie |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 21:18 - Jun 8 by Gwyn737 |
I don’t know.
But there doesn’t seem to be any point if the reasoning you’re trying to make is that he doesn’t win every bet - that would be daft.
Betting on favourites doesn’t guarantee wins over time, does it? |
I know he doesn't win every bet he hardly wins any from what I see, I just wanted to know what odds he had on Watson with 4.5 and 5.5 games start, but he won't answer that question.
Don't let him fool you about coin flips, as the actual odds of a coin flip is evens, his losing bets on the handicap was not evens or odds against it was massive odds 'on'.
As regards betting on favourites I am aware of a system that at the time I read about it had returned big profits for two years running by betting on horse racing favourites between evens and 1/3 odds on with strict criteria around what type of races you bet on, I think it was only 76 races fitted the criteria in 2 seasons of British racing. | |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 00:33 - Jun 9 with 479 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 21:18 - Jun 8 by Gwyn737 |
I don’t know.
But there doesn’t seem to be any point if the reasoning you’re trying to make is that he doesn’t win every bet - that would be daft.
Betting on favourites doesn’t guarantee wins over time, does it? |
Depends if the price the favourite is, is priced above their true probability.
It’s the same concept whether they are favourites or underdogs. (Man City example above). | |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 00:38 - Jun 9 with 476 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 21:10 - Jun 8 by trampie |
Why do you think that Dr P won't answer what odds he took on Watson with 4.5 and 5.5 games start ?, Why is that ?
Losing bets regularly you say, that depends if you are a favourites backer or not. |
I won’t because you are the one asking me, a known troll on these subjects.
But the answer of course is irrelevant.
Betting favourites or betting underdogs doesn’t matter, you will lose individual bets regularly on both. You win long term by taking value, value is not restricted to outsiders or longshots.
If Watson was value for the match, then all her derivative markets would be value too.
I take you back to the Man City example, priced at 3/10 instead of 1/33.
That means their handicap of +0.5 goals would also be extreme value. It may be 1/14 where in fact it should be 1/200.
It’s the same concept. | |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 00:55 - Jun 9 with 467 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 21:44 - Jun 8 by trampie |
I know he doesn't win every bet he hardly wins any from what I see, I just wanted to know what odds he had on Watson with 4.5 and 5.5 games start, but he won't answer that question.
Don't let him fool you about coin flips, as the actual odds of a coin flip is evens, his losing bets on the handicap was not evens or odds against it was massive odds 'on'.
As regards betting on favourites I am aware of a system that at the time I read about it had returned big profits for two years running by betting on horse racing favourites between evens and 1/3 odds on with strict criteria around what type of races you bet on, I think it was only 76 races fitted the criteria in 2 seasons of British racing. |
My Lord you really didn’t understand did you. 
The coin flip was for ease of reference. A nice evens probability with a nice above evens price. But that doesn’t mean that only things that are evens odds have value, I’m amazed we are having this discussion - this isn’t even basic, it’s something you should know long before you even start.
If something is “odds on” it doesn’t mean they always win. It means there is more chance that it will happen than won’t happen. It’s exactly the same concept as “the coin” but there is a shift between frequency of win and loss.
- If something is evens then the implied probability the event happens is 50%. (Lose 50 in 100)
- If something is 1/2 then the implied probability the event happens is 66.7% (Lose 33.3 in 100)
- If something is 1/5 then the implied probability the event happens is 80%. (Lose 20 in 100)
So…
- Take this favourite scenario…. We arrive at a favourite tennis match that we think is value; as we think she wins 80 out of 100 times they play, so we convert that into a % and then convert it to odds = 1/5. We can now identify that anything above 1/5 is “value”.
-We see it priced up at 1/2 (still odds on favourite). We convert that into probability and it reveals that the bookmakers are giving us a price representing her winning only 66.3 times out of 100.
So…
We have calculated that if we stake £10 every time at the bookmakers price. Every time we win, we win £5 and everytime we “lose” we lose £10.
We expect to win 80 times out of 100 (20 “losses”).
80 x £5 = £400
20 x -£10 = -£200
That means we would estimate that after 100 times, we would be £200 up.
So it’s exactly the same methodology regardless of if someone is favourite or underdog (hence why your question shows you don’t understand the concept).
Also your “system” is utterly laughable just like your roulette “system” was all those years ago. There is no such thing as a system, if there was one then it would no longer be the system - it would just be “the way”.
The only way you can win long term by betting on anything, be that sports, cards, games - ANYTHING… Is to simply take a price that represents a larger one than it truly should be.
Any talk of systems is pure nonsense. [Post edited 9 Jun 2022 2:01]
| |
| |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 08:50 - Jun 9 with 401 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Raducanu update - French Open on 07:26 - Jun 9 by trampie |
What price did you have on Watson with 4.5 and 5.5 games start then ? |
You will have to email your bookmaker for that price query Tramps.
But it’s irrelevant to our discussion. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.