rocket_scientist

Just stuck 0.2 on the draw at 17/2 after 87 minutes.

Or should I put 0.6 on the draw (currently 11/4) and pray for anything other than an away win to guarantee a (smaller) profit? Come on pro. You're the expert. A full time professional, so successful you don't need to work for "years".

Should I cash out at just over 1.6 minijc or wait for the full 2.6? My having this option is a massive advantage to the bookies of course. Edit: being offered 2.0 now after 73 minutes. Is this a good cash out?

Just backed Holland v. France halfway through the first half. Unbelievably one sided so far. Only watching it cos daughter 1 is there (as she lives in Rotterdam and her work mates got her along).

My interest therein has waned over the years, and accelerated sharply after the Dam ArenA but I'm not quite ready to hand it over for taxidermy yet. It's interesting... a little bit, but as for any passion, that got extinguished a long time ago. Al fucking bania though. If this country can't beat them, throw in the towel.

Two classics in this video: - 1. "You're all clever people"... says an uneducated man implying that he too is clever 2. using Dog racing as his example... to explain absolutely nothing that any reasonably-intelligent mind didn't already know and what incredibly stupid people misinterpreted Edit: Does anyone ever make money on dogs (apart from the bookies obvs and the corrupt thieves who fix the book in cahoots with them)?

I just checked the prices between odds available on betfair and prices already taken on 365 on my/our picks on Saturday: - Welling Utd. 4/9 365 no odds available betfair Luton 1/2 365 1.55 betfair Malaga 1/3 365 no odds available betfair Ayr 8/13 365 1.63 betfair Arbroath 10/11 365 1.90 betfair MK Dons 1/3 365 1.36 betfair Forget the betting exchanges Rico. I remember the average price advantage between betfair (make sure to use the exchange, not the sportsbook) and bet365 contracting in the last year or two I used to bet all the time, before giving up for 5+ years until I met an old mate in a pub on Boxing Day last year. There's not enough price difference between them to worry about. They're good for traders, they're not for the likes of you and me, punters.

Over the last 25 years or so, I'll have seen over 90% of the Question Times. We even went to one about 10 years ago in St Andrews. I've got an opinion on Dimblebum. Wonder if anyone else agrees? Particularly noticeable in the last year, he's becoming a right arse. I don't know if it's familiarity breeding contempt or whether it's his longevity making him feel like Erchie, bolstered by his obvious relationships in the real world with some of his panels. Whatever it is, he's become a right cunt, an irritable and intolerant pig who's got to make his control mechanisms the biggest dramas. Horrible establishment guffy wank.

On the principle, I totally agree. Making mistakes is a big instructor. Repeating the same mistake however isn't a mistake, it's a choice or a decision.

I didn't say bookies friend. I said punters friend (when the bet goes on to lose, the fundamentally crucial part you missed in your desperation not to be seen to be as intellectually handicapped as you appear to be). Either you fail to grasp which side of the argument we're on or you can't think straight as evidenced by your inability to express properly.

Brilliant

This may help you understand; The cash out option doesn't put profit into the bookies. It helps them lose less if the bet goes on to win. It hurts them greatly if the bet goes on to lose. What data do you think you'll need to determine whether cash out overall helps the bookies or the punters? I'll give you a clue; it's not social media.

I don't think Twitter is as powerful as the bookies own P & L's. In fact, it's an awesomely imbecilic addition to the debate. The simple example I gave of further options between -1 and +3 being available being a good thing for the punter is not something you can admit. As you can see from Rico's post (which you have hitherto ignored), I'm not the only one who picked up on your confused thinking, as evidenced by your inability to express a coherent argument.

Another terminological weakness which highlights your critical thinking weakness is saying "using the cash out properly". I would ask you what the proper way to use the cash out would be but you would just get more confused when you couldn't answer it.

Is that because you know that your bet will win, or do you back all contingencies to guarantee profits? What if your bet loses, would cash out NOT have helped you?

If that's true then I could guess that your use of the English language would be as similarly ineffective with them as it has been on here, you have failed to understand what Rico and I were saying and you were unable to make certain key distinctions between trading and punting, and between exchanges and bookies. The other possibility, that anyone else is as stupid as you, would not be possible.

You STILL don't understand the argument! Let me help you. The stake is 1. The odds are 2/1. The outcomes are -1 or 3.0. With in-play cash out, the punter has more options. He can cash out at 1.5 or 2.0. This option, never available in the high street in yesteryears doesn't help the bookies, it helps the punters.

Please don't try and dispute this FACT once again. Nobody's arguing that the cash out would be bigger on the exchange. You failed to see how cash outs work in the punter's favour and went off on tangents (algorithms, ratings - the tools for assessing risks and values - and "never use them") that had nothing to do with the central debate and you even went so far as saying that the bookies make profit on cash out whereas the fact is, they lose less on punters exercising the cash out. Traders use bigger volumes (of stakes) to net incremental marginal gains. Punters use odds to win a return, win a smaller return or lose their stake.

On the contrary, your weakness was your argument and your failure to communicate properly. Had you understood what we were saying and had you a full grasp of the mechanics of the debate, you wouldn't have let a fight develop. Cash out on a bookies is ALWAYS the punter's friend when the bet goes on to lose.

This is very true however you failed to state the case. On the other hand, your argument was confused. You argued that the cash out should never be used. You did not make the fundamental argument that exchanges normally always provide better value than the bet365's of this world, whom you described as the "king".

Nobody has ever disputed that the exchanges are far superior to the punter bookies for value. It's the concept of a punter using the cash out to take profit to end the contingency that you got tripped up on as you failed to appreciate the fundamental difference between traders and punters when arguing about the nature of cashing out.

That video doesn't add anything to our debate... other to highlight what I've been saying all along; You don't understand the basics of punting. Nor are you able to understand and communicate in plain English. We (Rico and I) weren't talking about trading pre-event. We were talking about punters cashing out in-play.

Informer has been brilliant. There's only six episodes available yes? And it says series 1. Anyone know when the second series is coming?

I think a hatchet across her face would be more satisfying personally.

I've not met any of you millions. Out of interest, how much have YOU earned in profit from betting? It must be a lot. Hat off to you. You're the one who obviously knows best.