Ivan Cleary effect takes hold at Wests Tigers

User avatar
GNR4LIFE
Member
Member
Posts: 21027
Joined: Mon 28 Feb, 2011 5:57 pm

Re: Ivan Cleary effect takes hold at Wests Tigers

Post by GNR4LIFE » Wed 21 Feb, 2018 1:39 pm

Lol, front row is where we have the most depth

Twal
Grant
Felise
Hooth
Sue

There would be other clubs far thinner.


Mac
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat 20 May, 2017 10:19 am

Post by Mac » Wed 21 Feb, 2018 2:37 pm

jirskyr wrote:
Wed 21 Feb, 2018 11:38 am
That's a 67% win rate at an average payout above $2.50, and $2.50 equates to a bookie win confidence of 17.5% (i.e. ~50% disparity between bookie confidence and actual results).
jirskyr, a price of $2.50 equates to a probability of 40%. Given that the bookie's profit is also in that price the actual probability they are working on is a bit less. They normally frame their markets to around 115%-125%. In theory, if their market works perfectly they make $15-$25 per $100 wagered.

Having said that, I take your overall point.

goldcoast tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 5834
Joined: Sat 12 Apr, 2014 5:42 pm

Post by goldcoast tiger » Wed 21 Feb, 2018 6:49 pm

GNR4LIFE wrote:
Wed 21 Feb, 2018 1:39 pm
Lol, front row is where we have the most depth

Twal
Grant
Felise
Hooth
Sue

There would be other clubs far thinner.
I agree on Twal,and Hooth, but I’d hate to have to rely on Grant or Sue
On a regular basis, mostly very ordinary,
Don’t know about Felise ; I haven’t seen him play, or if I have I didn’t notice him

User avatar
jirskyr
Member
Member
Posts: 5491
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 12:00 pm

Post by jirskyr » Wed 21 Feb, 2018 8:19 pm

Mac wrote:
Wed 21 Feb, 2018 2:37 pm
jirskyr wrote:
Wed 21 Feb, 2018 11:38 am
That's a 67% win rate at an average payout above $2.50, and $2.50 equates to a bookie win confidence of 17.5% (i.e. ~50% disparity between bookie confidence and actual results).
jirskyr, a price of $2.50 equates to a probability of 40%. Given that the bookie's profit is also in that price the actual probability they are working on is a bit less. They normally frame their markets to around 115%-125%. In theory, if their market works perfectly they make $15-$25 per $100 wagered.

Having said that, I take your overall point.
You are right re probability. What I was looking at was a variation from the vig, something I keep an eye on for bets, i.e. the relative distance from $1.91 (in sportsbet's case) as a proposition of bookie confidence.

Mac
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat 20 May, 2017 10:19 am

Post by Mac » Wed 21 Feb, 2018 8:52 pm

jirskyr wrote:
Wed 21 Feb, 2018 8:19 pm
Mac wrote:
Wed 21 Feb, 2018 2:37 pm
jirskyr wrote:
Wed 21 Feb, 2018 11:38 am
That's a 67% win rate at an average payout above $2.50, and $2.50 equates to a bookie win confidence of 17.5% (i.e. ~50% disparity between bookie confidence and actual results).
jirskyr, a price of $2.50 equates to a probability of 40%. Given that the bookie's profit is also in that price the actual probability they are working on is a bit less. They normally frame their markets to around 115%-125%. In theory, if their market works perfectly they make $15-$25 per $100 wagered.

Having said that, I take your overall point.
You are right re probability. What I was looking at was a variation from the vig, something I keep an eye on for bets, i.e. the relative distance from $1.91 (in sportsbet's case) as a proposition of bookie confidence.
No worries, I see where you’re coming from. Looking at the Rooster’s game Sportsbet have them at $1.30 (76.9%) and us at $3.50 (28.6%) - a fairly generous early market of 105.5% - or you can take a bit less than evens we won’t be beaten by more than 9 points.

I think we’re a big chance to knock them off so I’m having a good go at the outright win and a saver at the 9.5 pts in but will wait until closer to the game. Injuries etc might make a difference.

interesting that Vic TAB put our odds out after the trial?

Best bet of the year is Tigers to make the 8 @ $6 - though I remember when I was wrong once. Gamble responsibly 😎


User avatar
Russta
Member
Member
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon 22 Aug, 2011 10:22 pm
Location: Kingaroy, Qld

Post by Russta » Wed 21 Feb, 2018 10:56 pm

William Hill has us at $5.50 to make the 8. I've put $20 on and $10 on manly for most losses @$15. 8-)

Fade To Black
Member
Member
Posts: 5186
Joined: Tue 21 Feb, 2012 5:51 pm

Post by Fade To Black » Thu 22 Feb, 2018 6:25 am

snowleopard wrote:
Tue 20 Feb, 2018 8:53 pm
Who would be your top 17 SG?
That game-changer bloke would have to be in there somewhere......

NT Tiger
Member
Member
Posts: 2698
Joined: Sun 28 Apr, 2013 9:00 am
Location: Sitting in front of the computer (again)

Post by NT Tiger » Thu 22 Feb, 2018 6:49 am

Spartan117 wrote:
Wed 21 Feb, 2018 1:10 pm
Great, Its a word we use way to often .... Lets see in a few years

We Tigers Tragics have been crying out for some stability , let alone success for years.

lets not get too excited to early. (PS Cowboys were horrible on Sat)


I reserve judgement to see how we go after our very difficult start to 2018 and whether we are still paying overs for recruits in 2019
I certainly wouldn't bank anything on the first trial. WT players were vying for spots in the run on team come round 1. The cowboys were playing like it was a full contact practice run.
"Quality Stupidity"

User avatar
jirskyr
Member
Member
Posts: 5491
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 12:00 pm

Post by jirskyr » Thu 22 Feb, 2018 11:28 am

Mac wrote:
Wed 21 Feb, 2018 8:52 pm
jirskyr wrote:
Wed 21 Feb, 2018 8:19 pm
Mac wrote:
Wed 21 Feb, 2018 2:37 pm
jirskyr wrote:
Wed 21 Feb, 2018 11:38 am
That's a 67% win rate at an average payout above $2.50, and $2.50 equates to a bookie win confidence of 17.5% (i.e. ~50% disparity between bookie confidence and actual results).
jirskyr, a price of $2.50 equates to a probability of 40%. Given that the bookie's profit is also in that price the actual probability they are working on is a bit less. They normally frame their markets to around 115%-125%. In theory, if their market works perfectly they make $15-$25 per $100 wagered.

Having said that, I take your overall point.
You are right re probability. What I was looking at was a variation from the vig, something I keep an eye on for bets, i.e. the relative distance from $1.91 (in sportsbet's case) as a proposition of bookie confidence.
No worries, I see where you’re coming from. Looking at the Rooster’s game Sportsbet have them at $1.30 (76.9%) and us at $3.50 (28.6%) - a fairly generous early market of 105.5% - or you can take a bit less than evens we won’t be beaten by more than 9 points.

I think we’re a big chance to knock them off so I’m having a good go at the outright win and a saver at the 9.5 pts in but will wait until closer to the game. Injuries etc might make a difference.

interesting that Vic TAB put our odds out after the trial?

Best bet of the year is Tigers to make the 8 @ $6 - though I remember when I was wrong once. Gamble responsibly 😎
Ha I do often wonder where they get their margins from. In this case they are almost 80% sure Roosters will win but they are only 50% confident feel it will be by more 1.5 converted tries? I'm not going to go looking, because the history is almost certainly horrible, but how many times have we got within 9.5 points of the Roosters in the last 5 years?

I do definitely think we can take the Roosters and sportsbet normally have some deal in the first 6 rounds, like money back if your team leads at HT or some such. Makes it much easier to attack the early rounds, which is what I do every year, then scale it back depending on how well the first few rounds went. I've only had one zero profit year in the past 5 years, but I typically cannot do better than doubling my money.

I never bet on margins, I just don't have any confidence in win sizes because the psychology of it comes into play. E.g. I hate to be winning by 18 and then concede a late consolation try under the posts. I also don't bet on first try scorers, because you get this ridiculous situation where you might get $3+ in a 2-horse race, but $7 in a 34-horse race.

I do like Tigers @ $6 for the 8, but I have never had one of those bets come off, i.e. we usually don't make it!

Pawsandclaws
Member
Member
Posts: 2751
Joined: Sat 20 Jun, 2015 5:53 pm

Post by Pawsandclaws » Thu 22 Feb, 2018 4:26 pm

Nice interview on Ch9 with Chris Lawrence who spoke well. I enjoyed his comment about Benji and his impact on the club and younger players since his return. Also comments on Reynolds, his intensity and most importantly the lifting of standards at training since his arrival. Nice also we don't have to watch our captain continually move his hair out of his eyes. Well done Chris.

User avatar
vlad
Member
Member
Posts: 769
Joined: Tue 14 Jul, 2009 7:56 pm

Post by vlad » Thu 22 Feb, 2018 5:06 pm

Bee-Em wrote:
Wed 21 Feb, 2018 1:17 pm
goldcoast tiger wrote:
Wed 21 Feb, 2018 12:36 pm
The Patriot wrote:
Tue 20 Feb, 2018 9:01 pm
smoking gun wrote:
Tue 20 Feb, 2018 8:46 pm
That team is no where near the best 17.
Its not the first ive seen that these experts has left out Marsters, Eisenheuth and Aloia.

In my mind they are 3 of our best and why a few of us have some confidence in this squad.

If they havent looked at those 3 then they have just dismissed us before a ball has even been kicked.

Hopefully it works in our favour and we take a few by surprise early on.
Marsters and Eisenheuth had a very good end of the year, and I’d rather have them in the team than
Most of the newbies,
Matulino will have to play better than in his last couple of seasons, and I’m still not sold on Packer.
Listening to the wireless yesterday, their "how will the Tigers place in 2018" discussion on Talking Shi.. sorry Talking Sport with Gerrard Conlin (sorry if that's wrong), they were all in agreement that there is no depth in the front row. If either Packer or Matulino get injured, the Tiges will be struggling up front.

Those numpties always seem to struggle to say anything positive about the Tigers I've noticed
Yeah Gerard (reading the play) Conlon blocked me on Twitter last year after he’d made the Rabbits the bet of the week to beat us in rd 1 & I reminded him of it on the way home from the game , lol .

Post Reply