Jump to content

Bookmakers Change Title Odds


Mattio
 Share

Recommended Posts

From The Ugly Inside

http://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/southampton/fb_news.php?storyid=14960&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Hammers now favourite to win the title, I assume because of this weekends results, stupid IMO, but might be the best odds you'll get between now and the end of the season?

Edited by Mattio
Added my words!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm not sure it is that stupid, they've got a very good squad; money to spend; are still second just behind us despite not playing well. The bookies will argue we've peaked and are due a drop in form at some point, plus our away form isn't great.

 

Still hopefully we'll prove them wrong ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bookies out

 

Im still looking at a top 17 place. After the weekend I see it as a battle between us, Doncaster, Coventry, Pomps and Watford. I expect Bristol City to pull clear after they beat the leaders Saturday. I can see them going on a run and remain unbeaten for the rest of the season

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It'll change most weeks. If you're sure us or WH will win the league, you can make a profit by betting on both at the right times. They did it with Chelsea and Man Utd a couple of seasons ago, ended up getting decent odds on both after defeats and a guaranteed profit, unless Arsenal had made a miraculous run of wins.

 

It could well be that the odds on West Ham looked very attractive last week and the bookies have had big big bets from professional gamblers as a result.It's the sort of odds a PG is looking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's got nothng to do with results, the odds change depending on how much money is wagered on certain teams.

 

This is simply wrong. Yes, the amount of money wagered has an effect, as in a bookie has to "insure" against potentialy heavy losses from popular (for whatever reason) bets. However the likelihood of a particular event occuring (e.g. Southampton winning the Championship) is the prime factor in calculating odds, whether you consider it to be calculated objectively or subjectively. Hence the position after this weekend's results; i.e. Saints losing coupled with West Ham winning would always have a direct effect on the long term odds for the Championship, however slight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is simply wrong. Yes, the amount of money wagered has an effect, as in a bookie has to "insure" against potentialy heavy losses from popular (for whatever reason) bets. However the likelihood of a particular event occuring (e.g. Southampton winning the Championship) is the prime factor in calculating odds, whether you consider it to be calculated objectively or subjectively. Hence the position after this weekend's results; i.e. Saints losing coupled with West Ham winning would always have a direct effect on the long term odds for the Championship, however slight.

 

Especially if sh!!tloads of money went on West Ham as a result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm not sure it is that stupid, they've got a very good squad; money to spend; are still second just behind us despite not playing well. The bookies will argue we've peaked and are due a drop in form at some point, plus our away form isn't great.

 

Still hopefully we'll prove them wrong ;)

FWIW I think we have peaked, the team generally lacks pace up front and is vulnerable to pace at the back. We will not get a better chance of promotion ( I feel ) than we do now from the position that we are in, but I feel the club are happy to carry on as we are rather than "making a statement of intent" and nailing a top two position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW I think we have peaked, the team generally lacks pace up front and is vulnerable to pace at the back. We will not get a better chance of promotion ( I feel ) than we do now from the position that we are in, but I feel the club are happy to carry on as we are rather than "making a statement of intent" and nailing a top two position.

 

I don't think we are any more vunerable to pace than any other team in our division.We are however vunerable to individual

errors and missing a shedload of chances.We missed at least 3 we should have scored last week-end. It happens, no doubt we will overcome it.At the end of the day we just have to keep going because average results from here in will get us there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW I think we have peaked, the team generally lacks pace up front and is vulnerable to pace at the back. We will not get a better chance of promotion ( I feel ) than we do now from the position that we are in, but I feel the club are happy to carry on as we are rather than "making a statement of intent" and nailing a top two position.

 

It has been a very high plateau rather than a peak, and as such is much more sustainable and more likely to see a slight decline with injuries and tiredness as the winter bites, but not a collapse. It will be between us and WHU for champions, and us winning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's got nothng to do with results, the odds change depending on how much money is wagered on certain teams.

 

That's not true, sadly. Bookmakers don't wait for a wall of money and then react. They have odds-compilers who take a view to ensure they aren't knocked over in the first place!

 

Example. Horse A wins the Guineas and immediately will be priced to win the Derby at well below what price he might have been before the Guineas, and yet not a single additional bet has been placed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Palace fan at work (aka Cock) reckons we'll finish mid-table. (17th?!?) I have us down for the play-offs, which would be a very good season, with the hope that everybody is fit and ready for the three fixtures. West Ham will finish in the top two, based solely on their players, a lot of whom are Premiership quality, and I still think the other spot will be fought by Boro, Birmingham and Leicester, with us as the outsiders.

 

If you'd have offered me a play-off spot at the start of the season, I'd have bit your hand off. Now, after such a great start, it does seem a bit like an anticlimax.

 

The January transfer window will play a very big part in whether these particular clubs finish where I've said they finish. For instance we could surprise everyone and sign, say, Maynard (who self admits he wants to be in a Premiership team) and a top centre back, and another winger, and a top goalkeeper and right back, in some sort of gluttenous spending spree that nobody was expecting, and **** this league by winning all our remaining games. West Ham could get raped of Cole, Green and, say, Noble. etc etc. You get my (slightly drowsy) drift.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bookies out

 

Im still looking at a top 17 place. After the weekend I see it as a battle between us, Doncaster, Coventry, Pomps and Watford. I expect Bristol City to pull clear after they beat the leaders Saturday. I can see them going on a run and remain unbeaten for the rest of the season

 

Our lack of signings will begin to tell. Having said that this season was all about consolidation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW I think we have peaked, the team generally lacks pace up front and is vulnerable to pace at the back. We will not get a better chance of promotion ( I feel ) than we do now from the position that we are in, but I feel the club are happy to carry on as we are rather than "making a statement of intent" and nailing a top two position.

 

Bang on. It was obvious over the summer. I think my prediction of 17th will be closer than those predicting 1st !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not true, sadly. Bookmakers don't wait for a wall of money and then react. They have odds-compilers who take a view to ensure they aren't knocked over in the first place!

 

Example. Horse A wins the Guineas and immediately will be priced to win the Derby at well below what price he might have been before the Guineas, and yet not a single additional bet has been placed.

And the odds-makers frequently get it wrong. Their job is to get people to bet and they don't especially care who wins. They form an opinion but at the end of the day the likelihood of us winning the championships depends on Nigel Adkins a hell of a lot more than it does on a Ladbroke's odds setter. If anyone thinks that West Ham are more likely to win than us based on us losing to Bristol City then go ahead and put your money where your mouth is. At least you will have some consolation if we don't win the championship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Palace fan at work (aka Cock) reckons we'll finish mid-table. (17th?!?) I have us down for the play-offs, which would be a very good season, with the hope that everybody is fit and ready for the three fixtures. West Ham will finish in the top two, based solely on their players, a lot of whom are Premiership quality, and I still think the other spot will be fought by Boro, Birmingham and Leicester, with us as the outsiders.

 

If you'd have offered me a play-off spot at the start of the season, I'd have bit your hand off. Now, after such a great start, it does seem a bit like an anticlimax.

 

The January transfer window will play a very big part in whether these particular clubs finish where I've said they finish. For instance we could surprise everyone and sign, say, Maynard (who self admits he wants to be in a Premiership team) and a top centre back, and another winger, and a top goalkeeper and right back, in some sort of gluttenous spending spree that nobody was expecting, and **** this league by winning all our remaining games. West Ham could get raped of Cole, Green and, say, Noble. etc etc. You get my (slightly drowsy) drift.

By which you mean they have played in the premiership. I think that there are a heck of a lot of journeymen in the premiership as evidenced by that fact that many clubs that drop from the premiership do not get promoted again and on the fact that Pompey have a number of so called premiershio standard players and look where they are. How many of our players are premiership standard? We won't know until we get there but until we do don't assume that they aren't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So let me understand this correctly. The bookies lengthen the odds on Saints winning the title which means we will get more money back on the fiver bet we place. And you're not happy with that????????

 

Well it would seem that the general view is that if the bookies now favour West Ham for the title it must be true and that we will automatically go into a tailspin and get relegated.Complete crap of course. In horse racing the favourite wins about 30% of the time I think, perhaps in football it's a bit higher depending on the leagues.I'd say we still have the same 50/50 chance of winning the League that we had a few weeks ago.Not that I'm particularly worried whether we win the title or not...it means nothing to me (unlike Vienna),promotion is all I ask.Mind you placing a fiver at 7/4 is a bit of a waste of time seeing as you won't get any return until

next May.

Edited by Window Cleaner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the odds-makers frequently get it wrong. Their job is to get people to bet and they don't especially care who wins. They form an opinion but at the end of the day the likelihood of us winning the championships depends on Nigel Adkins a hell of a lot more than it does on a Ladbroke's odds setter. If anyone thinks that West Ham are more likely to win than us based on us losing to Bristol City then go ahead and put your money where your mouth is. At least you will have some consolation if we don't win the championship.

 

You're really not listening are you?

1.They TOTALLY care who wins. It is this, coupled with the amounts of money wagered in various directions that determines how much they win or lose and thus HOW MUCH THEY CARE.

 

2. Southampton's and West Ham's results in the Bristol City and Derby games respectively, had a real and numerical effect on the clubs' chances of ultimately winning the Championship. Southampton definitely reduced their potential total of points by exactly 3 points, West Ham maintained theirs. The only elements open to dispute are the amount that this might affect the outcome, and who may or may not remain as overall favourites.

 

These are not opinions, they are statistically self evident facts.

 

On the up side your first statement is of course correct - they do often get it wrong - it's about opinions amd likelihoods.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the odds-makers frequently get it wrong. Their job is to get people to bet and they don't especially care who wins. They form an opinion but at the end of the day the likelihood of us winning the championships depends on Nigel Adkins a hell of a lot more than it does on a Ladbroke's odds setter. If anyone thinks that West Ham are more likely to win than us based on us losing to Bristol City then go ahead and put your money where your mouth is. At least you will have some consolation if we don't win the championship.

 

I wouldn't say they 'frequently' get it wrong but yes ultimately it's often the decision of 'one' man who is fallible. That's the fantastic thing about betting. I've arrived at a racecourse and backed a horse at 50/1 (Time for Rupert, Kreon, Always Waining - funny how these names always stay with you when you made a packet!) simply because they were unconsidered by odds compilers in the morning and then subsequently ignored by punters as a result....

 

You're right, the likelihood of us winning doesn't change because of results, but fundamentally the odds reflect someone's opinion of the likelihood of us winning - and being five points clear of West Ham makes us a bit more likely to win than being two points clear. And annoyingly bookies don't make big mistakes that often.

 

Put it this way, the only time I've seen a skint bookie was September 29th, 1996.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i wouldn't say they 'frequently' get it wrong but yes ultimately it's often the decision of 'one' man who is fallible. That's the fantastic thing about betting. I've arrived at a racecourse and backed a horse at 50/1 (time for rupert, kreon, always waining - funny how these names always stay with you when you made a packet!) simply because they were unconsidered by odds compilers in the morning and then subsequently ignored by punters as a result....

 

You're right, the likelihood of us winning doesn't change because of results, but fundamentally the odds reflect someone's opinion of the likelihood of us winning - and being five points clear of west ham makes us a bit more likely to win than being two points clear. And annoyingly bookies don't make big mistakes that often.

 

Put it this way, the only time i've seen a skint bookie was september 29th, 1996.

 

yes it does!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...