• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

The Cycling Betting Thread

Page 48 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
sure, I can see your point, but if you want to make a totally unrelated general statement about bets with 6% yield please make that clear - you cannot expect anyone to see that it's unrelated if you post it in the middle of a discussion about that green jersey bet.
 
Jun 14, 2013
34
0
0
Visit site
search said:
sure, I can see your point, but if you want to make a totally unrelated general statement about bets with 6% yield please make that clear - you cannot expect anyone to see that it's unrelated if you post it in the middle of a discussion about that green jersey bet.

I accept that.I didn't make that clear in my first post.
 
the point is, just saying '6% is an acceptible return on a bet for a 'big stakes pro punter' is meaningless. 6% would be an acceptible return for anyone on an absolute 100% sure thing but the fact is there are no 100% sure things in real life (unless u have some inside info or something). i am not a big stakes gambler but if u gave me 6% that cav would not win the tour de france i would put everything i have on it. the 'acceptibility' of the % return for any gambler, whether big stakes pro or not, should always be based on probability, otherwise they will soon become a very poor pro-gambler!!
 
Jun 14, 2013
34
0
0
Visit site
willbick said:
the point is, just saying '6% is an acceptible return on a bet for a 'big stakes pro punter' is meaningless. 6% would be an acceptible return for anyone on an absolute 100% sure thing but the fact is there are no 100% sure things in real life (unless u have some inside info or something). i am not a big stakes gambler but if u gave me 6% that cav would not win the tour de france i would put everything i have on it. the 'acceptibility' of the % return for any gambler, whether big stakes pro or not, should always be based on probability, otherwise they will soon become a very poor pro-gambler!!

Look,i fully understand what you are saying,its based on the probability,yes,this is true but gambling by its very nature is a game of a chance,a risk if you like.

My own view (you probably think the same) is that there is no such thing as a certainty but you would also agree that as a general rule the higher the class of competition you are betting on (in this case the TDF,the pinnacle of the sport) the more stable the results form-wise.Hence why most big stakes punters in horseracing only bet heavy on group 1 and group 2 races where the best horses run and where the form usually holds up the best.Does this mean you won't get a 100-1 shot coming 2nd in the Epsom Derby? No,it happened last year but it won't happen many years.

Now i've been drawn into this Green jersey business (my own fault for posting a general comment amongst a specific discussion on it), i genuinely can't see past Cav/Sagan even if Greipel should be involved and is as big as 16-1 (a price that would appeal to a small stakes punter like myself).Whether there is any value in the Cav/Sagan bet is purely a personal opinion.

You intimated 6% yield is "a mug bet" I am disputing that so what i am saying isn't meaningless.A guy i know told me a couple of years ago he bet huge on the horse Sea the Stars for the Prix de L'Arc de Triomphe at odds of 4-6 in what is a notoriously roughhouse historically unpredictable race,i ridiculed him at the time but he phoned me afterwards to tell me how much he had won and to gloat.Who's the mug,me or him? I have never forgot that occasion.

I am stating the blatantly obvious now but you can narrow down the probability all you want but it is still a gamble every time you hand over the cash.Its not an exact science whether you have the data to support your bet choice or not.
 
Jun 6, 2012
49
0
0
Visit site
Telmisartan said:
You intimated 6% yield is "a mug bet" I am disputing that so what i am saying isn't meaningless.A guy i know told me a couple of years ago he bet huge on the horse Sea the Stars for the Prix de L'Arc de Triomphe at odds of 4-6 in what is a notoriously roughhouse historically unpredictable race,i ridiculed him at the time but he phoned me afterwards to tell me how much he had won and to gloat.Who's the mug,me or him? I have never forgot that occasion.

You wouldn't know unless you could either a) re-run the race a certain number of times or b) know the exact possibility of the horse winning before the race. The fact that this horse won once doesn't tell us anything.

Whether a certain percentage return would be good for a "heavy-hitter" is obviously foolish talk as it would always depend on the bet's possibility. Only for hedged bets can you only look at the return (to compare this return on a yearly or monthly basis with other "sure"/hedged returns).
 
Poursuivant said:
What bets are people doing for TDF?

Not a lot so far. Got talked into backing Valverde at 34ew (with PP) by the chat in this thread a month or two ago (of course he's gone out to 41 now :D), and just had a bet on Hesjedal to podium at 17 (with PP) - he seems to be ok after his crash earlier this week and hopefully will benefit from the Tour being so dependent on the third week climbs.

Hoping for some more interesting markets to be released soon - top 10, young rider etc.

You had any bets?
 
Leadbelly said:
Also, Mollema at 251 to podium with PP.

Nice odds that. Looking forward to top 10 odds myself but I recall last few years odds aren't that good. I am waiting to see what other bookies give as odds for a Froome Yellow/ Cav Green combination. PP Offering 9/4.

Also looking forward to seeing the head to head odds PP usually offer.
 
Ferminal said:
Dan Martin top10 @ 5 (Bet365)

Good price! Went to put mine on yesterday and he was already at 3.5. Got Froome at 2.5 after Oman. The only other one so dar is Griepel for the first stage at 4.5 (PaddyPower). I know Cav's possibly better than ever, and super-motivated, but he always stumbles out of the starting blocks in GTs
 
Jun 29, 2010
62
0
0
www.goodforthegame.co.za
PedalCastro said:
KoM Winner has some good prices IMO........

Quintana : 10/1
Anton: 33/1
Mollema : 50/1
Hoogerland 25/1
Fuglsang 125/1

Is it double points for the final climb again this year? If so I am wondering whether the 14/1 Froome is not decent value? He may get it by accident
 
Not long to go now. I feel like a kid waiting for Xmas Day to come around. :D

On Talansky for the Young Rider classement at 8 with PP. I feel he should be a bit closer to what TJVG's odds are. They're similar riders - very close in climbing ability, and Talansky could conceivably do better in the second TT and in the TTT.
 
Punter said:
Is it double points for the final climb again this year? If so I am wondering whether the 14/1 Froome is not decent value? He may get it by accident

I had a look at the website, but the only info I could find was that the prize money for the KotM points was doubled on summit finishes. You'd think this sort of info would be easy to find, but I can only assume that the points themself will be doubled too.

Speaking generally though, I find predicting the KotM nigh on impossible. Too many variables for my poor mind to cope with. :D
 

TRENDING THREADS