New Year's Eve Prem
Nigel
They have still to do it away from home. Villa are doing ok at the
moment and I reckon at 5.5 they represent good value.
Charlton v West Ham - Hammers will be glad when the holidays are over.
Charlton have struggled too recently but yesterday's postponement means
they've had a longer break. Somehow I fancy Rommedahl against Dailly or
Repka so I'm going with the 'Addicks, but no great value here.
Chelski v Brum - a curiously out-of-sorts Chelski winning ugly with a
single goal - what a surprise. Brum are doing well these hols but I
don't think they'll trouble the score sheet. Another single goal win for
Chelski?
Liverpool v West Brom - West Brom lorded it over disinterested Spurs,
but their away form is unimpressive and this looks a home banker. No
value at these odds though.
Man Utd v Bolton - are Man Utd getting leg-weary, letting Brum come back
twice? With their extra rest, Bolton's up-and-down style could be a
banana skin and the home win looks poor value.
Middlesbrough v Man City - 'Boro have been poor recently. City have
played quite well but poor defending and lack of finishing power has let
them down. Could be a low-scoring game, a very low-scoring game. Perhaps
worth a punt on 0-0.
Portsmouth v Fulham - Portsmouth were dire against Al Arsene but will be
a different proposition with their loyal crowd behind them. I'd like to
give the nod to Fulham because they're playing some decent footie at the
moment, but they always find a way to throw points away - perhaps a draw?
Sunderland v Everton - the bookies rate this even. I'd give the nod to
Everton as they have the ability to play some incisive football - they
actually scored against 'Pool - but I'm sure the match officials will
cost them at least one goal. This looks like another very low-scoring match.
Tottenham v Newcastle - Spurs look like a team badly in need of some
R&R. 'Toon weren't at the races last Saturday but Spurs aren't such
relentless opponents as Pool and I'm not convinced either team is strong
enough to force a result.
Wigan v Blackburn - Roberts and Camara are on fire at the moment and
despite Blackburn having a couple of decent wins away to Boro, I can't
see their big defenders having the speed to cope. Home win.
I'm going for a VERY aggressive double - Villa and Bolton at just over
40. I also quite fancy Boro and Sunderland as 0-0s.
Anyone have any thoughts?
NigelH
Lescor
"Nigel" <use...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:43b43214$0$27158$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net...
> Villa v Al Arsene - a turn in Al Arsene's season or a dead cat bounce?
> They have still to do it away from home. Villa are doing ok at the moment
> and I reckon at 5.5 they represent good value.
I forecast a decent run from Arsenal a few games back, enough at least
to get them into top 4 contention. They still have plenty of quality and
this tends to get sides through when they have tough schedules.
Villa are on a decent run, but will probably drop a point here, maybe 3 ?
>
> Charlton v West Ham - Hammers will be glad when the holidays are over.
> Charlton have struggled too recently but yesterday's postponement means
> they've had a longer break. Somehow I fancy Rommedahl against Dailly or
> Repka so I'm going with the 'Addicks, but no great value here.
Difficult, and a game, like many others, where it is just a waste of time to
try to predict the result (unless we see very attractive odds). W Ham are
probably performing the better of these two right now.
>
> Chelski v Brum - a curiously out-of-sorts Chelski winning ugly with a
> single goal - what a surprise. Brum are doing well these hols but I don't
> think they'll trouble the score sheet. Another single goal win for
> Chelski?
Chelsea seemed to miss that vital midfield to attack link which Lampard
provides so well, which is no surprise after 160 consecutive games.
But no fitter side in the Prem and plenty of subs to call on. Even with
Brums battling spirit I fancy the blues by 2 or 3. But not with money.
>
> Liverpool v West Brom - West Brom lorded it over disinterested Spurs, but
> their away form is unimpressive and this looks a home banker. No value at
> these odds though.
Agreed. WBA are poor away. But it is another game in a hectic period.
Benitez amazes me with some of his comments. He told the world that
it is impossible to get a team fit after playing 2 days earlier just before
Pools game against Everton. It rates with " Chelsea are scared of us"
for stupidity. I doubt if the managers of Wigan, Chelsea, Bolton or
Blackburn would encourage their side to feel tired?
>
> Man Utd v Bolton - are Man Utd getting leg-weary, letting Brum come back
> twice? With their extra rest, Bolton's up-and-down style could be a banana
> skin and the home win looks poor value.
You could be right. Bolton are a hard nut to crack and it's the well
organised
sides which win through when the games come with little rest. Even so,
I fancy the quality of Man U will prove enough.
> Middlesbrough v Man City - 'Boro have been poor recently. City have played
> quite well but poor defending and lack of finishing power has let them
> down. Could be a low-scoring game, a very low-scoring game. Perhaps worth
> a punt on 0-0.
City showing the better form I think. Close, but I doubt low scoring
>
> Portsmouth v Fulham - Portsmouth were dire against Al Arsene but will be a
> different proposition with their loyal crowd behind them. I'd like to give
> the nod to Fulham because they're playing some decent footie at the
> moment, but they always find a way to throw points away - perhaps a draw?
I think Fulham are good enough to win this, but the draw would be no shock.
>
> Sunderland v Everton - the bookies rate this even. I'd give the nod to
> Everton as they have the ability to play some incisive football - they
> actually scored against 'Pool - but I'm sure the match officials will cost
> them at least one goal. This looks like another very low-scoring match.
I agree.
>
> Tottenham v Newcastle - Spurs look like a team badly in need of some R&R.
> 'Toon weren't at the races last Saturday but Spurs aren't such relentless
> opponents as Pool and I'm not convinced either team is strong enough to
> force a result.
Clear home for me. Newcastle have been flattered by the apparent
improvement in form in some of their recent games. Spurs should be too
lively.
>
> Wigan v Blackburn - Roberts and Camara are on fire at the moment and
> despite Blackburn having a couple of decent wins away to Boro, I can't see
> their big defenders having the speed to cope. Home win.
Yes indeed. Having got a run of difficult games against some of the better
sides
out of the way ( where they played quite well except against Pool) they are
back
on song. Blackburn don't turn over easily. but a home win looks a good bet.
> I'm going for a VERY aggressive double - Villa and Bolton at just over 40.
> I also quite fancy Boro and Sunderland as 0-0s.
>
> Anyone have any thoughts?
Good luck Nigel. No bet from me. Fancy some but not at the prices.
Les
Woollyzone
"Lescor" <les...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:dp3cpt$dud$1...@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
>
Just out of interest, do you know how your predictions are faring for
profit/loss over the season so far? (if you record them, that is)
Nigel
I'm well down on the season - Les is the proven profit-maker. But I
derive encouragement from the number of times that my narratives prove
correct even if my recommended bet turns out to be a disaster.
NigelH
Woollyzone
(as does Les). Its also a bit depressing in that despite all that analysis,
it *still* seems hard to make a profit!
Lescor
"Woollyzone" <nn...@aaah.co.uk> wrote in message
news:dp3juh$bpi$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
Only a few hundred in front so, far but as a cash punter, who also has
the occasional midweek game bet, it is difficult to give an exact figure
without a lot of work. My overall football plus so far is around £700-800
but this is less than any other season so far at this stage
( except the first one where I posted my choices here and it proved to be
the kiss of death for that season) but the drop is mainly due to sticking to
the principle of only betting if the odds seem decent and not having a bet
just for the sake of it. This can cost as it did last week with a missed
treble
but it has to be wise in the long term.
Stakes vary from £15 to max £50 (rare). My overall choices are fine ,better
when tested a while back than most of the press pros.
Should be another winning season given 2 or 3 more winning weeks which
is all I need at the prices I look for at the stakes I invest.
I don't' think this shows any great skill. Two main factors: never rely on
book form, performance is more useful in the long run....and know when
to pass.
Les
Birminghampunter
Do you ever cover the draw as well as well as the result that you fancy ? I
have read a couple of things that suggest that in a treble for instance,
find two bankers and good price result that you think has a reasonable
chance, say two homes and an away. Have one treble on that selection, and
have another treble with the outsider as a draw. What's your opinion on this
?
Lescor
"Birminghampunter" <no-...@none.com> wrote in message
news:ldwuf.68755$PD2....@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
Sounds reasonable, but my preference would be to find another result
for my 3rd choice, if possible, rather than cut the bet by 50% ,or
alternatively,
restrict the bet to a full price double on the 2 bankers.
For me, the idea of covering a bet two ways is not on because it goes
against
my method which is to back my opinions. and covering a game for 2 possible
outcomes suggests that I have not got one. If this is true, why am I having
a
bet?
My method is not the only way, and I would not suggest it is the best way,
but
it is the result my own experience and it works pretty well for me. It is
very
simple. For what they are worth, they are...............
Never make your picks by using just the recent newspaper results or reports.
The bare result can often hide the facts about a teams performance with good
or bad luck playing a significant part, and match reports tend to be
coloured
by the outcome. The reason I stick to Prem only is because I can now watch
all the games on Sky and make my own judgements.
Only bet if you feel the odds are reasonable ( the layers are seldom
generous).
Vary the amounts you bet according to how confident you are in your choices.
Never back those massive odds-on bankers.
Remember that you don't have to have a bet. Looking for a bet every week is
a mugs game but thousands do it. Far better to pass and increase your next
wager when you really fancy some games ,rather than force yourself to come
to conclusions when you don't really have a view.
This last one can cost as it did for me having had no bets in the last 2
rounds
of Prem games. Missed a treble on Boxing day, and my posted views on the
midweek games were about spot on and so another win missed, But did not
like the odds enough and scared by the likely Xmas freak results, Wrong,
but probably the right way to go in the long run?
Good luck in your picks in the New Year,
Les
Nigel
> Never make your picks by using just the recent newspaper results or reports.
> The bare result can often hide the facts about a teams performance with good
> or bad luck playing a significant part, and match reports tend to be
> coloured by the outcome.
I posted a few days ago about my computer system for picking draws, but
for some reason the posting didn't make it through the ether to this
newsgroup.
At the start of the season the system didn't do very well - I could
claim it was 'unlucky' because it suffered a lot from 'last minute
syndrome' where someone would pop up and score a winner in injury time.
However it had a very good holiday period and has now moved into profit
for the season.
That's very unimpressive compared to Les's manual picks, but it does
show there can be value in picking draws and just using the bald match
results without taking standard of play or luck into account.
NigelH
Lescor
Hope it continues Nigel. We will all soon be mil-yon-ares.
But I wonder? Have you tested your computer results against your own draw
selections, or compared the number of holiday draws against the seasonal
weekly average. You probably have, and sorry if I am stating the obvious,
but
if the period had a higher than normal number of draws it will probably
reflect
in a favourable success rate whichever way you pick them.
You might guess that I have my doubts against stat based forecasting. The
reasons are straightforward and, to me, seem logical. The layers have more
stats available than any of us. Although the brighter odds compilers might
have
a view which might show up in the price, it is mainly the form data which is
reflected in the offers. They know how to get the most from their percentage
advantage.
Recent results mainly dictate price. But we all know that bare results
often
don't tell the whole story. A couple of unlucky 2-0 losses shows up the same
as two complete 2-0 thrashings which should have been worse.
Seems to me that the only possible advantage that we can ever have over
the layers is in something bare data will never show, which is spotting
improving
or falling performance. If this is true, the only way to do it is by
watching games.
Les
Nigel
> "Nigel" <use...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:43bbe713$0$2696$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net...
>
>>Lescor wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Never make your picks by using just the recent newspaper results or
>>>reports.
>>>The bare result can often hide the facts about a teams performance with
>>>good
>>>or bad luck playing a significant part, and match reports tend to be
>>>coloured by the outcome.
>>
>>I posted a few days ago about my computer system for picking draws, but
>>for some reason the posting didn't make it through the ether to this
>>newsgroup.
>>
>>At the start of the season the system didn't do very well - I could claim
>>it was 'unlucky' because it suffered a lot from 'last minute syndrome'
>>where someone would pop up and score a winner in injury time. However it
>>had a very good holiday period and has now moved into profit for the
>>season.
>>
>>That's very unimpressive compared to Les's manual picks, but it does show
>>there can be value in picking draws and just using the bald match results
>>without taking standard of play or luck into account.
>>
>>NigelH
>
>
>
>
> Hope it continues Nigel. We will all soon be mil-yon-ares.
I won't be, not using my draw system.
> But I wonder? Have you tested your computer results against your own draw
> selections, or compared the number of holiday draws against the seasonal
> weekly average. You probably have, and sorry if I am stating the obvious,
> but
> if the period had a higher than normal number of draws it will probably
> reflect
> in a favourable success rate whichever way you pick them.
I keep a count of the system's success rates against the percentage of
draws on each match day - as you'd expect, there is a weak correlation.
> You might guess that I have my doubts against stat based forecasting. The
> reasons are straightforward and, to me, seem logical. The layers have more
> stats available than any of us. Although the brighter odds compilers might
> have
> a view which might show up in the price, it is mainly the form data which is
> reflected in the offers. They know how to get the most from their percentage
> advantage.
> Recent results mainly dictate price. But we all know that bare results
> often
> don't tell the whole story. A couple of unlucky 2-0 losses shows up the same
> as two complete 2-0 thrashings which should have been worse.
True. No doubt the system could be improved if a lot more detail were
added to it. It might even approach the quality of predictions made by
the most powerful computers ever made - human brains! But my objective
was to have a bit of fun without putting in too much effort.
> Seems to me that the only possible advantage that we can ever have over
> the layers is in something bare data will never show, which is spotting
> improving
> or falling performance. If this is true, the only way to do it is by
> watching games.
The fact that I've made an overall profit from Ladbrokes suggests that
even a noddy system like mine can be competitive - at fair odds (or even
Betfair odds) the profit would have been larger. I don't think it's true
to say that watching games is the only way, although I don't dispute
that it's a more profitable way. Whether it's better depends on your
cost/benefit criteria. The system takes me a lot less time to run than
watching 15 hours of premiership games, and it covers the 4 English
divisions and 4 Scottish divisions.
>
> Les
>
NigelH
Lescor
True Nigel. I have often wondered if we could have a computer and data
based system where we might incorporate both book form and performance,
by adding a factor to entries which related just to performance rather than
the often deceptive score and result?
Problem is, I suppose, it brings us back to opinion, which is where I came
in.
Good luck with your picks.
Les
Birminghampunter
>
> "Birminghampunter" <no-...@none.com> wrote in message
> news:ldwuf.68755$PD2....@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>
>> Do you ever cover the draw as well as well as the result that you fancy ?
>> I have read a couple of things that suggest that in a treble for
>> instance, find two bankers and good price result that you think has a
>> reasonable chance, say two homes and an away. Have one treble on that
>> selection, and have another treble with the outsider as a draw. What's
>> your opinion on this ?
>
>
>
>
>
> Sounds reasonable, but my preference would be to find another result
> for my 3rd choice, if possible, rather than cut the bet by 50% ,or
> alternatively,
> restrict the bet to a full price double on the 2 bankers.
>
> For me, the idea of covering a bet two ways is not on because it goes
> against
> my method which is to back my opinions. and covering a game for 2 possible
> outcomes suggests that I have not got one. If this is true, why am I
> having a
> bet?
True, but even if your opinion is correct and your selection dominates the
game, sometimes the ball just wont go in the net or the ref sends off the
influential player. I suppose it comes down to temperament. Some people
would rather dilute the profit to get fewer losing runs and have a saver.
Nigel
Two observations. Firstly my comment about number of divisions covered
was a red herring - what matters is the rate of return on predictions
made ie quality not quantity.
Secondly, the acid test is whether predictions are good enough to charge
people for. My system's clearly are not whereas yours are. So that
potentially adds a whole new dimension to the cost/benefit criteria. Not
that I'm suggesting you turn pro - that would kill this newsgroup,
because I wouldn't bother to post opinions if there was no discussion.
NigelH
Lescor
Also true, but good or bad fortune will equal out over time and I know too
well that many winning bets came with a touch of luck. But this is expected
when we use a very general and subjective view of comparative form which
is certain to be wrong often ,but hopefully, correct enough times to produce
a decent profit. but I don't deny that it can be frustrating.
Les
>
>