WALES v AUSTRALIA-

[qccfc]

your original 'patriotism' remark has been blown out of the water, and you've been backtracking with bobbins ever since

Balancing the book is a tried and tested method of betting in this country, and i where i struggle is in the fact that people are suggesting that its rubbish that it is being used in this market.

[TruBlue]

However odds simple reflect flow of money.

Utter rot. Individual bookmakers often take a strong view on events in order to get the money in. They occasionally lose as a result.

The art of bookmaking is nowhere near as simple as you're suggesting.

Im not suggesting its simple at all. I'm simply saying that they dont simply predict the results.

All the odds show at the moment is that the bookies have taken more money on Eng than on Aus, and that there may be reasons why this is the case.

As I said a shared platform between Aussies and Brits in Betfair has the price at roughly the same as the bookies so clearly they are favourites to win the game and that isn't down to any patriotism.

[qccfc]

However odds simple reflect flow of money.

Utter rot. Individual bookmakers often take a strong view on events in order to get the money in. They occasionally lose as a result.

The art of bookmaking is nowhere near as simple as you're suggesting.

Im not suggesting its simple at all. I'm simply saying that they dont simply predict the results.

All the odds show at the moment is that the bookies have taken more money on Eng than on Aus, and that there may be reasons why this is the case.

Of course there are cases where the bookie chases the money and makes a loss, he may deliberately create a loss leader.

Is that fair.

[Eric Cartman]

However odds simple reflect flow of money.

Utter rot. Individual bookmakers often take a strong view on events in order to get the money in. They occasionally lose as a result.

The art of bookmaking is nowhere near as simple as you're suggesting.

Im not suggesting its simple at all. I'm simply saying that they dont simply predict the results.

All the odds show at the moment is that the bookies have taken more money on Eng than on Aus, and that there may be reasons why this is the case.

Of course there are cases where the bookie chases the money and makes a loss, he may deliberately create a loss leader.

However the long term aim is to create a balanced book and to make money, long odd encourages a punt, and short odd discourage.

source: mug punter of 10 years

[Kiffa]

However odds simple reflect flow of money.

Utter rot. Individual bookmakers often take a strong view on events in order to get the money in. They occasionally lose as a result.

The art of bookmaking is nowhere near as simple as you're suggesting.

Im not suggesting its simple at all. I'm simply saying that they dont simply predict the results.

All the odds show at the moment is that the bookies have taken more money on Eng than on Aus, and that there may be reasons why this is the case.

Of course there are cases where the bookie chases the money and makes a loss, he may deliberately create a loss leader.

However the long term aim is to create a balanced book and to make money, long odd encourages a punt, and short odd discourage.

It was the only part of your original argument???

[qccfc]

However odds simple reflect flow of money.

Utter rot. Individual bookmakers often take a strong view on events in order to get the money in. They occasionally lose as a result.

The art of bookmaking is nowhere near as simple as you're suggesting.

Im not suggesting its simple at all. I'm simply saying that they dont simply predict the results.

All the odds show at the moment is that the bookies have taken more money on Eng than on Aus, and that there may be reasons why this is the case.

Of course there are cases where the bookie chases the money and makes a loss, he may deliberately create a loss leader.

However the long term aim is to create a balanced book and to make money, long odd encourages a punt, and short odd discourage.

As asked earlier, what about the lower odds on England in Australia than in the UK? That surely goes against your argument?

I thought the patriotic betting in the UK was a stronger factor than it really was, this was proven to me. I was wrong on that point.

[TruBlue]

However odds simple reflect flow of money.

Utter rot. Individual bookmakers often take a strong view on events in order to get the money in. They occasionally lose as a result.

The art of bookmaking is nowhere near as simple as you're suggesting.

Im not suggesting its simple at all. I'm simply saying that they dont simply predict the results.

All the odds show at the moment is that the bookies have taken more money on Eng than on Aus, and that there may be reasons why this is the case.

Of course there are cases where the bookie chases the money and makes a loss, he may deliberately create a loss leader.

However the long term aim is to create a balanced book and to make money, long odd encourages a punt, and short odd discourage.

As asked earlier, what about the lower odds on England in Australia than in the UK? That surely goes against your argument?

It does, and its a perfectly valid point. I would assume that the Australian bookmaker is encouraging bets on Australia.

Either way I think England being favourites to win the group is now more than likely and the bookies have it priced correctly.

[qccfc]

However odds simple reflect flow of money.

Utter rot. Individual bookmakers often take a strong view on events in order to get the money in. They occasionally lose as a result.

The art of bookmaking is nowhere near as simple as you're suggesting.

Im not suggesting its simple at all. I'm simply saying that they dont simply predict the results.

All the odds show at the moment is that the bookies have taken more money on Eng than on Aus, and that there may be reasons why this is the case.

Of course there are cases where the bookie chases the money and makes a loss, he may deliberately create a loss leader.

However the long term aim is to create a balanced book and to make money, long odd encourages a punt, and short odd discourage.

As asked earlier, what about the lower odds on England in Australia than in the UK? That surely goes against your argument?

It does, and its a perfectly valid point. I would assume that the Australian bookmaker is encouraging bets on Australia.

Its too simplistic to use either argument that a bookmaker predicts results, or simply balances a book. Because there are reasons why a bookie may want to take a hit on a particular event.

Its been one of those weeks.

[TruBlue]

After reading Kiffa's post i had to go back and re-read my first comment, because i was convinced that i was talking about something else, and the patriotism was being over egged.

[Optimistic Nick]

However odds simple reflect flow of money.

Utter rot. Individual bookmakers often take a strong view on events in order to get the money in. They occasionally lose as a result.

The art of bookmaking is nowhere near as simple as you're suggesting.

Not true I'm afraid. It's not the tote, the odds are set by reference to probability, not volume. Odds will come in a bit if there is huge volume on one outcome if a bookie wants to limit its exposure, but if you are saying the odds of an Aussie win are longer than an England win just because everyone's put a fiver on an England victory, you are wrong. If that was true, the odds of an Australian win could conceivably be longer than the actual probability of an Aussie win, and when that happens bookies lose their shirts.

[lardy]

After reading Kiffa's post i had to go back and re-read my first comment, because i was convinced that i was talking about something else, and the patriotism was being over egged.

When i read it, even i disagreed with it.

And that's why qccfc is one of the best posters here.

[Optimistic Nick]

After reading Kiffa's post i had to go back and re-read my first comment, because i was convinced that i was talking about something else, and the patriotism was being over egged.

Refreshing to see someone do this. Good stuff

[TruBlue]

After reading Kiffa's post i had to go back and re-read my first comment, because i was convinced that i was talking about something else, and the patriotism was being over egged.

When i read it, even i disagreed with it.

Its been one of those weeks.

Agreed.

[AlwaysAway]

Bump

Am I right in thinking neither Wales nor Australia want to win.
Stupid game eggball

[surge]

Bump

My impression (already been wrong once in this thread) is that winners will face Scotland/Japan and losers will face South Africa.

[AlwaysAway]

Bump

Am I right in thinking neither Wales nor Australia want to win.

I had been told the winners of the Wales group would play New Zealand.

[Pearcey]

Bump

Am I right in thinking neither Wales nor Australia want to win.

Stupid game eggball

If we win the group we are likely to play Scotland. If we win that we are likely to face Ireland or France.

[Top Gun Chippy]

We shouldn't underestimate the pleasure it will give the Aussies to knock England out of their home tournament.

Interesting the bookies have England as favourites to beat Australia and therefore probably end up winning the group. They have beaten them 4 times in 5 so are understandably confident.

If they do then it's a quarter v Scotland and a semi against France/Ireland/Argentina and they would be very disappointed not to get to the final with that build up.

The worst possible result for Wales is England winning but Australia getting a bonus point, and that seems to be what most people are expecting.

The odds from English bookies means nothing. Its obvious they are taking more money on England, based on patriotism.

You don't understand how bookies compile odds. Shouldn't really try and present it as fact when you're clearly guessing.

[the other bob wilson]

Bump

Am I right in thinking neither Wales nor Australia want to win.

Stupid game eggball

My impression (already been wrong once in this thread) is that winners will face Scotland/Japan and losers will face South Africa.

If that means we face New Zealand in the Semi Finals, then so be it - if, by some miracle, we end up winning the thing, we will have to have done so by beating the top sides somewhere along the way.

[surge]

I click "quote" in order to respond to TOBW's post and it takes me to the paypal website. "Get adblocker" I hear you cry, it shouldn't happen regardless.

I wonder how many saying we have a winnable quarter-final whatever watched South Africa yesterday? Eventually our depleted squad, our weak set-piece will be destroyed and South Africa are set to be the team to do it, if Australia don't first.

[Harry Flashman]

Bump

Am I right in thinking neither Wales nor Australia want to win.

Stupid game eggball

My impression (already been wrong once in this thread) is that winners will face Scotland/Japan and losers will face South Africa.

Thank you

If we got to the semis it would be unbelievable and anyone could win it.

[the other bob wilson]

I click "quote" in order to respond to TOBW's post and it takes me to the paypal website. "Get adblocker" I hear you cry, it shouldn't happen regardless.

I saw a fair bit of the South Africa match and I'd make them favourites to beat us in a Quarter Final, but not by much and I certainly wouldn't rate them as one of the best teams I've seen from that country - Wales beating them wouldn't be a huge surprise to me.

[Pearcey]

I would go full strength too. Aus look better than us but there is a remarkable resilience in this Welsh squad. It's also worth noting that despite the injuries Gatland can pick his first choice pack. All our first choice forwards are fit. He has to change the front row. Owens and Lee have to start as does Charteris ahead of Davies at lock. I believe those changes would improve the scrum significantly.

Four first choice backs in Biggar,Roberts,Liam Williams and North should also be fit so 12 first choice selections should be available for the Aus game. Gareth Davies is doing well at 9 so Rhys Webb is not being badly missed so overall its perhaps not that bad.
I also think there is much less pressure on the players now that we have qualified from such a horrible group. That will boost them. We have also won five on the bounce.

We can beat Australia. We can beat Ireland or France. So play our best players against Aus and go for it. Let's get to the final and from there who knows.

[Pearcey]

I click "quote" in order to respond to TOBW's post and it takes me to the paypal website. "Get adblocker" I hear you cry, it shouldn't happen regardless.

I wonder how many saying we have a winnable quarter-final whatever watched South Africa yesterday? Eventually our depleted squad, our weak set-piece will be destroyed and South Africa are set to be the team to do it, if Australia don't first.

Scotland played most of their reserves yesterday. The Boks are very beatable.

[surge]

If we are resting players then key men like Biggar, Roberts, Liam Williams, North, Warburton, AWJ are those most likely.

On the other hand, Biggar and Davies have played few games together and need to develop their partnership, Roberts has had 3 men alongside him already so that's another new partnership, North hasn't hit any heights and we don't have the wing cover...