Desso Posted October 3, 2018 Report Share Posted October 3, 2018 10 hours ago, bcfcbird said: Not sure about that. Bet365 have the Rotherham win at 3.75, draw at 3.5 and a City win at 2.1 which I think is fair. We've not looked particularly strong in the last few games but this is a game we can win and bring our confidence back up! That can't be right can it? If I put a bet on all three, the worst I can do is get my money back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveInSA Posted October 3, 2018 Report Share Posted October 3, 2018 I’ve learnt over the years to expect the unexpected with BCFC. This is the sort of game we should win and more often than not we lose. My moneys on a 5-0 away win, a 3-1 home win or a 0-0 draw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ooRya Posted October 3, 2018 Report Share Posted October 3, 2018 10 hours ago, hodge said: I hate this saying 10 games into the season when we're at no danger of relegation atm. We could lose this win the next and no one would really bat an eye. If Hunt is the rumoured potential injured player I wonder whether we may go 3 at the back .... Maenpaa Webster .... Baker.... Kelly O'Dowda .......................................... Eliasson Brownhill ........... Pack .......Paterson Taylor .... Weimann Basically Pato getting 1 last chance through the middle how he did well last season, but this is also a case of what happens when you get a few injuries and all your best younger players are loaned out. Quite like the look of that, but personally I would put in Walsh instead of Paterson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coxy27 Posted October 3, 2018 Report Share Posted October 3, 2018 5 hours ago, Desso said: That can't be right can it? If I put a bet on all three, the worst I can do is get my money back. Errr? Say you placed £10 on each... You'd make £7.50 profit if Rotherham win, £5 profit on the draw and Lose £9 if City win. So no, the worst you could do would be lose on City. Another way to look at it is to work out the percentage an odd attributes to an outcome. In this case, Rotherham are 11/4 = 26.67%, Draw is 5/2 = 28.57% and City are 11/10 = 47.62% Total percentage is just under 103%. This total in any market is known as the overround, and basically anything over 100 is the bookie's 'margin' If this was under 100% then yes, you could theoretically bet on all three and profit whatever happened. Not possible here though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leveller Posted October 3, 2018 Report Share Posted October 3, 2018 23 minutes ago, Coxy27 said: Errr? Say you placed £10 on each... You'd make £7.50 profit if Rotherham win, £5 profit on the draw and Lose £9 if City win. So no, the worst you could do would be lose on City. Another way to look at it is to work out the percentage an odd attributes to an outcome. In this case, Rotherham are 11/4 = 26.67%, Draw is 5/2 = 28.57% and City are 11/10 = 47.62% Total percentage is just under 103%. This total in any market is known as the overround, and basically anything over 100 is the bookie's 'margin' If this was under 100% then yes, you could theoretically bet on all three and profit whatever happened. Not possible here though. Perhaps the way the odds are quoted is confusing us stupid non betting persons. Does it mean City are 2.1/1 to win? Doesn’t that mean you end up with £31 on a £10 stake? Clearly not, because if so you would gain £1 overall, not lose £9. On your figures, 2.1 must be a total return including the stake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pride of the west Posted October 3, 2018 Report Share Posted October 3, 2018 9 minutes ago, Leveller said: Perhaps the way the odds are quoted is confusing us stupid non betting persons. Does it mean City are 2.1/1 to win? Doesn’t that mean you end up with £31 on a £10 stake? Clearly not, because if so you would gain £1 overall, not lose £9. On your figures, 2.1 must be a total return including the stake. When quoted like this (2.1 etc) this includes stake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted October 3, 2018 Report Share Posted October 3, 2018 2 hours ago, ooRya said: Quite like the look of that, but personally I would put in Walsh instead of Paterson. Yeah so would I, think LJ would go Pato though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redrascal2 Posted October 3, 2018 Report Share Posted October 3, 2018 Is the possible return of Paterson, who offers virtually nothing to the team due to the fact that Johnson was stupid enough to give him a new three year deal and feels he needs to play to justify this decision. Even though he fails even to put a full shift in let alone influence a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted October 3, 2018 Report Share Posted October 3, 2018 This must be a sign. Two random files that were dropped on the Major's desk this morning ! Purple and Lime . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Robin Posted October 3, 2018 Report Share Posted October 3, 2018 16 hours ago, hodge said: I hate this saying 10 games into the season when we're at no danger of relegation atm. We could lose this win the next and no one would really bat an eye. Points are important at any point of the season: not taking them in affordable matches now could become a regret in a few months time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted October 3, 2018 Report Share Posted October 3, 2018 2 minutes ago, Dan Robin said: Points are important at any point of the season: not taking them in affordable matches now could become a regret in a few months time. Not disagreeing points are always important, just the term 'must win' annoys me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturny Posted October 3, 2018 Report Share Posted October 3, 2018 5 minutes ago, hodge said: Not disagreeing points are always important, just the term 'must win' annoys me. Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted October 3, 2018 Report Share Posted October 3, 2018 1 minute ago, Sturny said: Why? You may as well say every game is 'must' win then you know we won't though so its about taking things in perspective, if we lost/drew tonight but won our next 3 would anyone really look back on this game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturny Posted October 3, 2018 Report Share Posted October 3, 2018 7 minutes ago, hodge said: You may as well say every game is 'must' win then you know we won't though so its about taking things in perspective, if we lost/drew tonight but won our next 3 would anyone really look back on this game? No I don't think they would, I think the term must win seems quite entitled this early on. That being said we're pretty big favourites for this game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted October 3, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2018 So, Richard Wood is fit and selected. Towell the no10 not in the match day “17”, suggesting injured....only naming 6 subs. Hopefully Wood not 100% but playing because they are short in numbers. Palmer comes into the midfield, which probably means a 4141 (rather than 4411 v Stoke). Definitely will be congested in the centre of midfield, and would like to think our threat will be from wide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.