SA Footy

BAYMAN has had bets on sides batting 2nd after the toss in 20/20 games this season
He has collected 6 times in 8 games.

There were 15 games this season ????????
6 WINS BATTING 1ST
9 WINS BATTING 2ND

Those stats are misleading
SA batted first most games otherwise it would be prob 8-7 in favour of sides batting first ?


Inconclusive in my opinion
I think the better teams win overall
The better sides bat better whether they bat first or second.

However when poor batting teams play against each other [SA /NSW] there is some logic in backing the side that bets 2nd

But when 2 good batting teams play each other it should make no difference at all, and might suit sides batting 1st ?

So BAYMAN congratulations for winning on a recent trend of sides batting 2nd.
AND dont listen to those commentators who gave you a BUM STEER.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i think like most things you can bet on

should always stick to the better team/horse/dog etc........

mind you BAYMANS 6/8 is a fair record and if it continues retirement is around the corner..........

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:i think like most things you can bet on

should always stick to the better team/horse/dog etc........

mind you BAYMANS 6/8 is a fair record and if it continues retirement is around the corner..........

BAYMAN = genuis he backed 6 winners in 8 bets
The other 7 games he would have backed only 3 winners from 7 bets

worry about the future as you can't back winners from past events, although the form helps for FUTURE REFERENCE

bayman wrote:worry about the future as you can't back winners from past events, although the form helps for FUTURE REFERENCE

But you based your system on the past.
Didnt you get the brainstorm from some stats quoted by a cricket show ?


PS the past is always the best guide for the future

give it a rest malsation/rottweillor i'm not sure which breed bites on & hangs on more so i put both as you just refuse to let it go

You have been lucky backing the sides that bat 2nd in the bets you have had
Just admit there is no advantage.
You have not explained fully why it should work.
I have explained if you back the best teams you noMALly back the winner[that works]

PS you baited me first with this subject in a previous game in the cricket room.
You continue to start posts in the cricket room saying you will back the side batting 2nd.
You were also a very poor loser in the WA V VI game in your posts in the cricket room.


And I have researched the topic and your batting 2nd system is full of holes.
You have been lucky to start betting your system just as it started working.

mal wrote:You have been lucky backing the sides that bat 2nd in the bets you have had
Just admit there is no advantage.
You have not explained fully why it should work.
I have explained if you back the best teams you noMALly back the winner[that works]

PS you baited me first with this subject in a previous game in the cricket room.
You continue to start posts in the cricket room saying you will back the side batting 2nd.
You were also a very poor loser in the WA V VI game in your posts in the cricket room.


And I have researched the topic and your batting 2nd system is full of holes.
You have been lucky to start betting your system just as it started working.

i state something to TRY & HELP & all of a sudden i'm baiting you & i'm not a poor loser i stated a fact, the umpiring was dismal & it was also stated in the paper (so my brother told me) & i know an umpire (you know which one) & he told me after the bucknor episode that if it was a domestic game all hell would break loose behind the scenes & you wouldn't get another domestic game for a match or two, so wait & see

bottom line is i won, you won so what's the problem ? the only problem i can see is that i would not bet against you

You were trying to help with your system, thats fine thats not the issue.
The issue is your system has no foundation.
You backing teams on a toss of a coin and whether a side bats second or not.
This is an element of fluke, not sound betting principles
You fluked a few results.
If sides like NS + SA bat 2nd in 20/20 games you would go broke.

You have no long term stats to support your system, you had bets
in 8 games and you were very lucky that some good sides were batting second.

You have no long term research to back you up.
You also are dodging explaining why your system works
Convince me why it has worked and we may get somewhere

mal wrote:You were trying to help with your system, thats fine thats not the issue.
The issue is your system has no foundation.
You backing teams on a toss of a coin and whether a side bats second or not.
This is an element of fluke, not sound betting principles
You fluked a few results.
If sides like NS + SA bat 2nd in 20/20 games you would go broke.

You have no long term stats to support your system, you had bets
in 8 games and you were very lucky that some good sides were batting second.

You have no long term research to back you up.
You also are dodging explaining why your system works
Convince me why it has worked and we may get somewhere

i've had it subject closed

I have explained that its not neccessarily to do with who bats 2nd.
Its more to do with the quality of team that bats 2nd

RESULTS THIS SEASON
sides batting first listed first

VI 187.....QL 140
WA188....TA 189
_____________________

At this point leading into the SA V NS game at Adelaide Oval this statement was made by BAYMAN
" I heard [ from a cricket show?] that the sides batting 2nd have an advantage and have won 15 of the last 17 games."
At this point I replied, " Are you sure I would have thought the side batting first had the advantage."
You then backed NS v SA as they were batting 2nd [ and won the bet, well done]

________________________

SA 134...NS 135
NS 157...TA 5/161
VI 186....WA 5/187
QL V SA ABANDONED
SA 127...TA 2/131
VI 154....NS 8/142
QL 154...WA 6/157
NS 121...QL 115
SA 97....WA 5/98
VI 178...TA 171
NS 159..WA 4/160
TA 174...QL 1/177
VI 142...SA 137
VI 203...WA 171

As I have stated the system works better when bad batting teams like SA/NS bat first
SA/NS batted first 6 times and lost 5 times

This is called research

15 games
6 wins batting 1ST
9 wins batting 2nd

Leaving out the bad teams NS/SA who batted first 6 times the results would be
5 wins batting 1ST
4 wins batting 2ND

SA/NS would lose most games no matter who bats first or second.

Geezus mal, stop hounding Bayman FFS. He brings up ideas which usually win and you hound him for that!? Its getting boring mate.

MAL, What are the Stats for the Late MALS for 2007 ?

If we had $100 on every Late Mal for 2007 would we be OR

so basically in every game SA and NSW are involved in we back the opposition and collect $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

CMON NOW GROUP HUG TIME TO KISS N MAKE UP PMSL

i actually think this is a good topic for debate

every system should be debatable and if you believe in the system you use then you should stick by it and defend it against any constructive criticism, or use the constructive criticism to further improve the system

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:i actually think this is a good topic for debate

every system should be debatable and if you believe in the system you use then you should stick by it and defend it against any constructive criticism, or use the constructive criticism to further improve the system

At last someone who sees what Im up to

When its all done and dusted there is method to my madness.

Time for my confession.



On 1/1/08 I was at the Adelaide oval with the BAYMAN
He told me about his plan
" Whichever side bats second will win the game."
He was doing this because of a stat given to him by some TV commentators
The commentators said in the previous seventeen games of domestic 20/20 games
that the sides batting second had won 15 OF THE LAST 17 games.
I did query those stats at the time and.....

After that BAYMAN was backing teams batting 2nd and winning
I was unsure and did my research to see if in fact sides batting 2nd had success the previous years and to see if I could cash in on this trend.
This is the research I had done.

YEAR 1.... 2005
sides listed batting first and results of the winning sides if batting 1st or 2nd

QL 136...TA 1/15.. NO RESULT
VI 163.....WA 161...........IST
QL 167....NS 5/168.........2ND
SA 113....VI 2/114..........2ND
WA 174...SA 120............IST
NS 188...TA 119.............IST
VI 233....NS 140............1ST.......FINAL


_________________________
YEAR 2005 SUMMARY
BATTING 1ST 4
BATTING 2ND 2
_________________________

YEAR 2... 2006 GAMES

QL 202....TA 164............IST
VI 203.....SA 169...........IST
WA 194...NS 168............1ST
WA 193...SA.138............1ST
QL..173...NS 164............1ST
TA V VI ABANDONED
SA..150...NS 142............2ND
TA 208....NS 165............1ST
VI 194.....QL 106............1ST
TA 202....NS 165............1ST
SA 147....QL 128............1ST
WA 201...VI 206.............2ND
VI 160...TA 150............1ST..................FINAL


___________________________
YEAR 2006 SUMMARY
BATTING 1ST 10
BATTING 2ND 2
___________________________


YEAR 3 ...2007 GAMES

VI 187.....QL 140.............1ST
WA 188...TA 189..............2ND

At this point is when we went to Adelaide Oval
BAYMAN heard on TV that sides batting 2nd had won about 15 of the last 17 games.
Those commentators gave BAYMAN the BUM STEER

IT WAS THE SIDES BATTING FIRST THAT HAVE WON ABOUT 14 OF THE LAST 17 GAMES.

____________________________________________________________________________

Confession time
I have posted a few times it makes no difference who bats when, good sides win most games.
I was armed with those stats
Ive been setting BAYMAN up for over a week now saying his system has holes in it
I started this post with the view to stringing him along and ultiMATEly ending with this post.
PAYBACK TIME ......[you know why !]

Anyhow BAYMAN was winning on a system which only won when he started it
6 wins in 8 games
before that it was 3 wins 14 losses


Overall in all 20/20 games the stats are very close to
BATTING 1ST 20
BATTING 2ND 11

PS : BAYMAN I GOTTTTTTTCHA

You see Bayman was very clever, that run of teams winning batting first could not be maintained so he bet against it and cashed bigtime!

Once again MAL's too clever.
You gotta get up early to put one over him.

In relation to the profit/loss of the late MAL's, its success rate is probably around the 60% mark and your total profit for the year is about $3.80