Blyth

[swadquaker]

Got to admire them yesterday. At half time the title was nearly ours but they just wont lie down

[Ingleby]

We have 24 points still to play for. Little while to go just yet.

[Spyman]

Got to admire them yesterday. At half time the title was nearly ours but they just wont lie down

To say the title was nearly ours is ridiculous.

[swadquaker]

Well we are currently 4/11. If Blyth had lost we would have been about 1/6. I call that nearly

[Darlogramps]

Well we are currently 4/11. If Blyth had lost we would have been about 1/6. I call that nearly

You live by bookies' odds if you want. Sensible people prefer to judge by the NPL table.

[Spyman]

Well we are currently 4/11. If Blyth had lost we would have been about 1/6. I call that nearly

Of course the bookies rarely get it wrong and I'd have made us favourites too, but the odds are also compiled on the basis of the bookies limiting liabilities if we were to win - so given the volume of Darlington supporters likely to place a bet on their own team compared to Blyth supporters doing the same, the liabilities on us winning will be far greater - hence the dramatically shortened odds.

So yes, we're probably favourites (or would've been if Blyth lost on Saturday) - but the prices available are not a true reflection of the probabilities, just a reflection of how much risk the bookies want to take.

[moodymonica]

So are you saying if it was the opposite scenario, Darlington would still be favourites as we have a bigger fan base?

Don't think so, they'll price the league up based on the fact it's now a two horse race and the fact that mathematically were favourite as we have the potential to accrue the most points


If I was a bookie I wouldn't be laying any odds on darlo.

[Spyman]

So are you saying if it was the opposite scenario, Darlington would still be favourites as we have a bigger fan base?

Don't think so, they'll price the league up based on the fact it's now a two horse race and the fact that mathematically were favourite as we have the potential to accrue the most points


If I was a bookie I wouldn't be laying any odds on darlo.

Possibly, possibly not. I'm not a bookmaker.

But I'd wager that the odds would be a lot closer than they currently are if it was Blyth sitting 4 points behind with 3 games in hand.

Our odds are almost certainly skewed by our larger support and therefore larger liability against us winning the league. While our games in hand give us a good chance, as many have pointed out there are all sorts of reasons why they also count against us. Ask Spennymoor.

[DarloDean]

Yes, admire.



Fuck sake

[Neil Johnson]

So are you saying if it was the opposite scenario, Darlington would still be favourites as we have a bigger fan base?

Don't think so, they'll price the league up based on the fact it's now a two horse race and the fact that mathematically were favourite as we have the potential to accrue the most points


If I was a bookie I wouldn't be laying any odds on darlo.

Possibly, possibly not. I'm not a bookmaker.

But I'd wager that the odds would be a lot closer than they currently are if it was Blyth sitting 4 points behind with 3 games in hand.

Our odds are almost certainly skewed by our larger support and therefore larger liability against us winning the league. While our games in hand give us a good chance, as many have pointed out there are all sorts of reasons why they also count against us. Ask Spennymoor.

Glad someone understands betting and the setting of odds.

Some of our Twitterarti are lured into accumulator football bets at rubbish odds on form teams, when officials, mistakes and other factors can cancel out form.

The "know it all" bookies gave Leicester no chance, so they are no experts.

[Quakerz]

So are you saying if it was the opposite scenario, Darlington would still be favourites as we have a bigger fan base?

Don't think so, they'll price the league up based on the fact it's now a two horse race and the fact that mathematically were favourite as we have the potential to accrue the most points


If I was a bookie I wouldn't be laying any odds on darlo.

Possibly, possibly not. I'm not a bookmaker.

But I'd wager that the odds would be a lot closer than they currently are if it was Blyth sitting 4 points behind with 3 games in hand.

Our odds are almost certainly skewed by our larger support and therefore larger liability against us winning the league. While our games in hand give us a good chance, as many have pointed out there are all sorts of reasons why they also count against us. Ask Spennymoor.

Glad someone understands betting and the setting of odds.

Some of our Twitterarti are lured into accumulator football bets at rubbish odds on form teams, when officials, mistakes and other factors can cancel out form.

The "know it all" bookies gave Leicester no chance, so they are no experts.

Of course they're experts which is why they're in business. Experts in any field are not above getting things wrong - but they get things wrong less than, say, you.

No one would have given Leicester a chance, no one. So by your logic there are no experts anywhere. Which is silly.

[swadquaker]

So if we were one point behind with a better goal difference what would any of you put our odds as? And just to prove I am the worlds worst tipster, when I saw Leicester had appointed Ranieri, I backed them to be relegated

[moodymonica]

If we were one point behind, depends how many games were left.
But sat there were only three and there games on paper looked easier it wouldn't matter about out goal difference, the odds would probably be something like 1/2 Blyth, 6/4 Darlington.
Therefore if both teams were equally backed the bookie would still win, I.e. you wouldn't get 1/2 and 2/1 otherwise there would be no profit margin In for them

Neil I despair sometimes mate.
Odds compilers base there judgement on probability.
Leicester has just staved off relegation
If.it was such a certainty everyone would have been on them.
Even when they were winning the league by four or five points in Feb I still wouldn't touch them.
I k ow a.few lads backed them in December at 33/1.I thought it dumb.
Still wouldn't want to put cash on even now!

[Darlojack66]

Sorry if a ferdy but are Blyth playing Hyde tonight

[Spyman]

If we were one point behind, depends how many games were left.
But sat there were only three and there games on paper looked easier it wouldn't matter about out goal difference, the odds would probably be something like 1/2 Blyth, 6/4 Darlington.
Therefore if both teams were equally backed the bookie would still win, I.e. you wouldn't get 1/2 and 2/1 otherwise there would be no profit margin In for them

Neil I despair sometimes mate.
Odds compilers base there judgement on probability.
Leicester has just staved off relegation
If.it was such a certainty everyone would have been on them.
Even when they were winning the league by four or five points in Feb I still wouldn't touch them.
I k ow a.few lads backed them in December at 33/1.I thought it dumb.
Still wouldn't want to put cash on even now!

The point in this case though is that both won't be evenly backed. Because of our support, we will be backed more heavily so our odds will be shortened to limit liability.

The bookies know what they're doing.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

[Beano]

If we were one point behind, depends how many games were left.
But sat there were only three and there games on paper looked easier it wouldn't matter about out goal difference, the odds would probably be something like 1/2 Blyth, 6/4 Darlington.
Therefore if both teams were equally backed the bookie would still win, I.e. you wouldn't get 1/2 and 2/1 otherwise there would be no profit margin In for them

Neil I despair sometimes mate.
Odds compilers base there judgement on probability.
Leicester has just staved off relegation
If.it was such a certainty everyone would have been on them.
Even when they were winning the league by four or five points in Feb I still wouldn't touch them.
I k ow a.few lads backed them in December at 33/1.I thought it dumb.
Still wouldn't want to put cash on even now!

The point in this case though is that both won't be evenly backed. Because of our support, we will be backed more heavily so our odds will be shortened to limit liability.

The bookies know what they're doing.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

Correct, Spyman.

[Spyman]

You only have to look at horse racing, and the way the odds fluctuate constantly in the build up to a race, to see my point. Odds are not guided by probability, they are guided by risk.

Conditions may not change, the ability of the horses don't change - all that changes is that the market takes more money on a certain horse (perhaps because a tipster has recommended it) and so the bookies react by shortening the odds to limit their liability if that horse does win.

Look at the price of any horse Tom Segal tips in his Racing Post column within minutes of him tipping it and you will see my point.