Grim Reaper v Ozeagle - The Ultimate Betting Showdown [Archive]

bunghole

26-12-2005, 09:17 AM

Alright people, you asked for it and here it is. After years of 'spirited competition' on the BT and BGT, we're finally going to get the answer to the question asked by man since the dawn of time - Who is the better punter out of Grim and Oz?

From 1/1/06 to 31/12/06, this thread will serve as the home of one of the most eagerly anticipated head to head duels in generations. Forget Borg v McEnroe, Woods v Singh, Balboa v Creed etc, this is the only one that really matters.

The rules are the same as those in the BGT, but for those that are unfamiliar with them, or those that still haven't grasped them after 2000+ posts and 2 years of BBS membership (Fredman) :D, here they are in simple terms:

1. Competition begins 1/1/06 and concludes on 31/12/06

2. Nominated bets must be at a price of $1.50 or longer

3. Nominated bets are for a 1 unit stake. For example, 1 unit on a winning choice @ $1.75 would result in .75 of a point being added to a competitors cumulative score. Conversely, 1 unit on a losing bet will result in a 1 point deduction from a competitors cumulative score.

4. At the end of the competiton on 31/12/06, the competitor with the highest cumulative score from their nominated bets throughout the year, will be declared the winner. The winner's prize will be a lifetime of bragging rights over their vanquished opponent (regs on the BT will know EXACTLY what a monumental prize this is :eek: :D ).

5. Further to Rule 4 and to give the winner a more tangible 'prize', the competitor who comes '2nd' must add the following to their BBS signature:

'Winner of the Purewinners Cup for betting helmetry in 2006'.

This 'notation' must remain on the competitor's BBS signature for a period of 1 year.

6. When posting prices, competitors must advise which agency is offering the specific price. ALL registered agencies are acceptable.

7. In their posts when nominating their bets, competitors must give an outline of the reasoning and research that led their choice. Examples of this are stats/historical info/info gleaned from other knowledgeable sources/personal opinion etc.

8. Time limits. Competitors must post their nominated bet prior to an event starting (obviously). For the purposes of this competition, any nominated bets that are posted with less than 3 hours notice before a match commences, will be declared null and void. Given that nominated bets should be well reasoned and researched, this rule shouldn't be a problem.

9. If a competitor posts a losing bet, they will be given an automatic yellow card.

10. To have their yellow card rescinded, the competitor's next bet must be a winner.

11. If the competitors next bet after being given a yellow card is a loser (i.e 2 losing bets in succession), they will be given a red card and an automatic one month suspension from the competition.

12. Competitors are banned from posting bets whilst serving their suspension

13. Upon serving their one month's suspension, competitors are eligible to rejoin the competition with a clean slate in terms of yellow and red cards.

14. 'Joker' bets. Competitors may nominate 1 'Joker bet' per month. A Joker bet is a nominated bet that carries double the value of a 'normal' bet, for the usual 1 unit stake.

15. A successful Joker bet will result in DOUBLE the winnings being added to a competitors cumulative score. For example, a winning Joker bet @ $1.75, will result in 1.50 points being added to a competitors cumulative total, instead of 0.75 as would normally be the case.

16. An unsuccessful Joker bet will result in 1 point being deducted from a competitors cumulative score (as per a normal bet), but will carry double the punishment of a normal bet i.e a straight red card and a one month's ban from posting bets in the competition.

17. If a competitor is already on a yellow card and posts a losing Joker bet, the yellow card will not carry forward to when the competitor's suspension is completed.

18 To distinguish a Joker bet from a normal bet, competitors must include the following in their post:

****JOKER BET****

19. Competitors cannot 'bank' Joker bets and MUST use their Joker bet within the applicable calendar month, otherwise their Joker bet will be forfeited.

20. In addition to ALL of the above (and just to add a bit of confusion) competitors are allowed to post a maximum of 3 long term bets, supplementary to their 'normal' bets during the year. A 'long term bet' is basically a bet in which a competitor nominates a team or individual to win a specific competition. For example, a long term bet may include Wakefield to win the English RL title :eek:.

21. Long term bets are for a stake of 1 unit as per 'normal' bets and must be at a price of $1.50 or better.

22. Outcomes of long term bets are 'settled' at the conclusion of the nominated competition.

23. If a competitor's long term bet wins, their 'winnings' are added to their cumulative score.

24. If a long term bet loses, 1 unit is deducted from the competitors score.

25. There is no penalty in terms of yellow or red cards for losing long term bets.

26. All long term bets must be settled prior to midnight GMT on 31/12/06.

27. Disputes. Any disputes or protests lodged by a competitor will be referred to the Disputes Tribunal for consideration. The DT will comprise of 3 regulars from the BT. Membership of the DT will be advised prior to the competition commencing on 1/1/06, following a call for nominations on the BT.

ALL decisions handed down by the DT will be final and no further correspondence will be entered in to.

So them's the rules.

Simple innit? :o

Now that the rules are in place, we await with great anticipation for the contest to begin.

Best of luck to both competitors and in the words of the immortal US boxing ring announcer Michael Buffer.....................

"Ladies and Gentlemen, LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLET'S GET READY TO RUMBALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" :lux: :lux: :lux:

mik59

26-12-2005, 09:25 AM

2b46

Do we get pictures too?

Men At Work

26-12-2005, 10:06 AM

Originally posted by bunghole
they will be given a red card and an automatic one month suspension from the competition

That means neither of them will get to post more than two dozen bets a year. Can we make it a fortnight suspension but the non-offender is also allowed a 'free' bet where they are not carded if they lose on it (sort of like a free hit in the one-day cricket). At the very least it should keep the level of clownage to the consistently high level attained on the BT.

bunghole

26-12-2005, 10:07 AM

Originally posted by Men At Work
That means neither of them will get to post more than two dozen bets a year.

Why would that be MaW? :confused:

Men At Work

26-12-2005, 10:15 AM

Originally posted by bunghole
Why would that be MaW? :confused:

January 1 : Grim posts NFL over: missed FG puts him on a yellow. oz posts NHL annex: insipid performance puts him on a yellow.

January 2: Grim posts NFL under: 47-0 after first quarter so red card. oz posts smashed crab to win in the Hopman Cup: Russian mafia decree otherwise so red card.

Tumbleweeds on here for the next month.

Repeat eleven times.

bunghole

26-12-2005, 10:18 AM

Originally posted by Men At Work
January 1 : Grim posts NFL over: missed FG puts him on a yellow. oz posts NHL annex: insipid performance puts him on a yellow.

January 2: Grim posts NFL under: 47-0 after first quarter so red card. oz posts smashed crab to win in the Hopman Cup: Russian mafia decree otherwise so red card.

Tumbleweeds on here for the next month.

Repeat eleven times.

Cynic. :D If that happens then the clownage will come from all the grief that the rest of us give them for a month. :p :lux:

Speaking of clownage, how will the competitors EVER live it down if they BOTH end the year in the minus? :eek: :D

Men At Work

26-12-2005, 10:26 AM

Does the loser get the Purewinners Cup?

bunghole

26-12-2005, 10:27 AM

Originally posted by Men At Work
Does the loser get the Purewinners Cup?

Good suggestion. :D :o :lux:

Strathclyde Eagle

26-12-2005, 01:37 PM

Originally posted by Men At Work
January 1 : Grim posts NFL over: missed FG puts him on a yellow. oz posts NHL annex: insipid performance puts him on a yellow.

January 2: Grim posts NFL under: 47-0 after first quarter so red card. oz posts smashed crab to win in the Hopman Cup: Russian mafia decree otherwise so red card.

Tumbleweeds on here for the next month.

Repeat eleven times.
If that happens I'm locking the thread and making it a sticky for everyone to see. :D ;)

Flat Noodle

26-12-2005, 01:48 PM

Originally posted by Men At Work
Does the loser get the Purewinners Cup?

Very nice, MAW ~ :lux:

bunghole

26-12-2005, 01:52 PM

Poll closes 31 Jan 2006.

Strathclyde Eagle

26-12-2005, 02:01 PM

Threads merged before c_block could add his version of Christmas spirit to the proceedings. :p

Stigma

26-12-2005, 02:03 PM

:D Not bad!

bunghole

26-12-2005, 02:05 PM

Originally posted by Strathclyde Eagle
Threads merged before c_block could add his version of Christmas spirit to the proceedings. :p

:D

Flat Noodle

26-12-2005, 02:12 PM

I have a feeling this thread is gonna be an Epic ~ :lux:

Great job, Bung !!! :p

Men At Work

26-12-2005, 07:36 PM

Since I know both of the participants I've had to go for the diplomatic "don't care" option. BTW what happens in the case of a tie?

bunghole

27-12-2005, 01:32 AM

Originally posted by Men At Work
BTW what happens in the case of a tie?

They'll share the Purewinners Cup. :D

ozeagle

27-12-2005, 11:15 AM

really no need for a contest, we can see what the educated few think.

:lux:

Grim Reaper

27-12-2005, 01:34 PM

That's the beauty of it oz. As you yourself quoted after Australian Idol

"99% of the world are idiots!! "

Grim Reaper

27-12-2005, 01:41 PM

I realise this thread was done when I was away but was thinking in that time about a couple of rules that might be incorporated.

One JOKER bet whereby any winnings are doubled. Obviously the joker is 'played' at the time of the original post.

Somehow incorprating 3/4 long termers whereby they don't get you red carded if they fail given that some may settle in August (Challenge Cup for example,) some in December (tennis year bets)

For instance if I want to place a tennis long termer, then it'll be mid-November before it pays out. Under Goldmine rules that could clog up my 2 current bets etc. If we had a max of 4 long termers that were separate from the every day stuff then we still have this 'string to our bows' as long term bets are as much a part of disciplined gambling as daily stuff.

Would be intersting if say I was a point ahead of oz as we hit December 10th but oz's long term bet on Blake to be top US player in the ATP was due to be added at year end, meaning I had to carry on playing in order to win.

Think about it and see what you reckon.

bunghole

27-12-2005, 11:16 PM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
I realise this thread was done when I was away but was thinking in that time about a couple of rules that might be incorporated.

One JOKER bet whereby any winnings are doubled. Obviously the joker is 'played' at the time of the original post.

Somehow incorprating 3/4 long termers whereby they don't get you red carded if they fail given that some may settle in August (Challenge Cup for example,) some in December (tennis year bets)

For instance if I want to place a tennis long termer, then it'll be mid-November before it pays out. Under Goldmine rules that could clog up my 2 current bets etc. If we had a max of 4 long termers that were separate from the every day stuff then we still have this 'string to our bows' as long term bets are as much a part of disciplined gambling as daily stuff.

Would be intersting if say I was a point ahead of oz as we hit December 10th but oz's long term bet on Blake to be top US player in the ATP was due to be added at year end, meaning I had to carry on playing in order to win.

Think about it and see what you reckon.

'Joker bets', how appropriate. ;) :D

Sounds good to me, but Oz would have to agree. Also, we need to put a limit on them so I say 1 per month, so as not to make things too complicated in terms of tracking results.

Also, if someone posts a Joker bet worth double the return, then a losing Joker bet should carry double the punishment - i.e a straight red card regardless of whether or not the person concerned is already on a yellow. That would make things a bit more interesting in terms of tactics too.

Also be a good idea to have something on the post to distinguish a Joker bet from a normal bet. Something like this would do:

****JOKER BET****

Happy enough with your suggestion re long term bets. Lets limit them to a maximum of 3 for the year, without penalty, if they lose.

My only concern is that we could have a situation whereby one person dominates all year, only to lose at the 11th hour to a 'hail mary' long term bet by their opposition. I guess though, that come near to the end of the comp that the person who is behind will throw up a few 'hail marys' to try to catch up, so it doesn't really matter.

Really warming to MaW's suggestion that the person who comes '2nd' be awarded the 'Purewinners Cup'. I'd actually like to see that taken a step further as follows:

The person who comes '2nd' must add the following to their BBS signature and it has to stay there for 1 year:

'Winner of the Purewinners Cup for betting helmetry in 2006'. :D No 'disclaimers' allowed either.

OK, I'll leave it until tomorrow so that everyone can consider the above and if no-one objects then I'll alter the rules to include 'Joker Bets', 3 long term bets without penalty and the 'Purewinners Cup' clause. :p

ozeagle

28-12-2005, 12:08 AM

there is only 1 clown, he can have his joker loser whenever he wants.

bunghole

28-12-2005, 12:11 AM

Originally posted by ozeagle
there is only 1 clown, he can have his joker loser whenever he wants.

Happy with the other changes Oz?

bunghole

28-12-2005, 03:35 AM

Originally posted by bunghole
Happy with the other changes Oz?

Actually, now that I think of it, seeing that Grim's suggested some changes/additions it's only proper and fair that you be offered the same courtesy to put forward any changes/additions that you would like. :p

Funk Butter

28-12-2005, 01:45 PM

I know this is late in the game, but why was it decided to go with Goldmine rules? What was wrong with giving each person a virtual bankroll of 1000 or something and let them go at it?

bunghole

28-12-2005, 11:03 PM

Originally posted by bunghole
OK, I'll leave it until tomorrow so that everyone can consider the above and if no-one objects then I'll alter the rules to include 'Joker Bets', 3 long term bets without penalty and the 'Purewinners Cup' clause. :p

As no-one has objected to the proposed rule changes, I've now altered the rules to reflect these changes. :p

bunghole

28-12-2005, 11:04 PM

Originally posted by Funk Butter
I know this is late in the game, but why was it decided to go with Goldmine rules?

Everyone's familiar with the Goldmine rules, so an 'executive decision' was made to go with them. :)

Grim Reaper

28-12-2005, 11:31 PM

Originally posted by Funk Butter
I know this is late in the game, but why was it decided to go with Goldmine rules? What was wrong with giving each person a virtual bankroll of 1000 or something and let them go at it?

I believe it's because oz would pound it something chronic and make it a night mare to keep up with.

This way there's tactics involved and my theory is that we'll see a good ebb and flow over the year. No need for this to be become a dominating thread - the BT is the main thread and will remain so.

bunghole

28-12-2005, 11:35 PM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
I believe it's because oz would pound it something chronic and make it a night mare to keep up with.

This way there's tactics involved and my theory is that we'll see a good ebb and flow over the year. No need for this to be become a dominating thread - the BT is the main thread and will remain so.

Also, it might've been all over on Jan 2 if a major 'press' went astray. ;) :D

Grim Reaper

28-12-2005, 11:36 PM

Only intended for one Joker bet in the year. Do we have a final clarification of what's happening here? Yes, straight red card is good.

Also, if a player plays when on a yellow he only gets the normal red card i.e. no carry over. This will create a situation whereby a player may have his JOKER 'flushed out' so to speak where he'll possibly play it so as not to get added penalty but of course it may be played incorrectly. We shall see.

bung, when do the long termers have to be in?

End of January (?) in order to give us options on RL Super League / AFL / European soccer leagues / NRL / UK domestic cricket leagues etc.

bunghole

28-12-2005, 11:44 PM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
Only intended for one Joker bet in the year. Do we have a final clarification of what's happening here? Yes, straight red card is good.

Also, if a player plays when on a yellow he only gets the normal red card i.e. no carry over. This will create a situation whereby a player may have his JOKER 'flushed out' so to speak where he'll possibly play it so as not to get added penalty but of course it may be played incorrectly. We shall see.

bung, when do the long termers have to be in?

End of January (?) in order to give us options on RL Super League / AFL / European soccer leagues / NRL / UK domestic cricket leagues etc.

Doh, forgot to include the Joker bet in the rule changes. :o

Will ammend shortly. :p

1 Joker bet per month will be interesting in terms of tactics. No carry over if a player is already on a yellow i.e clean slate upon return.

Long termers - that's up to you and Oz. Tactically, you or Oz may want to keep 1 or 2 up your sleeves for later in the year, or you might want to press early on. Only requirement is that they must settle on or before 31/12.

bunghole

29-12-2005, 12:00 AM

Originally posted by bunghole
Doh, forgot to include the Joker bet in the rule changes. :o

Will ammend shortly. :p

Done. :p

Grim Reaper

01-01-2006, 12:08 AM

Right, let's get this show on the road

LONG TERM BET NO.1

Super League - Les Catalans to beat St Helens/Leeds/Bradford at any point during the season 5/2

Sporting Odds

bunghole

01-01-2006, 12:09 AM

The day has finally arrived. :lux:

Delighted to see that Grim and Oz, being the total professionals that they are, were doing their 'warm ups' on the BGT overnight. ;) :D

For the record, Stig and Fredman will form the Disputes Tribunal.

JCM will (hopefully) be co-moderator.

Over to you lads, best of luck. :p

Grim Reaper

01-01-2006, 12:10 AM

And now for the first current bet to give one of us the early lead

Arizona Cardinals v Indianapolis

Sunday 1/1/06

Cardinals Longest FG 1.83 Paddy Power

If you want reasoning then it's this - Arizona 14-1 in this market this year.

Kicker Neil Rackers on the verge of creating NFL History for FG kicking in a season.

With Indy likely to rest players and often keen to go for TDs, I'm working on the basis that Rackers will get more opportunities to kick and that when he gets those opportunities he'll nail them from any distance.

bunghole

01-01-2006, 12:10 AM

2052

Grim's obviously been anxiously awaiting 2006. :D

Grim Reaper

01-01-2006, 12:12 AM

Coiled like a powerful spring ;)

ozeagle

01-01-2006, 01:36 AM

just like those in the Priory's mattresses, worn, and offering little comfort :)

Grim Reaper

01-01-2006, 02:14 AM

Originally posted by ozeagle
just like those in the Priory's mattresses, worn, and offering little comfort :)

I don't recall either you or the tampon bird complaining :D

Strathclyde Eagle

01-01-2006, 04:28 PM

I'm waiting to see this being used on this thread:
http://forums.serverbeach.com/images/smilies/owned.gif

Grim Reaper

01-01-2006, 05:19 PM

I love it - oz speaks too soon yet again.

His so-called majority of people supporying him has now disappeared.

Grim Reaper

01-01-2006, 07:33 PM

Grim 0/1 -1

Oh well, I had to see if I could get off to a quick start.

One more pop and if I get banned then the RL season will be upon us when I return.

LLCOOLSTEVE

01-01-2006, 07:41 PM

The disciplined and methodical Grim :D

Grim Reaper

01-01-2006, 07:46 PM

Originally posted by LLCOOLSTEVE
The disciplined and methodical Grim :D

Hey, no harm in trying to shake up your opponent early doors.

Men At Work

01-01-2006, 07:54 PM

So in boxing terms they've done the trash talk and finally climbed into the ring where they have been warily circling each other while throwing jabs connecting with nothing but air. Then Grim trips over his shoelace.

We have another 364 days of this to look forward to.

Grim Reaper

01-01-2006, 08:00 PM

And ozplank says I'm boring??? Fool - nothing more entertaining than trash talk!!

I can already see this being BBS Thread of the year 2006!!

ozeagle

01-01-2006, 09:28 PM

1st day of the new year, and the idiot ALREADY finds a loser, one more and he's on a month's holiday.
:)

Grim Reaper

01-01-2006, 09:36 PM

All good fun.

Obviously a day that weird things happen - the Jets won, after all!!!

Grim Reaper

01-01-2006, 09:36 PM

How the hell have we had 28 people voting when there's only 20 regulars on the BT?????

ozeagle

01-01-2006, 09:37 PM

no fun losing, then again, you should be used to it.

you've proven for the past 12 weeks that you don't know a skerrick about NFL,

dallas to provide the final indignation later on tonight.

:D

Strathclyde Eagle

01-01-2006, 10:43 PM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
How the hell have we had 28 people voting when there's only 20 regulars on the BT?????
29 now.

Australia's a big place. I think Oz is getting the word around. ;)

bunghole

02-01-2006, 03:23 AM

Awful start to proceedings for the Clee Destroyer as Arizona's FG kicker loses out by a paltry 2 yards in the longest FG duel with the Colts. Grim cops the 1st yellow card of the year.

Showdown Standings

Oz 0/0 0
Grim 0/1 -1.0 (Y)

Showdown Stats

Profit -1.0
Win/Loss Record 0/1
Success Ratio -100%

In the words of the great Richie Benaud "super effort that". :D

Long Trem Bets In Play

Grim
1. Super League - Les Catalans to beat St Helens/Leeds/Bradford at any point during the season 5/2

Grim Reaper

02-01-2006, 07:26 AM

Originally posted by Strathclyde Eagle
29 now.

Australia's a big place. I think Oz is getting the word around. ;)

If that's the case then they're all betting on me.

I guess for those that know him, they know what a plank he is.

ozeagle

02-01-2006, 08:13 AM

what price can i get that grim NEVER returns to a +

ozeagle

02-01-2006, 08:15 AM

Originally posted by bunghole

Oz 0/0 0
Grim 0/1 -1.0 (Y)

Showdown Stats

Profit -1.0
Win/Loss Record 0/1
Success Ratio -100%

Bung, could you refer to Grim's, Lack of Success Ratio as 100%,

sounds much better, and, appropriate.

:p

Grim Reaper

02-01-2006, 04:57 PM

Done myself no favours with that loss. Wasn't too despondent initiaally as I was going to dive in again and then comeback for the start of RL if I got banned. However, I've remembered just how extensive the Specials maarket is for the Superbowl (400+ markets last year) and if you look hard enough you'll find some dead certs in amongst them. I MUST not banned for the Superbowl!!!

Grim Reaper

02-01-2006, 05:00 PM

Hmmm, do I go for it before Jan 5th? At least if I lose I'll have two bets to usse on the Superbowl anmd be back in time.

Decisions, decisions.

ozeagle

02-01-2006, 08:02 PM

go for it, please.

Grim Reaper

02-01-2006, 09:26 PM

Sick as a dog

Seriously considered the 6/1 on Taylor winning 7-0 in teh darts. As it is I still did a 1.73 in teh Masters on that match which would have done nicely in here.

ozeel's name gets more apt by the day

Grim Reaper

04-01-2006, 05:55 PM

Originally posted by ozeagle
go for it, please.

After missing out on three fat odds winners through fear of getting banned I'm now taking the plunge with this one!

If I lose then I'll be back for the Superbowl on Feb 5th. If I win then I'm likely to remain quiet until Feb 5th anyway. Either way, I really do want to have two available picks come Super Sunday in Detroit.

PARIS ST GERMAIN over Sochaux 1.59 Betfair

Paris been very string at home with 7-1-2 record while Sochaux struggling near the foot of the table.

Other than that I haven't got a bloody clue about French football but when I was a kid PSG were all that. That's good enough for me.

If you want further evidence then Ginola used to play for them years ago so that's all you need to know.

I'm also sick as a dog as my first thought was to go for Lyon. When I looked at livescore they were already 3-0 up versus Strasbourg

:bash: :bash:

(Note: my other thought was to plump for Texas at 2/1 in the NCAA. If that wins and this Paris one loses then I'll be sick as a dog.)

Grim Reaper

04-01-2006, 07:09 PM

Yes.

Paris 1-0 up after 38

Keep going Le Boys

Stigma

04-01-2006, 07:19 PM

Grim in football shocker!:eek:

ozeagle

04-01-2006, 10:27 PM

Originally posted by bunghole

8. Time limits. Competitors must post their nominated bet prior to an event starting (obviously). For the purposes of this competition, any nominated bets that are posted with less than 3 hours notice before a match commences, will be declared null and void. Given that nominated bets should be well reasoned and researched, this rule shouldn't be a problem.

not only are you a useless punter, you can't follow the basic rules.

PSG win, but Grim gets nothing, bet posted within the 3 hour timeframe.

bet posted 35 mins before kickoff.

:lux:

LMB du dummkopf. grim remains on a yellow :D

:p

ozeagle

04-01-2006, 10:29 PM

oh the magnificence of it all,

a desperate grim tips up on something he knows nothing about,

it wins, but he is unable to claim it, remaining on a yellow, and keeping a perfect losing record.

pile it on the Australian lads.

:)

bunghole

04-01-2006, 10:43 PM

I'm afraid Oz is right Grim.

PSG bet N & V.

bunghole

04-01-2006, 10:51 PM

BTW lads, I've ammended the rules slightly in terms of Joker bets, to reflect the fact that you must use your JB within the applicable calendar month otherwise you forfeit it.

Basically felt that 'banking' JB's would make things tougher in terms of tracking bets and also that the original intention was for each person to use them within a calendar month. :)

ozeagle

05-01-2006, 12:11 AM

Originally posted by bunghole
I'm afraid Oz is right Grim.

PSG bet N & V.

no need to be afraid Bung,

be pleased.

what a moron.

:D

Grim Reaper

05-01-2006, 05:55 AM

No, no, no guys

I'm sure an English person can back me on this one

The frigging server was down for ages last night and on and off during the day, hence I couldn't even get on when the match had finished.

Not continuous I hasten to add but down enough to stop me posting this when I originally wanted to.

Come on bung, you may even have encountered this for yourself when you tried to get online in the morning.

Christ, that's also why I didn't get to read your pm until god knows when, having started it at 9am!!

I posted the bet in plenty of time, no cheating involved. Jeez I even had to switch from my Lyon bet (which was mentioned above although didn't want to be whinging pom and curse my bet, hence didn't mention server problems as I was still confident in Paris) becauser of the server.

I'm still behind so I don't see what good banning a 1.59 will do. It's also important to my overall strategy that I'm off a yellow right now and hence why I took a risk last night.

Grim Reaper

05-01-2006, 05:55 AM

Grim Reaper

05-01-2006, 05:55 AM

Grim Reaper

05-01-2006, 06:00 AM

Let me also say that I picked Paris some hours before the game. Livescore showed it as an 8.30 kick off so even on that basis I was 95 minutes before kick off. Couldn't get online initially as the server was pissing about as I said above.

This is a head-to-head between me and oz - surely if oz has got anything about him he'll do the right thing and allow the bet to stand. It's a punting competition NOT a repeat of the main Goldmine where everyone else has to get on.

Grim Reaper

05-01-2006, 06:17 AM

And the finale

Why oh why ozthrush is this NOT allowed 35/95 minutes before kick off yet my Vainikolo bet in the Goldmine posted 20 minutes before the match last March IS allowed???

Please admit arseholeness and make the necessary amendments

Men At Work

05-01-2006, 06:18 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
I'm sure an English person can back me on this one

Technically speaking I'm an English person.

The rule is "any nominated bets that are posted with less than 3 hours notice before a match commences, will be declared null and void". I think the most important word here is posted. Perhaps we've all been guilty of assuming that the BBS will always be available or that our own ISP will always be connecting but it's a risk we take, much the same as some have not been able to place bets in the past because certain sites have crashed. Email would have a similar problem (and be easier to fake) should that be suggested as a backup solution.

Sorry, Cris, but I think you'll just have to wear this as one of those unfortunate random events. Just be glad it didn't happen on the deciding bet of the year. Plus the bets are meant to be "well reasoned and researched" so you may have lost out on that category anyway...

Men At Work

05-01-2006, 06:20 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
Why oh why ozthrush is this NOT allowed 35/95 minutes before kick off yet my Vainikolo bet in the Goldmine posted 20 minutes before the match last March IS allowed???

Because this is not the Goldmine and a much tighter rein will be held on the particpants.

Ooh, I do feel well 'ard talking like this :)

ozeagle

05-01-2006, 06:20 AM

hysterical stuff,

oh yeah, i was going to post Seppi at $6 Pinnacle last night as well,

but, the server crashed.

i want it included.

:)

ozeagle

05-01-2006, 06:22 AM

don't you love the way Grim places the prefix Oz in front of any random word he thinks fits the bill.

maybe i'll try it,

Grimcheat

got a solid enough ring to it.

Grim Reaper

05-01-2006, 06:33 AM

ozthrush is more apt

Grim Reaper

05-01-2006, 06:35 AM

Well, look at this way, I even stuck a cover bet in on my PSG bet, Texas in the College football. If you don't allow this then by all means use my substitute bet.

ozthrush, please explain why this is not allowed but Vainikolo is

ozhypocrite - please do not do your usual head-up-your-ass-firmly-ensconsed-next-to-the-latte and explain this.

Grim Reaper

05-01-2006, 06:37 AM

Come on bung - get this sorted

Grim Reaper

05-01-2006, 06:37 AM

I see I've gone back ahead in the voting - obviously people voting for justice.

Gooders

05-01-2006, 06:38 AM

Surely the ultimate betting showdown would be between two of the most successful punters on the BBS, not two of the worst?

Grim Reaper

05-01-2006, 06:39 AM

Originally posted by Gooders
Surely the ultimate betting showdown would be between two of the most successful punters on the BBS, not two of the worst?

on the face of it but coming from one of the few people below ME in the Goldmine, this is rather amusing!! ;)

Phil Bennett

05-01-2006, 06:45 AM

Hoo hoo, that's a tough'un Grim, I think I'll sidestep that one again.

Any stuff I can't answer, I'll just sidestep the issue and hope it goes away! :lux:

Now where that's latte cup to jerk off into!! :D

Gooders

05-01-2006, 06:58 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
on the face of it but coming from one of the few people below ME in the Goldmine, this is rather amusing!! ;)

The Goldmine is a tin-mine Grim.

The best punting by far happens in the Masters every month. :p

Men At Work

05-01-2006, 07:02 AM

Originally posted by Gooders
Surely the ultimate betting showdown would be between two of the most successful punters on the BBS, not two of the worst?

We use a different dictionary in this part of the BBS, pardner.

Gooders

05-01-2006, 09:17 AM

Ah, so ultimate was being used to mean last in this context?

We live in hope. :)

ozeagle

05-01-2006, 09:23 AM

see betting thread for hottest punter on the BBS without doubt.

27 bets, 23 winners this year, ROI 29.4%

only one winner in this showdown.

ozeagle

05-01-2006, 09:24 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
Come on bung - get this sorted

get what sorted.

i'll give you this much, f uck can you whinge.

reaper, 100% failure ratio.

:eek:

Men At Work

05-01-2006, 09:26 AM

Originally posted by ozeagle
see betting thread for hottest punter on the BBS without doubt.

You mean Shamone with his 80.65% ROI on the football?

Grim Reaper

05-01-2006, 09:32 AM

Originally posted by ozeagle
get what sorted.

i'll give you this much, f uck can you whinge.

reaper, 100% failure ratio.

:eek:

If Goldmine rules are strictly applied then so be it, add 1 to my actual Goldmine score for the Vainikolo bet placed 20 mins before the match and I'll let this one rest

Stigma

05-01-2006, 09:37 AM

Originally posted by Men At Work
You mean Shamone with his 80.65% ROI on the football?

:o

ozeagle

05-01-2006, 09:40 AM

Originally posted by Men At Work
You mean Shamone with his 80.65% ROI on the football?

no, he's posted about 5% of them on the thread.

and grim, FFS, put a sock in it.

:clown:

Gooders

05-01-2006, 09:42 AM

Originally posted by ozeagle
see betting thread for hottest punter on the BBS without doubt.

27 bets, 23 winners this year, ROI 29.4%

only one winner in this showdown.

Oh per-lease. How to lie with statistics.

In the last two betting Masters qualifying stages I've turned 400 pts staked into 799.1 (which represents just shy of a 100% ROI).

You don't half talk some bollocks.

Grim Reaper

05-01-2006, 09:46 AM

Originally posted by ozeagle
get what sorted.

i'll give you this much, f uck can you whinge.

Whinge = arguing the correct point :rolleyes:

ozeagle

05-01-2006, 10:30 AM

Originally posted by Gooders
Oh per-lease. How to lie with statistics.

In the last two betting Masters qualifying stages I've turned 400 pts staked into 799.1 (which represents just shy of a 100% ROI).

You don't half talk some bollocks.

there's no lie,

you've not posted on the BT, and after my 1 (destruction) in the masters, i haven't visited there for yonks.

credit on your ROI, but don't call my stats a lie.

90% of winners have been posted in the BT, and some that have been have not been included in the ROI (such as Seppi)...

:p

bunghole

05-01-2006, 10:32 AM

When I came up with the idea of a Disputes Tribunal I didn't think we'd really need it, but here we are a mere 5 days into the competition and controversy has already broken out. :D

I'll keep my own thoughts to myself for the moment, but will refer it to the DT for consideration. Ideally I wanted 3 people on the DT so that we could get a majority decision on any disputes, but as there are only 2 people on it (Stig & Fredman), I'll cast the deciding vote if Stig and Fredman fail to agree.

Over to you lads.

ozeagle

05-01-2006, 10:35 AM

personally i don't see the issue, the rule states 3 hours, grim posted 35 mins before kick off,
do the math

bunghole

05-01-2006, 10:38 AM

BTW.

If Stig and Fredman rule against your PSG bet Grim, then the Texas one wont be allowed as a replacement. By your own post, Texas was just your 'other thoughts'.

ozeagle

05-01-2006, 10:44 AM

what are you on about, a replacement that already won.

this is a ••••••• joke.

ozeagle

05-01-2006, 10:45 AM

Originally posted by bunghole
BTW.

If Stig and Fredman rule against your PSG bet Grim, then the Texas one wont be allowed as a replacement. By your own post, Texas was just your 'other thoughts'.

i can't see how they WOULDN'T rule against it.

:confused:

bunghole

05-01-2006, 10:47 AM

Originally posted by ozeagle
i can't see how they WOULDN'T rule against it.

:confused:

Best we let them decide Oz.

ozeagle

05-01-2006, 10:49 AM

no problems Bung,

both are respectable men of the punt.

:)

bunghole

05-01-2006, 10:56 AM

Originally posted by Gooders
Oh per-lease. How to lie with statistics.

In the last two betting Masters qualifying stages I've turned 400 pts staked into 799.1 (which represents just shy of a 100% ROI).

You don't half talk some bollocks.

Pot, kettle, black in terms of selective use of stats Gooders.

Your Goldmine record:

LAST Gooders 1/6 -5.4

As you were lads. :)

Strathclyde Eagle

05-01-2006, 11:06 AM

From the very first post on the thread...
Originally posted by bunghole
8. Time limits. Competitors must post their nominated bet prior to an event starting (obviously). For the purposes of this competition, any nominated bets that are posted with less than 3 hours notice before a match commences, will be declared null and void. Given that nominated bets should be well reasoned and researched, this rule shouldn't be a problem.
Seems pretty clear to me.

Stigma

05-01-2006, 11:14 AM

Originally posted by bunghole

Over to you lads.
"
8. Time limits.. For the purposes of this competition, any nominated bets that are posted with less than 3 hours notice before a match commences, will be declared null and void..
"

The rules seem pretty clear on the subject.
The technical difficulties encountered shouldn’t be a factor in this decision.
Bet voided..(in my humble opinion).

bunghole

05-01-2006, 11:29 AM

Originally posted by Stigma
"
8. Time limits.. For the purposes of this competition, any nominated bets that are posted with less than 3 hours notice before a match commences, will be declared null and void..
"

The rules seem pretty clear on the subject.
The technical difficulties encountered shouldn’t be a factor in this decision.
Bet voided..(in my humble opinion).

Thanks Stig :p

Fredman's started his new job and doesn't seem to be around at the moment. If Fredman votes with Stig then the bet is N & V. But to put this one to bed so that it doesn't drag on, I'll use my casting vote to agree with Stig.

Now Grim. I totally understand where you're coming from, as all of us know that there are times when we can't get onto the BBS for one reason or another. I'm also 100% certain, as I'm sure ALL of us are (even Oz), that you weren't acting dishonestly and that the events you outlined happened exactly how you said they did. That's why I referred it to the DT.

However, the fact remains that the time limit rule is clearly articulated on Page 1 of the thread. Whilst you've been the unfortunate one to miss out on this occassion due to server problems, there could be times throughout the year when the same thing happens to Oz and under the same circumstances, Oz will have to cop it on the chin too.

I'm not going to re-write the time limit rule to include BBS down times, as those problems are part and parcel (albeit infrequently) of the BBS.

BTW lads, if there's anyone in the UK who'd like to become the 3rd member of the DT then feel free to come forward. :hi:

Gooders

05-01-2006, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by ozeagle
there's no lie,

you've not posted on the BT, and after my 1 (destruction) in the masters, i haven't visited there for yonks.

credit on your ROI, but don't call my stats a lie.

I stopped posting in the Goldmine after you and some others got uppity about me putting up hunches rather than solid info.

It's called a Goldmine and it just about breaks even - waste of time.

You played the Masters during a quiet month and haven't been seen since when, frankly, you would have been taken to the cleaners.

ozeagle

05-01-2006, 12:37 PM

gooders, i can only beat what i'm up against.

i can't go TM and destroy the BT, battle hopelessly in the GM, wrestle Grim, and pulverize you all in the BM...

not to mention trying to keep a 15% ROI on my own bets, follow sport, hold down a 40hr job and get married.

the GM whilst about making money has become more than that, do yourself a favour, and tip some of your winners in there and get Grim back where he belongs.

:p

Gooders

05-01-2006, 01:48 PM

Alright, maybe I'll have another go one of these days. :p

The Masters is a real challenge recently though Oz - people have been getting some stunning numbers in the last few months - you should come and join the fray.

Strathclyde Eagle

05-01-2006, 01:54 PM

While we're on the topic I'm tempted to unstick the goldmine and stick the masters each month instead.

LLCOOLSTEVE

05-01-2006, 03:32 PM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
Let me also say that I picked Paris some hours before the game. Livescore showed it as an 8.30 kick off so even on that basis I was 95 minutes before kick off.

8.30 French time, 7.30 UK time

fredman

05-01-2006, 07:49 PM

Originally posted by bunghole
When I came up with the idea of a Disputes Tribunal I didn't think we'd really need it, but here we are a mere 5 days into the competition and controversy has already broken out. :D

I'll keep my own thoughts to myself for the moment, but will refer it to the DT for consideration. Ideally I wanted 3 people on the DT so that we could get a majority decision on any disputes, but as there are only 2 people on it (Stig & Fredman), I'll cast the deciding vote if Stig and Fredman fail to agree.

Over to you lads.

sorry about late response...have been tied up at work...however...

The rules clearly state

bets must be posted 3 hrs before match kick off...quite clearly this didnt happen here....or at least we didnt see the post until it was within the 3 hr frame....
The rules have been stuck up....
Lets not confuse what happens here compared to the goldmine , it is a different thread....:p

simply

"Bet void" as not within time frame....

Lets move on....:p

bunghole

05-01-2006, 11:12 PM

Originally posted by fredman
sorry about late response...have been tied up at work...however...

The rules clearly state

bets must be posted 3 hrs before match kick off...quite clearly this didnt happen here....or at least we didnt see the post until it was within the 3 hr frame....
The rules have been stuck up....
Lets not confuse what happens here compared to the goldmine , it is a different thread....:p

simply

"Bet void" as not within time frame....

Lets move on....:p

Thanks Fredman. :p

Wasn't sure when you'd be on due to starting your new job. :)

ozeagle

05-01-2006, 11:35 PM

ok ok,

i'll enter the fray.

seeing as it's 8hrs til he plays tonight, and there's 8 players left in it regardless of what happens in the other matches starting soon,

Berdych, 3.25 to win Adelaide International.

Quite simply, he's a class above any of these chumps.

Niemenen - Clown
Serra - Battler
Carlsen - Old Man
Hrbaty - Solid, only danger
Malisse - Dud
Seppi - Good up and comer, but can't match Berydch on hard
Kohlscreiber - will be annexed tonight.

Berdych, been at the top of the world juniors and on the rise on the pro circuit for the past few years, annexed TMS masters in Paris, a tournament much harder than this. Big serve, great groundstrokes. big year coming up.

3.25 Bet365 and how.

Can afford to bite the dust with this, being 1 up already.

If the bet is not allowed until after matches tonight, then so be it, suffice to say, the price won't change too much, unless of course Hrbaty gets knocked out in 3hrs or so time.

I'll leave it for Bung to adjudicate.

:)

bunghole

05-01-2006, 11:52 PM

Originally posted by ozeagle
I'll leave it for Bung to adjudicate.

Sorry Oz.

The 1st match has already started or is just about to.

In effect, this means that betting (or in this case posting) closed 3 hours ago for the purposes of the Showdown.

Feel free to repost at the adjusted price after Berdych wins tonight. :p

bunghole

05-01-2006, 11:56 PM

Gee, still no sign of Grim. :eek:

ozeagle

06-01-2006, 12:02 AM

ozeagle

06-01-2006, 12:02 AM

all academic really, not as though i'll need the .75 difference at the end of the year.

those of you who can get on Oz -$5, do so.

bunghole

06-01-2006, 12:10 AM

Originally posted by bunghole
Sorry Oz.

The 1st match has already started or is just about to.

In effect, this means that betting (or in this case posting) closed 3 hours ago for the purposes of the Showdown.

Feel free to repost at the adjusted price after Berdych wins tonight. :p

I'll just explain this for everybody so that there's no confusion.

As Oz points out, Berdych doesn't play his 1/4 final for another 8 or so hours. However, because Oz's bet is for Berdych to win the tournament and betting on the tournament winner is suspended as soon as the 1st match of the days play starts, this in effect makes Oz's bet N & V for the purposes of the Showdown.

By posting the bet within minutes of the 1st match starting, this didn't allow anyone else to get on. The intention of the time limit rule in both the BGT and this thread, is designed to ensure that if other people see a well reasoned and researched bet, that've they've got enough time to bet accordingly. :)

ozeagle

06-01-2006, 12:16 AM

yes, fair enough, suffice to say, all 8 players are still in the tournament.

interestingly enough Ladbrokes still betting $3 whilst match 1 of 4 is being played for the day,

hey Bung, what if they are still betting at 2pm, and Berdych plays at 7.30 tonight, THEN i can get on, yes?

:)

bunghole

06-01-2006, 12:22 AM

Originally posted by ozeagle
yes, fair enough, suffice to say, all 8 players are still in the tournament.

interestingly enough Ladbrokes still betting $3 whilst match 1 of 4 is being played for the day,

hey Bung, what if they are still betting at 2pm, and Berdych plays at 7.30 tonight, THEN i can get on, yes?

:)

FFS Oz. :D :D :D

Your original post quoted the price from another bookie. If however, you wish to repost, quoting Laddie's price and IF it doesn't close before 2.22pm AEDT (3 hours from now) then it's on.

I will monitor Laddie's and check to see if betting is still open at the above time.

Fair dinkum, I wouldn't have Strath's job for all the tea in China. :D

ozeagle

06-01-2006, 12:31 AM

yes, other bookies closed betting but when i last checked, Laddies still offering it.

because i'm such a good bloke :) i won't bother with stressing the mods any further, i'll simply get on later,

here's hoping xman and herr batty do the business, keeping the price up.

:)

bunghole

06-01-2006, 12:32 AM

Originally posted by ozeagle
yes, other bookies closed betting but when i last checked, Laddies still offering it.

because i'm such a good bloke :) i won't bother with stressing the mods any further, i'll simply get on later,

here's hoping xman and herr batty do the business, keeping the price up.

:)

Good man. :p :lux: :hi:

ozeagle

06-01-2006, 12:37 AM

Bung, i'd like a price to say that Grim never gets back into the black.

:)

ozeagle

06-01-2006, 12:39 AM

by the way, i expect things to get interesting when he and W.A poleaxe the prices on betandwin, hammer them from 1.9 to 1.6, everyone else tries to annex 1.9, and can't, or, the line moves from +17.5, to +8.5, etc etc...

all hell is going to break loose in clee.

bunghole

06-01-2006, 12:42 AM

Originally posted by ozeagle
Bung, i'd like a price to say that Grim never gets back into the black.

:)

Talk to Laddies. :D

ozeagle

06-01-2006, 05:40 AM

ok, time to get onboard here.

simple weight of numbers.

golf

vijay singh to beat olin browne, round 2, hawaii.

everyone's aware of the class difference between these 2, but, dating back to 2000, these 2 have played 100 rounds in the same tournaments, for a record of 92-8 to vijay,

1.57 Stan James is way over the odds.

nice way for Oz to lengthen his advantage over Grim.

PILE IT ON

Men At Work

06-01-2006, 05:55 AM

Just as an aid can the particpants put in the time the event is due to start. Local time and/or GMT would be sufficient.

That gives me a thought: what if the start time of an event is moved? The odds can change in the period between the original and rescheduled time. What if, for example, crowd trouble had postponed Grim's PSG game for two hours. Would that bet then have been valid? What if an event is shifted to an earlier time at short notice and so begins in less than the three hours? Rare situations, I know, but sods law decrees it will probably happen on 31/12/2006 with the deciding bet of this comp.

ozeagle

06-01-2006, 06:00 AM

no MaW, it's the advertised start time.

my bet jumps tomorrow Oz time, 10am ish.

get down the TABber and load it up.

bunghole

06-01-2006, 06:26 AM

Originally posted by Men At Work
what if the start time of an event is moved? The odds can change in the period between the original and rescheduled time. What if, for example, crowd trouble had postponed Grim's PSG game for two hours. Would that bet then have been valid? What if an event is shifted to an earlier time at short notice and so begins in less than the three hours? Rare situations, I know, but sods law decrees it will probably happen on 31/12/2006 with the deciding bet of this comp.

What if Grim never comes back? :eek:

Men At Work

06-01-2006, 06:32 AM

Originally posted by bunghole
What if Grim never comes back? :eek:

Twelve months of only oz on this thread? I think we'd all leave :)

fredman

06-01-2006, 06:46 AM

Originally posted by bunghole
Thanks Fredman. :p

Wasn't sure when you'd be on due to starting your new job. :)

you welcome:) look forward to the next one....reckon there will be a few tiffs to come....:D "fair dinkum" just love it

Strathclyde Eagle

06-01-2006, 09:52 AM

Originally posted by Men At Work
Twelve months of only oz on this thread? I think we'd all leave :)
Maybe that's the tactic, to see if oz leaves the thread alone after March, then slowly chips in with regular wins on RL in the summer. All his posts on this thread will be in the middle of the Australian night.

"Top Tips For How To Win Showdowns" by Grim Reaper can now be found at all good bookshops. Lulling your opponent into a false sense of security is chapter five. :D

ozeagle

06-01-2006, 10:17 AM

berdych goes through, waiting on tournament price.

bunghole

06-01-2006, 10:23 AM

Originally posted by ozeagle
berdych goes through, waiting on tournament price.

Nice work Oz. :p

bunghole

06-01-2006, 10:25 AM

Originally posted by Strathclyde Eagle
Maybe that's the tactic, to see if oz leaves the thread alone after March, then slowly chips in with regular wins on RL in the summer. All his posts on this thread will be in the middle of the Australian night.

"Top Tips For How To Win Showdowns" by Grim Reaper can now be found at all good bookshops. Lulling your opponent into a false sense of security is chapter five. :D

Hope he surfaces soon. :eek:

Maybe his old Batcave computer has bitten the dust again. ;) :D

Grim Reaper

06-01-2006, 02:18 PM

Originally posted by Gooders
I stopped posting in the Goldmine after you and some others got uppity about me putting up hunches rather than solid info.

It's called a Goldmine and it just about breaks even - waste of time.

You played the Masters during a quiet month and haven't been seen since when, frankly, you would have been taken to the cleaners.

Gooders, do you wanna join my 'Down with oz Gang'? ;)

You have the right credentials.

An eye for facts
A dislike of the plank

That ticks all the boxes. Welcome to the fastest growing club on the BBS!!
:p

Grim Reaper

06-01-2006, 02:32 PM

Originally posted by Men At Work
Just as an aid can the particpants put in the time the event is due to start. Local time and/or GMT would be sufficient.

That gives me a thought: what if the start time of an event is moved? The odds can change in the period between the original and rescheduled time. What if, for example, crowd trouble had postponed Grim's PSG game for two hours. Would that bet then have been valid? What if an event is shifted to an earlier time at short notice and so begins in less than the three hours? Rare situations, I know, but sods law decrees it will probably happen on 31/12/2006 with the deciding bet of this comp.

All this talk of times is frustrating but if I'm ruled against then there's little I can do.

I was happy to do this this comp with oz on the basis that we were here to have a BETTING competition. Now I've placed plenty of greyhound bets 30 seconds before the off and never been denied my money when I've won.

The 3 hour rule should be scrapped, regardless of whether I get the 0.59 or not.

I had no idea the game was 35 minutes away as livescore honestly showed it as 20.30, which I always assume is in GMT. It was either an error or they now switch to sticking local time up there.

It serves no purpose in a head to head and is simply a part of the Goldmine that isn't necessary here.

Put it this way - what possible use does it serve in the confines of this thread? In The Goldmine - yes, it works because the 'Mine is designed to make people money, this on the other hand is not. This is simply to teach that gobby Aussie a lesson in the way I taught Odds Against a lesson when he was shouting the odds and people were wary of playing him head to head.

On this basis we'd need to put the same rule into effect on the Betting Thread. When you look at it like that you realise how silly it is to have it on here.

I also have to worry about oz's mentality. In theory he's favourite given his crowing on the BT yet he's hiding behind what (if he's honest) is a bit of a poor rule in this context.

oz, answer this seriously, what kind of man are you? Will you be happy to win by less than +0.59 and then always have the win disputed?

Jesus, if you win fair and square then you'll have the whole of 2007 (and beyond?) to say what you like and there will be nothing I can do and say about it.

And of course oz, with the three hour rule out of the way just imagine it swung on its head when I wake up to find you've slammed in an NBA winner and have suddenly jumped +1 overnight and slam my skull against the desk in despair.

And of course, if I don't get the PSG bet credited, imagine what kind of signature I'll have if I win. 2007 will be unbearable for you!!

Play the game like a man, oz. Try and make your online persona more like the one who spent 48 hours in Clee. You know it makes sense. :p

Grim Reaper

06-01-2006, 02:34 PM

Originally posted by Strathclyde Eagle
All his posts on this thread will be in the middle of the Australian night.

You've met me only a handful of times but you know me well enough to have sussed this out!! ;)

Fair play.

Even though I've been rumbled in Wk1 that's not say I won;t do this again. :D

Strathclyde Eagle

06-01-2006, 03:14 PM

I would have said met you on countless occasions, read every single issue of OMP and seen you take a inflatable dinosaur to a football tournament, but who's keeping score anyway? ;)

Grim Reaper

06-01-2006, 03:55 PM

Originally posted by Strathclyde Eagle
I would have said met you on countless occasions, read every single issue of OMP and seen you take a inflatable dinosaur to a football tournament, but who's keeping score anyway? ;)

Oh God, Dino the dinosaur. He truly did rock......until someone stuck a cocktail stick in him :sob:

Ahhh the good old days, when Monsieur Reaper was fit enough to be out on the razz til God knows when, turn up 2 hours late (with said dinosaur) for a July six-a-side tourney in the second hottest summer of the decade, perform admirably in a series of back to back matches to make up the time, whilst entertaining the crowd with an Andy Thorn exhibition of well placed hoofs out of the 'ground' (!!!!), lead the side to a gallant runners up spot (losing narrowly to a team of unruly thugs) and then back two hours in the car to Gillingham for another five hours heavily on the case at Excalibur nightclub.

Could hardly stand by 2am but that's what God invented bars for! :o

Grim Reaper

06-01-2006, 05:18 PM

Final word on oz's gayness....for now

What the hell are we playing at with a three hour time rule, anyway?

I was jus thinking abaout submitting an NFL bet then thought 'I'll wait for the weather report first'

DING!

Of course, professional gamblers don't go wading in in advance. It's about making informed decisions. Jeez, if this is the ultimate betting showdown then surely let's make it as realistic aspossible to make profits.

Look at me with texting Johnson with bets once I giot to Hull's ground last year. 4/4 on match bets @1.91 and the only one I got wrong overall was a pot shot on 1st try scorer which was too late to get on anyway.

If this means oz getting late track info and placing a horse winner ten minutes before the off then fine, I can live with that.

I'm here to try and kick oz's ass (again) NOT make other people money(but if people do make money then so much the better)

Australasian contingent - over to you

Men At Work

06-01-2006, 07:57 PM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
Final word on oz's gayness....for now

What the hell are we playing at with a three hour time rule, anyway?

Because bung put it in the rules and both you and oz agreed to those rules. You had the opportunity to raise concerns over that point before the comp started but neither of you did. Therefore you both agreed to the rules as they stand. Continual complaining about the rules after they have affected you is simply whingeing.

Sit down, shut up, and get on with the competition.

Men At Work

06-01-2006, 07:58 PM

Grim makes yet another complaint about Rule 8: "It's sooooooo unfair" :)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38347000/jpg/_38347633_kevin300.jpg

Grim Reaper

06-01-2006, 08:15 PM

Originally posted by Men At Work
Because bung put it in the rules and both you and oz agreed to those rules. You had the opportunity to raise concerns over that point before the comp started but neither of you did. Therefore you both agreed to the rules as they stand. Continual complaining about the rules after they have affected you is simply whingeing.

Sit down, shut up, and get on with the competition.

Forget the PSG bet for a minute

So you think a rule that hampers good betting practice is good?

Grim Reaper

06-01-2006, 08:16 PM

Jeez MaW I didn't do all that reasoned argument for you to come on and clown it up.

Men At Work

06-01-2006, 08:24 PM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
So you think a rule that hampers good betting practice is good?

This is not about good betting practice. This is about a competition between two people following a set of agreed upon rules. If you want good betting practice then go to the masters threads.

Just stop your bloody moaning :bash:

Men At Work

06-01-2006, 08:25 PM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
Jeez MaW I didn't do all that reasoned argument for you to come on and clown it up.

Sorry for throwing facts into the mix so early in the morning :rolleyes:

Jim Cannons Moustache

06-01-2006, 08:29 PM

:smugsmiley:

how pleased am I that I didn't see Bunghole's pre christmas offer for me to co-moderate this mess till just now

nicely swerved.

Jim Cannons Moustache

06-01-2006, 08:30 PM

should really be :sighofreliefsmiley: shouldn't it.

Grim Reaper

06-01-2006, 09:59 PM

Originally posted by Men At Work
Sorry for throwing facts into the mix so early in the morning :rolleyes:

Twice I said I wasn't referring to pSG bet - I'm talking about going forward to make an authentic BETTING competition.

Goldmine rules have been changed as weve gne along.

Can't see what problem there is in improving this set up.

Besides, I don't recall HArry Enfield being part of the facts of this thing :rolleyes:

Men At Work

06-01-2006, 10:14 PM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
Can't see what problem there is in improving this set up.

Please tell me what part of "because bung put it in the rules and both you and oz agreed to those rules. You had the opportunity to raise concerns over that point before the comp started but neither of you did. Therefore you both agreed to the rules as they stand" you don't understand?

Perhaps we should change the rules to implement a penalty system for advanced helmetry in failing to understand rules, excessive complaining about them and other dummy spits. But that would make this far less entertaining so let's just allow Kevin and Perry to get on with it :)

ozeagle

06-01-2006, 11:25 PM

ok, bet 2 for Oz, Berdych 1.56 Sportsbet, to beat Malisse.

scrapping the tournament win, as i reckon 1.56 into the price v Hrbaty will be much better anyway.

i've given explanation countless times elsewhere, but berdych is headed for top 10, malisse a veritable ******* and choker of the highest order.

berdych will win the title.

1.56 h2h with Malisse this afternoon, game kicks off in 3hrs, 35 mins.

:)

ozeagle

06-01-2006, 11:26 PM

and Grim, LMB, the 3hr rule stays.

bunghole

07-01-2006, 01:17 AM

What a nice start to what I'd planned would be a peaceful weekend. :grrr:

Grim, let me ask you the following:

1. If your pc hadn't crashed and you'd got your bet on as per the rules, would we be having this 'discussion'?

2. If the reverse had happened with Oz's pc crashing, meaning that he missed out on posting a winner as per the rules, would you be jumping to his defence and asking for the rules to be overlooked so that he'd get credited with winnings from a bet that he otherwise would've posted?

3. If the PSG bet had lost, wouldn't you be asking for your 1 point back in accordance with the 3 hour rule, which I assume you'd forgotten about until Oz mentioned it?

4. At last count, 46 people had voted in the poll. All of them (or I assume most) are aware that the rules were posted before the competition started and comments or suggestions for additions/changes were called for. This being the case, don't you think that the credibility of the whole Showdown will go out the window in the eyes of the 'spectators' if the rule, which you didn't comment upon until your PSG bet, was changed?

The Showdown rules apart from being designed to get as definitive an answer as possible as to who is the better punter out of you and Oz, were also written in the way that they were to ensure that this comp is as genuine a test of betting skill as possible.

That was one of the reasons why I came up with the Showdown idea. Instead of trying to guess who's the better punter from the multitude of bets posted on the BT over the past few years, a H to H comp, with a clear set of rules seemed to be the answer.

We all know that the BT is a bit of a free for all in terms of tracking who's successful by the sheer weight of numbers of tips posted on there. Sure there's times when someone has a good trot and we think to ourselves "gee, such and such is having a good run", or "bloody hell, (usually me) is poo :D" but overall, it's very hard to tell over the long period of time that the BT's been going who's consistently been better than others.

If we now ditch the 3 hour rule, we then leave open the possibilty of someone winning this comp on the back of a few lucky 'hail mary' bets. That doesn't really tell us anything and any claims that you or Oz may have over one another, would be just as hollow as the daily 'I'm better than you' posts on the BT (that we all admittedly enjoy for their comic value).

I'll give you an example. Let's imagine that you've worked dilligently all year to grind out a 3 or 4 point lead over Oz. Come December, in the middle of the night your time, Oz gets out his trusty Helmetform ratings and as luck would have it, happens to strike one of the few days when it actually strings together a few winners ;) :D. Oz slams down his Helmetform form bets a couple of minutes before each race starts and by the time you wake up, he's wiped out your lead and gone 5 points in front.Despite your best efforts you can't claw back the lead and Oz wins.

Does this tell us definitively that Oz is a better punter than you? Of course it doesn't. Does the 'discussion' about who's the better out of you guys get put to bed? Of course not. Will the banter between you guys increase as you argue the merits of Oz's victory? Of course it will. Bottom line is that we're back to square 1 and this whole Showdown thing will have been a complete waste of time.

The rules for this comp were written in good faith and there was a bit of thought put into them. Despite this, I'm sure that one could argue when examining them closely, that you could find a reason to alter any or all of them if you looked closely enough. Example. Why make it a minimum of $1.50 price wise? Does it really matter if someone finds a winner @ $1.49? How much less valuable is a winner @ $1.49 than $1.50?

The bottom line is that we have to have SOMETHING. We could all sit down together for a year and collectively fail to come up with, or agree to a set of rules that are 100% 'watertight'.

This being the case, complaining about the rules when the unexpected happens, may only lead to the possibility of someone winning, but having their 'claims to fame' dismissed if they win off the back of complaining about the rules when things don't go their way. I'm sure that BOTH of you guys want to win fair and square and not off the back of your debating skills in terms of problems that you have with the rules. :)

You did make some good points in your post Grim, but I'm not prepared to wipe the time limit rule, or restropsectively credit you with the winnings for the PSG bet (please refer to Rule 27 with respect to DT rulings).

Having said ALL of that, I am prepared to offer a COMPROMISE on the time limit rule.The best point you made was about the weather and how skillful betters will do their research, monitor what's happening and bet accordingly if they think the weather will be a determining factor that could assist one team or competitor over another.

With this in mind, my compromise idea is that the time limit rule be reduced from 3 hours to 2, so that any change in weather conditions can be noted more accurately and taken into account when posting bets in the Showdown.

However, this is conditional on 2 things:

1. Oz agrees.
2. That the DT agree (Stig and Fredman).

If either don't, then the 3 hour rule stays.

One last thing people. Regardless of whether or not the time limit rule is amended, this will be the LAST time this year that any of the rules are altered, regardless of any unforeseen circumstances, well articulated posts, or out and out whining. Any further 'suggestions' will just go straight through to the keeper, regardless of who they come from.

Apologies for being so blunt, but everyone had their chance to put their 2 cents worth in before the comp strarted, so now it's time to put the rules to bed and get on with (hopefully) enjoying the contest. :)

bunghole

07-01-2006, 02:55 AM

A winner for Oz as Vijay shots +1 against Browne +3 in Hawaii, after coming from 3 shots behind on the back nine. :eek:

Well played Oz, off to a flyer. :p

Showdown Standings

Oz 1/1 +0.57
Grim 0/1 -1.0 (Y)

Showdown Stats

Profit -0.43
Win/Loss Record 1/2
Success Ratio 50%

Long Trem Bets In Play

Grim
1. Super League - Les Catalans to beat St Helens/Leeds/Bradford at any point during the season 5/2

ozeagle

07-01-2006, 03:01 AM

3 hrs rule stays,

Bung, please add inidividual competitor strike rates,

oz 1/1 100% win strike rate
grim 0/1 100% loss strike rate

93-8 vijay, stat bet of the century.

:)

bunghole

07-01-2006, 03:10 AM

Originally posted by ozeagle
3 hrs rule stays,

Bung, please add inidividual competitor strike rates,

oz 1/1 100% win strike rate
grim 0/1 100% loss strike rate

Oz.

I think anyone with better than a kindergarten aptitude in mathematics can interpret the stats without needing to spell them out. :D

If we get any pre-schoolers on here, I'll gladly amend. :p

Flat Noodle

07-01-2006, 03:52 AM

Bung, superb job ~ :p

ozeagle

07-01-2006, 04:56 AM

but what's this? berdych being hosed???????

ozeagle

07-01-2006, 05:07 AM

you have to laugh, 27/32, 28/7% ROI this week in the tennis, and Berdych goes down bagel in the 2nd set.

even when grim loses, he tips 5 FG bets, 4 win and the other :)

still, at least i remain in front, 50% winners, and 1 winner.

.57 in front, but on a yellow.

:(

bunghole

07-01-2006, 05:19 AM

Originally posted by Flat Noodle
Bung, superb job ~ :p

Ty FN. :)

So to the sounds of uncontrollable laughter coming out of Reaperbet headquarters, Berdych bites the dust 4/6 0/6 in a text book display of utter clownage.

Oz wipes off his earler profit and cops a yellow in the process.

Showdown Standings

Oz 1/2 -0.43 (Y)
Grim 0/1 -1.0 (Y)

Showdown Stats

Profit -1.43
Win/Loss Record 1/3
Success Ratio 33.3333333333333333333333333333333333333%

Showdown Form Guide - Last 6 Bets

Grim - L
Oz - LW

Long Term Bets In Play

Grim
1. Super League - Les Catalans to beat St Helens/Leeds/Bradford at any point during the season 5/2

Strathclyde Eagle

07-01-2006, 07:14 AM

Bung, how about a form guide to go with the other stats, like last six or something? E.g., Oz, 1/2 (WL), Grim, 0/1 (L). Handy reference point to see who is hot and who is not.

bunghole

07-01-2006, 07:22 AM

Originally posted by Strathclyde Eagle
Bung, how about a form guide to go with the other stats, like last six or something? E.g., Oz, 1/2 (WL), Grim, 0/1 (L). Handy reference point to see who is hot and who is not.

Yep that sounds good Strath and easy to update.

Just had my trusty calculator out and did some 'projections'. As week 1 draws to a close, our betting buddies have a loss of -1.43. If they maintain this rate for the full year, over all 52 weeks, the balance at the end of the year will be -74.36. :D

Of course a losing strike rate of this magnitude will see red cards handed out like boiled lollies, so we mightn't quite get to Purewinners type figures. ;) :D :o

Men At Work

07-01-2006, 07:27 AM

Like this, Tony?

Oz:
Current position: First
Wins: 1/2 - 50.00%
Profit: -0.43
Form: WL
Current status: on a yellow
Recent comment rating: Swaggering
Current rating: :hmph:

Grim:
Current position: Last
Wins: 0/1 - 0.00%
Profit: -0.1
Form: L
Current status: on a yellow
Recent comment rating: Moaning
Current rating: :clown:

bunghole

07-01-2006, 07:30 AM

LOL MaW, one of your best. :p :D :lux:

Strathclyde Eagle

07-01-2006, 07:47 AM

Originally posted by Men At Work
Like this, Tony?

Oz:
Current position: First
Wins: 1/2 - 50.00%
Profit: -0.43
Form: WL
Current status: on a yellow
Recent comment rating: Swaggering
Current rating: :hmph:

Grim:
Current position: Last
Wins: 0/1 - 0.00%
Profit: -0.1
Form: L
Current status: on a yellow
Recent comment rating: Moaning
Current rating: :clown:
Loving the use of the red text there. :p

ozeagle

07-01-2006, 09:23 AM

only 1 member of the BBS will fail to see the humour in all of this.

suffice to say, purewinners is not apt,

i actually tipped a winner today.

Grim Reaper

07-01-2006, 12:07 PM

Jeez, the 3 hour rule remains????

Great so, ozplank adds the +1 to my Goldmine score as the bet shouldn't have been allowed and EVERYONE wins as the Goldmine profile is also raised.

FFS ozthrush jusst do the right thing so we can move on.

ozeagle

07-01-2006, 12:48 PM

no grim.

no retrospectives in the GM.

shut it.

Grim Reaper

07-01-2006, 01:57 PM

You are a twat

fredman

09-01-2006, 12:13 PM

Originally posted by bunghole
What a nice start to what I'd planned would be a peaceful weekend. :grrr:

Having said ALL of that, I am prepared to offer a COMPROMISE on the time limit rule.The best point you made was about the weather and how skillful betters will do their research, monitor what's happening and bet accordingly if they think the weather will be a determining factor that could assist one team or competitor over another.

With this in mind, my compromise idea is that the time limit rule be reduced from 3 hours to 2, so that any change in weather conditions can be noted more accurately and taken into account when posting bets in the Showdown.

However, this is conditional on 2 things:

1. Oz agrees.
2. That the DT agree (Stig and Fredman).

If either don't, then the 3 hour rule stays.

One last thing people. Regardless of whether or not the time limit rule is amended, this will be the LAST time this year that any of the rules are altered, regardless of any unforeseen circumstances, well articulated posts, or out and out whining. Any further 'suggestions' will just go straight through to the keeper, regardless of who they come from.

Apologies for being so blunt, but everyone had their chance to put their 2 cents worth in before the comp strarted, so now it's time to put the rules to bed and get on with (hopefully) enjoying the contest. :)

I quite like Bung's compromise suggestion and would have voted the 3hr rule to be amended to 2 (reasonable as per bung's comments and Grim's play on being a more informed punter)......however as Oz has degreed not to agree it remains....

ozeagle

10-01-2006, 06:46 AM

decreed, not degreed, you English minnow.

Flat Noodle

11-01-2006, 05:46 AM

so quiet around here... :rolleyes:

Shamone

11-01-2006, 06:11 PM

Christmas drinking really did take its toll as Ive only just realised this is here.

Just a quick thought on the yellow card rule that I dont remember reading. Is the order of bets 1st bet written on here or 1st bet settled? Could have an outcome on whether somone gets banned if 2 bets are placed up at once.

Grim Reaper

11-01-2006, 09:28 PM

Originally posted by Shamone
Christmas drinking really did take its toll as Ive only just realised this is here.

Just a quick thought on the yellow card rule that I dont remember reading. Is the order of bets 1st bet written on here or 1st bet settled? Could have an outcome on whether somone gets banned if 2 bets are placed up at once.

Good point

In my mind it's order of settlement.

To be honest I can 't see me having two bets at once to make this situation arise but you never know.

Lets' see what Fuhrer bung says ;)

ozeagle

11-01-2006, 11:29 PM

i concur, order of settlement.

bunghole

12-01-2006, 01:35 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
Lets' see what Fuhrer bung says ;)

Achtung! :D

Order of settlement. :p

Men At Work

12-01-2006, 01:48 AM

What about arbs? It would produce a win and a loss which could be a problem if someone is on a yellow as you'd have to decide which of the results came first.

I know most arbs are only in short odds range but if both were over 1.5?

bunghole

12-01-2006, 02:01 AM

Originally posted by Men At Work
What about arbs? It would produce a win and a loss which could be a problem if someone is on a yellow as you'd have to decide which of the results came first.

I know most arbs are only in short odds range but if both were over 1.5?

If anyone can find a 50% arb, they're more than welcome to post it in here. They'll also get to claim their rightful place in the arbing Hall Of Fame. :eek:

Grim Reaper

12-01-2006, 06:52 AM

You're missing the point bung.

oz's complete non-grasp of the spectrum of betting has rubbed off on you

What Graham means is that both sides of an arb are priced at 1.5

To be honest he's wrong on this. Most common arb I ever found was 5/4 v 5/6. It's the 50/50 matches that are more likely to produce an arb, certainly in tennis anyway.

When I arbed, first thing I looked for was a bookie pricing 5/6 each side. There was an instant chance that the bookie didn't have a clue and was just taking the easy option and hoping to get away with it.

All it took was for a bookie to rate one of the players and suddenly the arb was on.

Grim Reaper

12-01-2006, 06:54 AM

Originally posted by bunghole
If anyone can find a 50% arb, they're more than welcome to post it in here. They'll also get to claim their rightful place in the arbing Hall Of Fame. :eek:

I know of one in the past

The guy who taught me arbing tells the story fo the F1 Qualifying bets

6/4 on Fiscchela on one side and 6/4 on his team mate on the other side

£400 on each = £800 outlay and £1200 return = £400 profit

Men At Work

12-01-2006, 07:03 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
6/4 on Fiscchela on one side and 6/4 on his team mate on the other side

Isn't 6/4 the same as 1.5? :confused:

bunghole

12-01-2006, 07:16 AM

bunghole

12-01-2006, 07:19 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
You're missing the point bung.

oz's complete non-grasp of the spectrum of betting has rubbed off on you

What Graham means is that both sides of an arb are priced at 1.5

To be honest he's wrong on this. Most common arb I ever found was 5/4 v 5/6. It's the 50/50 matches that are more likely to produce an arb, certainly in tennis anyway.

When I arbed, first thing I looked for was a bookie pricing 5/6 each side. There was an instant chance that the bookie didn't have a clue and was just taking the easy option and hoping to get away with it.

All it took was for a bookie to rate one of the players and suddenly the arb was on.

What I meant was that finding a 50% ROI on an arb, would get one into the HOF.

If both sides are priced at 1.5, then it's impossible to be an arb. :)

bunghole

12-01-2006, 07:23 AM

Just to clarify for MaW.

6/4 is $2.50.

Made up of getting your stake ($1) back, added to 1.5 ROI.

Grim Reaper

12-01-2006, 07:35 AM

Originally posted by bunghole
400 on each = 800 outlay and 1000 return = 200 profit. :p

Doh, yes you're right

My error is the fact I remembered the figures and not the facts of his tale. He made £400 because he structured the arb in such a way as to make it favourable if Fisichela won.

Bit like me with Colchester the other day

:lux:

ozeagle

12-01-2006, 07:36 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
I know of one in the past

The guy who taught me arbing tells the story fo the F1 Qualifying bets

6/4 on Fiscchela on one side and 6/4 on his team mate on the other side

£400 on each = £800 outlay and £1200 return = £400 profit

oh my giddy aunt.

i have never witnessed such arithmetic fuc kwittery.

2 bets

400 at 6/4 or 2.5
400 at 6/4 or 2.5

1 loses -400, collect 0
1 wins +600, collect 1000

200 profit.

any wonder the financial world gave the ultimate figure dud the flick.

guesthouse sums don't come much harder than 15 x 3,

or perhaps grim's moronic maths has been fudging the clee income for eons eternal.

this, at almost the exact same time as last years 128+128+128,

2 years running, 2 years the most idiotic posting

you can count Grim in for back to back clownage awards

:lux:

ozeagle

12-01-2006, 07:39 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
Doh, yes you're right

My error is the fact I remembered the figures and not the facts of his tale. He made £400 because he structured the arb in such a way as to make it favourable if Fisichela won.

Bit like me with Colchester the other day

:lux:

no no no, you are a first class fool.

i never thought i'd see the day when you confirmed your lack of ability in the area of basic maths, but you have.

:eek:

Skin Up

12-01-2006, 04:28 PM

Don't have time to read 8 pages.

how many is oz losing by?

Grim Reaper

12-01-2006, 09:33 PM

Skin Up, oz will be losing by a small amount when this little number comes in

CHANTELLE TOP FEMALE CELEBRITY BIG BROTHER 1.55

This mish mash of celebs has thrown together some entertaining/ruide men with a lot of non-entity women. The upshot of thsi combo is that we have the gimmick of the woman who entered as a genuine non-celebrity becoming a celebrity through this reverse psychology gimmick.

While Jodie Marsh gets panned by the entire media, young Chantelle (Essex's answer to Paris Hilton - with a pound or two extra in the weight dept) is winning the battle simply by being a little dizzy but a nice lass.

Two weeks or so until it settles so I now await what gayness oz conjures up to get this banned. Tw*t!

ozeagle

13-01-2006, 01:24 AM

no gayness at all, except for your insipid multiplication.

:)

Men At Work

13-01-2006, 01:45 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
Skin Up, oz will be losing by a small amount when this little number comes in

1) That means oz is currently in the lead (thus answering Skin Up's question)
2) You're assuming that your bet will win
3) You're assuming that oz will not settle any bets before that time (which may go either way)

bunghole

13-01-2006, 02:00 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
Skin Up, oz will be losing by a small amount when this little number comes in

CHANTELLE TOP FEMALE CELEBRITY BIG BROTHER 1.55

This mish mash of celebs has thrown together some entertaining/ruide men with a lot of non-entity women. The upshot of thsi combo is that we have the gimmick of the woman who entered as a genuine non-celebrity becoming a celebrity through this reverse psychology gimmick.

While Jodie Marsh gets panned by the entire media, young Chantelle (Essex's answer to Paris Hilton - with a pound or two extra in the weight dept) is winning the battle simply by being a little dizzy but a nice lass.

Two weeks or so until it settles so I now await what gayness oz conjures up to get this banned. Tw*t!

Achtung!

Which agency would this be with Mr Reaper? :hi: :D

ozeagle

13-01-2006, 02:37 AM

Bung, please check price when operator is listed.

regardless, it'll lose.

:)

bunghole

13-01-2006, 10:06 AM

Originally posted by bunghole
Achtung!

Which agency would this be with Mr Reaper? :hi: :D

??

ozeagle

13-01-2006, 11:26 AM

has this guy NO brain whatsoever?

bunghole

13-01-2006, 06:41 PM

Originally posted by bunghole
Achtung!

Which agency would this be with Mr Reaper? :hi: :D

Betfair.

Thanks Grim. :p

Grim Reaper

13-01-2006, 08:18 PM

Originally posted by Men At Work
1) That means oz is currently in the lead (thus answering Skin Up's question)
2) You're assuming that your bet will win
3) You're assuming that oz will not settle any bets before that time (which may go either way)

3 statements of the obvious there.

Quite what this achieved is anybody's guess BUT to your credit your P&L was better than FN's :D

Grim Reaper

13-01-2006, 08:32 PM

Originally posted by ozeagle
has this guy NO brain whatsoever?

I have but dealing with the childish retorts from yourself with regard to Goldmine points does take its toll at times. :rolleyes:

Flat Noodle

14-01-2006, 01:15 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
BUT to your credit your P&L was better than FN's :D

Thanks for that, Grimmy... :sob:

ozeagle

15-01-2006, 12:08 PM

right, ozeagle dipping in.

risking a ban,

nice acca which should oxo the yellow and lump .54 to my score.

stepanek
moodie
nalbandian
gonzalez
berdych,

via sportsbet,

pays 1.54

moodie over hernandez, who's won 1 match on hard in 5 years.
nalbandian, talented, might make the final here v a perennial thai ******* who should be making tom yum rather than pounding the courts.
berdych, another with rare talent, against bobby boo reynolds, who will try hard but to no avail.
stepanek, with a good mixed up game will have FAR too much for qualifier abba rehnqvist
gonzalez, who may surprise here, with far too much ammo for buy one get one free molov,

SMASH !!

Men At Work

15-01-2006, 12:58 PM

And oz catches Grim's disease of not specifying what time the events are on. I'm assuming these are all in the AO?

And is moodie actually berdych in disguise? :)

bunghole

15-01-2006, 01:02 PM

Originally posted by ozeagle
right, ozeagle dipping in.

risking a ban,

nice acca which should oxo the yellow and lump .54 to my score.

stepanek
moodie
nalbandian
gonzalez
moodie,

via sportsbet,

pays 1.54

moodie over hernandez, who's won 1 match on hard in 5 years.
nalbandian, talented, might make the final here v a perennial thai ******* who should be making tom yum rather than pounding the courts.
berdych, another with rare talent, against bobby boo reynolds, who will try hard but to no avail.
stepanek, with a good mixed up game will have FAR too much for qualifier abba rehnqvist
gonzalez, who may surprise here, with far too much ammo for buy one get one free molov,

SMASH !!

I'd just like to point out Oz that if any of these matches don't go the distance, that this acca will be declared N and V as the return will fall below the required $1.50 mark. :cool:

bunghole

15-01-2006, 01:03 PM

Originally posted by Men At Work
And oz catches Grim's disease of not specifying what time the events are on. I'm assuming these are all in the AO?

Yes MaW.

All on the AO, well in advance of the 3 hour deadline. :p

Grim Reaper

15-01-2006, 05:26 PM

Originally posted by bunghole
I'd just like to point out Oz that if any of these matches don't go the distance, that this acca will be declared N and V as the return will fall below the required $1.50 mark. :cool:
Good point

Can't believe this helmet slates FN non stop for doubles thenlaunches a 1.54 fivefold

I'll give him credit though - this idiocy has paralysed me temporarily through my sheer disbelief

Can only assume that this was his driving inspiration in such lunacy.

Grim Reaper

16-01-2006, 05:15 AM

GRrr, looks like this one's coming in in spite of the *******ity!

Flat Noodle

16-01-2006, 02:58 PM

4 down... only Gonzo to go for oz... :p

ozeagle

17-01-2006, 09:07 AM

disaster :(

Grim Reaper

17-01-2006, 09:07 AM

Jesus, oz you got in quick then!!!!!!!

(Note to reaaders, I'm genuinely laughing as I type this, not just some smiley but really laughing!!!!!)

Grim Reaper

17-01-2006, 09:08 AM

Originally posted by ozeagle
disaster :(

Post of the year

Doubt this will be beaten :D :lux: :lux: :lux: :lux: :lux: :lux:

Grim Reaper

17-01-2006, 09:08 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
Post of the year

Doubt this will be beaten :D :lux: :lux: :lux: :lux: :lux: :lux:

And just for good measure

:D :D :D

Grim Reaper

17-01-2006, 09:10 AM

That's one hell of a trick

Losing to a guy on 0% success rate

Damn, wish I'd not done the Chantelle bet now as it crossed my mind last week to see if I could win this thing by finishing on 0/1

:hi: :hi: :hi: :hi: :hi: :hi: :hi: :hi: :hi:

Grim Reaper

17-01-2006, 09:12 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
Good point

Can't believe this helmet slates FN non stop for doubles thenlaunches a 1.54 fivefold

I'll give him credit though - this idiocy has paralysed me temporarily through my sheer disbelief

Can only assume that this was his driving inspiration in such lunacy.

Cough cough

:lux: :lux: :lux: :lux: :lux: :lux: :lux: :lux: :lux: :lux:

Grim Reaper

17-01-2006, 09:14 AM

Where is bung?

get the table updated!!!!!!!!

ozeagle

17-01-2006, 09:17 AM

worst of all, that ruined a near perfect day on the punt :(

Grim Reaper

17-01-2006, 09:42 AM

You gotta admit oz, your earlier twattishness (PSG/3hour rule/creaming pants on Jan 2nd) in this thread has come back to haunt you pretty quickly.

Men At Work

17-01-2006, 09:54 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
You gotta admit oz, your earlier twattishness (PSG/3hour rule/creaming pants on Jan 2nd) in this thread has come back to haunt you pretty quickly.

That was actually due to bung who merely implemented the rules to which you had agreed. Enjoy the result but please not at the expense of truth.

I'm always reminded in situations like this of back in the (last) Coppell term when we were 3-0 up against Stockport after half an hour and giving it large to their supporters. On the hour it was 3-3 and we somehow managed to hang on for a point. It's always far more enjoyable when the fat lady has sung her song and then buggered off home because there's no comeback then :)

Men At Work

17-01-2006, 09:55 AM

A quick question: does this mean oz can't post a tip here for a month or that his next tip can't settle until a month from now?

Grim Reaper

17-01-2006, 10:16 AM

Originally posted by Men At Work
That was actually due to bung who merely implemented the rules to which you had agreed. Enjoy the result but please not at the expense of truth.

I'm always reminded in situations like this of back in the (last) Coppell term when we were 3-0 up against Stockport after half an hour and giving it large to their supporters. On the hour it was 3-3 and we somehow managed to hang on for a point. It's always far more enjoyable when the fat lady has sung her song and then buggered off home because there's no comeback then :)

Yes, you are right but oz taking glee in wanting the three hour rule to remain was my particular grievance.

As I said at the time when I asked what kind of man he was, if he took teh cowardly route and I still end up winning then he'll have to live with that forever. Also, he had a courageous option of allowing the PSG bet and beating me in which case he'd have double cause to be happy.

And besides, after taking the flak for the first 17 days do you really think I'm going to let this opportunity pass me by :lux: :lux: :lux:

And let's face it. the public seem to love me and oz going hammer and tongs so why disappoint them??

As for Stockport and such like, I used to think that but then if you spend your whole time worrying about what might happen you never enjoy the good things at the moment they happen.

'Tis better to have loved and lost' and all that

Grim Reaper

17-01-2006, 10:17 AM

Originally posted by Men At Work
A quick question: does this mean oz can't post a tip here for a month or that his next tip can't settle until a month from now?

As a non-slimy non-cowardly participant I say he can post as long as settlement is after 16 Feb.

Men At Work

17-01-2006, 10:23 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
As a non-slimy non-cowardly participant I say he can post as long as settlement is after 16 Feb.

If it's a calendar month then getting red carded in February would seem to be the best option.

Men At Work

17-01-2006, 10:25 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
'Tis better to have loved and lost' and all that

That just reminded me of some girls I used to know. Thanks, Grim :sob:

Grim Reaper

17-01-2006, 10:26 AM

Originally posted by Men At Work
If it's a calendar month then getting red carded in February would seem to be the best option.

Indeed

I was just thinking that.

Oh well, there will still be time for oz to manage this as well. :D

Grim Reaper

17-01-2006, 10:29 AM

Originally posted by Men At Work
That just reminded me of some girls I used to know. Thanks, Grim :sob:

And me

Got there in the end....... but one of two heartaches along the way.

Although I can't be bitter as it's swings and roundabouts. Would still love to know if Suzanne from Burton that I dumped (I gave her plenty of warning that when Palace's run of away games in the Sheffield/Derby area stopped then I'd be off but she didn't believe me) did appear on Trisha one time. Certainly looked and sounded like her but she was called 'Sarah' God she was bitter!!! :o

Men At Work

17-01-2006, 10:40 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
God she was bitter!!! :o

She would be - she's lost the chance of living in Cleethorpes.

A mate of mine at uni broke up with a girl who promptly became a lesbian. He handled it in the time honoured tradition by copping off with her best friend :)

bunghole

17-01-2006, 11:48 AM

Gonzo gags and Oz cops a red.

Showdown Standings

Grim 0/1 -1.0 (Y)
Oz 1/3 -1.43 (17 February '06)

Showdown Stats

Profit -2.43
Win/Loss Record 1/4
Success Ratio 25%

Showdown Form Guide - Last 6 Bets

Grim - L
Oz - LLW

Long Term Bets In Play

Grim
1. Super League - Les Catalans to beat St Helens/Leeds/Bradford at any point during the season 5/2

Grim Reaper

17-01-2006, 11:52 AM

WTF?

Put me TOP ofthe table bung!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jeez

bunghole

17-01-2006, 03:10 PM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
WTF?

Put me TOP ofthe table bung!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jeez

Amended

Terribly sorry Grim. :rolleyes:

Grim Reaper

17-01-2006, 07:47 PM

Originally posted by bunghole
Amended

Terribly sorry Grim. :rolleyes:

That's better :lux: :D :lux: :D

Strathclyde Eagle

17-01-2006, 08:09 PM

Someone call 999 and ask for the Fire Brigade, these two are setting the world on fire.

Not. :clown:

Shamone

18-01-2006, 11:59 PM

At this rate you'll both be sharing the Purewinners cup. Or if its a (losing) draw does one get the Purewinners cup, the other The Flat Noodle Plate?

Men At Work

19-01-2006, 12:11 AM

Originally posted by Shamone
Or if its a (losing) draw does one get the Purewinners cup, the other The Flat Noodle Plate?

Cruel but funny :D

Perhaps topped off with the Late Mail sash and the Tor tiara?

Late Mail

19-01-2006, 04:12 AM

Originally posted by Men At Work
Cruel but funny :D

Perhaps topped off with the Late Mail sash and the Tor tiara?

Thats just lovely, thanks for that.

I doubt FN, Tor or myself would be trailing in this competition. Supreme punting it is. :clown:

ozeagle

19-01-2006, 05:05 AM

no. i'm pretty sure you would be.

Flat Noodle

22-01-2006, 12:03 PM

Surprise to not to see Grimmy taking advantage while Oz is still in Red Card... :rolleyes:

Why is it so quiet ???

Grim Reaper

22-01-2006, 12:37 PM

I can't do anything until the Chantelle bet settles. Stalemate for another week or so.

Then, if Chantelle loses, we'll have a two week period where neither of us can bet!! :o

The key is I need the Chantelle bet to win. If it does then you'll see TWO bets from me for the Superbowl and, depending how they go, probably quiet from me again for while.

Remember, FN, I'm the 'disciplined and methodical' Grim.

No need to take risks when you're winning ;)

hong_kong_hg

22-01-2006, 01:18 PM

Looking dodgy. Chantelle up for eviction with 2 out 3 getting the boot on Weds.

Grim Reaper

22-01-2006, 04:10 PM

How come?

This has looked too good for me to take it seriously

That's why it's such a swine to bet big on these things because the rules are forever changing.

Channel 4 are tossers for that.

Grim Reaper

27-01-2006, 08:16 PM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
Skin Up, oz will be losing by a small amount when this little number comes in

CHANTELLE TOP FEMALE CELEBRITY BIG BROTHER 1.55

This mish mash of celebs has thrown together some entertaining/ruide men with a lot of non-entity women. The upshot of thsi combo is that we have the gimmick of the woman who entered as a genuine non-celebrity becoming a celebrity through this reverse psychology gimmick.

While Jodie Marsh gets panned by the entire media, young Chantelle (Essex's answer to Paris Hilton - with a pound or two extra in the weight dept) is winning the battle simply by being a little dizzy but a nice lass.

Two weeks or so until it settles so I now await what gayness oz conjures up to get this banned. Tw*t!

As I said above, let's see what gayness Black Mail conjures up to get this winner banned :rolleyes: :veryangry :bash: :S: :S: :bash: :(

Men At Work

28-01-2006, 02:00 AM

Celebrations in Cleethorpes as Grim (with a bit of help from the missus) lands a Celebrity Big Brother winner and heads into the lead of The Showdown.

Can people check that I've got the details right? I don't want to stuff it up too much while bung's away.

Showdown Standings

Rankings
1st. Grim Reaper
last. ozeagle

Form for Grim Reaper
Won 1 out of 2 bets. 50% success ratio
Recent form: LW
Profit: -0.45
Current status: clear
Next bet permitted to settle: any time

Form for ozeagle
Won 1 out of 3 bets. 33% success ratio
Recent form: WLL
Profit: -1.43
Current status: banned
Next bet permitted to settle: 17 February 2006

Showdown Statistics
Won 2 out of 5 bets. 40% success ratio
Recent form: LWLLW
Profit: -1.98

Standard bets in play
Grim Reaper: none
ozeagle: none

Long term bets in play
Grim Reaper: 1. Super League - Les Catalans to beat St Helens/Leeds/Bradford at any point during the season 5/2
ozeagle: none

Grim Reaper

31-01-2006, 12:35 PM

Right, taking the plunge here and using my February JOKER BET

EVERY 6 NATIONS MATCH TO HAVE A TRY 1.5

SPORTINGBET.COM

Quite simply a great bet. Had to check if there was a catch but there is none. A sport which throws up 5-6 tries per game on average and all that has to happen is a try in each of the 15 games in the tournament.

I don't follow Union that closely so just checked the 6 Nations website and there has been at least one try in each of the last 30 games in this tournament. I can only assume there's been tries in more games than that but the site only goes back the past two seasons. Off the top of my head I don't recall an England game without a try in God knows how long so that's 5 of the 15 games taken care of. Italy leak points like water so that's another 4 games accounted for. France are a free scoring flair side who'll keep the scoreboard ticking, so that's another 3 games taken care of.

Of the 3 games left (involving Scotland, Wales and Ireland) there's nothing to suggest that the teams will suddenly adopt ultra defensive qualities. All three are scheduled to finish in the bottom four so will let in points to each other.

Flat Noodle

03-02-2006, 11:24 AM

Funny for Oz got banned in both the Showdown and GM now... he must be pretty bored to suddenly show up in the Betting Masters Comp... :D

ozeagle

03-02-2006, 11:35 AM

on the contrary, the only way to get out of a rut is to get rid of all the bad selections somewhere where it will be of the last 4 concern.

Men At Work

03-02-2006, 11:41 AM

Originally posted by Grim Reaper
Right, taking the plunge here and using my February JOKER BET

EVERY 6 NATIONS MATCH TO HAVE A TRY 1.5

Just to clarify does this apply to all matches in the competition or only those played during February? Given that the last games are in the middle of March the first option could mean that two joker bets are active at the one time (including that the second settles before the first which would cause hell if that lost while the first was still active). It's a vague area of the rules so any light shed on the matter would be welcome.

Grim Reaper

06-02-2006, 12:16 AM

I see what you're saying but unlikely that I'll stumble upon a bet as strong as this between March 1st and March 18th so I daresay it won't crop up.

Of course, if it fails in Feb then I'm banned and we don't have to worry!

I suppose the fairest thing is to have a rule that two joker bets can't be in play at the same time, period.

Grim Reaper

09-02-2006, 05:23 PM

LONG TERM BET NO.2 (and one I won;t object to losing!!!)

HULL FC TO NOT MAKE THE PLAY OFFSS IN SUPER LEAGUE THIS YEAR.
William Hill 5.50

First part of this is an omen. Hull's finishing slots in teh last five years have been

3rd, 5th, 7th, 3rd, 5th.

No prizes for guessing where the omens say we'll finish this time around

Other than that there's still a question over John Kear's ability to actually manage a winning side. He won the Cup last year but in doing so also took a team that finished 3rd in 2004 to 5th last year and you could even say that with the players he had, he should have matched the previous year. It looked for all teh world that they would for a long time but a late collapse saw them drop from 3rd to 5th.

With Wigan bound to come strong, along with Huddersfield, Wire and London all likely to be stronger than last year PLUS the unknown factor of Les Catalans, that's six teams going for the remaining three slots behind the big three.

I said to WA and bung some time ago that if the price was good I'd take Hull to miss out and 5.5 (that's a real +450, not the balls up I made on the RLfans site!!!) is a good enough price to warrant a score being slapped down.