Skip to main content

1.01 beaten in biathlon


Now do you believe me that it's a great trading sport? Until the final round of shooting is finished, they should never be 1.01.

Jonsson looked like she hit the front at the last round of shooting when Tora Berger started missing, but then Jonsson missed some too and Andrea Henkel shot clear to win.

This Mass Start format is great, a mad rush and they're all out on the course together.
Labels:

Comments

  1. JS11 January 2010 at 19:56

    Well you did just warn all the money buyers with your previous post! Biathlon looks like a very interesting prospect to trade indeed, unfortunately my knowledge of the sport and runners is zero, not much of an edge. I can imagine a veteran biathlon trader would clean up with so many swings.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Scott11 January 2010 at 20:11

    the best way to start is just by trying to lay them all at odds-on, say £5 at 1.8, and then watch how the race unfolds. Once you start picking up on what makes a good biathlete, it really does become very interesting!

    I wrote this basic guide to the sport a couple of years ago - http://betting.betfair.com/education/sports/biathlon/

    Where it does help to know the runners is in the Sprint and Individual events, where they go out at 30sec breaks. It then helps to know who the better shooters are, and who skis faster to make up for their imperfect shooting.

    Ruhpolding this week is traditionally one of the biggest events of the season - just watch the massive party in the crowd, despite the freezing conditions.

    ReplyDelete
  3. JS11 January 2010 at 20:44

    Will certainly have a closer look, thanks for the heads up.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thanks for your comments, but if you're a spammer, you've just wasted your time - it won't get posted.

Popular posts from this blog

Spot-fixing - you will never, ever be able to stop it

According to this report , IPL tournaments so far have been rife with spot-fixing - that is fixing minor elements of the game - runs in a single over, number of wides bowled etc. The curious part of that article is that the Income Tax department are supposed to have found these crimes. What idiot would be stupid enough to put down 'big wad of cash handed to me by bookie' as a source of income? Backhanders for sportsmen, particularly in a celebrity- and cricket-obsessed culture like India are not rare. They could come from anything like turning up to open someone's new business (not a sponsor, but a 'friend of a friend' arrangement), to being a guest at some devoted fan's dinner party etc. The opportunities are always there, and there will always be people trying to become friends with players and their entourage - that is human nature. This form of match-fixing (and it's not really fixing a match, just a minor element of it) is very hard to prove, but also, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

lay the field - my favourite racing strategy

Dabbling with laying the field in-running at various prices today, not just one price, but several in the same race. Got several matched in the previous race at Brighton, then this race came along at Nottingham. Such a long straight at Nottingham makes punters often over-react and think the finish line is closer than it actually is. As you can see by the number of bets matched, there was plenty of volatility in this in-play market. It's rare you'll get a complete wipe-out with one horse getting matched at all levels, but it can happen, so don't give yourself too much risk...
33 comments
Read more

It's all gone Pete Tong at Betfair!

The Christmas Hurdle from Leopardstown, a good Grade 2 race during the holiday period. But now it will go into history as the race which brought Betfair down. Over £21m at odds of 29 available on Voler La Vedette in-running - that's a potential liability of over £500m. You might think that's a bit suspicious, something's fishy, especially with the horse starting at a Betfair SP of 2.96. Well, this wasn't a horse being stopped by a jockey either - the bloody horse won! Look at what was matched at 29. Split that in half and multiply by 28 for the actual liability for the layer(s). (Matched amounts always shown as double the backers' stake, never counts the layers' risk). There's no way a Betfair client would have £600m+ in their account. Maybe £20 or even £50m from the massive syndicates who regard(ed) Betfair as safer than any bank, but not £600m. So the error has to be something technical. However, rumour has it, a helpdesk reply (not gospel, natur...
14 comments
Read more