Nadal + Federer Gamble

RichieD

I've been looking at the odds for the Australian open and you can get both fed and nadal at around 2/1 on various bookies.

So my idea would be to put 1000 on both of them
1000 on Nadal at @ 2/1 returns = 3000
1000 on Federer at @ 2/1 returns = 3000

If either of them win its a 1000 profit.

Now if either of them get knocked out in the earlier rounds the odds of the other will likely plumet and you can lay it off, e.g.

Federer knocked out & Nadals odds drop to evens. In which case lay 2000 against nadal @evens on BetFair.

Final outcome 1 - Nadal wins tournament - You collect 3000 to cover your 1000 Federer Bet + the 2000 Lay. Break even (-commissions)

Final outcome 2 Nadal kncocked out - You collect 2000 BetFair Lay to cover your 1000 Federer Bet + 1000 Nadal Bet = Break even (-commissions)

Since both players wont play at the same time theres no danger of them getting eliminated simultaneously.

Even if the odds dont fall as low as evens you still only stand to lose a couple hundred in the difference. Seems worth the risk.

What do you think?

Juwwi

Final outcome 1 - Nadal wins tournament - You collect 3000 to cover your 1000 Federer Bet + the 2000 Lay. Break even (-commissions)




What about the 1000 Nadal bet.
At the start of tournament you layout 2000 and then if 1 of them is knocked out u layout another 2000 in the lay so now ur 4000 out of pocket
and if nadal wins it u get back 3000 and ur down 1000.

RichieD

Thanks for replying.

The way i figure it, in that outcome you would lose 3000, not 4000. The 1000 Nadal bet is returned as a win.

Loss 1000 Federer Stake
Loss 2000 Nadal Lay

Win 1000 Nadal Stake
Win 2000 Nadal Profit.

Result = 0

Juwwi

Im getting confused .

If one of them loses early and you lay the other at 1/1 for 2000 the two options you have is either break even or lose a 1000.

You will have laid out 4000 if 1 loses early.

sleepyholland

Surely robbie1977 is correct.
I'll try putting it another way.

The mistake is here:

RichieD wrote: »

Final outcome 1 - Nadal wins tournament - You collect 3000 to cover your 1000 Federer Bet + the 2000 Lay. Break even (-commissions)

This is really:
Nadal wins - you get your 1,000 stake back and win 2,000.

But your outlay was 1,000 + 1,000 + 2,000.

You don't 'win' the Nadal stake.

You lose 1,000 overall..

RichieD

robbie1977 wrote: »

Im getting confused .

If one of them loses early and you lay the other at 1/1 for 2000 the two options you have is either break even or lose a 1000.

You will have laid out 4000 if 1 loses early.

Its quite confusing indeed, it took me some time to get my head around it. Just break it down on the Nadal bet.

If you are betting 1000 on Nadal and then lay 2000 against him, only 1 of these can happen since they are the opposite outcome. So thats never laying out 3000 its 2000 max in the worst case i.e he wins and you lose your lay.

RichieD

sleepyholland wrote: »

Surely robbie1977 is correct.
I'll try putting it another way.

The mistake is here:


This is really:
Nadal wins - you get your 1,000 stake back and win 2,000.

But your outlay was 1,000 + 1,000 + 2,000.

You don't 'win' the Nadal stake.

You lose 1,000 overall..

I understand your point, but you are laying 2000 against Nadal which you already have a 1000 bet on. Essentially giving you a position of 1000 against Nadal.

Another way of putting it,

Loss1000 against Nadal
Loss 1000 on federer

Win 2000 Nadal profits

Juwwi

RichieD wrote: »

Its quite confusing indeed, it took me some time to get my head around it. Just break it down on the Nadal bet.

If you are betting 1000 on Nadal and then lay 2000 against him, only 1 of these can happen since they are the opposite outcome. So thats never laying out 3000 its 2000 max in the worst case.

Ritchie are you smoking marijuana

RichieD

robbie1977 wrote: »

Ritchie are you smoking marijuana

Yes i bought it with my HUGGGGEEEEEE tennis betting profits.

Seriously think about it again.

RichieD

If you bet 1000 on something, then lay 2000 against it. You are now laying 1000 against it. Thats my point I guess

Juwwi

To make it easier you go down to the bookies and put 1000 nadal and 1000 federer both at 2/1 so u have gave the bookie 2000

if 1 wins u win 1000.

but if disaster happens and either of the 2 loses early u have to go onto betfair and lay the other person for 2000 at 1/1

now u have gave the bookie 2000 + 2000 to betfair

if ur other player wins u get 3000 from bookie and nothing from betfair


if ur other player loses u get nothing from bookie and 4000 from betfair
u break even

please tell me u understand it now

RichieD

robbie1977 wrote: »

To make it easier you go down to the bookies and put 1000 nadal and 1000 federer both at 2/1 so u have gave the bookie 2000

if 1 wins u win 1000.

but if disaster happens and either of the 2 loses early u have to go onto betfair and lay the other person for 2000 at 1/1

now u have gave the bookie 2000 + 2000 to betfair

if ur other player wins u get 3000 from bookie and nothing from betfair


if ur other player loses u get nothing from bookie and 4000 from betfair
u break even

please tell me u understand it now

You've said it perfectly mate, both cases you break even. If ur other player wins, you get 3000 from the bookie yeah??? But you;ve only lost 2000 on betfair, and 1000 on the other other player at the bookie.

Juwwi

I dont know if your a troll

but lm gona leave it at that .

RichieD

robbie1977 wrote: »

I dont know if your a troll

but lm gona leave it at that .

Im not a troll, I seriously cant understand the difference here & i appreciate your replies.

Juwwi

RichieD wrote: »

Im not a troll, I seriously cant understand the difference here & i appreciate your replies.

Its like this if you give the bookie 2000 and then have to lay on betfair 2000 u are out of pocket 4000

but if 1 of the 2 players win the total amount back from the bookie is 3000.

thats 3000 in total including ur stake so then u are down 1000.

RichieD

You are counting the 1000 bet on Nadal on both sides.

You either lose the money into oblivion or you get it back. You cant count it on both sides its either a return or a loss.

Yes you are laying out 4000 but you're not losing 4000, you get the 1000 back and lose 3000

RichieD

Dont know how else to say this.

You bet 1000 on Nadal - He wins you get 3000.

You had 1000 on Federer & 2000 Lay on Betfair - 3000

sleepyholland

RichieD wrote: »

You are counting the 1000 bet on Nadal on both sides.

You either lose the money into oblivion or you get it back. You cant count it on both sides its either a return or a loss.

Yes you are laying out 4000 but you're not losing 4000.

If you are not a troll, please read robbie1977's last explaination until it sinks in.
I was confused too initially by the way you reasoned it out.

Alternatively, just go put the bets on and if it goes horribly wrong, your bank balance will tell us the answer.

ft9

RichieD wrote: »

Dont know how else to say this.

You bet 1000 on Nadal - He wins you get 3000.

You had 1000 on Federer & 2000 Lay on Betfair - 3000

Exactly!

So you have 'spent' €1000 + €1000 + €2000 = €4000

Nadal wins you get €3000, so you have lost €1000...

sleepyholland

RichieD wrote: »

Dont know how else to say this.

You bet 1000 on Nadal - He wins you get 3000.

You had 1000 on Federer & 2000 Lay on Betfair - 3000

This should explain it. Imagine you have €4,000 in your wallet at the start.

---

Balance in your wallet at the start = 4000
Initial bets, 1000 x 2 ----Balance in your wallet = 2000
Federer knocked out, 2000 lay---Balance in your wallet = 0
Nadal wins, returns 3000---alance in your wallet = 3000

Yes?

RichieD

You have all said it, but i still dont understand where you are getting 4000 from. Its not like im betting 4000 on completely different events, im laying against my own bet, effectively shifting my position fully to the other side.

I've bet 1000 on Nadal
I've then layed 2000 against Nadal.

My position is now laying 1000 against Nadal?

Am i right so far ???

So Nadal wins the tournament, i've lost the 1000 I was laying against him + the 1000 i had on Federer.


The difference is i bet him at 2/1(3000) and layed him at evens(2000).



Did you read the part about laying him at evens ??

Im not taking the piss here it works out fine in my mind.

ft9

Best way to understand is to go and do the bet, just make sure you stake €1 instead of €1000, and €2 instead of €2000, for learning purposes

Juwwi

Are you around tomorrow evening Ritchie and we can go through the
off side rule with ya. :D

ft9

When you lay for 2000, its not as if the bookie says ok youve changed your mind heres your original win bet of 1000 back and i will still pay you if you win.

You are staking 2000 in win bets and laying 2000 thats 4000, if Nadal wins you get 3 back. Simples!!

RichieD

robbie1977 wrote: »

Are you around tomorrow evening Ritchie and we can go through the
off side rule with ya. :D

Sure mate :)

RichieD

ft9 wrote: »

When you lay for 2000, its not as if the bookie says ok youve changed your mind heres your original win bet of 1000 back and i will still pay you if you win.

You are staking 2000 in win bets and laying 2000 thats 4000, if Nadal wins you get 3 back. Simples!!

Yes but 1000 of that 4000 is the Nadal stake, you too are counting it on both sides. I cant lose it and get it back at the same time. In this case im getting it back. Im getting my 1000 back and winning 2000 on top.

So how can you then say i've lost 4000?

ft9

Yes ok if thats how your looking at it your only spending 3000 but your only making 2000 off Nadal win, so your still loosing a grand

RichieD

ft9 wrote: »

Yes ok if thats how your looking at it your only spending 3000 but your only making 2000 off Nadal win, so your still loosing a grand

Yes but im betting Nadal 1000 @ 2/1 and laying him 2000 @ evens. 1000 difference.

1000 difference covers the Federer bet ?

ft9

Sorry Richie, I give up... Just try it with small stakes

RichieD

ft9 wrote: »

Sorry Richie, I give up... Just try it with small stakes

Will do, cheers.

thesandeman

.

thesandeman

Lol. This reminds me of the Naked Camera bit with Jake Stephens in the Casino.

Healio

Anyone else want to point out the problem commission-wise, or have we not got to that stage yet :pac:

Verance

RichieD wrote: »

Final outcome 1 - Nadal wins tournament - You collect 3000 to cover your 1000 Federer Bet + the 2000 Lay. Break even (-commissions)

Your problem lies here. Within that 3000 is 1000 to cover your own stake. It can only cover your own stake and not the other bets. So you'll only have 2000 left to cover the other bets leaving you -1000.

Basically the 1000 is your own money and you're using it to cover another bet, ie. -1000.

digme

use decimal odds next time lol

ft9

So who's getting the ball rolling on explaining offside? Only joking, OP have you got your head around this yet or whats the situation?

Bumsex

lads ive never laughed so hard in my life,especially when robbie was saying "i give up"...
OP im assuming youve never had a bet in your life,im only saying that because when you cant understand the basics of gambling you havent a hope,

loved the read though,brilliant tread..:pac:

FOXFISH1

...and neither won,
what did the op do in the end?

ALBUR182

FOXFISH1 wrote: »

...and neither won,
what did the op do in the end?

What did he do? He lost a thousand quid!!