A betting thread - Predictions by Evo Web users

I know what +1 1/2 means Interista but when it comes to soccer and those +1/2 or -1/2 , I'm not entirely sure myself and we never use it.

I think that bet is called an Asian Handicap or something. It should be easy enough to google and find out though.

In the TOTAL points, when it's let's say Over 2.5 goals in soccer or 4.5 in Hockey, it basically means you're betting that there will be 3 goals or more in the soccer game or 5 goal or more in the hockey game.

So if there are only 2 goals in the soccer game, you lose your money while if there are 3 or more, you win.

Same goes for NBA total points. So if we're betting on NY Knicks vs. Miami Heat to go OVER the 188.5 Total it means we're betting the game will have 190 points or more.
 
I think it's the same as other sports like basketball etc.

For example, this:
Manchester Utd (ENG-P) +½
means that the opponent, must not win with a 1 goal or more difference (1-0, 2-1, 2-0, 3-0, etc.) In every other situation, you win the bet.
It's like Manchester United starts the match with a 0.5 goal lead, and you place a bet on their victory.

The Manchester City (ENG-P) -½, is exactly the opposite, Man City has to win with 1 goals difference or more. Again, it's like they start 0 - 0.5 down, and you want them to win.
 
Last edited:
Does anyone know a site were you can bet for fun and free with like a points system, no money? I remember there was a Bulgarian (also in English) but I can't remember the name.:(
 
-Panos- said:
I think it's the same as other sports like basketball etc.

For example, this:
Manchester Utd (ENG-P) +½
means that the opponent, must not win with a 2 goal or more difference (2-0, 3-1, 3-0, 4-0, etc.) In every other situation, you win the bet.
It's like Manchester United starts the match with a 1.5 goal lead, and you place a bet on their victory.

The Manchester City (ENG-P) -½, is exactly the opposite, Man City has to win with 2 goals difference or more. Again, it's like they start 0 - 1.5 down, and you want them to win.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the explanation.

That makes sense except I thought that's the case when it's +1 1/2 not just +1/2?

Because -1/2 or +1/2 means half a goal and not a 1.5 difference. Am I missing something?

At least that' what it means in other sports.

So in NBA for example, what you described is if a team is +1.5 not +0.5
 
Thanks for the explanation guys, will need to read a bit more on betting :p I won my first bet yesterday on Chelsea-QPR having more than 3 goals but lost on Udinese-Lazio betting that Udinese will win in HT and FT.

@PLF I registered for a week at your website, problem is I receive the email at 1:30 am my time and I'm usually in bed lol. Also, you guys only do NFL/MLB/NBA? Didn't see any football picks.
 
Hey dude

its not my site but i have been using them for awhile and yeah i dont like the time they post picks either.

It's bad for some time zones like me
 
Last edited:
PLF said:
Thanks for the explanation.

That makes sense except I thought that's the case when it's +1 1/2 not just +1/2?

Because -1/2 or +1/2 means half a goal and not a 1.5 difference. Am I missing something?

At least that' what it means in other sports.

So in NBA for example, what you described is if a team is +1.5 not +0.5
Click to expand...

My mistake, you are right, what I wrote is for +1 1/2, but I corrected it now.
 
:SHOCK: wow, that is some serious professional shit!
i still can't believe u had the stomach to ask me about my (pathetic) betting techniques years ago. u truly have no shame, my friend.:P
 
Always good to keep an open mind and consider all ideas/views. Especially from a football professor such as 'The Uncle'. ;)
 
Good picks
I have already placed a bet on (for winning the tournament):
Russia (9€)
Ireland (2€)
Greece (2€)

Small bets on outsiders, because if one of them makes it, there are lots of winnings :D


edit:
the Montpellier bet I had placed back in August and won!
montpellierbet.png
 
Last edited:
Very nice!

To be honest, I can only see Russia winning it among those and even that's unlikely but like you said, stranger things have happened. Greece 2004 being best example! :)

Good luck.
 
Some decent value to be had in the "first manager to get sacked" Premier League Odds.

http://www.thesackrace.com/competitions/premier-league

I'd say Rodgers (20/1) and Villas Boas (25/1) are decent value. I think not finishing in the top 4 for teams that harbor this ambition is a big disaster, and in that sense if Spurs start to slip away from the top four I could see Daniel Levy changing things. If Spurs dont make the CL this year their whole squad could come under pressure from top 4 teams (the likes of Bale, Walker and even Lennon might leave). They've also lost a few key players (Modric looks to be off, King has gone - even though he didnt play that much in the last few years he was a very good senior pro at the club, and Adebayor is in a bit of limbo). Some decent back up players have also gone, Kranjkar, Chorluka, Pavyluchenko, Saha and Pineaar all added strenght in depth - and a lot of the rest of the squad is heading (or has headed already) the wrong side of 30 - Friedel, Gallas, Defoé. The little Portguese fella might sign some new players in addition to Sigurdsson and Verthongen, but he's running out of time, there is only just over a month left in the transfer window and once the European Club competitions kick off there are complications with players being cup tied. Even if Villas Boas can pull off some signings, they might be no good or could take time to settle. Spurs are also coming off a pretty dire run of form since Jan - Feb and I think the rut might continue into the new season.

I think Rodgers has a potential to be a good manager but Liverpool is very difficult job. He's said things along the lines of, "I just want to play good football and win trophies", but will the Liverpool fans by that? I have a feeling there will be a desire for the fans to see goals and put weaker teams to the sword. I dont know if the fans will want to see Liverpool go 1-0 up against a team like Norwich and then play keep ball and pass the game out. Swansea's football was good at times last year, but towards the end of the season it seemed as though teams had established a way of defeating them. They would tend to pressure the team a lot, deny them space on the halfway line and harry them. I think teams might do this against Rodgers' Liverpool and the team will also have to adapt to Rodgers' system. They have also got rid of a lot of players from the edge of the squad (Maxi - who ironically might have been the most suitable player to Rodgers' style, Kuyt, now Carroll it seems) I dont know if Borini (and maybe Joey Allen) can add much to the first team.

I also think both managers are starting to show a very slight lack of dilligence in terms of comments. Last year Villas Boas launched a huge tirade at Lambert (it was about a penalty in the Chelsea v Norwich match), and he seems to be going down the public critism route at Spurs. So far he's criticised Modric (which he had a fair point about), Charlie Adam's tackle (again he made a valid point but went on to dwell on speculating that Adam had a personal vendetta against Bale), and more recently had a go at Dos Santos wanting to leave Spurs. This last point seems to show a lack of knowledge about the Mexican's situation over the last 4 years at Spurs. Dos Santos, a player of immense talent, had been repeatedly marginalised by Redknapp, having less than 10 starts, despite regularly playing well for the Mexican team (esp in WC2010) - he has reached a dead-end at Spurs and needs to move to restart his career. If Villas Boas can't see that you worry about his ability to empathise with his players (which seemed to be a problem at Chelsea especially with the Alex and Anelka incidents). If you compare his stance over Modric with that of Van Der Vaart (who was more measured and bascially said, "Modric is great player, I understand him wanting to play CL football, but hopefully he will see that we only missed the CL by a very fine margin, and next year we have a great chance to make it, so I hope he stays at the club") you can see the Dutchman seems to have a more measured stance.
 
Very good points that are definitely worth considering.

Another thing to consider though is compensation.

How big a contract are either of those two on and more importantly, how many years?

When things go wrong, it's much easier for the board to pull the plug on a manager with a 2-year contract than one with 4 years.
 
Rodgers won't go unless Liverpool are floating in relegation by Christmas, I think they'll be patient with him.

AVB is probably more value of the two but again unless something goes terribly wrong I wouldn't put any money on either of them. Di Matteo could go early doors if Chelsea don't hit the ground running possibly and whose to say Roman really wanted him in the first place, he only gave him a 2 year contract and that's because he fluked the Champions League.
 
Di Matteo might go, but he's 12/1 which isnt great odds. The other thing is he does have the CL win behind him, and Chelsea have signed quite a few decent players so far this summer, so in a sense their squad isnt as trimmed as Liverpool's or Spurs's, although they may miss the physical option Drogba provided. I've a feeling that Di Matteo will go unless he wins the league or CL again, but this is likely to happen at the end of the season. The players also seem to back Di Matteo, their turnaround in performances (compared to under AVB) was remarkable and so the squad seems to be prepared to go the distance for him, whereas we just dont know yet if the same is true of Spurs and/or Liverpool's players in terms of Villas Boas and Rodgers.
 
I think FSG will be patient with Rodgers as well.

Is he on a 3 or 4 year contract? What about AVB?

I agree that Di Matteo could unfortunately go before most. :/
And he's only been given a two-year contract which could be a sign on its own...
 
Time to bring this thread back from the dead!

Here's what I've got for this week's CL and EL:

Benfica - Barcelona: Barcelona (Handicap 1-0)
CFR Cluj - Manchester United: Manchester United (Handicap 1-0)
Arsenal - Olympiacos: Arsenal
Valencia - Lille: Valencia
Juventus - Shakthar: Juventus
PSV - Napoli: Napoli

With €1,- I can win €41,69.

Not bad.:BOP:
 
All bets combined into one, where the total odds is the odds of each bet multiplied with each other. If you lose one of the picks, you lose everything.
Example
TeamA vs TeamB -> TeamA pick | Odds: 2,8
TeamC vs TeamD -> TeamD pick | Odds: 1,7

If I put those two picks in a parlay then the total odds are 2,8*1,7 = 4,76.
 
What Panos said.

I'm guessing you are doing that and that's how $1 turns into $41.

You get one game wrong, you lose it all so it's very risky but of course pays better. :)
 
You can reduce the risk if for example you have 7 games in a parlay, there is something called "by x" where x is the number of matches you want in your combination. So if you have 7 matches and you tell it you want parlay by 5 it will create for you different combinations of 5 matches from the 7 matches. So in this situation even if you get 1 result wrong some of your other combinations will hit and you'll still make profit.

I started doing this for 3 weeks now for EPL/Serie A matches. I started with 90$ and now have 210$. I bet really low though max is 20$ only, this week I tried 60$ but didn't get lucky :p. Once I was 1 result away from getting ~1000$ :(

I mainly use the over/under 2.5 goals.. Some matches you just get a feeling if it'll have goals or not. For example if Zeman's Roma are playing thats a guranteed over 2.5 goals match :D. When they played Juve on Saturday I went for the over 3.5 goals and they didn't disappoint :P
 
I'm getting so frustrated at the place I bet. The value is very low comparing to online betting, and they're aren't a lot of options to play, only home team to win, draw, away team to win, ht/ft, exact scores and handicap for bigger teams. I want to play both teams to score since it isn't too risky most of the time and it also has pretty decent value. Sucks I have to be 18 to bet though, can get away with it at stores, but not online. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom