re the aussies & cricket.

Wouldn't the statistically certainty be backing the poms? Largest 2nd innings total to chase etc.

Then again, the poms haven't won a test for a while.

I had both results covered Mr J. I got $4 for England before the start of play, and $3 for Australia at lunch on day 1. Very rare to get a draw these days unless there's a huge downpour, so on most occasions I just rule out the draw altogether.

Sure is Mr J,
However when i proposed that silly idea play was yet to start and i was thinking along the lines:

Aussies - great team/great record Vs Poms

That all changed after first innings. Still, only 2 runs in the end.

The statistical certainty tennis system won again with Roddick ($1.09) this week. Now 2-0 for a profit of .19.


This week the pick is #1 seed (Nadal) to win 2nd rd match. This is 21-2 since 1978. must beat Moya in rd 1 first to qualify.

By the way I am looking up the results of the system for 2005.

Rules.
A - must be seeded 1-8 player (not a replacement)
B - must have at least 15 years of results
C - must be 90% or above strike rate.

Results from 1/1/05 until 15/4/05 Monte Carlo - picks 13, wins 13 - profit 1.42 units.

Will post complete results when finished.

Good Punting
Karla

Geelong aren't in great form, so it's risky to back them. However, Melbourne's form is even worse, and Melbourne have lost their last 10 matches at Kardinia Park (Skilled Stadium). They haven't won there since 1988.

If Sydney were playing Brisbane at the SCG, they would be specials. But they're playing at Telstra Stadium instead and I'm not quite as confident about their chances there. Still think they're likely to win though.

Hows about this little tid -bit,

Since 2000 Hawthorn has played Essendon 8 times for no wins. That's a 0% strike rate.

Similarly, going back as far as 1983 the Hawks and the Dons have met on the hallowed MCG turf a total of 16 times. Essendon have won 12.

__________________
I like Bing Lee.

As much as I hate to pour cold water on all this statistics inanity,I will !!!
On Sunday last I read Ricky Ponting, lamenting that he'd allowed the English to bat first in the 2nd Test despite favourable weather conditions etc etc (and the lack of G. Mcgrath to get the Poms out) Why did he do it? While you and I are probably STILL wondering, Ricky was straightforward..
As Punter put it "I was misled by the stats: in the previous 13 Tests at Birmingham,12 had been won by the team batting second" Can't get more CERTAIN than that!!! And Karla, I don't know what the stats were saying when Ginepri upset Roddick (at $12!!!!) two weeks back in the RCA but I reckon it wasn't pretty for Robby; only for those who look at statistical certs and then BET AGAINST THEM!!!! Cheers and best to all.

That's a fair point P57 albeit another view,

However i would argue that it's very easy for all of us to sit here after the fact and explain away the Aussies loss - not so easy to call before McGrath got injured. With Mcgrath in, i for one would have expected the Aussies to have bowled the Poms out for three less runs and batting second would suit in this instance.

Another view is that the highest successful run chase in the second innings had for some time been quite low, with no McGrath this meant to me that batting first the Poms had every chance of making a reasonable total , meaning the Aussies had to do what no one else could - chase a reasonable second innings total. These stats go against 'Pontings Logic', a fact i think he should of been aware of considering he knew he would be without McGrath.

For Ponting to choose to bowl first based solely on the fact that 12 of 13 wins came from batting second is silly on many levels. For instance, how many of those teams were struggling with form and had just lost their strike bowler the morning of the test?

Ultimately stats don't determine how the match is played or who wins, for me they are used to support a view i have already formed about the game and as such aid in my decision, not make them.

__________________
I like Bing Lee.

Well, I did say it was risky to back them.

I hope nobody followed this info. I think I'll keep quiet in future.

this has nothing to do with s.c but in the union NZ to bt Aus -3.5 at $1.70 NSW sportstab...Multi it up with Essedon to bt Hawthorn and the multi is $2.41