You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.

You might need to refresh your page afterwards.

** JACKPOT SYNDICATE ** OFFICIAL THREAD ** 357 SHARES FINALISED FOR SEPTEMBER 25TH 2017 ONWARDS ** O

1171820222346

Comments

  • StayOrGoStayOrGo Member Posts: 12,181
    edited May 2017
    No good today guys, although a lot of effort from the team, so TY to all those who participated.

    Opening post ledger etc. has been updated.

    Share value is now £3.71

    Cheers,

    G
  • StayOrGoStayOrGo Member Posts: 12,181
    edited May 2017
    The pool was part won today, which means a carry over of £7,209 to tomorrow (that's what we would have won for a 50p line if we managed it today)

    As there is a carry over I will take a cursory glance at tomorrow's potential Jackpot card.

    Cheers,

    G
  • StayOrGoStayOrGo Member Posts: 12,181
    edited May 2017
    Pretty sure it will be either Wetherby or Windsor tomorrow, both of which are tough cards, so we can stand down tomorrow and have a rest. Just one selection tomorrow for those doing NAP's.

    Cheers,

    G
  • StayOrGoStayOrGo Member Posts: 12,181
    edited May 2017
    We have £685.75 left in the kitty, so two (at a push) possible attempts left this month. We may need to choose wisely.

    Certainly not tomorrow anyway.

    Cheers,

    G
  • SnufferSnuffer Member Posts: 3,057
    edited May 2017
    When you get a minute Graham can you send the Totesport screenshots over please.

    Thanks
  • StayOrGoStayOrGo Member Posts: 12,181
    edited May 2017
    In Response to Re: ** JACKPOT SYNDICATE - OFFICIAL THREAD ** NO GOOD AT LUDLOW TODAY (SUN 14TH MAY) ** SHARE DEALINGS ARE NOW FROZEN UNTIL 26TH MAY 2017:
    When you get a minute Graham can you send the Totesport screenshots over please. Thanks
    Posted by Snuffer
    Was doing it as you wrote this. Sent. :=)
  • SnufferSnuffer Member Posts: 3,057
    edited May 2017
    Syndicate Members,

    I have received the screenshots of the Totesport account and can confirm the amended ledger on the opening post is correct and £685.75 is in the betting account.
  • SnufferSnuffer Member Posts: 3,057
    edited May 2017
    In Response to Re: ** JACKPOT SYNDICATE - OFFICIAL THREAD ** ALL PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED. TY. SHARE DEALINGS ARE NOW FROZEN UNTIL 26TH MAY 2017:
    Had this thought while I was in the bath this morning!     If a situation arose when we had got through the first 5 legs of the jackpot and ,for example,we had say 4 of the  7 runners in the last leg and we knew more or less what we might win with any of our selections  - would  it make sense to back the remaining  3 selections to cover the cost of our perm of even to show a small profit? It would be most likely that the 3 we did not have would be outsiders and these could be backed according to the price so that if any of those 3 won we would cover the cost of our perm  -  of course if they lost we would get the jackpot up with a profit reduced by the amount we bet on the 3 outsiders. If we are talking about hopefully a large dividend the cost of the losing covering bets would not make a lot of difference. These outsiders could be backed on the exchanges at bigger prices than available eleswhere.    For example: We have laid out £500 on our perm and we are through to leg 6 . The remaining 3 that we do not have are available at  10/1  16/1  33/1   We could back them -  £65  @  10/1 ,  £40 @ 16/1 and £20 @ 33/1       That would mean a total outlay of  £500  + the cost of the bets £125  =   £625. So if we got the jackpot up we would lose £125 from our returns but I am sure we would still be happy.If one of the 3 that we did not have in our perm won  we would get back either  £650,£640 or £660  resulting in a profit and lessening the disappointment of losing in the last leg of our jackpot bet.       Of course every situation will be different with regards to the size of our perm, how many runners there are and how many we have backed in the last race -   if it happens to be  a large field it would not be pratical to back say 5 or more horses but if a situation did arise similar to the example I have given then I think it makes a lot of sense to consider this type of insurance.    I was in the bath for quite a long time!               
    Posted by bearace

    Regarding hedging this post by bearace makes perfect sense to me.

  • vaigretvaigret Member Posts: 16,380
    edited May 2017
    and me
  • StayOrGoStayOrGo Member Posts: 12,181
    edited May 2017
    OK, regarding "hedging".

    Please can syndicate members post "YES" or "NO"on this thread, to allow me the flexibility to do this occasionally.

    If there are any NO's, we will leave it as is.

    It needs to be unanimous.

    Cheers,

    G


  • DollieDollie Member Posts: 706
    edited May 2017
    Yes. See my post on hedging thread
  • vaigretvaigret Member Posts: 16,380
    edited May 2017
    YEs
  • wynne1938wynne1938 Member Posts: 20,556
    edited May 2017
    Yes
  • MAXALLYMAXALLY Member Posts: 17,621
    edited May 2017


    Yes.

    (can you also do my lawn after the hedge, cheers ;) )
  • StayOrGoStayOrGo Member Posts: 12,181
    edited May 2017
    Today's first result at Wetherby all but guarantees a Jackpot roll over for tomorrow.

    Cheers,

    G
  • bearacebearace Member Posts: 133
    edited May 2017
    It's a yes from me.

       With regards to yesterdays perm I would say that by hedging from the 4th race as you suggested would clearly have paid off on that occasion and covered our stake   -  though if doing this you would have had to be very confident that the jackpot dividend if we had won would have  been sufficient to cover a number of losing hedging bets that we might have placed along the way eg say the favs won the 4th ,5th and 6th race would the dividend have been enough to justify the amount we put on the other bets? Say we had all selections covered in the 5th and 6 th leg (we should be so lucky!) clearly a bet on the one selection we did not have in the 4th leg would have been a no-brainer as it would have been one bet only.
            Graham , your knowledge on odds and statistical percentages is obviously very good so I would trust you to make the right call as and when you think it is justified.Like you said previously you might  not be available (school run etc) so it would only work when you were there which might mean losing out on some hedging opportunities but that can not be avoided. 
            A big advantage of hedging is that when it saves our stake on a particular day we retain that money in our fund to enable another attempt -  this could be invaluable in our long term strategy and would allows us to have more attempts than we might otherwise have had. Lets hope we get through to the later stages as often as possible to give us chance to consider this option!
         Another thing I would add is that if you bet with bookies and for example had put £20 on a 33/1 shot(as in my previous post) as one of your hedging bets and it won you would stand a good chance of having your account closed or restricted!Also if you backed 3  or 4 outsiders in the same race with the same bookie this might raise some alarm bells with them. This is a good reason to look at the exchange on these occasions as apart from almost certainly getting bigger odds there is no chance of your account being closed because you backed a big odds winner.

  • MICKYBLUEMICKYBLUE Member Posts: 2,035
    edited May 2017
    yes 


  • zadoczadoc Member Posts: 3,402
    edited May 2017



          YES
  • mkgunnermkgunner Member Posts: 3,032
    edited May 2017
    yes
Sign In or Register to comment.