The Ashes

Tikay10

One of the great sporting occasions starts in the morning (Thursday), weather permitting of course.

Here's the Series Odds;

England Evens

Australia 6/4

Draw 13/2

Who would you back at those prices, & why?

Tikay10

Here's the prices for the 1st Test, which, in fact, are very similar to the Series prices;

England Evens

Australia 13/8

Draw 13/2

Allan23

Any punters out there - why is a series draw 13/2 but a 2-2 draw 11/2?

Snuffer

Allan23 said:

Any punters out there - why is a series draw 13/2 but a 2-2 draw 11/2?

Im guessing the 13/2 covers 1-1 & 0-0 as well? Not into cricket so could be wrong.

EDIT: actually that is completely wrong as the draw odds should be shorter!

gpc70

if the test wickets are as bowler friendly as the world cup ones dont buy a ticket fore the 4th and 5th days,weve got 5 number 5/6s and u get past smith aussies are very light

gpc70

but it will be a great watch

MattBates

Snuffer said:

Allan23 said:

Any punters out there - why is a series draw 13/2 but a 2-2 draw 11/2?

Im guessing the 13/2 covers 1-1 & 0-0 as well? Not into cricket so could be wrong.

EDIT: actually that is completely wrong as the draw odds should be shorter!

Confused by this!

@EvilPingu Any idea?

HAYSIE

MattBates said:

Snuffer said:

Allan23 said:

Any punters out there - why is a series draw 13/2 but a 2-2 draw 11/2?

Im guessing the 13/2 covers 1-1 & 0-0 as well? Not into cricket so could be wrong.

EDIT: actually that is completely wrong as the draw odds should be shorter!

Confused by this!

@EvilPingu Any idea?

I am guessing that as they don't get as much rain as us, that it will be unlikely to get no result in 3 or 5 test matches out of a total of 5.

So 0-0, and 1-1 would seem less likely.

It is therefore probably more likely that if the series was to be drawn, that it would be 2-2.

Has a test series ever ended 0-0?

Perhaps somewhere during the monsoon season.

Allan23

It’s more likely to be 2-2 than 1-1 or 0-0 but how does that still make it more likely to be 2-2 than a draw overall? @HAYSIE

Tikay10

I think this is just an anomaly between 2 different markets. A similar situation often occurs in football, when the price for 0-0 in "Correct Score" is often slightly less than "No Goalscorer" in Goalscorer markets.

In this case, if we use Sky Bet as an example, for Series Correct Score, which has around 20 components (all possible outcomes) they go these prices for the draw;

0-0; 250/1

1-1; 50/1

2-2; 11/2

Whereas in the Outright (just 3 components - 1-2-x) they quote 13/2.

So, if we fancy 2-2 then we are better off betting in the 1-2-X "Series" Market, where we can get a full point better, &, as a small bonus, we get the improbable 0-0 & 1-1 in the price.

The Exchanges don't have this anomaly, their prices are virtually identical. So an opportunity probably exists to arb if you approve of that sort of thing.

Tikay10

Anyway, that aside, who do we fancy, & why?

PS - @sillymid

HAYSIE

Allan23 said:

It’s more likely to be 2-2 than 1-1 or 0-0 but how does that still make it more likely to be 2-2 than a draw overall? @HAYSIE

Not sure what you mean by a draw overall?

lucy4

Speaking from my head not my heart,I'd have to say Australia.I think they're a bit tougher mentally,if things ain't going their way they seem to be able to dig in and get a result,England on the other hand tend to crumble when things don't go their way.

Allan23

HAYSIE said:

Allan23 said:

It’s more likely to be 2-2 than 1-1 or 0-0 but how does that still make it more likely to be 2-2 than a draw overall? @HAYSIE

Not sure what you mean by a draw overall?

A series draw, so 0-0, 1-1 or 2-2, is somehow less likely to happen than exactly 2-2? Probably just an anomaly as tikay points. I still don’t really understand the reasoning though

HAYSIE

Allan23 said:

HAYSIE said:

Allan23 said:

It’s more likely to be 2-2 than 1-1 or 0-0 but how does that still make it more likely to be 2-2 than a draw overall? @HAYSIE

Not sure what you mean by a draw overall?

A series draw, so 0-0, 1-1 or 2-2, is somehow less likely to happen than exactly 2-2? Probably just an anomaly as tikay points. I still don’t really understand the reasoning though

All those examples refer to series draws.
So 0-0 means no result in all 5 tests, and therefore the least likely.
1-1 means no result in 3 tests, and although more likely than 0-0, still unlikely.
The shortest odds are for 2-2, which means getting a result in 4 out of 5 tests.
The bookies obviously think that getting a result in nearly all the tests is much more likely than none, or a small number of them.

Allan23

HAYSIE said:

Allan23 said:

HAYSIE said:

Allan23 said:

It’s more likely to be 2-2 than 1-1 or 0-0 but how does that still make it more likely to be 2-2 than a draw overall? @HAYSIE

Not sure what you mean by a draw overall?

A series draw, so 0-0, 1-1 or 2-2, is somehow less likely to happen than exactly 2-2? Probably just an anomaly as tikay points. I still don’t really understand the reasoning though

All those examples refer to series draws.
So 0-0 means no result in all 5 tests, and therefore the least likely.
1-1 means no result in 3 tests, and although more likely than 0-0, still unlikely.
The shortest odds are for 2-2, which means getting a result in 4 out of 5 tests.
The bookies obviously think that getting a result in nearly all the tests is much more likely than none, or a small number of them.

Still don’t understand the logic. Of course, with how cricket has gone in the last few years, combined with some dodgy batting and English conditions, results in 4 games out of 5 is far more likely than results in 2 games or zero. How does that make the combined likelihood of 0-0, 1-1, 2-2 less than that of just 1 of those results?

HAYSIE

Allan23 said:

HAYSIE said:

Allan23 said:

HAYSIE said:

Allan23 said:

It’s more likely to be 2-2 than 1-1 or 0-0 but how does that still make it more likely to be 2-2 than a draw overall? @HAYSIE

Not sure what you mean by a draw overall?

A series draw, so 0-0, 1-1 or 2-2, is somehow less likely to happen than exactly 2-2? Probably just an anomaly as tikay points. I still don’t really understand the reasoning though

All those examples refer to series draws.
So 0-0 means no result in all 5 tests, and therefore the least likely.
1-1 means no result in 3 tests, and although more likely than 0-0, still unlikely.
The shortest odds are for 2-2, which means getting a result in 4 out of 5 tests.
The bookies obviously think that getting a result in nearly all the tests is much more likely than none, or a small number of them.

Still don’t understand the logic. Of course, with how cricket has gone in the last few years, combined with some dodgy batting and English conditions, results in 4 games out of 5 is far more likely than results in 2 games or zero. How does that make the combined likelihood of 0-0, 1-1, 2-2 less than that of just 1 of those results?

Its not.

0-0 is 250/1

1-1 is 50/1

2-2 is 11/2.

These odds reflect the likelihood of either of these results occurring.

If you just bet the draw, any of the above outcomes, however unlikely, mean you win.

So if you thought it might end up as 1-1, but bet the draw, you would get 11/2, rather than 50-1.

Allan23

HAYSIE said:

Allan23 said:

HAYSIE said:

Allan23 said:

HAYSIE said:

Allan23 said:

It’s more likely to be 2-2 than 1-1 or 0-0 but how does that still make it more likely to be 2-2 than a draw overall? @HAYSIE

Not sure what you mean by a draw overall?

A series draw, so 0-0, 1-1 or 2-2, is somehow less likely to happen than exactly 2-2? Probably just an anomaly as tikay points. I still don’t really understand the reasoning though

All those examples refer to series draws.
So 0-0 means no result in all 5 tests, and therefore the least likely.
1-1 means no result in 3 tests, and although more likely than 0-0, still unlikely.
The shortest odds are for 2-2, which means getting a result in 4 out of 5 tests.
The bookies obviously think that getting a result in nearly all the tests is much more likely than none, or a small number of them.

Still don’t understand the logic. Of course, with how cricket has gone in the last few years, combined with some dodgy batting and English conditions, results in 4 games out of 5 is far more likely than results in 2 games or zero. How does that make the combined likelihood of 0-0, 1-1, 2-2 less than that of just 1 of those results?

Its not.

0-0 is 250/1

1-1 is 50/1

2-2 is 11/2.

These odds reflect the likelihood of either of these results occurring.

If you just bet the draw, any of the above outcomes, however unlikely, mean you win.

So if you thought it might end up as 1-1, but bet the draw, you would get 11/2, rather than 50-1.

A series draw is 13/2 not 11/2

Allan23

HAYSIE said:

Allan23 said:

HAYSIE said:

Allan23 said:

HAYSIE said:

Allan23 said:

It’s more likely to be 2-2 than 1-1 or 0-0 but how does that still make it more likely to be 2-2 than a draw overall? @HAYSIE

Not sure what you mean by a draw overall?

A series draw, so 0-0, 1-1 or 2-2, is somehow less likely to happen than exactly 2-2? Probably just an anomaly as tikay points. I still don’t really understand the reasoning though

All those examples refer to series draws.
So 0-0 means no result in all 5 tests, and therefore the least likely.
1-1 means no result in 3 tests, and although more likely than 0-0, still unlikely.
The shortest odds are for 2-2, which means getting a result in 4 out of 5 tests.
The bookies obviously think that getting a result in nearly all the tests is much more likely than none, or a small number of them.

Still don’t understand the logic. Of course, with how cricket has gone in the last few years, combined with some dodgy batting and English conditions, results in 4 games out of 5 is far more likely than results in 2 games or zero. How does that make the combined likelihood of 0-0, 1-1, 2-2 less than that of just 1 of those results?

Its not.

0-0 is 250/1

1-1 is 50/1

2-2 is 11/2.

These odds reflect the likelihood of either of these results occurring.

If you just bet the draw, any of the above outcomes, however unlikely, mean you win.

So if you thought it might end up as 1-1, but bet the draw, you would get 11/2, rather than 50-1.

A series draw is 13/2 not 11/2

EvilPingu

HAYSIE said:

I am guessing that as they don't get as much rain as us, that it will be unlikely to get no result in 3 or 5 test matches out of a total of 5.

So 0-0, and 1-1 would seem less likely.

It is therefore probably more likely that if the series was to be drawn, that it would be 2-2.

Has a test series ever ended 0-0?

Perhaps somewhere during the monsoon season.

Yeah, 0-0 test series happen a fair bit, especially when they have these 2 test series.

The last 0-0 series of 3+ tests was our tour of NZ in March 2013. We were 9 wickets down in the final test with no hope of winning - Matt Prior and Monty Panesar held on for the draw.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/569233.html

As you say though, a lot of the 0-0 test series nowadays tend to be the result of weather. There was an absolute farce of a test series between SL and WI a few years back where the whole series got decimated by rain.

pompeynic

For me England are just favourites. English conditions, the Duke ball, being used by Anderson and Broad, with Woakes as the third swing/seam option, against an Australian batting side, Smith apart, who aren’t that good and struggle against a moving ball. England also have the potential to add pace later in the series with Archer, Wood and Stone. How Australia bat against Moeen will be crucial, can they stop him “ holding down an end “ while the seamers get a rest?
Starting the series at Edgbaston , a stronghold for England, adds to the advantage.

Against England is the fact that they will probably be two or three down for less than 100 in most innings, give Australia a chance. They have been struggling for opening batters for a while and have not had a number three since Trott lost his way, when bounced out by Mitchell Johnson. I also think they have the line up wrong, Roy shouldn’t open and Root should stay at four , where he scores bucket loads of runs.

Starc (if fit) Hazlewood ,Pattinson, Cummins and Siddle, along with the grossly underrated Lyon are very good, and should keep the series close. Australia will almost certainly outfield England whose catching has been woeful for some time. Giving extra lives via dropped catches and missed run out opportunities may cost England.

For me, home advantage in test cricket is huge and should just give England the edge.