: Tue Jul 07, 2009 10:50 am  

Dave Lister wrote:

You can't have a first goal scorer and correct score double in any bookies. The odds they offer for Gerrard to score first and Liverpool to win are different to the odds of doing a seperate double. The X to score and X to win are adjusted specials.

So they do. Scorecasts are doubles!

: Tue Jul 07, 2009 10:51 am  

WANDERER wrote:

2 very late scores make that one a winner.

I was sweating a bit, I didn't realise the game had been delayed for 10 mins by an injury.

But the late scores were predictable, when they were averaging close to a point a minute.

[Wanderer]

: Tue Jul 07, 2009 11:29 am  

richardviking wrote:

I was sweating a bit, I didn't realise the game had been delayed for 10 mins by an injury.

But the late scores were predictable, when they were averaging close to a point a minute.

To be honest the second half was painful to watch as have been the second halves of the previous two games.

: Tue Jul 07, 2009 11:37 am  

Swann 16/1 MOM for the first ashes test. Supposedly a spinners paradise so he could be the man to watch if we are to win.

: Tue Jul 07, 2009 12:14 pm  

richardviking wrote:

So they do. Scorecasts are doubles!

Not in the traditional sense of a double it's not. You wuoldn't have 5/1 1-0 and 5/1 first goal as 25/1.

It would likely be 16/1 instead since the two bets are related (commonly called related contingency).

: Tue Jul 07, 2009 1:58 pm  

airliebird9 wrote:

Why

Look at the date and time of that post, right in the middle of the game when Roddick could easily have won.

: Tue Jul 07, 2009 2:02 pm  

Sthelens RLFC wrote:

Swann 16/1 MOM for the first ashes test. Supposedly a spinners paradise so he could be the man to watch if we are to win.

Robert Croft and Dean Cosker have certainly had longer careers than most county spinners because of that pitch but I think there are runs to be had and it is likely that the MOM will be a batsman who can pile on some runs.

: Tue Jul 07, 2009 10:14 pm  

Anyone got any views on the Women's US Open Golf this week???

I know a few on here follow the tour and with the betting being wide open I wonder if anyone has a bit of info to point us in the right direction.

: Tue Jul 07, 2009 11:16 pm  

Gahan wrote:

Stick to horses my mate

Will do mate, definitely!

Well done the other day on taking money from the enemy, that's as far as the well done's go though..

So back to the horses then....

Start of some good racing tomorrow and am in a real dilemna. As a betting rule there's two jockey's who I won't back, one of those... Richard Hills, is on what I consider to be two 'good' things tomorrow.

2.35 - Newmarket - Habaayib lowered the colours of a real talking horse in the Albany at Royal Ascot winning very nicely indeed, if the runner up is as good as they reckon, then this is a serious horse and should win this doing handstands.

5.30 - Newmarket - Last Three Minutes was arguably one of the eyecatchers of the season when finishing a close 3rd to Kavachi at York last time finding all sorts of trouble 2 furlongs out before finishing like an express train and just failing to get up. Is a horse that has to be held up and come late, but for the trouble last time would surely have won comfortably, the 4th home that day...Acrostic... boosted the form at the weekend by winning a very competitive handicap at Sandown, so off only a 3lb higher mark this looks to have a cracking chance.

The other interesting one for me tomorrow is Goldikova in the Falmouth Stakes at 3.10. Can you forgive her the poor re-appearence run and can she recapture the spark from last season? I think she can, and if she can then the 2/1 - 5/2 could turn out to be a cracking price.

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 7:25 am  

Carneys Pint wrote:

Not in the traditional sense of a double it's not. You wuoldn't have 5/1 1-0 and 5/1 first goal as 25/1.

It would likely be 16/1 instead since the two bets are related (commonly called related contingency).

Call it a scorecast, related contingency, a double or whatever. However the point was the first goal scorer and a match result is just the same as the top run scorer and the match result is it not??? So why do they not allow it in cricket??