Hawthorn to win flag in 2013

[wolftone57]

No Stars - Selling your Team Short.... Kennedy, Goodes (Certianly at one stage the best in the AFL), Bolton, Hannebury, O'Keeffe, Jack are Stars and several young kids who will be stars, you also have more 200K players than any other side in the comp (Many delisted end of the year (Types like Seaby etc) I'm sure to free up a million a year for Tippett who must be now classed as a star given his pay cheque).

What is scary is you acquired Tippett and have not lost a player from your best 25, add in a maturing Tom Mitchell and a returning Gary Rohan and you are probably the most balanced side in the comp.

As much as you all seem to like to think you are hard done by underdogs, you have 10% more to spend and you have spent that cash very well - not blaming the Swans for taking advantage, blaming the AFL for continuing to let it happen after it has had its desired affect and made the Red and white ducks a power of the AFL.

Every player on the base salary must get the 9.8% extra in the pay packet, it is a requirement. We also pay experienced players this bonus as well. We do not stock up the 9.8% and use it to buy other players. The money for Tippett came from the delisting of several players and the fact several of our veterans were outside the cap. We also had quite a bit of cap in hand because of the retirements of a raft of players who were replaced by younger less well paid players. We delisted Seaby and Bulldog and traded Dennis-Lane.

[Nico]

The great white hope, Brian Lake (nee Harris), gets locked up and fined for being pissed outside the Sorrento Hotel in Victoria. Will be interesting to see what type of lettuce leaf Hawthorn slaps his wrist with. Back in training a week and gets pissed. Certainly has his own version of pre season training. Now not hard to see why Footscray had issues with him. Reputedly on 400,000. What a dead set goose.

[wolftone57]

It didn't say they were flag favourites it said they were taking the most money for them. Hawks are still favourites with Swans and WC next.

Jewels the more money bet on a horse or footy club the shorter the odds. The shortest in odds is the favourite in the race. In this case the race for the flag.

[Triple B]

Jewels the more money bet on a horse or footy club the shorter the odds. The shortest in odds is the favourite in the race. In this case the race for the flag.

You're gibbering Wolfy.

As Jewels points out, the article said that the most money had come for Geelong. That doesn't make Geelong the favourites, just the best backed.

[wolftone57]

You're gibbering Wolfy.

As Jewels points out, the article said that the most money had come for Geelong. That doesn't make Geelong the favourites, just the best backed.

Wrong if your odds are shortest the horse with the shortest odds is the favourite in any race. Have a look at your local pub or betting shop TB! If the Hawks are the shortest odds then they are favourite if Geelong then they are favourites. The article said Geelong were shortest odds, then i fail to see how Hawks could be favourites. Maybe favoured by the so called experts but not on odds.

[wolftone57]

You're gibbering Wolfy.

As Jewels points out, the article said that the most money had come for Geelong. That doesn't make Geelong the favourites, just the best backed.

And another remark about gibbering or any of that personal @@@@ and I will be reporting your post.

[Triple B]

Wrong if your odds are shortest the horse with the shortest odds is the favourite in any race. Have a look at your local pub or betting shop TB! If the Hawks are the shortest odds then they are favourite if Geelong then they are favourites. The article said Geelong were shortest odds, then i fail to see how Hawks could be favourites. Maybe favoured by the so called experts but not on odds.

And yet again you refuse to accept that the article only said that Geelong were best backed.

Jewels tried to explain it and when you dismissed him/her, I tried to explain it that being the 'best backed' doesn't make them favourites. You then try to explain to me how betting works which given my background is laughable.

Here's the article here.

Pay particular attention to this sentence...

Hawthorn is a short $3.50 favourite at TABSportsbet while this bookmaker has the reigning premier, the Sydney Swans, a joint second-favourite with West Coast

Report away...

[Jewels]

And yet again you refuse to accept that the article only said that Geelong were best backed.

Jewels tried to explain it and when you dismissed him/her, I tried to explain it that being the 'best backed' doesn't make them favourites. You then try to explain to me how betting works which given my background is laughable.

Here's the article here.

Pay particular attention to this sentence...



Report away...

Thanks Trips.

Wolftone, it's a matter of reading the article in its entirety and not reading the headline and running with it.

We opened them at $18 but they have been heavily backed since day one and are now into $12," said sportsbet.com.au spokesman Shaun Anderson.

I'm not a gaming person myself but I do have a basic knowledge of how the whole thing works and when Geelong are paying $12 and Hawks $3.50 as it clearly states in the article, I don't see how you could have read it right through and come to the conclusion you did.

And you take offense at a word like gibbering, geesh.......

[Big Al]

Re: Hawthorn to win flag in 2013

Why the confusion Wolftone?

Hawthorn are favourites... End of story. Geelong were heavily backed which altered their price but still not enough to be favourites.

As for Gibberish... That's a term that describes the content of a post (I'm an expert at writing gibberish so I know what I'm talking about) and is in no way a personal attack.

[Plugger46]

Wrong if your odds are shortest the horse with the shortest odds is the favourite in any race. Have a look at your local pub or betting shop TB! If the Hawks are the shortest odds then they are favourite if Geelong then they are favourites. The article said Geelong were shortest odds, then i fail to see how Hawks could be favourites. Maybe favoured by the so called experts but not on odds.

That's not right when talking fixed odds. Without getting too complicated, a fixed odds market is originally based on opinion/ratings etc. Whoever is framing the market assesses the chances of each team/runner. Teams will then firm in price by either weight of money or performance. Obviously the opposite applies to drifters.

The tote system is different to this as all bets enter a pool. The final dividends on a tote system are completely based on weight of money.

[Nico]

That's not right when talking fixed odds. Without getting too complicated, a fixed odds market is originally based on opinion/ratings etc. Whoever is framing the market assesses the chances of each team/runner. Teams will then firm in price by either weight of money or performance. Obviously the opposite applies to drifters.

The tote system is different to this as all bets enter a pool. The final dividends on a tote system are completely based on weight of money.

And folks, that's coming from an expert in the field of punting.