Yes, I did not mean that he's a lock to win this. I was simply referring to the 2000 and 2005 Open's as examples of tourneys where a lot of folks considered him a lock. He is not a lock this week by any stretch in my opinion. And as I said before, regardless of whether he wins, he's not a good moneymaker unless you REALLY put down a lot of cash on him. If he's got 2-1 odds and you put down a ton of cash, then it works great. But if you're only betting $50 or something then it's not worth it in my opinion.
yeah, i agree.
i wouldn't go any less than $100 on Tiger or any runaway favourite, especially not when there is 150+ players all wanting the same thing.
he has 11 Majors, he is the obvious pick and worthy favourite, but at under 2/1 i couldn't touch him.
yeah, i agree.
i wouldn't go any less than $100 on Tiger or any runaway favourite, especially not when there is 150+ players all wanting the same thing.
he has 11 Majors, he is the obvious pick and worthy favourite, but at under 2/1 i couldn't touch him.
Yeah, it just isn't a sound "investment" if you want to call gambling an investment. The only way it's worth it is if you lay down a ton of cash like I said before. It's gotta be in the thousands of dollars for it to be worth it in my opinion.
Yeah, it just isn't a sound "investment" if you want to call gambling an investment. The only way it's worth it is if you lay down a ton of cash like I said before. It's gotta be in the thousands of dollars for it to be worth it in my opinion.
it all depends on what you gamble for, some people gamble to make a living (a hard job, one day your up, next your down, needs a good system and money management. it comes in the category of ''hard way to make an easy living''), some gamble to add excitement, there the ones that would most likely lay small stakes out (unless they are rich), and the rest are somewhere in between.
Gambling question: If TW isn't a good bet with small change, why is TW an OK bet with a lot of money?
He means it's a good "fun" bet where win or lose, you don't care. He still likes the bet, but not enough to make a big play on it where losing a chunk of green would hurt his bank account. Got it?
He means it's a good "fun" bet where win or lose, you don't care. He still likes the bet, but not enough to make a big play on it where losing a chunk of green would hurt his bank account. Got it?
That kind of logic seems a little twisted to me, but I get the idea. Thank you! BTW, the guys in the earlier post were thinking the other way around (only worth it with lots of cash at stake), but I am sure that some 'reason' can be found for that also!
Gambling question: If TW isn't a good bet with small change, why is TW an OK bet with a lot of money?
With a small amount of money, you don't get as much return on your investment even if he wins. But if you bet on a guy with 15-1 or worse odds, then your return is much greater. With a larger investment, even at 2-1 you STILL make a ton of cash back on it.
Tiger is currently 2.85 to 1 on Betfair in England- not available to you Yanks though I am afraid as you are not free to access this from the land of the free.
August 15th, 2006, 04:29 PM
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
