Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The 2013 SPOTY election: The value bet could be that Murray

SystemSystem Posts: 12,215
edited December 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The 2013 SPOTY election: The value bet could be that Murray doesn’t get it

The BBC’s Sports Personality of the Year (SPOTY) is, like X Factor, Strictly Come Dancing, Big Brother or Eurovision, very much an election.  As with all elections, working out the likely chances comes down to correctly understanding four things: the candidates, the campaigns, the voters, and the electoral system.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    FPT

    The key to things like FGM is not covering it up. Like the grooming gangs and the gang-ruled inner city hell estates senior plod won't do anything about it unless they are certain their careers won't be ended by the PC establishment if they do.

  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    I think the Young SPOTY will be Adnan Januzaj, because he's the only one I've heard of.
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    JohnLoony said:

    I think the Young SPOTY will be Adnan Januzaj, because he's the only one I've heard of.

    Oops - no he won't; I've just realised they've reduced the shortlist of nominees to three (not including him).
  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    (Off Topic)

    Two threads ago there was a mini-quiz about what connected three people who bla-bla-bla, or whatever it was.

    As a variation, here is an arithmetic quiz. Connect the numbers using standard arithmetical operations, to make each line equal 6. You're not allowed to write in any extra numbers, so (for example) you can't do a little 2 to make "squared", and you can't do a little 3 to make a cube-root sign. :

    0 0 0 = 6
    1 1 1 = 6
    2 2 2 = 6
    3 3 3 = 6
    4 4 4 = 6
    5 5 5 = 6
    6 6 6 = 6
    7 7 7 = 6
    8 8 8 = 6
    9 9 9 = 6
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    England got a chance here of avoiding the follow on.
  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    O/T

    Can I just say I am completely Mandela'd out. I think I'll be going for a walk or watching streaming TV today.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    Blue_rog said:

    O/T

    Can I just say I am completely Mandela'd out. I think I'll be going for a walk or watching streaming TV today.

    Agreed - the curse of 24 hours news funded by a poll tax and an organisation, the BBC, run by and for the chattering classes.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Draw price has come in from last night. Of course I doub t it will be a draw still - Australia have runs on the board.

    Anyway I've laid off my £30 stake on the draw from last night.

    Aus +19.57
    Eng +21.85
    Draw -1.50 now.
  • jayfdeejayfdee Posts: 618
    Mr Loony
    Just to test the rules for your maths puzzle.
    0 0 0 = 6

    (Cos(0)+Cos(0)+Cos(0))!=6

    The! is the factorial symbol.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    edited December 2013
    Obviously the trick in betting the test match is to dump a pro England or draw position at the right time:

    I assume a wicket has gone judging by the betfair odds movement.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    3 * (3/3) ! = 6
  • Wouldn't (0!+0!+0!)!=6. do as well?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    (2 + (2/2)) ! = 6
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited December 2013
    Sounds like Root got a rough decision from Erasmus just now.
  • Yeah, was going to post (0!+0!+0!)! = 6
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    (1 + 1 +1)! = 6
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    (4 - (4/4))! = 6
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    (6*6)/6 = 6
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    5 + (5/5) = 6
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    7 - (7/7) = 6
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    JohnLoony said:

    (Off Topic)

    Two threads ago there was a mini-quiz about what connected three people who bla-bla-bla, or whatever it was.

    As a variation, here is an arithmetic quiz. Connect the numbers using standard arithmetical operations, to make each line equal 6. You're not allowed to write in any extra numbers, so (for example) you can't do a little 2 to make "squared", and you can't do a little 3 to make a cube-root sign. :

    0 0 0 = 6
    1 1 1 = 6
    2 2 2 = 6
    3 3 3 = 6
    4 4 4 = 6
    5 5 5 = 6
    6 6 6 = 6
    7 7 7 = 6
    8 8 8 = 6
    9 9 9 = 6

    Are we allowed to change the "equals" sign into "not equals" by drawing a diagonal line through it?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,568
    Don't know anything about this, but I saw a Standard report which I think said Murray had been told "he might have reason to regret" not being able to attend the SPOTY event (he doesn't want to interrupt his training in Florida IIRC). Appeared to be a broad hint, but could be a tease - anyway passing it on FWIW.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    SQRT(9*9) - SQRT(9)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    I am noting of course that SQRT written out 'normally' has no numbers in it (Unlike cube roots)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    For SPOTY I've probably lost a fiver (My Red on Murray), will hit the jackpot if Chris Froome wins (264.2 odds)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    (SQRT(8 + (8/8)))! = 6
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Three lines instead of two means "congruent" rather than "equals". Maybe that can be used as well.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    For completeness:

    (COS(0) +COS(0) + 0!)! = 6
    (1 +1+ 1)! = 6
    (2 +(2/2))! = 6
    (3 *(3/3))! = 6
    (4 -(4/4))! = 6
    5+ (5/5) = 6
    6* 6 /6 = 6
    7 - (7/7) = 6
    (SQRT(8 + (8/8)))! = 6
    SQRT(9*9) - SQRT(9) = 6
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    AndyJS said:

    Three lines instead of two means "congruent" rather than "equals". Maybe that can be used as well.

    How lol ?
  • I think David may be over-analysing here.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.

    Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.
  • Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Observer, wash your mouth out with soap, young man! I thought the article was very interesting. I've put a few pounds on Farah, but (whilst financially delighted if he wins) I think Murray deserves it by a country mile.

    FPT: Miss Cyclefree, you're very welcome. We seem to be drifting towards an increasing narrowing of freedom, whereby more actions are obligatory or forbidden, and we're (or the metropolitan political clowns who govern us) losing the common sense ability to disapprove of something without wanting to pass a law making it illegal.

    Rowan Atkinson's right. We must be allowed to insult other people.
  • There has been a bit of campaign amongst the racing fraternity to get McCoy elected, but I don't think it has gained much traction. He is nevertheless pretty much nailed on for a podium finish.
  • Pulpstar said:

    From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.

    Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.

    From a sporting perspective, Mo Farah is *already* an all-time great championship runner; Froome at the moment is a one-time winner with the ability to join the greats. In some ways, that may count against Froome this year (especially considering cycling's recent Spoty wins); those who may have though of voting for him will consider that there'll be other opportunities down the road, as it were.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,672
    edited December 2013
    To clarify: over-analysing SPOTY. Tendulker and Team Sky are very good calls, though the Lions must be favourites to win team of the year. Foreign personality of the year? If it's a footballer it will surely be Ronaldo, not Messi. But it's never a footballer, is it? A car driver might be the best bet in a non-Olympic year. Coach of the year? If the Lions do win team, how about Sky getting a consolation with Dave Brelsford? Not sure if he has won it before (must have done), but it's hard to think of any British coach/manager who's done a better job this year.
  • There has been a bit of campaign amongst the racing fraternity to get McCoy elected, but I don't think it has gained much traction. He is nevertheless pretty much nailed on for a podium finish.

    I'd agree that he's very likely for a place.
  • One horrible possibility is that the decision about team of the year is made a few weeks in advance and that the England cricketers get it on the back of last summer's Ashes win. That would be hugely embarrassing all round.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411

    Pulpstar said:

    From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.

    Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.

    From a sporting perspective, Mo Farah is *already* an all-time great championship runner; Froome at the moment is a one-time winner with the ability to join the greats. In some ways, that may count against Froome this year (especially considering cycling's recent Spoty wins); those who may have though of voting for him will consider that there'll be other opportunities down the road, as it were.
    Yes, indeed he is. The fact he was beaten by Jess Ennis last year shows that it is not purely about sporting achievement - If she'd have done the hurdles/heptathlon double one could make a case for her but the 5/10k double was 'bigger'. Hopefully Mo can get it when he wins the London marathon.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411

    One horrible possibility is that the decision about team of the year is made a few weeks in advance and that the England cricketers get it on the back of last summer's Ashes win. That would be hugely embarrassing all round.

    I'd have thought the Lions would be nailed on for that.
  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    Morning all, on thread I would not be surprised if Andy Murray doesn't win, though would be delighted if he does. There is always a strong hint of anti-Scottish resentment when Murray's name is mentioned and rarely do London based journalists speak about him in a manner they should when he is easily the most successful male British tennis player since Fred Perry. He is just not seen as "one of us". I hope he does win, he obviously doubts he will.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    A big plus this time that Farah has is the athletics community vote is not split. But I reckon Murray will hoover up the previous Ennis votes.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.

    Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.

    From a sporting perspective, Mo Farah is *already* an all-time great championship runner; Froome at the moment is a one-time winner with the ability to join the greats. In some ways, that may count against Froome this year (especially considering cycling's recent Spoty wins); those who may have though of voting for him will consider that there'll be other opportunities down the road, as it were.
    Yes, indeed he is. The fact he was beaten by Jess Ennis last year shows that it is not purely about sporting achievement - If she'd have done the hurdles/heptathlon double one could make a case for her but the 5/10k double was 'bigger'. Hopefully Mo can get it when he wins the London marathon.
    True. Women tend to perform more strongly at the top end if there's a serious candidate as there appears to be something of a female block vote. If they're pretty, there's also a superficial male block vote.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.

    Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.

    From a sporting perspective, Mo Farah is *already* an all-time great championship runner; Froome at the moment is a one-time winner with the ability to join the greats. In some ways, that may count against Froome this year (especially considering cycling's recent Spoty wins); those who may have though of voting for him will consider that there'll be other opportunities down the road, as it were.
    Yes, indeed he is. The fact he was beaten by Jess Ennis last year shows that it is not purely about sporting achievement - If she'd have done the hurdles/heptathlon double one could make a case for her but the 5/10k double was 'bigger'. Hopefully Mo can get it when he wins the London marathon.

    Froome hasn't seemed to have made the connection Wiggins and Cavendish did. Being the "first" Brit to do something is a very big deal. As David points out SPOTY is FPTP. Obviously, there's no way of knowing, but I'd be surprised if Farah and Wiggins were not fighting it out in the "sports" demographic, while many Ennis voters were more "personality". She did brilliantly, of course, as a sportswoman, but she was very high profile throughout last year in ads and as the Olympics poster girl. Wiggins and Farah were much more back page.

  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095

    One horrible possibility is that the decision about team of the year is made a few weeks in advance and that the England cricketers get it on the back of last summer's Ashes win. That would be hugely embarrassing all round.


    You must be a real killjoy at parties, relentlessly negative about pretty much anything and everything.
  • After the explosion in Belfast, police have detonated a small package in a controlled explosion in Blackpool: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-25378453

    No word on who was behind it.
  • To clarify: over-analysing SPOTY. Tendulker and Team Sky are very good calls, though the Lions must be favourites to win team of the year. Foreign personality of the year? If it's a footballer it will surely be Ronaldo, not Messi. But it's never a footballer, is it? A car driver might be the best bet in a non-Olympic year. Coach of the year? If the Lions do win team, how about Sky getting a consolation with Dave Brelsford? Not sure if he has won it before (must have done), but it's hard to think of any British coach/manager who's done a better job this year.

    Dave Brailsford is the current Coach of the Year. In addition to his win last year, he was also awarded the trophy in 2008. Not sure he'll win third quite so soon, though it wouldn't be unjustified.

    One technical point I'm not sure of. I know the awards beyond the main prize are made by panels of experts but I don't know if this is the same panel for each or there are individual panels for the various awards. Obviously, the notion that someone might stand a better chance for one award if their team doesn't win another only applies if the decision-makers know what's gone on elsewhere.
  • One horrible possibility is that the decision about team of the year is made a few weeks in advance and that the England cricketers get it on the back of last summer's Ashes win. That would be hugely embarrassing all round.


    You must be a real killjoy at parties, relentlessly negative about pretty much anything and everything.

    I never get invited to parties. Can't think why.

  • On Vettel: he's achieved a level of dominance in these four years rivalling and perhaps exceeding that of Schumacher. Against him is the notion (not entirely false but overblown) that it's 'all the car', and, more seriously, the multi-21 episode. That showed wilful disobedience, an unsporting approach, and the chopping and changing story (from "I was racing, I was faster, I passed him, I won" to a vague apology and then saying he'd do the same again) means there's no real plus side for him.

    It'd be good if Red Bull cocked up their car next year. Unlikely, but they did miss the double-DRS in 2009, and will miss Webber's technical feedback. In addition, Mercedes could be a real threat in 2014.
  • Slightly off topic and a gentle muse, why, when the country has a successful sports person/s, that general participation decreases, for example, tennis, golf, swimming and football amongst many?

    All of the sports mentioned have been reported as being in difficulty and/or, of having funding reduced.

    In Edinburgh, one of our long established golf courses has just closed due to having a membership of 800 five years ago, had less than 300. Reports are coming in that another local course is considering going the same route due to a similar fall in membership, with a lot of courses in Scotland in financial difficulties.

    Swimming and tennis losing sports funding due to lack of results. There was a report on TV the other day of a lack of use at the Dunblane indoor tennis center (you might need to think why that is important).

    To make the point, for some of the PBpendants, participation is taking part, supporting is watching as a form of entertainment.
  • Mr. Rokz, got to consider the economic climate. Less money to spend means funding cuts from the government and less disposable income for individuals.

    Golf is monstrously expensive. Swimmers under-achieved significantly at the Olympics. Tennis is a bit odder, as, although we're not exactly the top nation, we've got one of the stars of the men's game and Laura Robson has been putting in decent performances.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095

    One horrible possibility is that the decision about team of the year is made a few weeks in advance and that the England cricketers get it on the back of last summer's Ashes win. That would be hugely embarrassing all round.


    You must be a real killjoy at parties, relentlessly negative about pretty much anything and everything.

    I never get invited to parties. Can't think why.

    Boring people to death with negativity is good starting point..
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Thought about taking Evens on Oz. Too late now - Definitely been a wicket at the cricket.
  • To clarify: over-analysing SPOTY. Tendulker and Team Sky are very good calls, though the Lions must be favourites to win team of the year. Foreign personality of the year? If it's a footballer it will surely be Ronaldo, not Messi. But it's never a footballer, is it? A car driver might be the best bet in a non-Olympic year. Coach of the year? If the Lions do win team, how about Sky getting a consolation with Dave Brelsford? Not sure if he has won it before (must have done), but it's hard to think of any British coach/manager who's done a better job this year.

    Dave Brailsford is the current Coach of the Year. In addition to his win last year, he was also awarded the trophy in 2008. Not sure he'll win third quite so soon, though it wouldn't be unjustified.

    One technical point I'm not sure of. I know the awards beyond the main prize are made by panels of experts but I don't know if this is the same panel for each or there are individual panels for the various awards. Obviously, the notion that someone might stand a better chance for one award if their team doesn't win another only applies if the decision-makers know what's gone on elsewhere.

    Isn't it a panel of sportswriters and editors? I think it's the same one that nominates the candidates for the main award.

    If he's won it twice already, Brelsford probably won't win again. Could be a Lions double, with Gatland getting the coach award; though Fergie might have a shout on the basis that he can't get lifetime achievement again. Moyes, who's not a bad manager at all, is showing what an achievement it was for Fergie to manage Utd to the league last season. Same players, very different results.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,025
    Oh FFS Cookie. We so needed a 100 from you today.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    The betting "without Murray" appears tempting. Mo at around 11/8 looks exceptionally solid.

    Next JackW Chrimbo Quiz Question coming up ....
  • Relevant betting post:

    http://news.opinium.co.uk/survey-results/two-horse-race-sports-personality

    I hadn't seen this at the time I wrote my article but it does bear out my thinking (and certainly reinforces the value with Mo).

    One caveat: the electorate for SPOTY is by definition self-selecting. Polls taken of a balanced sample will therefore not necessarily be representative in this case: those who care count more.
  • One horrible possibility is that the decision about team of the year is made a few weeks in advance and that the England cricketers get it on the back of last summer's Ashes win. That would be hugely embarrassing all round.


    You must be a real killjoy at parties, relentlessly negative about pretty much anything and everything.

    I never get invited to parties. Can't think why.

    Boring people to death with negativity is good starting point..

    Yes, that must be it.

  • Mr. Herdson, on the caring note: I imagine Scots and UK-wide tennis fans will turn out solidly for Murray.

    I'm genuinely surprised Farah's such a strong contender, though.
  • DavidL said:

    Oh FFS Cookie. We so needed a 100 from you today.

    Yet another wicket given away. It's just extraordinary how often our top order sell themselves cheaply.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,025
    I also know this is sacrilige on PB but I for one have had enough of cyclists dominating SPOTY and will vote for almost anyone else.

    It understates Murray's achievement to go back to Wade. The wait for a male WImbledon winner was a lot longer than that. The fact he achieved it despite only being the third best tennis player in the world (not a small achievement that in itself) makes the achievement all the more remarkable in my book.

    Mo should have won last year. He is a true great but I don't think this will be his year either.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,568
    Edin_Rokz said:

    Slightly off topic and a gentle muse, why, when the country has a successful sports person/s, that general participation decreases, for example, tennis, golf, swimming and football amongst many?

    All of the sports mentioned have been reported as being in difficulty and/or, of having funding reduced.

    In Edinburgh, one of our long established golf courses has just closed due to having a membership of 800 five years ago, had less than 300. Reports are coming in that another local course is considering going the same route due to a similar fall in membership, with a lot of courses in Scotland in financial difficulties.

    Swimming and tennis losing sports funding due to lack of results. There was a report on TV the other day of a lack of use at the Dunblane indoor tennis center (you might need to think why that is important).

    To make the point, for some of the PBpendants, participation is taking part, supporting is watching as a form of entertainment.

    It's an example of a general trend for anything involving group/mass participation to decline: clubs, pubs, political parties, spoting events, you name it. Society has become increasingly individualised, perhaps partly through the wealth of choice of activities through the internet and of course the opportunities to watrch by TV. The sheer hassle of going to an event with maybe an hour travelling there and back when you can just curl up and do it at home is a significant factor for me and I suspect many others. That's maybe why pb online gets a vastly bigger audience than pb get-togethers, come to that.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    So day 3 of the most awaited quiz since all of .... er ... yesterday !!

    It's the turn of Labour this morning so here we go :

    Who are these three Labour worthies and what historic post links them all :

    a. Was he still platting his hair as leader. No ice axe required.
    b. A French Lieutenants Woman's father in law
    c. Thelma had become a bit of a crow for some years.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,025

    DavidL said:

    Oh FFS Cookie. We so needed a 100 from you today.

    Yet another wicket given away. It's just extraordinary how often our top order sell themselves cheaply.

    In fairness they have at least coped with Johnson this time. But that pitch looks terrible. If England don't get a good lead in the first innings (I think they need 500) they will be in serious trouble again. With cracks like that on day 2 I wouldn't be putting any money on a draw.
    Now a piece of idiocy by KP. Bit unlucky but really.

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    I waded into Farah at 115 on Betfair thanks to Opiniums survey, so that would be a lovely little Birthday/Christmas present!

    McCoy should surely get the lifetime achievement award for his 3000 winners? Or is tha for retired sportsmen? Getting to 3000 was more of a lifetime achievement than a particularly good season for AP.

    Really though Murray deserves to get the award, although I agree w Easterross that he doesn't get such good press as an Englishman would. To be fair I find getting excited about a 'Brit' finally winning Wimbledon a bit contrived.... If a young SE England man came through to challenge him there's no doubt who the public would support

    Oh dear England collapse in full flow
  • Edin_Rokz said:

    Slightly off topic and a gentle muse, why, when the country has a successful sports person/s, that general participation decreases, for example, tennis, golf, swimming and football amongst many?

    All of the sports mentioned have been reported as being in difficulty and/or, of having funding reduced.

    In Edinburgh, one of our long established golf courses has just closed due to having a membership of 800 five years ago, had less than 300. Reports are coming in that another local course is considering going the same route due to a similar fall in membership, with a lot of courses in Scotland in financial difficulties.

    Swimming and tennis losing sports funding due to lack of results. There was a report on TV the other day of a lack of use at the Dunblane indoor tennis center (you might need to think why that is important).

    To make the point, for some of the PBpendants, participation is taking part, supporting is watching as a form of entertainment.

    It's an example of a general trend for anything involving group/mass participation to decline: clubs, pubs, political parties, spoting events, you name it. Society has become increasingly individualised, perhaps partly through the wealth of choice of activities through the internet and of course the opportunities to watrch by TV. The sheer hassle of going to an event with maybe an hour travelling there and back when you can just curl up and do it at home is a significant factor for me and I suspect many others. That's maybe why pb online gets a vastly bigger audience than pb get-togethers, come to that.

    Women's team sports are seeing a lot of new participants, I believe. And at grassroots level football and cricket generally do well. Rugby seems to be having trouble though. Around here I get the impression that a lot of clubs put out fewer teams than they used to - and this is (maybe was) a big rugby area. Golf and tennis are often their own worst enemies - a lot of clubs give the impression they don't want many types of person anywhere near them and this may well affect many other clubs that are not like that.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    England are screwed
  • Mr. L, I think that's debatable, about Murray being third best. He's been out with injury for a while, but to win both his titles he had to beat Novak Djokovic, who is still in his prime. I think that all the other top players (Federer, Nadal, Djokovic) had an easier rise to the top. For Nadal, Federer was the only big beast, and the Spaniard always had dominance on clay. For Djokovic, Federer was starting to fade, and Nadal had the odd injury.

    Djokovic's first Grand Slam came beating Tsonga (Federer beat him in the first final).

    Nadal's was beating Puerta.

    Federer's was beating Philippoussis. In fact, Federer won his first seven Grand Slam finals, against six different opponents, and only met one of the other big three in the eighth (losing to Nadal at the French Open).

    Sorry, this has become a bit rambly. But I think that, fully fit, Murray is a match for anyone today.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Wish I had a time machine. I'd have gone back 20 minutes and put my entire mortgage on Aus at evens.
  • Mr. Pulpstar, if you had a time machine you could've backed Button at 70/1!
  • Pulpstar said:

    England are screwed

    The MD of our Asia office has been in Oz for the last two weeks on an extended business trip. The meetings have been horrific from a piss take perspective, he told us; but he's had to grin and bear it. He flew back to HK yesterday beaten and bloodied (but with some deals sorted, hopefully).

  • tim said:

    Geoff Boycotts commentary is bloody brilliant

    Southam
    Sorry to disappoint you but Spurs are on the up now

    Let's see where they are on 2nd January: eight games in three weeks, starting with Team Suarez tomorrow. It could be the making of the team; it could be horrible. I (and you) know where my money is.

  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    @SouthamObserver Poms turn up for five days pay, for four days work?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,025

    Mr. L, I think that's debatable, about Murray being third best. He's been out with injury for a while, but to win both his titles he had to beat Novak Djokovic, who is still in his prime. I think that all the other top players (Federer, Nadal, Djokovic) had an easier rise to the top. For Nadal, Federer was the only big beast, and the Spaniard always had dominance on clay. For Djokovic, Federer was starting to fade, and Nadal had the odd injury.

    Djokovic's first Grand Slam came beating Tsonga (Federer beat him in the first final).

    Nadal's was beating Puerta.

    Federer's was beating Philippoussis. In fact, Federer won his first seven Grand Slam finals, against six different opponents, and only met one of the other big three in the eighth (losing to Nadal at the French Open).

    Sorry, this has become a bit rambly. But I think that, fully fit, Murray is a match for anyone today.

    Murray is unlucky to have played in a golden age for tennis. In other eras he would have picked up a lot more grand slams with a lot less effort. I would certainly rate him ahead of the Fed now but Djokovic and Nadal are both ridiculous, surely amongst the fittest men on the planet which makes beating them over 5 sets seriously hard work.

    Murray's great strengths are his returns and his speed of reaction but his movement around the court and most days his service are not in the same class as the big two. Still a very, very fine player though.

  • dr_spyn said:

    @SouthamObserver Poms turn up for five days pay, for four days work?

    And the rest. The Aussies like to draw conclusions about the English generally when our cricket teams roll over and they delight in sharing their views. They've waited a while for this so are not holding back! But you can take a fair bit when cash is at stake and our man in HK has the finest public school education and the stiffest of upper lips.

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    tim said:

    Geoff Boycotts commentary is bloody brilliant

    Southam
    Sorry to disappoint you but Spurs are on the up now

    Let's see where they are on 2nd January: eight games in three weeks, starting with Team Suarez tomorrow. It could be the making of the team; it could be horrible. I (and you) know where my money is.

    Surely anyone born after 1980 must listen to the Spurs fans "they let us down time after time" type moans and wonder why they have high expectations anyway? For thirty odd years they have been a pretty solid top 10 side who never look like winning the league or getting relegated (apart from 86/87 and 93/94?)

    Yet I know Spurs fans who were born around that time and have that sense of not living up to whattheyaresupposed to be achieving.

    Everton fans have tasted glory in that time, but I dont getthe impression theythink theyare being let down, when theyfinish 7th or8th....maybe I just don't know any
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    Pulpstar said:

    From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.

    Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.

    LOL, he should be picked because he might win something in the future. He has won one race where it is a team effort , and you try to compare that with someone winning Wimbledon. I can only assume you are being a wit.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    @SouthamObserver

    On consecutive mornings, I woke up to see Australia had leads of 500+, even after England had batted. Good job Johnston had been such a naughty boy that he was left out in the summer.

    Like the nomination for team of he year, is it still possible to vote?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    tim said:

    @isam

    4000

    Oops well spotted

    He should be a shoo in for SPOTY!!!

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Observer, wash your mouth out with soap, young man! I thought the article was very interesting. I've put a few pounds on Farah, but (whilst financially delighted if he wins) I think Murray deserves it by a country mile.

    FPT: Miss Cyclefree, you're very welcome. We seem to be drifting towards an increasing narrowing of freedom, whereby more actions are obligatory or forbidden, and we're (or the metropolitan political clowns who govern us) losing the common sense ability to disapprove of something without wanting to pass a law making it illegal.

    Rowan Atkinson's right. We must be allowed to insult other people.

    MD, I would not call it drifting , more organised than that , it is very deliberate.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,471
    malcolmg said:

    Pulpstar said:

    From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.

    Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.

    LOL, he should be picked because he might win something in the future. He has won one race where it is a team effort , and you try to compare that with someone winning Wimbledon. I can only assume you are being a wit.
    That shows a massive misunderstanding of the amount of effort required to win the TdF. Three weeks of cycling for many hours a day, with only a handful of rest days, over vast distances and up and down mountains.

    Tennis requires fitness of a very different sort. But which one is fitter? I'd say the cyclist.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    malcolmg said:

    Pulpstar said:

    From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.

    Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.

    LOL, he should be picked because he might win something in the future. He has won one race where it is a team effort , and you try to compare that with someone winning Wimbledon. I can only assume you are being a wit.
    I take it you didn't watch the Tour this year. Unless by Team Sky you mean Movistar ?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Who will win SPOTY - The Scot, the Somali, the Kenyan, the Northern Irish or the Welsh ?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Wales -> Scotland -> Wales -> NIR -> Isle of Man -> Belgium were the previous winners ;p
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Pulpstar said:

    malcolmg said:

    Pulpstar said:

    From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.

    Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.

    LOL, he should be picked because he might win something in the future. He has won one race where it is a team effort , and you try to compare that with someone winning Wimbledon. I can only assume you are being a wit.
    I take it you didn't watch the Tour this year. Unless by Team Sky you mean Movistar ?
    Chris Froome also won the Tour of Oman. Crit Int'l, Crit Dauphine and Tour De Romandie ;P
  • 'he’s been extremely long odds on to win'

    Pedant's note, don't very long odds suggest a huge price rather than the measly one for Murray to win SPOTY?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited December 2013

    'he’s been extremely long odds on to win'

    Pedant's note, don't very long odds suggest a huge price rather than the measly one for Murray to win SPOTY?

    Long odds means big price

    Long odds on is a small price

    Odds on is shorter than even money
    Odds against is longer than even money
  • isam said:

    tim said:

    Geoff Boycotts commentary is bloody brilliant

    Southam
    Sorry to disappoint you but Spurs are on the up now

    Let's see where they are on 2nd January: eight games in three weeks, starting with Team Suarez tomorrow. It could be the making of the team; it could be horrible. I (and you) know where my money is.

    Surely anyone born after 1980 must listen to the Spurs fans "they let us down time after time" type moans and wonder why they have high expectations anyway? For thirty odd years they have been a pretty solid top 10 side who never look like winning the league or getting relegated (apart from 86/87 and 93/94?)

    Yet I know Spurs fans who were born around that time and have that sense of not living up to whattheyaresupposed to be achieving.

    Everton fans have tasted glory in that time, but I dont getthe impression theythink theyare being let down, when theyfinish 7th or8th....maybe I just don't know any

    Spurs are one of the 20 richest clubs in world football. Everton aren't.

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Is anyone aware of @melissabachman on twitter? Horrendous photos of her posing next to animals she has just killed


  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,155
    edited December 2013
    isam said:

    'he’s been extremely long odds on to win'

    Pedant's note, don't very long odds suggest a huge price rather than the measly one for Murray to win SPOTY?

    Long odds means big price

    Long odds on is a small price

    Odds on is shorter than even money
    Odds against is longer than even money
    Sorry, missed the 'on'. I'll blame clouds of stale alcohol..

  • isam said:

    tim said:

    Geoff Boycotts commentary is bloody brilliant

    Southam
    Sorry to disappoint you but Spurs are on the up now

    Let's see where they are on 2nd January: eight games in three weeks, starting with Team Suarez tomorrow. It could be the making of the team; it could be horrible. I (and you) know where my money is.

    Surely anyone born after 1980 must listen to the Spurs fans "they let us down time after time" type moans and wonder why they have high expectations anyway? For thirty odd years they have been a pretty solid top 10 side who never look like winning the league or getting relegated (apart from 86/87 and 93/94?)

    Yet I know Spurs fans who were born around that time and have that sense of not living up to whattheyaresupposed to be achieving.

    Everton fans have tasted glory in that time, but I dont getthe impression theythink theyare being let down, when theyfinish 7th or8th....maybe I just don't know any

    Spurs are one of the 20 richest clubs in world football. Everton aren't.

    For a long time Spurs were arguably London's biggest club. Now you're clearly number 3.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    isam said:

    Is anyone aware of @melissabachman on twitter? Horrendous photos of her posing next to animals she has just killed


    Hunting is legal in many countries.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Decent day for Eng in the test - all to play for tomorrow. 63-37 to Oz from 80-20 at the start of play - IMHO....
  • malcolmg said:

    Pulpstar said:

    From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.

    Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.

    LOL, he should be picked because he might win something in the future. He has won one race where it is a team effort , and you try to compare that with someone winning Wimbledon. I can only assume you are being a wit.
    That shows a massive misunderstanding of the amount of effort required to win the TdF. Three weeks of cycling for many hours a day, with only a handful of rest days, over vast distances and up and down mountains.

    Tennis requires fitness of a very different sort. But which one is fitter? I'd say the cyclist.
    But cyclists are sitting down, they don't have to support their own weight.
  • tim said:

    isam said:

    tim said:

    Geoff Boycotts commentary is bloody brilliant

    Southam
    Sorry to disappoint you but Spurs are on the up now

    Let's see where they are on 2nd January: eight games in three weeks, starting with Team Suarez tomorrow. It could be the making of the team; it could be horrible. I (and you) know where my money is.

    Surely anyone born after 1980 must listen to the Spurs fans "they let us down time after time" type moans and wonder why they have high expectations anyway? For thirty odd years they have been a pretty solid top 10 side who never look like winning the league or getting relegated (apart from 86/87 and 93/94?)

    Yet I know Spurs fans who were born around that time and have that sense of not living up to whattheyaresupposed to be achieving.

    Everton fans have tasted glory in that time, but I dont getthe impression theythink theyare being let down, when theyfinish 7th or8th....maybe I just don't know any

    Spurs are one of the 20 richest clubs in world football. Everton aren't.


    So are Newcastle, and they've won even less

    Since 1980 Spurs have won the FA Cup three times, the UEFA Cup once and the League Cup twice. Not brilliant, but outside of Arsenal, Utd, Chelsea and Liverpool I am not sure there are any other teams in England that come close to that.

    In the all time PL table, we're 5th:

    http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/premier-league/all-time-table/pl-years

    Our support base was (no longer is, sadly) as big as Arsenal's and way bigger than Chelsea's. But in the 1980s we got Alan Sugar; Arsenal got David Dein. Then a few years later Chelsea got Roman Abramovitch after Ken Bates bankrupted them. That, I would argue, is the difference. And Spurs fans pay as much as Arsenal and Chelsea fans to go to games.


  • F1: party like it's 2009 with a nostalgic post (mostly graphs with a few betting stats/facts) about the five years I've tipped on F1:
    http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/five-years-of-betting.html
  • tim said:

    Geoff Boycotts commentary is bloody brilliant

    Southam
    Sorry to disappoint you but Spurs are on the up now


    Spurs for the Quadruple baby!

    Weirdly Spurs for the league are best priced 66-1, yet Liverpool (sans Gerrard, Sturridge) who we could be level with by Sunday night are 9-1.

    If Spurs win then those will change big-style.. if only Liverpool drifting.

    Our big squad, busy calendar = the next 3 weeks will show if that's the making of us or not.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    TGOHF said:

    isam said:

    Is anyone aware of @melissabachman on twitter? Horrendous photos of her posing next to animals she has just killed


    Hunting is legal in many countries.
    So are political executions in North Korea ;)
  • TGOHF said:

    Decent day for Eng in the test - all to play for tomorrow. 63-37 to Oz from 80-20 at the start of play - IMHO....

    No doubt this will curse him, but I like the look of Stokes. Whatever happens tomorrow, I reckon he's worth persevering with.

    The silver lining in this series for England is that Australia are doing it largely on the back of a bowling attack that is coming to the end of its effectiveness. Of the fasties, Siddle is the only one under 30 - and he's 29. A few of the batsmen are in their 30s too, as is Brad Haddin. So this is not an Australian team that is built to last. They are going to have to make big changes over the coming years.



  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    Pulpstar said:

    malcolmg said:

    Pulpstar said:

    From a purely sporting perspective, Chris Froome should win it. He didn't just win the Tour De France, he utterly crushed it and had a cushion of over 4 minutes coming down the Champs Elysees. His Ventoux ascent in particular was ridiculous.

    Murray is probably the No 3 tennis player in the world whereas Chris Froome could well go down as an all time great in cycling when the history books are written. Of course he needs to win more Tour De Frances first but I can see him equalling Hinault's record. He will never match Mercx as I can't see him winning a World championships.

    LOL, he should be picked because he might win something in the future. He has won one race where it is a team effort , and you try to compare that with someone winning Wimbledon. I can only assume you are being a wit.
    I take it you didn't watch the Tour this year. Unless by Team Sky you mean Movistar ?
    I did not mention any specific team, I merely pointed out that nowadays the TDF is a team effort and one of the team members is picked beforehand to be the winner if that team are successful. Hence Bradley not being interested this year as he would just have been a grunt for Froome.
  • Mr. G, do you think it was churlish of Wiggins not to support Froome?
This discussion has been closed.