Spread Betting League - 2010 T20 WC

[Mr. Wicket]

At the request of other people? Oh noes. We were all just pushing for justice, h4te himself had asked for those bets! :protest: BTW, could we get Bangladesh/Aus bets, if you don't mind? And what about a Multi "Overs lost due to rain" or "Runs knocked off targets by Duckworth Lewis" spread? :--D

[h4te]

At the request of other people? Oh noes. We were all just pushing for justice, h4te himself had asked for those bets! :protest: BTW, could we get Bangladesh/Aus bets, if you don't mind? And what about a Multi "Overs lost due to rain" or "Runs knocked off targets by Duckworth Lewis" spread? :--D

I agree with vicky on all 3 valid points here. :clap:

[goose]

Outsider, both the SL/ZIM and ENG/WI games were played to a conclusion and a legitimate result should be assigned to each bet. That is the betting convention adopted the world over. It makes sense if you consider that there is no difference between a game curtailed by 1 ball or 10 overs as long as an official result is achieved. E.g W Indies won by 8 wickets thus the Eng/WI Sup = -80.

[Zelig]

Outsider' date=' both the SL/ZIM and ENG/WI games were played to a conclusion and [b']a legitimate result should be assigned to each bet. That is the betting convention adopted the world over. It makes sense if you consider that there is no difference between a game curtailed by 1 ball or 10 overs as long as an official result is achieved. E.g W Indies won by 8 wickets thus the Eng/WI Sup = -80.

:dito: He has voided even the multi-fours. This is very unfair:sniffle:

[Lord]

as Goosy said,both matches had an official result n hence all bets should be valid.i can understand bets being void if it was a no result,but there was a result,the bets should be valid n on what logic have u voided total fours but the total wides is valid?:hmmm: n my winnings from bets u made valid r not included in my position

[The Outsider]

^ Lord, I had not updated the positions yet - will be doing so later in the day. Will also update the win index, Australia - BD, and Super 8 markets today. Regarding the results, I have updated them. The way I had settled them was if the index was above the buy price I had considered it valid and voided the rest. But everything has been considered and added now. Watch this space for the updated league standings later in the day as major changes might happen with the new bet results from curtailed matches.

[Lord]

^ Thanks Prof,btw r there gonna be any bets for today?

[Zelig]

:aha::aha::aha::aha::aha:

[gaurav92]

Well no bets for today ? Anyways no probs But the league standings is not updated.I hope i am in +ve

[The Outsider]

League standings updated. The rains have created quite a tumult in the positions with LUDHIANVI not only losing his top position, but slipping way down into negative. LALOO just can't get any luck. LORD has become the table leader, with a quite a few players in the green now. Markets will be open and updated in a few hours time. Sorry, was caught up in some work so did not really bother to put up the bets for today's low profile matches. Will have them for tomorrow and more diverse market from the Super 8 onwards.

[Laaloo]

:whine:

[ludhianvi]

:bawling: Rain :whack: Just a clarification Shwetabh, what's going to be result if only one team gets to bat and the second team doesnt get a chance to play their full overs i.e 1 over and it rains. In these scenarios, would the markets be settled or voided i.e multi fours, multi wides, total wides,etc Scenarios a. Rain interrupts match in the first innings itself and 2nd innings is not started at all b. Team 1 bats full 20 overs but team 2 gets no overs to bat c. b. Team 1 bats full 20 overs but team 2 gets only 1/2 overs to bat And could you check my balance again... I got -7.3 Million Thanks

[The Outsider]

^ According to goose, looks like as long as there is a result all markets will be settled. Only in the case of a no result will they be voided. I'll check the calculations again - was planning on uploading the spreadsheet tonight anyways, so if you can wait till then.

[The Outsider]

Scenarios a. Rain interrupts match in the first innings itself and 2nd innings is not started at all b. Team 1 bats full 20 overs but team 2 gets no overs to bat c. b. Team 1 bats full 20 overs but team 2 gets only 1/2 overs to bat

I am not sure how these scenarios are handled by global spread betting sites, but here is what I propose. Assuming there is no result, I will settle the markets if the current value is above the buy spread. Let's say, the 50 UPS spread market was 20-25 and the match get washed out after the first innings with someone scoring 90 runs. In this case I will settle the market at 40. On the other hand, if there was only 1 50+ score in the innings of 65, I would void the bet. Let me know if you guys agree to this or if there is some standard followed by betting sites. Or for example, total wides was at 10-12 and before the rain interruption itself wides were 16, so I would settle the market at 16. But if in the first innings total wides were 6, I would void the bet.

[goose]

The convention adopted by most sites is to take the raw outcome as long as an official result is declared. If you think that makes for some wild swings you'd be correct. The weather, toss, D/L etc are all part and parcel of this wonderful game. Spreadbetting is a perilous activity. I would add, however, that many sites also offer a selection of bets in-play thus permitting the punter to place bets as the game evolves. Clearly, that's not the case on ICF. I reckon there's no choice but to settle at the raw outcome. If you feel compelled to bet on a game likely to be effected by rain that's your shout as far as I'm concerned.

[The Outsider]

^ What happens if there is no official result due to rain, but you have enough data to settle some bets. Like the example I gave above, say the spread on total wides was 10-12. Rain interruption causes a no result and by that time total wides are 16. Would the bet be settled at 16 or not? I would say it makes sense to do it because no matter if the game had finished the number of wides would not have gone lower than 16.

[goose]

If punter A traded at 18 with punter B, then your idea would favor one punter over the other. The punter that sold would have a let-off, whereas the punter that bought would feel hard done by. The question is how far does a game need to be advanced before we are willing to accept this skew's impact on betting outcomes. I guess the ICC's definition of a complete game is as good as any. The world of spread-betting needs to be a zero-sum game so that one site can hedge bets with another. It's in everyone's interests to adopt the same rules. That said, you're the boss and we're not connected with these sites. If you did fall into line, however, you'd have the advantage of being able to take the results off one of the many sites.

[ludhianvi]

Shwetabh, I propose/request that you waive off all the negative markets for the 7th/8th matches that were affected by rain since we are still discussing what is the proper method to settle them and we didnt know how the rain-affected matches would be settled. You still keep the markets that resulted in profit for the users. Or you can ask the users if they want to void or keep all the markets for those two matches. This way both the users that gained/lost during those two matches would be happy. :P

[Zelig]

I wanna keep my bets for the 7th game:hitler:

[gaurav92]

I am in positives again :aha: