Are Dead Rubber Games to be Avoided or Can They be Bet On?

someguy4321
Group 3 Class
Tips
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2014 11:00 pm

Are Dead Rubber Games to be Avoided or Can They be Bet On?

Postby someguy4321 » Sat Jan 23, 2016 9:19 pm

I hate finding out the hard way!

I'm talking about the Australia v India cricket series just been:

1st ODI - I won money
2nd ODI - I won money
3rd ODI - Cashed out. Made no money, lost no money (broke-even) for this ODI
4th ODI - I won money
5th ODI - Lost all my winnings from previous 3 ODIs I won from!!!

I was so sure Aussie would win the 5th ODI based on their winning record over India, form and the fact the Aussie team said they wanted to win the series 5-0!!

Once a series has been won, I'm not betting on dead rubber matches again!

[Mod Note - It's a fairly interesting topic, so rather than leave it as a personal statement, I've changed the title of the thread to better reflect it as a possible discussion topic. Who knows, there may be someone who can shed some positive light on it. That's what OLBG is all about after all :win: ]

someguy4321
Group 3 Class
Tips
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2014 11:00 pm

Postby someguy4321 » Sat Jan 23, 2016 10:32 pm

Good idea!

TraderGautam
2yo
Tips
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2015 9:09 am

Postby TraderGautam » Sun Jan 24, 2016 6:31 am

thats not a reason mate.....then 4th odi was also dead rubber....how u won in that match then?in that match aus won from very low odds....then u should guess that...in 5th odi also india will come low as 4th

someguy4321
Group 3 Class
Tips
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2014 11:00 pm

continued...

Postby someguy4321 » Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:34 am

Yes you're right, Aussie won the 4th ODI which was a dead rubber but they lost the 5th ODI which was a dead rubber also. So from these 2 games we can say there was 50% Aussie win rate for dead rubber games (1 win from 2 'dead rubber' games).

If you look at the first 3 ODIs (100% win rate in the first 3 games), it's possible Aussie played their best cricket to win the series against India and once they did, maybe the motivation decreases slightly because they've won the series already. I know both teams played with heart and soul in the 4th and 5th ODIs, so not taking anything away from both teams.

Also, Glen Maxwell who I thought was a huge loss for Aussie in the 5th ODI, showed up because Aussie scored 330 and should have scored an extra 20-30 runs to keep India's batsman at bay. All I'm saying is, once the series has been won, injuries could affect certain players and/or key players could be rested.

jaydubs
Stallion
Tips
Posts: 5633
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 12:00 am
Contact:

Postby jaydubs » Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:06 am

The series was a lot closer than you thinking Aus should have won 5-0 ... the maxwell 100 won one game that they should have lost and then the collapse of India when they lost 8 wickets for about 40 was another that was won from a losing position... all the games have been high scoring tight matches

nors
Legend
User avatar
Betting Blog Tips
Posts: 14824
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Coventry

Postby nors » Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:13 am

Its motivation based.

When we all have tasks to undertake we are motivated more by some than others, even though we think our level of motivation is the same on all tasks.

Does a team have to win or want to win?

With dead rubbers a team wants to win so the motivation is less.

I wouldnt bet on dead rubbers or any match where the motivation to win is less than the norm (except if the odds were huge)

someguy4321
Group 3 Class
Tips
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2014 11:00 pm

continued...

Postby someguy4321 » Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:18 am

Yes they were close games but what about the fact that Aussie are known for winning tight games (especially at home) and Aussie players rising to the challenge where needed (i.e. Glen Maxwell's 100).

seconnol
2yo
Tips
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2015 12:00 am

Postby seconnol » Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:26 pm

It's my view that you should be very wary of dead rubber games in any sport. I have learned the lesson and have put it to good use. For example, you should avoid betting on the team that is minus the handicap and should concentrate on the final outcome. This is a favourite subject of mine and I will revisit in the coming weeks.

jaydubs
Stallion
Tips
Posts: 5633
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 12:00 am
Contact:

Postby jaydubs » Sun Jan 24, 2016 1:12 pm

Yes the aussies do win tight games but every one of them ... surely a kohl a Dhoni a dhawan is allowed to win a game every now and again...effectively the game was won when Dhoni hit a low full toss for 6... Most other batsman in the world couldn\'t have played that shot

nellberg1
Classic Winner
User avatar
Betting Blog Tips
Posts: 808
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 12:00 am

Postby nellberg1 » Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:30 pm

I think Dhoni's whole innings was the reason India NEARLY lost the 5th ODI, but that can be a debate for another time. Another dead rubber happening at the moment is the 4th test between South Africa and England. Prior to the game South Africa made 5 changes, does that mean they are searching for the right combinations and haven't a clue what their best side is, or they have 5 new hungry players to add to the team? you could argue the point either way. England had Finn out with injury, so Woakes should have been super-motivated to bowl well and further his case. Guys like Hales and Taylor needed runs to cement a spot in the team. England came in with all the momentum and the Saffers looked a beaten side. So prior to the game if I'd had a bet my money on a team to win it would have been on England ... but we don't have to bet prior to the game!

I backed South Africa when they were 200-1 on day one at odds of 10/11. Prior to the game they were about 15/8. The reasoning was they were obviously going well, so whatever negative thoughts they came into the game would be gone as they were flying along. England looked lethargic and as if they weren't interested. Pre-game they were talking the talk about how they were switched on, no test is a dead rubber etc but those 1st 2 sessions they went through the motions and it may cost them the test. The other thing to consider at the time I placed my bet was that England would likely be batting on day 5 to save the test. With no series on the line, would they be able to summon together enough resolve to block out a full day's play? I didn't think so (we shall see tomorrow if I'm right or wrong :P ).

Basically, when I'm unsure about one or both's sides motivation levels, I can keep your powder dry, watch the early exchanges, and then make an informed decision as play goes on. I had no interest in punting the Saffers pre-game, but a few hours later it seems a solid bet. Things can change quickly.

jaydubs
Stallion
Tips
Posts: 5633
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 12:00 am
Contact:

Postby jaydubs » Mon Jan 25, 2016 5:18 pm

But surely in SA v Eng case SA have won something like 15 out of 20 at Centurion. ..so SA whatever side and form .. its like backing Australia to beat England at Lords despite was has gone on before

nellberg1
Classic Winner
User avatar
Betting Blog Tips
Posts: 808
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 12:00 am

Postby nellberg1 » Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:09 pm

Yeh, that can definitely be a factor. If you\'d stuck with the trends pre-game you\'d be in a strong position. After the way they got rolled for 80-odd last game and then change 5 guys I\'d need to see them start this game well before getting involved, but then that\'s a good example of risk-reward. Pre-game it\'s a risk but the reward is the much bigger price.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users