🚀 go-pugleaf

I expect the stats to reflect more closely in about 6 more weeks.  Since I
did not have all the data for 1998, I chose to reset the stats and start
fresh on January1st.  The stats will need to even out before everything can
become a little more in-line with player ability.

The odds are as you have guessed, likely outcome, IE: Likely to win.

Doesn't necessarily mean they will, but shoes an approximation of their
chances to win.

Tim

--
Tim Fierro - timfierro@golfstockmarket.com
GSM: Golf Stock Market - Fantasy Golf 24 Hrs A Day / 7 Days A Wk
http://www.golfstockmarket.com

Crispin Roche wrote in message ...
>Well after 3 rounds of the Phoenix open your top 10 currently stand at
>Symbol Odds Golfer Name
>DUVADAVI 4:1 David Duval    tied 10th
>ESTEBOB  5:1 Bob Estes      tied 21st
>TRIPKIRK 5:1 Kirk Triplett       tied 34th
>SINGVIJA 5:1 Vijay Singh     not in cut
>WOODTIGE 6:1 Tiger Woods   2nd
>VERPSCOT 6:1 Scott Verplank   tied 34th
>MAYFBILL 7:1 Billy Mayfair     not in cut
>STEWPAYN 7:1 Payne Stewart     tied 40th
>MCCASCOT 7:1 Scott McCarron    tied 40th
>GOYDPAUL 8:1 Paul Goydos      tied 50th
>
>would this be a good "result" for your stats? or do your top 10s more
>closely match the tournment results.  (I know the tourney hasn't finished
>yet).
>
>Actually that has just made me think of another question by your top 10 do
>you mean most likely to win?  or a prediction of the top 10 places?
>
>
>Crispin Roche
>Tim Fierro wrote in message <790fas$6d0$1@birch.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
>>Let's put it this way.
>>
>>According to my statistics, David Duval has a 4/1 chance of winning this
>>week's tournament.  Again, according to the statistics I keep, Tiger Woods
>>has a 6/1 chance to win the tournament.
>>
>>I am not saying I am posting these odds so someone can bet with me, the
>odds
>>are only for informational purposes.
>>
>>Mr. Las Vegas bookmaker says he will take bets on David Duval and pay
10/1.
>>That's fine, if you want to bet with a bookmaker and you like the 10/1
>odds,
>>then go for it.
>>
>>Actually the posted odds in Las Vegas at the Stardust is David Duval 9/2
>and
>>Tiger Woods was 6/1.
>>
>>I am guessing they also have some statistics they keep and have also done
>>some calculations to post their odds.  Where I post odds relative to the
>>field and post whatever the result, 18/1 or similar, a bookmaker may have
>>odds posted at 20/1 or even 30/1 or whatever.  It does not matter.
>>
>>What good are the odds sheet I post?  Based on statistics, if David Duval
>is
>>4/1 by my odds, and a bookmaker has odds posted at 50/1, then take the
50/1
>>as you know by calculations (paper) it looks like a good bet.  When you
see
>>Tiger Woods posted at Stardust at 6/1 odds, and my statistical odds show
up
>>as 6/1 also, then maybe this would not be a bad bet also.
>>
>>It is up to the individual if they gamble on these events and to get odds
>at
>>whatever casino/bookmaker they want.  Anyone can use my golf odds sheet to
>>compare what statistical the odds are of a player winning the tournament,
>>and compare that with what a bookmaker is actually accepting bets at.
>>
>>Does the above make sense now?  So let's drop any association that I may
>>have with a bookmaker or casino.  I am just an individual who likes to
play
>>with numbers.  I am not associated with any gambling affiliation.  Just a
>>guy with a notion to mix my hobby of golf, computers, and numbers into
fun.
>>I am not accepting bets or posting odds that I will accept.  I am not a
>>bookmaker. <g>
>>
>>
>>Tim
>>
>
>
>