Discussion in 'BETNOD free Cash Football comp for season 2015-16' started by slick, Aug 6, 2014.
Also welcome to Betnod Yorkie, enjoy your stay.
I think that's the best way, yes.
Good point. Is there any need for it? If you're not going to get your 1pt stake back and you're daft enough to back five at odds of 1.1, you're not going to win much. Similarly, if you back QPR to win at Stamford Bridge at 15s, then fair play to you.
As for the maximum odds, 10 or 15pts is a pretty big margin in the context of this competition (more so under the new scoring rules). For most of the competition, I'd agree with you that if you want to back QPR to win at Stamford Bridge, fair play to you. In the final weeks, though, I'd say allowing big odds like that leaves it open to people adopting a bit of a scattergun approach, backing 5 teams at big prices and hoping that they get lucky.
I'm considering Dundee Utd this weekend and it's not like it's the end of the season. Single figures..9.5?
I'm easy in terms of the maximum, just as long as whatever we go for is decided before the start of the competition.
If we set the top score for any match to say be 7.5 points and Punter picks Dundee Utd at 9.5 and they win instead of 9.5 he would score only 7.5.
If we don't then someone taking a scatter bomb approach on say international weekends with the minnows at massive odds like San Marino, Luxembourg or Scotland (to save ODM mentioning them later ) only needs to hit lucky once
Good shout imo.
If you read the rules Yorkie, and as already mentioned by RC read post 28, you are not getting your stake back, which means even 5 x 1.30 shots doubled would not amount to a half decent score. A much better scoring system imo.
Think Betnod are putting up the prizes this year, Yorkie, no need for you to worry about that.
Exactly. 5 x 1.3 shots are only going to return a maximum of 3pts. If they get one (or more) of them wrong (as they inevitably will quite often) and they're looking at a score of 1.2. If people want to play it that way anyway, that's up to them, but I can't see that being a particularly profitable tactic.
Oh are they lol well the offer is there, yeah I suppose it wouldn't be beneficial I'm easy going on the rules as long as everyone agrees on them
You can get as involved as you like with the running of it- me and RC have said we will chip in with scoring etc so just let us know what you want us to do.
As for the rules, Kegman's idea is a genius one- you can pick as high odds as u like but will only be paid up to a certain level.
If last years level was 6/1 I don't see any reason to change that unless anyone strongly disagrees.
No need for a minimum odds rule as has been discussed
What does everyone think?