You may also like...

3 Responses

  1. Tage Poulsen says:

    “I thought I would see if this “1 in 10,000 bets is declined” comment was just a made up number. ”

    You would never be able to say anything meaningful by this method!

    Try running this:
    “Retweet if you have ever told a lie”
    “Favourite if you have always told the truth”

  2. Joe Dale says:

    Hi Steve,

    Firstly let me say I thoroughly enjoy your articles and various contributors. You’re clearly one of the sharper minds in the punting game and have a way with numbers.

    However this article and “research” have disappointed me somewhat. Surely you as a mathematically minded individual can see that the sample size is pretty flimsy and that’s probably being generous.

    I’d also imagine, and you can take this as a compliment, that your tweets and website would be monitored by a more elite punting clientele that work also skew the number.

    There’s an awful long way from 1-2% and 80% of bets. While it may not be as low as the figure quoted by the AWC, it’s impossible for it to be 80%. Your methodology here would see full round AFL or NRL multis regularly affected. You can’t tell me any corporate is doing that.

  3. Steve says:

    Hey Joe,
    The post and quote is there merely to point out how easy it is to “lie with statistics”. The 1 in 10,000 number is an absolute lie, and while my 8 in 10 is accurate if going off the numbers, as you say, the sample size is tiny, the demographic is skewed and the question forces the retweets to be re-shared whereas the favs are final. So the people who are limited re-tweet and they would likely have friends who are also limited.

    The point is that this is a very serious issue and not as small as the bookies like to make out. I would imagine it is close to 30-40% that have been limited (not banned) in some way.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.