I'm completely puzzled by the latest Betfred Champions betting odds.
Why such a large gap in the odds between Warrington (9/1) and the next teams Wakefield and Huddersfield (both 40/1).
Do they really thinks there is that much difference??????????

Bookies pre-conceived opinion of wakeys chances?

It’s because more money will be wagered on Wire, than on us.

Odds aren’t a reflection of probability, but of loss/gain.

If enough money is placed on Wakey, the odds will shorten.

I’ll be having a quids worth tomorrow!

I point this out every season but it upsets Bellys argument for despair so I don't bother anymore.

You're right that's why they are called Turf Accountants. They don't study form as you rightly say they study betting patterns. So long as the odds cover the bets it makes no difference to them. It's simple really.

Well, you learn something everyday! Not being a gambler I somewhat naively thought that the bookie originally set the odds based on "expert" knowledge and previous experience, and then the odds fluctuated based on the betting trends. Not the other way round.

Thats how I always understood it, which means a lot of money must have gone on Cas.

I had my usual 10 bucks on Wakey and 10 bucks on the Dragons (nrl) - Got 41 dollars over here for wakey (happy with that)

also had a 10 buck Multi wakey into dragons got the juicy odds of 251/1 - lets go boys!!!

I’ve had a tenner on Wakey to be in the top 4 after 23 rounds at 8/1

Thats great odds, I'd have had them at being nearer evens.

There's truth in what most people have said as re. betting and odds that are quoted. Initially when a bookmaker prices up any 'race' be it horses, dogs, football, RL, it is worked out as that 99 times out of a hundred, the bookies can't lose, but of course that doesn't take into account the unpredictable nature of sport does it! Before a ball was kicked in the premier league, you could have got 1000/1 on Huddersfield winning it, and around 11/4 on Man Utd winning it, based on a few factors obviously. If there were lots of bets on Huddersfield to win, their odds would shorten accordingly, and vice versa, but before any bet is struck you have to be quoted a price in the first place, where obviously weight of money hasn't yet played a part. I think the odds I've seen are about right, but I think we are over priced, and Huddersfield & particularly Warrington represent no value, but that's the beauty of sport and why we all love it, the unpredictability.......?!

Here are William Hill's odds for the regular season:


7/2 St Helens
7/2 Wigan
4/1 Castleford
6/1 Hull FC
6/1 Warrington
7/1 Leeds
20/1 Huddersfield
33/1 Wakefield
40/1 Catalan Dragons
80/1 Salford
100/1 Hull KR
100/1 Widnes

I know that they want to entice people to place a bet and they would expect more bets to come in on certain clubs but I wouldn't back Wigan to finish top if you gave me the money to do it.

Leeds, on the other hand, assuming they find a HB pairing that works look better value.

Betfred have 3 of the Cas wingers in the top 6 for leading try scorer. We can only play 2 at a time. Greg Eden, Greg Minikin, and Gary Lo

They still start with likelihood and then adjust for what punters bet.
They are still saying we are less likely to win than Cas it's the difference in odds that is affected by bets.
We are a small market too. A couple of decent bet on Wakefield will move those odds.

Garry Lo has been loaned back to Sheffield for the season hasn't he?

One month has been confirmed but i think that was there original plan to loan him out for the season.

Can`t understand why Powell would continue to play Minikin for me every time we played Cas last season he was the only chink in there Armour, defensively speaking, one of the games he dropped more or less every bomb we put up. Rather go with Hitchcox if I was Powell.