"Lucky Red"

Tan on Sky saying that.. So disrespectful to the players and coaching staff.

Have a look at what you wrote down, you can't know what the players and staff are thinking, or maybe you think you can

Having a differing opinion to others doesn't make you look silly, it's those who make up stories about other forum members and making up quotes that look daft.

What have I made up about other forum members, you made the quote not me

Tan on Sky saying that.. So disrespectful to the players and coaching staff.

Surely he's entitled to his opinion?

Its his favourite phrase Shame he doesnt stick to it for other people

When will the users of this forum start to understand this forum is to discuss discuss people's opinions?

If your opinion doesn't involve Cardiff becoming the next super power in world football then you are either a WUM, a troll, a jack, roath magic or all of the above

We can't all be Roath Magic can we paxoman.

Anyway got your head around setting odds yet.

Nope we can't.

Setting odds was never the debate, the debate was why don't people take correct odds. Simple as that.

Why can't we all be Roath Magic then

The debate was so much more than that, in fact the debate once we got around your constant need to move the goalposts, showed us all that you have absolutely no idea how to calulate odds. Also your assertion that pricing both players in a tennis match at 10/11 was nonsense was in fact shown to be nonsense. Your opinion that is.

Shall we continue the debate paxoman.

When will the users of this forum start to understand this forum is to discuss discuss people's opinions?

If your opinion doesn't involve Cardiff becoming the next super power in world football then you are either a WUM, a troll, a jack, roath magic or all of the above

We can't all be Roath Magic can we paxoman.

Anyway got your head around setting odds yet.

Nope we can't.

Setting odds was never the debate, the debate was why don't people take correct odds. Simple as that.

Why can't we all be Roath Magic then

The debate was so much more than that, in fact the debate once we got around your constant need to move the goalposts, showed us all that you have absolutely no idea how to calulate odds. Also your assertion that pricing both players in a tennis match at 10/11 was nonsense was in fact shown to be nonsense. Your opinion that is.

Shall we continue the debate paxoman.

Because he's one person is he not? Not sure why you are winking at me however.

The debate was never more than that.

The initial post was stating that bookies are offering odds on Watford winning the title at 200-1. I said people shouldn't bet with bookies as the odds aren't a correct representation of probability. I.e. if the odds for someone to win is 1-200 then it should be 200-1 to not win... But it never is, in that scenario the bookies would probably go 40-1.

My tennis story was spot on. There are two possible outcomes, if they can't be split then the correct odds should be evens. Bookies mark it up as 10/11 on each meaning they are both odds on to win.

You then decided that my point was "bookies aren't viable businesses" and explained why they set odds the way they do, which of course was never the debate or indeed has absolutely nothing to do with the debate in the first place.

By all means, lets continue.

1. I'm pretty sure he was joking.

2. We just got promoted stop being a negative ass hole you can get back to that next season.

Nothing negative about raising an opinion on a quote attributed to our esteemed owner.

Plenty negatives in abusing others for having a differing opinion on a forum.

Not abusing others just you, taking the negative out of everything you see or hear.
Your opinions are always negative, you go on and f*cking on in circles about stupid shit constantly.
He dosent think we got promoted because of the lucky red he was joking about it because of the controversy he caused. In his next breath he thanks the staff and players.

When will the users of this forum start to understand this forum is to discuss discuss people's opinions?

If your opinion doesn't involve Cardiff becoming the next super power in world football then you are either a WUM, a troll, a jack, roath magic or all of the above

We can't all be Roath Magic can we paxoman.

Anyway got your head around setting odds yet.

Nope we can't.

Setting odds was never the debate, the debate was why don't people take correct odds. Simple as that.

Why can't we all be Roath Magic then

The debate was so much more than that, in fact the debate once we got around your constant need to move the goalposts, showed us all that you have absolutely no idea how to calulate odds. Also your assertion that pricing both players in a tennis match at 10/11 was nonsense was in fact shown to be nonsense. Your opinion that is.

Shall we continue the debate paxoman.

Because he's one person is he not? Not sure why you are winking at me however.

The debate was never more than that.

The initial post was stating that bookies are offering odds on Watford winning the title at 200-1. I said people shouldn't bet with bookies as the odds aren't a correct representation of probability. I.e. if the odds for someone to win is 1-200 then it should be 200-1 to not win... But it never is, in that scenario the bookies would probably go 40-1.

My tennis story was spot on. There are two possible outcomes, if they can't be split then the correct odds should be evens. Bookies mark it up as 10/11 on each meaning they are both odds on to win.

You then decided that my point was "bookies aren't viable businesses" and explained why they set odds the way they do, which of course was never the debate or indeed has absolutely nothing to do with the debate in the first place.

By all means, lets continue.

Moving the goalposts again paxoman, you do a lot of that don't you. Why?


You still clearly don't understand the principal of how bookmakers operate a book on an event, such as a tennis match. Perhaps you should go back to that thread and read it again it may help, unlikely I know as the whole concept seems to complex for you but give it a try. Is this because you've been eating to much monkey meat.

Is Roath Magic one person or could it be he has multiple personas on say a internet messageboard. Could it be that Roath Magic is also Paxoman is that possible.

When will the users of this forum start to understand this forum is to discuss discuss people's opinions?

If your opinion doesn't involve Cardiff becoming the next super power in world football then you are either a WUM, a troll, a jack, roath magic or all of the above

We can't all be Roath Magic can we paxoman.

Anyway got your head around setting odds yet.

Nope we can't.

Setting odds was never the debate, the debate was why don't people take correct odds. Simple as that.

Why can't we all be Roath Magic then

The debate was so much more than that, in fact the debate once we got around your constant need to move the goalposts, showed us all that you have absolutely no idea how to calulate odds. Also your assertion that pricing both players in a tennis match at 10/11 was nonsense was in fact shown to be nonsense. Your opinion that is.

Shall we continue the debate paxoman.

Because he's one person is he not? Not sure why you are winking at me however.

The debate was never more than that.

The initial post was stating that bookies are offering odds on Watford winning the title at 200-1. I said people shouldn't bet with bookies as the odds aren't a correct representation of probability. I.e. if the odds for someone to win is 1-200 then it should be 200-1 to not win... But it never is, in that scenario the bookies would probably go 40-1.

My tennis story was spot on. There are two possible outcomes, if they can't be split then the correct odds should be evens. Bookies mark it up as 10/11 on each meaning they are both odds on to win.

You then decided that my point was "bookies aren't viable businesses" and explained why they set odds the way they do, which of course was never the debate or indeed has absolutely nothing to do with the debate in the first place.

By all means, lets continue.

Moving the goalposts again paxoman, you do a lot of that don't you. Why?


You still clearly don't understand the principal of how bookmakers operate a book on an event, such as a tennis match. Perhaps you should go back to that thread and read it again it may help, unlikely I know as the whole concept seems to complex for you but give it a try. Is this because you've been eating to much monkey meat.

Is Roath Magic one person or could it be he has multiple personas on say a internet messageboard. Could it be that Roath Magic is also Paxoman is that possible.

What? I'm not sure if you are genuinely stupid or just fishing.

Ill give you the benefit of the doubt it's the former.

Why on earth would I be discussing the reasons bookmakers compile their books the way they do? What possible reason would I reply to the OP with "bookmakers are viable businesses". You are a classic example of someone hearing/reading a buzz word, in this instance it's "bookmaker" and then decided to google and write down everything he can find about that subject, completely ignoring whats actually being discussed.

Bookmaking is a simple process, for bookies it's excellent, for the punter it is not. HENCE THE DISCUSSION. If two tennis players are priced up at 1/10 with the other at 5/1 then why the hell would you back the 5/1 when you know that at the current odds offered it should be 10/1 not the 5/1 offered.

On betting exchanges you get to back the true odds and a direct opposite of what one player is to another in a two horse race as it were.

Simple discussion, simple concepts, simple points..... Shame it was bulldozed by a simple mind eh?

As for roath magic being me, no it isn't possible - but you may think it is. Again, pretty obvious.

I can't believe people are looking to have a moan today.

Anyone who seen the video in sky shows he is clearly joking, hence the big laugh after it. To me it seemed he was taking the piss out of him self.

What? I'm not sure if you are genuinely stupid or just fishing.

Ill give you the benefit of the doubt it's the former.

Why on earth would I be discussing the reasons bookmakers compile their books the way they do? What possible reason would I reply to the OP with "bookmakers are viable businesses". You are a classic example of someone hearing/reading a buzz word, in this instance it's "bookmaker" and then decided to google and write down everything he can find about that subject, completely ignoring whats actually being discussed.

Bookmaking is a simple process, for bookies it's excellent, for the punter it is not. HENCE THE DISCUSSION. If two tennis players are priced up at 1/10 with the other at 5/1 then why the hell would you back the 5/1 when you know that at the current odds offered it should be 10/1 not the 5/1 offered.

On betting exchanges you get to back the true odds and a direct opposite of what one player is to another in a two horse race as it were.

Simple discussion, simple concepts, simple points..... Shame it was bulldozed by a simple mind eh?

As for roath magic being me, no it isn't possible - but you may think it is. Again, pretty obvious.

Me stupid paxoman I'm really hurt

Moving goalposts again and clearly you haven't read the thread yesterday. Why In that thread you expressed a view that bookmakers were cons and that pricing two players at 10/11 in a tennis match was a nonsense. Now is that expressing an opinion on how bookermakers compile thier books. Of course it is and more importantly they are your views, the views you paxoman posted in that thread. So the real question is why on earth are you not prepared to discuss how bookmakers make thier books today when you clearly were yesterday. Can't wait for the answer on that one paxoman but I won't hold my breath because you don't answer direct questions. Do you.

Anyway all this 1/10 and 5/1 stuff thats just your latest attempt to move the goalposts on the debate. The point in debate is a tennis match where both players are priced at 10/11. Your views, expressed yesterday, were that this was a nonsense and that bookmakers were cons. Why is it a nonsense and what is your basis, in fact, which supports your claim that bookmakers are cons.

We covered this nonsense about betting exchanges offering "True" odds which again is clearly to complex for you to understand.

Interesting your answer to the question I raised about the possibility of people having multiple personas as it almost seems like a denial that your Roath Magic. I only asked if it's possible for someone to have more than one username but you answered by saying your not Roath Magic. Jumped in a bit quick with the denial there paxoman.

I can't believe people are looking to have a moan today.

Anyone who seen the video in sky shows he is clearly joking, hence the big laugh after it. To me it seemed he was taking the piss out of him self.

Can you tell Chuckles that

What? I'm not sure if you are genuinely stupid or just fishing.

Ill give you the benefit of the doubt it's the former.

Why on earth would I be discussing the reasons bookmakers compile their books the way they do? What possible reason would I reply to the OP with "bookmakers are viable businesses". You are a classic example of someone hearing/reading a buzz word, in this instance it's "bookmaker" and then decided to google and write down everything he can find about that subject, completely ignoring whats actually being discussed.

Bookmaking is a simple process, for bookies it's excellent, for the punter it is not. HENCE THE DISCUSSION. If two tennis players are priced up at 1/10 with the other at 5/1 then why the hell would you back the 5/1 when you know that at the current odds offered it should be 10/1 not the 5/1 offered.

On betting exchanges you get to back the true odds and a direct opposite of what one player is to another in a two horse race as it were.

Simple discussion, simple concepts, simple points..... Shame it was bulldozed by a simple mind eh?

As for roath magic being me, no it isn't possible - but you may think it is. Again, pretty obvious.

Me stupid paxoman I'm really hurt

Moving goalposts again and clearly you haven't read the thread yesterday. Why In that thread you expressed a view that bookmakers were cons and that pricing two players at 10/11 in a tennis match was a nonsense. Now is that expressing an opinion on how bookermakers compile thier books. Of course it is and more importantly they are your views, the views you paxoman posted in that thread. So the real question is why on earth are you not prepared to discuss how bookmakers make thier books today when you clearly were yesterday. Can't wait for the answer on that one paxoman but I won't hold my breath because you don't answer direct questions. Do you.

Anyway all this 1/10 and 5/1 stuff thats just your latest attempt to move the goalposts on the debate. The point in debate is a tennis match where both players are priced at 10/11. Your views, expressed yesterday, were that this was a nonsense and that bookmakers were cons. Why is it a nonsense and what is your basis, in fact, which supports your claim that bookmakers are cons.

We covered this nonsense about betting exchanges offering "True" odds which again is clearly to complex for you to understand.

Interesting your answer to the question I raised about the possibility of people having multiple personas as it almost seems like a denial that your Roath Magic. I only asked if it's possible for someone to have more than one username but you answered by saying your not Roath Magic. Jumped in a bit quick with the denial there paxoman.

It's exactly the same concept Gary. You seem to be discussing something nobody has mentioned and when you are met with someone telling you this, you accuse them of moving the goalposts.

by the way I never discussed how bookmakers make their books with you, apart from telling you it has no relevance and over rounds have no place in a debate in which we were having... Which of course was whether betting at a bookies is good for the punter, with my opinion clearly being that it wasn't.

If there are two tennis payers evenly split, let's say for example Federer and murray. The odds should be evens. Bookmakers would have them at 10/11 and 10/11. Why would you back Federer at 10/11 when you know he should be evens? Why the bookmakers make their odds like this is obvious, why you think this is under debate I don't know. The debate was why people do this when they can get the true odds. Simple as that.

I also think the lottery is stupid and follows the same logic, I think the chances of winning the jackpot is 8.1 million to 1. So I would expect 8.1 million back for my pound or I wouldn't bother playing. The fact the jackpots are £4 million and often split to me suggests a bad bet and would question the thoughts of the person betting.

On the other thread I suggested your ramblings were that of a mad man. They seem to be continuing with your last paragraph. You have said you simply asked me can people have multiple usernames and were shocked that I responded that I wasn't roath magic. When in reality you said, and I quote....

"Is Roath Magic one person or could it be he has multiple personas on say a internet messageboard. Could it be that Roath Magic is also Paxoman is that possible."

And you accuse others of moving the goalposts

Does Kathy know you spout such drivel on here? I bet she doesn't.

I can't believe people are looking to have a moan today.

Anyone who seen the video in sky shows he is clearly joking, hence the big laugh after it. To me it seemed he was taking the piss out of him self.

Absolutely right.

Loved hearing on skysports news that before every game he goes around the pitch throwing rice. Brings good luck apparently so maybe it was the mix of rice, red shirts and The Malkay which got the job done.

What? I'm not sure if you are genuinely stupid or just fishing.

Ill give you the benefit of the doubt it's the former.

Why on earth would I be discussing the reasons bookmakers compile their books the way they do? What possible reason would I reply to the OP with "bookmakers are viable businesses". You are a classic example of someone hearing/reading a buzz word, in this instance it's "bookmaker" and then decided to google and write down everything he can find about that subject, completely ignoring whats actually being discussed.

Bookmaking is a simple process, for bookies it's excellent, for the punter it is not. HENCE THE DISCUSSION. If two tennis players are priced up at 1/10 with the other at 5/1 then why the hell would you back the 5/1 when you know that at the current odds offered it should be 10/1 not the 5/1 offered.

On betting exchanges you get to back the true odds and a direct opposite of what one player is to another in a two horse race as it were.

Simple discussion, simple concepts, simple points..... Shame it was bulldozed by a simple mind eh?

As for roath magic being me, no it isn't possible - but you may think it is. Again, pretty obvious.

Me stupid paxoman I'm really hurt

Moving goalposts again and clearly you haven't read the thread yesterday. Why In that thread you expressed a view that bookmakers were cons and that pricing two players at 10/11 in a tennis match was a nonsense. Now is that expressing an opinion on how bookermakers compile thier books. Of course it is and more importantly they are your views, the views you paxoman posted in that thread. So the real question is why on earth are you not prepared to discuss how bookmakers make thier books today when you clearly were yesterday. Can't wait for the answer on that one paxoman but I won't hold my breath because you don't answer direct questions. Do you.

Anyway all this 1/10 and 5/1 stuff thats just your latest attempt to move the goalposts on the debate. The point in debate is a tennis match where both players are priced at 10/11. Your views, expressed yesterday, were that this was a nonsense and that bookmakers were cons. Why is it a nonsense and what is your basis, in fact, which supports your claim that bookmakers are cons.

We covered this nonsense about betting exchanges offering "True" odds which again is clearly to complex for you to understand.

Interesting your answer to the question I raised about the possibility of people having multiple personas as it almost seems like a denial that your Roath Magic. I only asked if it's possible for someone to have more than one username but you answered by saying your not Roath Magic. Jumped in a bit quick with the denial there paxoman.

It's exactly the same concept Gary. You seem to be discussing something nobody has mentioned and when you are met with someone telling you this, you accuse them of moving the goalposts.

by the way I never discussed how bookmakers make their books with you, apart from telling you it has no relevance and over rounds have no place in a debate in which we were having... Which of course was whether betting at a bookies is good for the punter, with my opinion clearly being that it wasn't.

If there are two tennis payers evenly split, let's say for example Federer and murray. The odds should be evens. Bookmakers would have them at 10/11 and 10/11. Why would you back Federer at 10/11 when you know he should be evens? Why the bookmakers make their odds like this is obvious, why you think this is under debate I don't know. The debate was why people do this when they can get the true odds. Simple as that.

I also think the lottery is stupid and follows the same logic, I think the chances of winning the jackpot is 8.1 million to 1. So I would expect 8.1 million back for my pound or I wouldn't bother playing. The fact the jackpots are £4 million and often split to me suggests a bad bet and would question the thoughts of the person betting.

On the other thread I suggested your ramblings were that of a mad man. They seem to be continuing with your last paragraph. You have said you simply asked me can people have multiple usernames and were shocked that I responded that I wasn't roath magic. When in reality you said, and I quote....

"Is Roath Magic one person or could it be he has multiple personas on say a internet messageboard. Could it be that Roath Magic is also Paxoman is that possible."

And you accuse others of moving the goalposts

Does Kathy know you spout such drivel on here? I bet she doesn't.

Fair play you've got me now. Whose Kathy.

Glad you admit it finally. Read what people are actually saying in future. You wouldn't want me showing Kathy the type on nonsense you type now would you?

Chuckles,you've been found out.Taking a partial statement out of context is poor even for you.But theres more to it than that.On a night that was all about CCFC'S on field achievements you show your true colour and it ain't blue.

Forgot to mention the part when he said we will always be cardiff city. Or when he lavished praise on malky and the team.

Here Here

What a load of cobblers as it was a throwaway line said in jest and I don't think for one minute any of the players or coaching staff would take offence.

However, on another level we have enjoyed luck this season like no other IMO. For example when I think back to the Watford game at home when we were struggling to break them down when losing 1-0 only for the Hornets to get 2 players sent off, give away a penalty and then we nicked it against 9 men in final few minutes.

You can argue if that was luck or by design but personally I would consider it a huge chunk of luck.

Many a truth spoken in jehst - Shakespere

Had he not taken the identity of this institution, it 'could' have been regarded a throw away line. Sadly our identity is the only thing thrown away, Some people only believe what they want, no matter how obvious it is.

Glad you admit it finally. Read what people are actually saying in future. You wouldn't want me showing Kathy the type on nonsense you type now would you?

I don't admit anything. Who is Kathy ?

I can't believe people are looking to have a moan today.

Anyone who seen the video in sky shows he is clearly joking, hence the big laugh after it. To me it seemed he was taking the piss out of him self.

He changed 100 years of history, was that just part of the famous Vincent Tan 'joke' repotoire aswell? Taking the piss of himself? What a guy he'll be taking his show to the Edinburgh festivel this september

1. I'm pretty sure he was joking.

2. We just got promoted stop being a negative ass hole you can get back to that next season.

Nothing negative about raising an opinion on a quote attributed to our esteemed owner.

Plenty negatives in abusing others for having a differing opinion on a forum.

Not abusing others just you, taking the negative out of everything you see or hear.
Your opinions are always negative, you go on and f*cking on in circles about stupid shit constantly.
He dosent think we got promoted because of the lucky red he was joking about it because of the controversy he caused. In his next breath he thanks the staff and players.

That sums up chuckles

I can't believe people are looking to have a moan today.

Anyone who seen the video in sky shows he is clearly joking, hence the big laugh after it. To me it seemed he was taking the piss out of him self.

He changed 100 years of history, was that just part of the famous Vincent Tan 'joke' repotoire aswell? Taking the piss of himself? What a guy he'll be taking his show to the Edinburgh festivel this september

He hasnt changed history. Unless he's created the flux capacitor

Last edited by CraigCCFC on Wed Apr 17, 2013 12:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Glad you admit it finally. Read what people are actually saying in future. You wouldn't want me showing Kathy the type on nonsense you type now would you?

I don't admit anything. Who is Kathy ?

Are you denying what you wrote again?

Kathy is Kathryn.

Kathy? Ok who is the drag artist moonlighting as a football hooligan?

I can't believe people are looking to have a moan today.

Anyone who seen the video in sky shows he is clearly joking, hence the big laugh after it. To me it seemed he was taking the piss out of him self.

He changed 100 years of history, was that just part of the famous Vincent Tan 'joke' repotoire aswell? Taking the piss of himself? What a guy he'll be taking his show to the Edinburgh festivel this september

He hasnt changed history. Unless he's created the flux capacitor

He hasn't changed anything, it's all a big joke, he's taking the piss of himself he is.

I must remember this for his impending gag fest live at the appollo, are his trousers part of the 'act' or are they real?

Kathy? Ok who is the drag artist moonlighting as a football hooligan?

Not Me.

As for paxoman I'm saying nothing.

Glad you admit it finally. Read what people are actually saying in future. You wouldn't want me showing Kathy the type on nonsense you type now would you?

I don't admit anything. Who is Kathy ?

Are you denying what you wrote again?

Kathy is Kathryn.

Does she have a username.

Glad you admit it finally. Read what people are actually saying in future. You wouldn't want me showing Kathy the type on nonsense you type now would you?

I don't admit anything. Who is Kathy ?

Are you denying what you wrote again?

Kathy is Kathryn.

Does she have a username.

Don't know. Ask her I guess Gary.

Glad you admit it finally. Read what people are actually saying in future. You wouldn't want me showing Kathy the type on nonsense you type now would you?

I don't admit anything. Who is Kathy ?

Are you denying what you wrote again?

Kathy is Kathryn.

Does she have a username.

Don't know. Ask her I guess Gary.

I see what you doing now throw something from left field to distract us from the debate. Nice try but didn't work

So what's all this about the lottery now those goalposts must be fed up with being moved back a forth. Let's get back to why you think it's a nonsense for bookmakers to offer 10/11 on both players in a tennis match.

We know you have no idea how a bookmaker sets up a book but do you think it's possible for the amount of money taken as bets on each player would have more of less affect on the price than the relative strengths of the individual players. Is that possible.

I think it was a light hearted tongue in cheek comment and let's face it part of an edited TV interview.


Whatever your views on the rebrand as regards any media organisation a comment on the rebrand is "Good Copy" and that's why it was shown. In fairness to SKY they have also shown VT talking about his appreciation of MM, his backroom team and of course the players. He spoke about planning for the future, a strategic plan designed to keep us in the PL "For a long, long time"

His other tongue in cheek comment was "Hopefully we won't have to spend to much money".

I have missed watching the team I love playing in Blue, the colours I most associate them with, but I honestly didn't last night it just never crossed my mind. I think the reception VT received from the crowd last night shows that for the vast majority of Cardiff fans the colour of the shirt was not a problem either.

I agree with that 100% Castleblue