Topic: ⭐⚽⭐ Sportsbet's Bitcointalk Sports Fanatics League (BSFL) – 10000$ rewards ⭐⚽⭐ - page 568. (Read 106757 times)
March 28, 2023, 06:30:40 AM
Damn it, I almost forgot to send my answers. I wrote them yesterday but didn't send them because I wanted to see if there will be some last minute changes with Manchester roster or in Miami (tennis). I remembered in time to send the answers so let's see what this week will bring us.
March 28, 2023, 06:01:23 AM
That said, it took me way longer than I expected to come to a conclusion on certain amount of questions, and that's with knowing my opponent, the toughest question had to the Man United XI, knowing what I know about the current players available, and my perceived Ten Haag's preference as a coach too literally didn't help matters.
Same here, it took me quite some time to answer that question. Even though I watch EPL regularly, I seriously dislike Man Utd and everything related to that club (trauma goes all the way back to 1999 CL final lol) and very rarely watch any of their games so I had to do some serious research to figure out their possible starting 11 vs Newcastle. I can imagine how more interesting all this will get when I actually start playing against someone.
March 28, 2023, 05:47:34 AM
P.S. Guys,almost every week we get tennis questions, it's all good, but please show some lover for WTA 
.
Really? You would prefer to toss a coin to write finalists instead of looking at the draw and picking 2 players in best form at the moment? .Just kidding but as a mental excercise I invite you to answer the same question but for WTA here in the thread. I am thinking that same question on WTA side is way more difficult. I will try as well.
Rybakina-Sabalenka, Sabalenka
Despite not being a tennis fanatic nor place bet on it often, I'd say I prefer it to having to guess Man Utd starting XI for Sunday game week versus Newcastle, and I think I'd have done pretty well in the previous questions, if they had counted especially the one including the semi-finalists.
That said, it took me way longer than I expected to come to a conclusion on certain amount of questions, and that's with knowing my opponent, the toughest question had to the Man United XI, knowing what I know about the current players available, and my perceived Ten Haag's preference as a coach too literally didn't help matters.
The women UCL 2nd leg fixtures is another crazy one, that was just a coin flip versus settling for a wider margin or just pure guessing living it at the hands of fate, if there is anything as such.
NBA prediction is still easier for me to choose from imo, less than 70% sure on that, but then I'd fancy my chances.
March 28, 2023, 05:03:28 AM
I see a lot of confusion around this, let's try this way:
Options are:
1) 1 or 2 different goalscorers, all from the same team
This means for example Spain winning 2-0 with Torres and Morata as goalscorers, or winning 6-0 with Torres scoring 5 goals and Olmo scoring once
2) 3 or more different goalscorers, all from the same team
This means for example Spain winning 4-0, Torres scores 2, Morata scores 1 and Olmo scores 1 (or Scotland scores an own goal)
3) 1 or 2 different goalscorers, from both teams combined
This means for example a 2-1 win for Spain in which Morata scores 2 times and Che Adams scores once, or a 4-1 Scotland win in which Che Adams scores 4 goals and McTominay scores an own goal for Spain
4) 3 or more different goalscorers, from both teams combined
This means any result where both teams score and has more goalscorers - example, a 2-1 win for Spain with goalscorers Olmo and Morata for Spain and Adams for Scotland
5) no goalscorers
Self - explanatory
Options are:
1) 1 or 2 different goalscorers, all from the same team
This means for example Spain winning 2-0 with Torres and Morata as goalscorers, or winning 6-0 with Torres scoring 5 goals and Olmo scoring once
2) 3 or more different goalscorers, all from the same team
This means for example Spain winning 4-0, Torres scores 2, Morata scores 1 and Olmo scores 1 (or Scotland scores an own goal)
3) 1 or 2 different goalscorers, from both teams combined
This means for example a 2-1 win for Spain in which Morata scores 2 times and Che Adams scores once, or a 4-1 Scotland win in which Che Adams scores 4 goals and McTominay scores an own goal for Spain
4) 3 or more different goalscorers, from both teams combined
This means any result where both teams score and has more goalscorers - example, a 2-1 win for Spain with goalscorers Olmo and Morata for Spain and Adams for Scotland
5) no goalscorers
Self - explanatory
It is not that I didn't know what to conclude from the answers provided, but someone could have argued against your case and I must confess I couldn't criticize anyone who would have done that. A specification for "from both teams combined" could have been "no team keeps a clean sheet", as it also subsumes the own goal scenario.
But all good, I wrote my concern in public to provide a level playing field for all competitors.
Edit: question 3 refers to regular time only?
March 28, 2023, 04:55:20 AM
Really? You would prefer to toss a coin to write finalists instead of looking at the draw and picking 2 players in best form at the moment?
Just kidding but as a mental excercise I invite you to answer the same question but for WTA here in the thread. I am thinking that same question on WTA side is way more difficult. I will try as well.
Rybakina-Sabalenka, Sabalenka
Not that I would prefer, but it would be interesting to give a try. And actually there is very few players in current WTA tour who can perform conistent well, especially when Swiatek is out, so, there isn't so many options to pick.Just kidding but as a mental excercise I invite you to answer the same question but for WTA here in the thread. I am thinking that same question on WTA side is way more difficult. I will try as well.
Rybakina-Sabalenka, Sabalenka
After looking at remaining draw, I won't be original and I go with same final, just different winner.
Rybakina - Sabalenka, Rybakina.
March 28, 2023, 04:43:23 AM
Good to hear that now it's clear enough 
We have to be a bit creative with the questions and try to introduce different types - otherwise we risk that it becomes a bit boring soon.
Our options here are still limited but we try to test out different formats as well so sometimes we are aware that we might have to explain something a bit more.
________________________
I'd also like to state that although this is BSFL - a league for the best sports fanatics, what we're really trying to build here is a gambling community.
Throughout BSFL we hope that you'll get to know each other better, have some sidebets and friendly banter, and some of you will be able to meet SB team, maybe get invited to a hangout or a game, receive some merch etc.
So whatever your knowledge is, if you follow sports we want you here. If you don't but want to, we want you here. If you just want to have some friendly banter, we want you here
We have to be a bit creative with the questions and try to introduce different types - otherwise we risk that it becomes a bit boring soon.
Our options here are still limited but we try to test out different formats as well so sometimes we are aware that we might have to explain something a bit more.
________________________
I'd also like to state that although this is BSFL - a league for the best sports fanatics, what we're really trying to build here is a gambling community.
Throughout BSFL we hope that you'll get to know each other better, have some sidebets and friendly banter, and some of you will be able to meet SB team, maybe get invited to a hangout or a game, receive some merch etc.
So whatever your knowledge is, if you follow sports we want you here. If you don't but want to, we want you here. If you just want to have some friendly banter, we want you here
March 28, 2023, 04:39:07 AM
I have sent my answer a few hours ago, now with anticipation, I hope to get good results this week
March 28, 2023, 04:29:18 AM
Welcome 1miau! I have seen your name before but probably not in gambling, so another great addition. Trust me, this place is not all full of experts. Just look at me, participating almost every pool almost since beginning and I am bottom of Div 1 table
Everywhere I look Alcaraz is the favorite, but didn't he have a bad injury last time and aren't veterans like Sinner better chance at going to final? I wonder how tennis bookies make their odds. In football you have sort of better size of results to look at but tennis you meet a guy maybe 5 times in a few years max.
And yes I was initially quite confused by the goalscorer question and like you I thought answer 3 is better than answer 1, as it contains the same outcome, because of mathematical combination! But then I understood it the way cryptofrka has finally clarified.
In other words, this is basically Goalscorer betting, with clean sheet or no clean sheet
Everywhere I look Alcaraz is the favorite, but didn't he have a bad injury last time and aren't veterans like Sinner better chance at going to final? I wonder how tennis bookies make their odds. In football you have sort of better size of results to look at but tennis you meet a guy maybe 5 times in a few years max.
in most cases. Logically, answer 3 is strictly better than answer 1 as answer 3 contains answer 1 as a statistical subset. Every outcome that validates answer 1 also validates answer 3, but not vice versa. Why pick answer 1 at all?
And yes I was initially quite confused by the goalscorer question and like you I thought answer 3 is better than answer 1, as it contains the same outcome, because of mathematical combination! But then I understood it the way cryptofrka has finally clarified.
In other words, this is basically Goalscorer betting, with clean sheet or no clean sheet
March 28, 2023, 04:18:29 AM
I see a lot of confusion around this, let's try this way:
Options are:
1) 1 or 2 different goalscorers, all from the same team
This means for example Spain winning 2-0 with Torres and Morata as goalscorers, or winning 6-0 with Torres scoring 5 goals and Olmo scoring once
2) 3 or more different goalscorers, all from the same team
This means for example Spain winning 4-0, Torres scores 2, Morata scores 1 and Olmo scores 1 (or Scotland scores an own goal)
3) 1 or 2 different goalscorers, from both teams combined
This means for example a 2-1 win for Spain in which Morata scores 2 times and Che Adams scores once, or a 4-1 Scotland win in which Che Adams scores 4 goals and McTominay scores an own goal for Spain
4) 3 or more different goalscorers, from both teams combined
This means any result where both teams score and has more goalscorers - example, a 2-1 win for Spain with goalscorers Olmo and Morata for Spain and Adams for Scotland
5) no goalscorers
Self - explanatory
Options are:
1) 1 or 2 different goalscorers, all from the same team
This means for example Spain winning 2-0 with Torres and Morata as goalscorers, or winning 6-0 with Torres scoring 5 goals and Olmo scoring once
2) 3 or more different goalscorers, all from the same team
This means for example Spain winning 4-0, Torres scores 2, Morata scores 1 and Olmo scores 1 (or Scotland scores an own goal)
3) 1 or 2 different goalscorers, from both teams combined
This means for example a 2-1 win for Spain in which Morata scores 2 times and Che Adams scores once, or a 4-1 Scotland win in which Che Adams scores 4 goals and McTominay scores an own goal for Spain
4) 3 or more different goalscorers, from both teams combined
This means any result where both teams score and has more goalscorers - example, a 2-1 win for Spain with goalscorers Olmo and Morata for Spain and Adams for Scotland
5) no goalscorers
Self - explanatory
March 28, 2023, 03:39:16 AM
Guys correct me if I am wrong as I am not a native speaker, but in question 2 there is no semantic/logical difference between the answer 1:
"1 or 2 different goalscorers, all from the same team"
and answer 3:
"1 or 2 different goalscorers, from both teams combined"
in most cases. Logically, answer 3 is strictly better than answer 1 as answer 3 contains answer 1 as a statistical subset. Every outcome that validates answer 1 also validates answer 3, but not vice versa. Why pick answer 1 at all?
"..., from both teams combined" allows for a Spain 2 + Scotland 0 combination the same way this outcome would validate answer 1.
If 2 Spanish players score, will it be a tie if one selects answer 1 and one selects answer 3?
"1 or 2 different goalscorers, all from the same team"
and answer 3:
"1 or 2 different goalscorers, from both teams combined"
in most cases. Logically, answer 3 is strictly better than answer 1 as answer 3 contains answer 1 as a statistical subset. Every outcome that validates answer 1 also validates answer 3, but not vice versa. Why pick answer 1 at all?
"..., from both teams combined" allows for a Spain 2 + Scotland 0 combination the same way this outcome would validate answer 1.
If 2 Spanish players score, will it be a tie if one selects answer 1 and one selects answer 3?
March 28, 2023, 02:15:43 AM
P.S. Guys,almost every week we get tennis questions, it's all good, but please show some lover for WTA .
.Hahah, we'll give it a try maybe. Trofo will have to ask the question though, I don't know 2 female tennis players in total.
But I do agree - if we're to introduce some female athletes tennis is the go-to sport for that.
I have another observation about question number 5. The options are correct, but I am concerned about the wording for non-English native speaker like myself and my brothers.
City win to Nill (bookies terms) sounds better?
Code:
City to win, Liverpool doesn’t score
City win to Nill (bookies terms) sounds better?
It does in bookie terms, yeah. The problem is that we don't know how the bookies call it in German, French or Turkish - so it might be less clear for most participants to understand.
This way it doesn't follow the english bookie terms but is quite easy to understand for all.
I think both would be fine though.
Hello, dear Trofo and cryptofrka
I appreciate your invite to your competition very much as I'm always in favor of new incentives brought to our forum and your Bitcointalk Sports Fanatics League is an outstanding example for such a nice incentive and a big contribution for our forum in general.
However, as discussed with Trofo, I believe I don't stand any chance against established gamblers and Bitcointalk Sports Fanatics, so it's quite certain that it won't end well for me to participate here.
Yes, I'm interested in soccer and mabye I'll join your next round of Champions League (pool) and I'll follow your league results here, too (without participating to avoid being a hopeless backmarker
).
Maybe I'm lucky and I'm getting a Top 10 position in our Formula 1 pool at least.
But once again big KUDOS for arranging Bitcointalk Sports Fanatics League, of course.
Bitcointalk can be proud to have members like Trofo and cryptofrka arranging such opportunites.
+100
I appreciate your invite to your competition very much as I'm always in favor of new incentives brought to our forum and your Bitcointalk Sports Fanatics League is an outstanding example for such a nice incentive and a big contribution for our forum in general.
However, as discussed with Trofo, I believe I don't stand any chance against established gamblers and Bitcointalk Sports Fanatics, so it's quite certain that it won't end well for me to participate here.
Yes, I'm interested in soccer and mabye I'll join your next round of Champions League (pool) and I'll follow your league results here, too (without participating to avoid being a hopeless backmarker
). Maybe I'm lucky and I'm getting a Top 10 position in our Formula 1 pool at least.
But once again big KUDOS for arranging Bitcointalk Sports Fanatics League, of course.
Bitcointalk can be proud to have members like Trofo and cryptofrka arranging such opportunites.
+100
Cheers and thanks for the kind words. It doesn't really matter who's first and who's last - this is meant to be a fun competition that kinda helps you track weekly sports events.
If you change your mind, we'd love to have you so you know where we are
March 27, 2023, 11:35:09 PM
P.S. Guys,almost every week we get tennis questions, it's all good, but please show some lover for WTA .
Really? You would prefer to toss a coin to write finalists instead of looking at the draw and picking 2 players in best form at the moment? .Just kidding but as a mental excercise I invite you to answer the same question but for WTA here in the thread. I am thinking that same question on WTA side is way more difficult. I will try as well.
Rybakina-Sabalenka, Sabalenka
March 27, 2023, 10:33:44 PM
I spent too much time researching some of the questions compared to the previous rounds and I hope this time I could get better results as I need to get my second win and stop missing out on some points.
BOL to my opponent joker_josue, both of us will need all those three points to move away from the bottom three.
BOL to my opponent joker_josue, both of us will need all those three points to move away from the bottom three.
March 27, 2023, 07:28:19 PM
Hello, dear Trofo and cryptofrka
I appreciate your invite to your competition very much as I'm always in favor of new incentives brought to our forum and your Bitcointalk Sports Fanatics League is an outstanding example for such a nice incentive and a big contribution for our forum in general.
However, as discussed with Trofo, I believe I don't stand any chance against established gamblers and Bitcointalk Sports Fanatics, so it's quite certain that it won't end well for me to participate here.
Yes, I'm interested in soccer and mabye I'll join your next round of Champions League (pool) and I'll follow your league results here, too (without participating to avoid being a hopeless backmarker).
Maybe I'm lucky and I'm getting a Top 10 position in our Formula 1 pool at least.
But once again big KUDOS for arranging Bitcointalk Sports Fanatics League, of course.
Bitcointalk can be proud to have members like Trofo and cryptofrka arranging such opportunites.
+100
I appreciate your invite to your competition very much as I'm always in favor of new incentives brought to our forum and your Bitcointalk Sports Fanatics League is an outstanding example for such a nice incentive and a big contribution for our forum in general.
However, as discussed with Trofo, I believe I don't stand any chance against established gamblers and Bitcointalk Sports Fanatics, so it's quite certain that it won't end well for me to participate here.
Yes, I'm interested in soccer and mabye I'll join your next round of Champions League (pool) and I'll follow your league results here, too (without participating to avoid being a hopeless backmarker
). Maybe I'm lucky and I'm getting a Top 10 position in our Formula 1 pool at least.
But once again big KUDOS for arranging Bitcointalk Sports Fanatics League, of course.
Bitcointalk can be proud to have members like Trofo and cryptofrka arranging such opportunites.
+100
March 27, 2023, 06:02:06 PM
Naming starting X1 is never easy for me, especially when I don't follow this team that much. But with some research it's not that difficult to get most names right. NBA is also, I don't folow regular season very closely, so, I just followed stats and averages of players.
I did the same on the NBA issue.
By the way, I believe that most of the participants did the same thing. They looked at the measurements and chose 5 names. That's why this question turns out to be well balanced among most participants.
Not so much measurements per se, but just knowing who's the go to guy's on said teams is key, i follow NBA a bit more than the other sports so I have a lil edge not much.
March 27, 2023, 05:59:32 PM
Naming starting X1 is never easy for me, especially when I don't follow this team that much. But with some research it's not that difficult to get most names right. NBA is also, I don't folow regular season very closely, so, I just followed stats and averages of players.
I did the same on the NBA issue.
By the way, I believe that most of the participants did the same thing. They looked at the measurements and chose 5 names. That's why this question turns out to be well balanced among most participants.
March 27, 2023, 05:02:05 PM
^ Thanks for the explanation. I understood precisely what was meant, of course, but yeah, just being a deliberate ass about the wording
3 [alone] = 3+0 [combined] = 2+1 [combined] was the possible trick misunderstanding I just thought BTTS prevents.
3 [alone] = 3+0 [combined] = 2+1 [combined] was the possible trick misunderstanding I just thought BTTS prevents.
I have another observation about question number 5. The options are correct, but I am concerned about the wording for non-English native speaker like myself and my brothers.
Code:
City to win, Liverpool doesn’t score
City win to Nill (bookies terms) sounds better?
Monday and is it weird I can't easily figure who won't play for United Sunday?
I know the players that are currently unavailable, but the problem is that there are still international games tomorrow after the deadline, and anything can happen; players could sustain an injury in their last international game, and ETH is someone who rotates his back line and forwards frequently, which is another issue.
________________________++++++++++++++++__________________
Igebotz from 10th to 10th Harry fucking Graham Potter must be proud!!! relegation bond? fucking hell, DIV 2 is fucking boring, no one to banter, i need to seat my ass up and focus.
Code:
Igebotz vs arallmuus
Relegation battle!!!! hahahah
March 27, 2023, 04:56:21 PM
Anyway, good luck LTU_btc!!
Good luck for you too. It won't be easy for me, despite that you're not doing very well so far. Now you have nothing to lose and such opponents is very dangerous.- The question of the Man United starters is always a bit complicated for me, because I don't follow it very strictly.
Naming starting X1 is never easy for me, especially when I don't follow this team that much. But with some research it's not that difficult to get most names right. NBA is also, I don't folow regular season very closely, so, I just followed stats and averages of players.P.S. Guys,almost every week we get tennis questions, it's all good, but please show some lover for WTA
. 
March 27, 2023, 04:39:16 PM
I have the feeling that this week I'm going to lose again, after having won last week. 
I think I'm going to fail at least 3 answers:
- The question of the Man United starters is always a bit complicated for me, because I don't follow it very strictly.
- The tennis question is not an easy one, not least because the two potential finalists are tied in direct comfort.
- And I'm sure I'll miss at least one more.
But it's part of the game, what matters is having a little fun.
I think I'm going to fail at least 3 answers:
- The question of the Man United starters is always a bit complicated for me, because I don't follow it very strictly.
- The tennis question is not an easy one, not least because the two potential finalists are tied in direct comfort.
- And I'm sure I'll miss at least one more.
But it's part of the game, what matters is having a little fun.
You are not alone and also if you follow or know you can fail, because some ones are really spicy, Man Utd having two or three players in doubt.....
NBA question difficult to know, Tenis question..... a little bit easy but not so much.
F1 question..... maybe an engine broke and..... so much questions open in our heads.
March 27, 2023, 04:26:30 PM
^ Thanks for the explanation. I understood precisely what was meant, of course, but yeah, just being a deliberate ass about the wording
3 [alone] = 3+0 [combined] = 2+1 [combined] was the possible trick misunderstanding I just thought BTTS prevents.
Monday and is it weird I can't easily figure who won't play for United Sunday?
3 [alone] = 3+0 [combined] = 2+1 [combined] was the possible trick misunderstanding I just thought BTTS prevents.
Monday and is it weird I can't easily figure who won't play for United Sunday?
Jump to: