Now I can understand spreading bets across a few long shots for the stage win in case a breakaway succeeds, but for a so called cycling expert, I don't understand some of these head to heads.
Vande Velde is a journeyman rider, and he's a very average climber. Sastre over him @ 1.72 was the biggest banker of the day. Why did you bother taking Sastre to beat Frank Schleck, two evenly matched great climbers, for a mere extra $0.13? Same goes for Armstrong (even though this bet came off, I don't see the point in taking on a much tougher opponent, for marginally better odds).
Similarly, the Kreuziger and Gerdemann bets seem rather pointless.
Looking back at it now - yes waste of money. Point taken Jim! Idiot bets.
And yes - the long shots do work out occasionally - I've bagged two of them.
The long shots will keep on happening. The next stage is shit, Wednesday's stage is big but it's before a time trial, friday's stage is breakaway as Saturday is ventoux.
From what I can tell, there are a few riders who are targetting a stage win. I'm going to look through more.
Juan Manuel Garate
Jose Ivan Gutierrez
David Millar or a Garmin rider - I'll get an idea on that one soon as I'll be asking Jonathan Vaughters a few questions later on today.
Not sure on the following:
Michael Rogers (aimed for last fridays stage but had a crash the day before. Need to find out what stage he is aiming for next.) - Use your contacts, see if you can find out.
Chances are the only bets I put on Tomorrow, Wednesday and Friday will be those riders. Tomorrow Moncoutie is 23, Garate is 67, Gutierrez is 101 - I read that Gutierrez will keep trying as he wants a stage win this week.
I'm pissed off Leipheimer is out because he would have been a good bet for the time trial on Thursday. Although, I'd like to know what his odds are first.
When the next stage suitable to head to heads come around (Time Trial), I'll use your advice Jim.