A point can get you the title. But losing two points can and did cost us a CL spot. My guess/feeling/experience is that people by nature are bad gamblers because they tend to let their losses run and cut their winnings, when they should do the opposite. When you have a reasonable chance, and you get twice as much reward for getting the win as you do punishment for getting a loss, take a deep breath, relax, and take reasonable risks.
But, from a manager's point of view, you get the sack if you get it wrong. I'm not saying you're wrong - playing devil's advocate. But, avoiding a loss seems to be the main aim of many teams, especially in away games against the top sides.
Four games in, only one goal conceded, granted, against some pretty toothless attacks. This is a real tester. Personally, I'd like to see Gerrard start and finish he game. As great a player as he's been and talk of him going on as long Stanley Matthews, (probably playing at least 2 seasons between the sticks when his legs finally go,) I think he has a mistake or two a game in him these days; big ones. If we keep it tight and snuff out the supply to Sturridge and Sterling, then maybe the likes of Lamella or Eriksen can capitalise on these errors. Does Brendan drop Gerrard? Difficult. Too early to "rest" him. I'd normally take a draw, but I can't see the massacres of last season being repeated and I actually think a narrow victory for us is on the cards.
I found it an eye opener to talk to a few professional gamblers, and read what others wrote. What they said is that most of us are. well, chicken. Good gambling is very considerably about holding your nerve. If NFL coaches consulted professional gamblers (and/or probability experts), they would play much less conservatively than they do. But as you say, however that may be, the thing is to get it right. And every decision is unique in football since there are so many unquantifiable aspects to each one, unlike, say, backgammon or poker, where every chance is purely mathematical.
We play a top team early on in the season and when Spurs are on form early then I take them to beat anybody. I said we wouldn't lose last night and whilst we didn't score the four I thought we should we were still quite comfortable. But I'm not going to say that we will win this one because it's a wait and see match. Sterling, Sturridge and Balotelli are all match winners. Now what I will say is that if we get a two goal win against Liverpool then we'll fly from then on beating Sunderland and not losing to City, beating Forest etc etc. A one goal win might see us continue to win but by quite narrow margins and a draw will be a disappointment seeing as Liverpool only just beat Saints and didn't score against City. A draw wouldn't be a disaster but I'd be more cautious going into our next matches. I don't want to think about a defeat. Get the strongest defence in and play two strikers Pocket not just one.
"I found it an eye opener to talk to a few professional gamblers, and read what others wrote. What they said is that most of us are. well, chicken. Good gambling is very considerably about holding your nerve." Victoria Coren said something very telling on this and Poker games. Basically she said you do have to have a fear of losing, but if it is paralysing there is no way you can ever play.
I played quite a bit of poker in London clubs, in my young day. You have to understand the difference, the fine line, between gambling and foolhardiness. Poker is about playing the odds, and reading your opponent(s) as much as keeping your nerve. More important is to keep a clear, logical thought process going. As the song says, "you got to know when to hold 'em and know when to fold 'em"
It's surprisingly pleasing for me though that we are keeping clean sheets against "lesser" opposition. Last season we were allowing teams of a similar calibre (or one of the same teams in fact ) to find the net with some ease.
The thought of Balotelli scares me...he and sturridge with sterling are going to be a very dangerous front 3...all fast, comfortable on the ball, like to take people on, go down easily and good finishers...think we will be hit on the break a lot
I think Balotelli And Sturridge are overhyped,Sterling is dangerous though with his pace,but our full backs are just as quick
It's a good trio but the thought of our quad of Chadli, Eriksen, Lamela and Ade should scare Pool just as much if not more, especially with Glen Johnson in defence. Plus, we also have Eric Dier... Who scores when he wants ;-)
Sturridge is a fantastic striker imo...i read he has the best striker goals to games ratio in liverpool history....not to be sneezed at And balotelli will be desperate to impress on hid debut... I agree our full backs are fast but I think they'll be very dangerous. We will need to do the high pressing really well through out the match from srart to finish and we must take our chances....thats where southampton fell down. I really want us to beat them after last season and cos of BRs constangfucking "we didnt panicbuy like spurs" comments...if evera man believed his own hype its that twat and I would love to see him taken down a peg or two but unfortunately a draw is the best I can see ... if we play well
"I really want us to beat them after last season and cos of BRs constangf**ing "we didnt panicbuy like spurs" comments... if evera man believed his own hype its that t**t and I would love to see him taken down a peg or two but unfortunately a draw is the best I can see ... if we play well" A draw while giving a creditable performance in a non-contentious match is still a good result.
I agree but it is the wrong tactic for the reason RWAEB points out. Winning half the matches and losing half of them gives you 57 points. Drawing all of them only 38. So riskier tactics will accumulate more points. The other thing I've never understood is why there is such an apparent advantage to the home team. Doesn't make any sense to me.
"The other thing I've never understood is why there is such an apparent advantage to the home team. Doesn't make any sense to me." The notion that a home crowd can have a psychological rallying effect on the home side, and an intimidating effect on the opposition. Of course at WHL in recent times the converse is true. And in the case of Stoke and allegedly the Spanners, physically adjusting the properties of the pitch to suit the home team and not the opposition.
