Arbitrage betting can of course be practised on any market in which there are at least two or more bookmakers offering the required range of odds.  Our focus is of course sport but the financial and currency markets are areas in which arbitrage betting can also be used.

Here’s an example of a recent successful arbitrage bet:

The person betting had a total of £1000 to invest and placed the following amounts on a French volleyball match:

Montpellier to win – 11/4 with Stan James £278 placed would return £1,042.50            Stade Poitevin to win – 11/25 with Bet365 £722 placed would return £1.042.57

Now it’s pretty obvious that, using this example, the person betting would walk away with a profit of either £42.50 or £42.57 (just over 4.2%).  That’s it, a tax free profit for watching the markets and calculating the correct amount of money to lay.  This is the point at which it becomes more complicated.  Out of the millions of odds available out there, how does the discerning arbitrage gambler pick out the ones which offer the guaranteed profit?

Can this really work?

The reason it’s now possible is of course the power of the internet, or more specifically computer software which can trawl the online bookmakers to find the arbitrage opportunities for you.  The software will then calculate the correct amount of money needed to be laid.

So there must be some drawbacks right?  Well yes – the bookmakers obviously don’t like it and have sophisticated software themselves to spot customers accounts who may be engaged in arbitrage.  It’s not illegal but there’s no compulsion for the bookies to take your bets either.

Another drawback is that you will need a pretty hefty bankroll to begin with; in the example above it costs £1000 to make £42.  You will also need a large number of bookies accounts and different credit cards so get your accounting and spreadsheet skills up to scratch.  Lastly, odds change all the time so when the arbitrage software finds an opportunity you need to act quickly – lay the money a few seconds late and you could face a loss rather than a profit.  For those who like the risk and skill of sports betting, take a look at a site such as sportsbettingguru.co.uk for betting tips.

So why do sportspeople get involved with gambling?  Actually that’s not a well-phrased question as it brings to mind gambling addicts who’ve lost fortunes to unwise sports betting – a better question is to ask which sportspeople have chosen to invest their time in the noble game of poker?  To be a high profile player you need to be able to afford high profile-level buy-ins, something that is within the reach of wealthy ex-sportspeople.  But, you say, surely you also need a reasonable level of intelligence to play the holy game?  How do some of those cerebrally challenged footballers grasp the finer nuances and technical challenges of poker?

Well of course they don’t; the system soon weeds out those who can’t cut it at this level.  They lose they substantial buy-ins and go back to the golf course, never to return.  The ons that remain are the ones who can do the business, those who are sharp enough to learn the poker ropes and challenge for the money successfully.  So below are a few of the more notable sporting/poker crossovers.

Teddy Sheringham – veteran of several famous English clubs across the leagues, he won a number of honours on the pitch before turning his attention to poker at invitational events.  Some success at these convinced Teddy he had what it took to expand on this new career and he began to play more seriously.  His first major success was in 2009 at a €4000 buy-in charity tournament in Monte Carlo where he finished second.  He linked up with PokerStars and continues to make a name for himself in European events.

Tony Cascarino – another footballer, this time from Ireland who couldn’t match Sheringham on the pitch but has outperformed him at the poker table.  Cascarino appears to favour high-stakes games and his best finish so far has been a win in 2009 at the Grosvenor UK Poker Tour.  Cascarino has earned an estimated £500,000 in career prize money. If you’re looking for some Casino Tipps, ask this man.

Boris Becker – sticking with the European theme, former tennis champion Becker has not yet had the success of Sheringham or Cascarino but may well in the future.  Also signed by PokerStars, Becker has placed well in several medium sized tournaments, especially in the European Poker Tour but has yet to win any significant sums.  Watch this space though.

However we like to make the occasional exception and because there are some keen gamblers among us, the impartial choice is those games of skill and luck which comprise an evening out at the casino or perhaps some hours spent at home, playing Online Roulette on one’s laptop.  But how do you keep fit for these activities and how do you persuade an overweight poker player that spending a few hours a week in the gym is beneficial.

Training for Poker

The first place to start is to make the connection between physical exercise and mental acuity.  If you want to spend a number of hours concentrating on whether or not your opponents are bluffing, you must be fit enough to be able to stay alert and sharp enough to maintain your concentration.  A junk food-eating poker player leading a sedentary lifestyle will be a poorer player than one who pounds the treadmill or the exercise bike on a regular basis.

On a similar note, physical exercise not only keeps the muscles and joints fit and healthy but also produces greater levels of natural substances which keep the brain active and alert.  You’ll soon be giving out Roulette Tips.  If you have the pleasure of following the Twitter feed of some of the top poker players such as Daniel Negreanu and Phil Hellmuth, you won’t fail to notice their frequent mentions of gym attendance at whichever hotel in whichever part of the world they are currently playing.

Exercise is especially important for you if you play as an amateur in the evening but spend all day sitting in front of a computer in the office.  30 minutes a day is all it will take to make you and your brain fitter and your general lifestyle healthier.

In typical amateurish FIFA style, the Secretary General of the much-derided organisation, Jerome Valcke, decided it would help things along to say that the Brazilians needed a ‘kick up the backside’ and were more concerned about winning the competition than setting it up.  The fact that Mr Valcke’s organisation is clearly the one needing a ‘kick up the backside’ had clearly passed him by and Brazil, through sports minister Aldo Rebelo, responded by rightly saying it wanted no further contact with Valcke.

Jerome Valcke

Valcke consequently backed down immediately and sent a letter to the Brazilian sports ministry to apologise.  The elderly head of this FIFA, Sepp Blatter decided he would apologise too, stating that he wanted to “apologise to everyone who may have had their honour and their pride hurt, especially the Brazilian government and President Dilma Rousseff.”

Being the greedy commercial organisation that it is, FIFA want to restrict the sale of beer inside the stadia to it’s corporate sponsors, forcing everyone to drink a low quality, mass produced product.  The first hurdle to overcome is the illegality of beer consumption within Brazilian arenas and there is currently a bill passing through the Brazilian Congress.  That bill is facing some pretty stiff opposition and it seems that FIFA are now trying to surreptitiously impose their own will on the Brazilian congress.  If that’s the case, FIFA’s actions are completely unacceptable and an apology is the least it should be offering.

Aldo Rebelo

It’s fair to say that Brazil is experiencing one or two issues regarding it’s preparation for the 2014 World Cup but nothing which won’t ultimately be overcome.  Nine of the twelve stadiums will be either renovated or constructed by the end of 2012 and the remaining three will be finished during 2013.   This is alongside a number of other infrastructure improvements which will contribute to Brazil’s world cup legacy.

Rangers are not alone;  Portsmouth are in desperate trouble again and there are suspicions that they may not be able to see out the season.  They are joined by others such as Birmingham and Coventry, who both failed to submit their annual accounts on time and who will therefore not be allowed to make any transfers until further notice.  Lower down the leagues Port Vale are almost struggling.

In fact a list of clubs in tough financial straits could well be longer than those which are solvent.  The reasons are many but largely revolve around attempting to pay unsustainable wages to mediocre players.  But I’m not hear to discuss the reasons, I want to make the point that if your club ceases to exist it may not be the end of the world.  In fact it could be the start of a new adventure.

Let’s take Portsmouth as an example; a club with a relatively large,  fiercely loyal fan base who do not deserve the problems the club is going through.  If the club went out of business tomorrow, the entity would cease to exist but the supporters would still be there.  It’s the supporters which make the club and they’re not all going to start supporting Southampton.  The club exists because the supporters exist, not vice versa.

The next bit is the tough bit but it’s a step other clubs have taken over the years and it’s where the adventure really begins.  Aldershot FC went of business in 1992 with crippling financial debts but regrouped and re-registered as Aldershot Town and played their first match in the Isthmian League (five leagues down from where they had been in the fourth division) in August 1992.  They are now back in League Two.

It’s not ideal but it is an answer for those who are prepared to start from scratch and run their clubs sensibly and within their means.  It also introduces fans to a whole new world of non-league football and the frankly superior day out it provides.  Of course it doesn’t help those local businesses and suppliers which lose out as their debtor goes bankrupt but they’re not getting their money back anyway.  That’s it really, I just wanted to make the point that it’s not the end of the world.

For some of us lower league supporters though, the reason is a little different.  Manchester United is the embodiment of the ruthless business ethic that took hold of the Premier League in the early 1990s;  before the Glazers took over it was the PLC which used its reach and influence to hoover up the spare fans and pounds from every provincial town in the country and by extension help many of those town’s clubs on their way to significant financial difficulties.  That those smaller teams managed to survive owes nothing to any ‘trickle down’ wealth from the Premier League but everything to local supporters and communities and occasionally a charitable benefactor.

My point is that there are very good reasons why we still want Manchester United to lose when we watch them play but on Saturday lunchtime, Liverpool’s Luis Suarez somehow managed to make us forget all that and back United against possibly their biggest rival.

What happened all dates back to the well-reported racism incident between Luis Suarez and Patrice Evra which led to an eight match ban for Suarez and a general recognition that he was in the wrong.  Saturday’s match was the first meeting between the two players since the incident and all Suarez had to do was shake hands with the man he abused in the pre-match line up.  Evra offered up his hand and Suarez ignored him, instantly re-igniting the whole unsavoury business.  The guilty party had failed to shake hands with the victim and that is why, in that moment, we suddenly didn’t mind if Manchester United won the match.

Far, far too late on Sunday, Suarez apologised to everyone involved (apart from Evra) after Liverpool’s owners apparently realised the negative effect on Liverpool FC was getting out of control.  Manager Kenny Dalglish, who has so far rather unwisely stood by Suarez, was also asked to apologise after berating a Sky Sports journalist who asked him about the missing handshake.  Dalglish said he never saw it.

This whole sorry saga should never have reached the point where Liverpool’s owners had to step in to advise their employees to do the right thing and it remains to be seen whether the apology will draw a line under the affair.

Capello & John Terry

Or had it?  Would the same decision have been reached had England-manager-in-waiting Harry Redknapp not been cleared of all tax dodging charger earlier the same day, suddenly making him available should he fancy a pop at the hardest job in football?

Who knows, but the situation now is that the F.A. have a vacancy which needs filling on either a full or part time basis pretty quickly so there’s some continuity in the system in time for the Euros.  Harry looks like the overwhelming favourite but if he doesn’t want the job the remaining options are limited.  Martin O’Neill is always in the frame but the clamour for an Englishman will probably rule him out – not to mention his falling out with the F.A. during the last application process plus his obvious enjoyment at his new post at Sunderland.

Roy Hodgson could be a decent second choice but the list pretty much runs out after that.  Alan Pardew has already said he’s not interested and could be a name for the future.  The same goes for Stuart Pearce, already within the England set-up.

Steve McClaren

What everyone will want to avoid is the farcical situation which led to Steve McClaren somehow getting the job in 2006.  When the likely candidates were dropping out of the running, people started whispering the name ‘McClaren’ as a sort of joke last resort.  What then happened was that the suggestion began to become serious, to take on a horrifying life of its own.  That momentum evolved what had begun as a joke into an appalling inevitability and all us England fans could do was stand back and watch as McClaren was appointed and we all wasted another 18 months of our lives in the completely vain hope that despite McClaren, something good might happen.

Harry Redknapp

It didn’t of course – England failed to qualify for the 2008 Euros and McClaren departed.  Fabio Capello then steadied the ship somewhat but it seems as though in the end he failed to get to grips with the English psyche.  For now Harry Redknapp looks like the best, but unfortunately the only, realistically decent choice.

Man vs Horse

The Man vs Horse race is possibly one of the more sensible events when compared to cheese rolling and shin kicking and it’s not that old either.  It’s relative youth – it dates from 1980 – suggests that the British are still capable of dreaming up silly sporting challenges.

As with some of the best ideas, it emerged from a pub/hotel called the Neuadd Arms in Llanwrtyd Wells, Wales when the landlord, Gordon Green, overheard a couple of customers discussing whether, over a certain distance, a man could beat a horse across country.

Mr. Green immediately got to work organising an event which would prove the case one way or another and the Man vs Horse was born.  It’s set over a distance of 22 miles just outside the Welsh town and does include a couple of miles of tarmac.  As one might expect, the horses almost always win and when a runner does it’s a moment of some note.  Aside from the strength issues, the horses also run a slightly different route to help them avoid some of the trickier descents.

Of the 32 events run so far only two have been won by runners; Huw Lobb was the first in 2004, followed by Florian Holzinger in 2007.  Another runner, Martin Cox, won in 2009 but some apparent unannounced rule changes meant that the first horse was given the victory to much derision and anger.

Cyclists were allowed to compete in 1985 and Tim Gould, one of the foremost riders of the early years of mountain biking in the U.K. won in 1989.  Since 1993 cyclists have not been able to compete due to local laws keeping them of the paths and one may cynically wonder if the’ horsey’ set has had something to do with that.

Whatever, it’s a great event and one to put on your bucket list!

Currently Brazil has legislation which prevents the sale of alcohol within stadiums.  It was passed in 2003  and is even harsher than than the British regulations which state that you can drink alcohol and watch the match, but not at the same time.  However, when Brazil won the rights to host the final they agreed to amend their legislation.  Why would they do that?  Because one of FIFA’s main sponsors is Budweiser.  Would FIFA be pressing for beer sales in stadia if they weren’t propped up by a brewery?  Probably not, but ethics don’t really play a role here – this is all about money.

But Brazil did agree to amend their rules, if only temporarily, so what’s the problem here?  Well there are some members of the Brazilian congress who don’t want their (possibly sensible) legislation changed and their could be something of a battle to get the amendment passed.  Supporting the change is Brazilian Minister for Sports, Aldo Rebelo, who said the bill is “….a compromise the country committed to when it was bidding for hosting the event“, but others are clearly not so convinced this is the right move.

Interestingly, FIFA only wants beer sold – no other alcohol will be available.  We also wonder whether any alternatives to Budweiser will be available; after all it’s hardly the tastiest brew in the world.

Putin and Blatter

In a similar vein, FIFA is lobbying Russia to allow the same thing in all their sports stadia in time for the 2018 World Cup.  Beer and beer advertising was banned in 2005 for what Prime Minister Vladimir Putin called “the best of intentions” but has since said he will rethink the legislation.

Sepp Blatter was in St. Petersburg to take part in preparations for the 100th birthday of the Russian Football Federation.

The 15th April 1989 was when everything changed in English football.  96 Liverpool fans died on the terraces at Hillsborough, Sheffield Wednesday’s home ground, when a number of factors led to a deadly crush behind one of the goals.  The Taylor Report concluded in the aftermath that “the failure of police control” was the main reason for the disaster, although the design of the aging terraces contributed.

The outcome was the elimination of all terracing at top division stadia (with a couple of temporary exceptions) and the requirement that all new stadia built in the top two divisions should be all-seater.  Clubs in lower leagues can retain terracing as long as it conforms to the requirements of the Taylor Report recommendations.

(Very) old terracing

The long-recognised problem with all-seater stadia is the absence of any atmosphere in most venues.  Standing up in a seated area is also frowned upon by most local authorities (who govern the licensing requirements), meaning that the football watching experience is reduced to paying your money, watching a match and going home.  For those of us used to the intense atmosphere of packed terraces, something is clearly missing from the experience.

For me, it’s no fun anymore.  Back at Layer Road (look it up), the experience was one to enjoy even if you lost – a visit t0 the pub beforehand, shouting and singing at the ground for 2 hours and then going home hoarse.  The experience at the new, identikit breeze block development is not fun.  There’s very little atmosphere, the fans have lost their connection to the club and we’re reduced to paying our money, watching in silence and leaving.  If we lose it just seems like a monumental waste of time and money.  For the foreseeable future I’m not going anymore and I’m not the only one.  There’s plenty of other local clubs in the area where I can stand and watch the match for half the price – Heybridge Swifts, Wivenhoe, Harwich & Parkeston & Braintree Town to name a few.

German style terracing

So is there any hope for fans of terracing?  Probably not for the English but the Scottish football authorities seem to be letting common sense at least have a say.  The Scottish Premier League (SPL) has decided to let clubs make their own decisions as to whether to introduce standing areas inside their grounds.  Local authorities and the police will still have the final say as to whether the changes can go ahead but at least it’s a start.

It’s worth remembering that the type of terracing, or more accurately ‘safe standing areas’, would bear very little relation to what existed pre-1989.  There is plenty of evidence to show that these safe standing areas, which exist in stadia in other countries around the world, are just as safe as seating areas.  Germany is often held up as an example of modern, standing stadia.

In the end, my club probably won’t miss me but they need to be careful – I’m not the only one who is finding more attractive things to do on a Saturday afternoon.