Bookies paying out early - why?

[TalkShow Bob]

I see some bookies are allready paying out for Wiggins to win Sports Personality. Is there a reason they do this other than publicity?

[thetime]

I see some bookies are allready paying out for Wiggins to win Sports Personality. Is there a reason they do this other than publicity?

[TheGayTent]

It's basically ensuring that instead of stopping taking bets which bookies don't like doing - they can - but spin it into good publicity. Win win.

Besides, even if Adlington wins the 800m in a world record, or Murray wins the worthless title of Olympic champion, Wiggins is a certainty for the SPOTY and a knighthood.

[thetime]

It's basically ensuring that instead of stopping taking bets which bookies don't like doing - they can - but spin it into good publicity. Win win.

Besides, even if Adlington wins the 800m in a world record, or Murray wins the worthless title of Olympic champion, Wiggins is a certainty for the SPOTY and a knighthood.

[rexclark]

No doubt John Terry will turn up in full kit to collect it no matter who wins.

[doe]

They will also insure again the result going the otherway. So win-win-win

[Alcatraz]

Yeah think its more to do with tour de France than anything, Chris hoy can overtake him as Britains best "Olympian".

[TalkShow Bob]

Ahh so its insured publicity - makes sence. Wasnt sure if it was some odd legal thing ie the only way they could close the book or if it was a way of stopping more losses some how that I didnt understand. I I did see on the press release of one of them that they were now taking bets on him getting a kighthood. Think it was 2:1 which isnt a bad shout. Unless hes the sort to turn one down?

Its funny what theyre referring to him as. Seems the 'table' still ranks Redgrave top, based on his Gold tally (which I'm inclined to agree with as its how its down in the overall competition) whilst referring to him as Britain's most decorated Olympian (as opposed to successful)

Edited August 1, 2012 by TalkShow Bob

[thetime]

To be honnist I think Redgraves achevement is more impressive (not that Wiggins inst) - being the be best for 20 years...

[pink_triangle]

Slightly disagree as redgrave always had someone else to share the work load and Wiggins has done it on his own on occasions.

[AcademicPistol]

Slightly disagree as redgrave always had someone else to share the work load and Wiggins has done it on his own on occasions.

[TalkShow Bob]

Slightly disagree as redgrave always had someone else to share the work load and Wiggins has done it on his own on occasions.

[TheGayTent]

To be honnist I think Redgraves achevement is more impressive (not that Wiggins inst) - being the be best for 20 years...

[TalkShow Bob]

16 surely?

Edited August 2, 2012 by TalkShow Bob

[TalkShow Bob]

I agree, also with a cyclist you can be pretty sure that he is beating the best his sport has to offer. In rowing there is a tendancy for rowers to choose the boat which maximizes their chances of winning a medal which means the standard of opposition is not always as high as it potentially could be.

[gary1979666]

5 consectuve Golds. Working on 5*4 as years as champion equiling 20 years?

[TalkShow Bob]

Sorry - it is 16 - 84, 88, 92, 96, 00 - so 2000 - 1984 = 16.

[TheGayTent]

So who was champion from 2000 - 2004 then?

[TalkShow Bob]

Being the reigning champion is not the same as being the best for 20 years. Given Redgrave retired in 2000, you'd be hard pushed to claim he was the best in say 2002.

Greece won the Euros in 2004. Would you try and tell me they were the best team in Europe in 2008 2 weeks before the start of the next European Championships? They weren't - they were just the reigning champions. Massive difference.

Redgrave is a 5 time olympic champion over a period of 16 years.

[TheGayTent]

If your arguing that way then he may have been for a lot less than 16 years. Im sure he didnt win everything he entered for those 16 years. However he was an olypic champion for 20 consective years. Basicly it was 20 or nothing.

[TalkShow Bob]

You'd argue black was white!

Redgrave won 9 world championship golds in 13 years. But he still wasn't the best in the world in 2003...

[pink_triangle]

Does the fact that redgrave does a sport which most people never get the opportunity to do count against him? It's undoubtedly a great achievement but lack of participation definitely does reduce the talent pool and its not a sport often done in state schools. Changing the subject a little but heard on the radio 50 % of medalists so far are privately educated which makes me thing gb are still missing a huge amount of talent.

[eFestivals]

Changing the subject a little but heard on the radio 50 % of medalists so far are privately educated which makes me thing gb are still missing a huge amount of talent.

I'm guessing that what you heard came off the back of this article:-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/01/sport-britain-elite-privilege-schools?INTCMP=SRCH

[TalkShow Bob]

My dad is allways quick to point out that we only really win at expensive sports ie rowing and sailing that need expensive kit.

[AcademicPistol]

My dad is allways quick to point out that we only really win at expensive sports ie rowing and sailing that need expensive kit.