Lions Redwash

Still laughing at the bitterness and -vty on here regarding Gatland and his coaches choices. Stevens and Hartley aside I don't see much of a problem. I think the Lions will actually frighten the Aussies here with huge power and dynamism up front and a backline which will be difficult to break down. I actually think we will suffocate the Aussies and then overwhelm them with our power and pace. I can see us driving right through the middle and then going wide if need be. YES the Aussies have the dancing backs and potentailly more flair; however I think this will be a 0-3 series win for the men in Red. Warburton to be an outstanding leader and perhaps more importantly a winner. For all the exhaltations of recent past great Captains, they have all failed when it mattered. Sam is the man and I believe he along with his compatriots will win the series with something to spare. Hows that for -vty

Now you can get on board or carry on whinging

i think picking stevens has given people something to talk about i think it would have been easy to pick a boulter and people would have been happy and we could have gone along with nothing to talk about apart from who didn't get picked but no one thought of any players like stevens getting picked he clearly isn't the Poopie prop out there but isn't the best. he plays for a top team in AP HC semi-finalist so hes clearly doing something right.

As I wrote on another thread, my principle concerns:

Hartley over Best?
Croft over Robshaw?
Stevens over Sheridan?
Parling over Launchbury?
Farrell picked? Warburton captain?

RubyGuby wrote:For all the exhaltations of recent past great Captains, they have all failed when it mattered.

Now you can get on board or carry on whinging

Just two points Ruby:

1. South Africa have the stadiums in the clouds that you need the oxygen masks for
2. New Zealand have............ the All Blacks.

That Australia is the easiest of the three is not just my humble opinion but it's written in the record books. If Warburton wants to be a winning Captain, he sure picked the right tour to do it.

Duty281 wrote:As I wrote on another thread, my principle concerns:

Hartley over Best?
Croft over Robshaw?
Stevens over Sheridan?
Parling over Launchbury?
Farrell picked? Warburton captain?

Croft offers something Robshaw don't speed, finisher and a great lineout option, i think you should be comparing brown/ robshaw/ lydiate because their all for one postion.

Hartley has better darts than Best from what i saw in 6 nations and some ulster games best couldn't hit a barn door from 5 yards away but his game in loose will be missed

its not stevens wasn't picked over sheridan because stevens is TH Sheridan is LH.
Parling played amazing through out the 6 nations and is also a line out caller and also was one of the few english players that played out standing in the 6 nations decider.

Farrell was picked due to the fact Wilkinson is commited to Toulon so Farrell was the next best choice with experience.

and warburton is the most successful national captain available to the coaches, semi-final world cup and a grandslam he was never stripped of the welsh captaincy he turned it down so he could get some from back

SecretFly wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:For all the exhaltations of recent past great Captains, they have all failed when it mattered.

Now you can get on board or carry on whinging

Just two points Ruby:

1. South Africa have the stadiums in the clouds that you need the oxygen masks for
2. New Zealand have............ the All Blacks.

That Australia is the easiest of the three is not just my humble opinion but it's written in the record books. If Warburton wants to be a winning Captain, he sure picked the right tour to do it.

Fly - you can only play what's in front of you - SCW took a Circus to NZ with him and Alastair Campbell being the chief Clowns. S Africa were there for the taking and we failed - the series was ours and we failed - There is no "easy" SH tour; however I believe we have the personnell within this squad to win all 3 matches - That's just how I see it. My backline would be 9 Phillips - Sexton - BOD - Tuilangi - North - Bowe - Hogg with Jones Hibbard Healey POC Grey in the front 5 and Warburton, OBrien and Faletau in the back row with Tipuric ready to come on. 0-3

For all the exhaltations of recent past great Captains, they have all failed when it mattered. Sam is the man and I believe he along with his compatriots will win the series with something to spare. Hows that for -vty

Now you can get on board or carry on whinging

RubyGuby

Posts: 5083
Join date: 2011-05-31
Location: UK


Sam Warburton? a great captain? Did not Wales "LOSE" 8 games on the trot with him as (CAPTAIN?)

It as been said on another thread that Owen Farrell is only in the squad because his dad Andy Farrell, is one of the coaches on the Lions tour.

If that is true, is Warren Gatland Gethin Jenkins dad? I mean why is he in the squad, he is not even first choice for his team toulon.

I do think you could be right though RugbyGuby, it may well be a white wash. But it will be Australia who will come out as winners.

With some think to spare.

when will people get it into your skulls its not sam that lost them games to Australia it was wales as a team. true saying is you win as a team you lose as a team and the players that blame others are poor sports people

Sam Warburton? a great captain? Did not Wales "LOSE" 8 games on the trot with him as (CAPTAIN?) - Wrong

It as been said on another thread that Owen Farrell is only in the squad because his dad Andy Farrell, is one of the coaches on the Lions tour. Might be right

If that is true, is Warren Gatland Gethin Jenkins dad? I mean why is he in the squad, he is not even first choice for his team toulon. Illustrating your lack of rugby knowledge about a Lion and TREBLE G Slam winner

I do think you could be right though RugbyGuby, it may well be a white wash. But it will be Australia who will come out as winners. - You enjoy your negativity

Iron Mike and the boys will take care of business

I agree with the OP. I'm quite positive about the selections bar Best and Robshaw who I think will probably get drafted in at some stage due to injuries or Hartley inevitably getting banned anyway.

Hartley will be injured on the first social night out by a couple of Ulster fellas

RubyGuby wrote:Hartley will be injured on the first social night out by a couple of Ulster fellas

Well Ferris wont be there to inspect his tonsils with his finger hehe

nathan wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:Hartley will be injured on the first social night out by a couple of Ulster fellas

Well Ferris wont be there to inspect his tonsils with his finger hehe

Just as well as the chompers of 'Hannibal Hartley' will be required to munch on Oz meat. Can be the only reason he was picked...

I hope you are right, Ruby, and I will be delighted if we win and praise Gatland and say Warburton was a great captain if this turns out to be true. I just don't think it will be. But then, I didn't give Munster a prayer against Clermont and they gave a brave go at it so what do I know?

majesticimperialman wrote:For all the exhaltations of recent past great Captains, they have all failed when it mattered. Sam is the man and I believe he along with his compatriots will win the series with something to spare. Hows that for -vty

Now you can get on board or carry on whinging

RubyGuby

Posts: 5083
Join date: 2011-05-31
Location: UK


Sam Warburton? a great captain? Did not Wales "LOSE" 8 games on the trot with him as (CAPTAIN?)

It as been said on another thread that Owen Farrell is only in the squad because his dad Andy Farrell, is one of the coaches on the Lions tour.

If that is true, is Warren Gatland Gethin Jenkins dad? I mean why is he in the squad, he is not even first choice for his team toulon.

I do think you could be right though RugbyGuby, it may well be a white wash. But it will be Australia who will come out as winners.

With some think to spare.

I'll be honest, I'm surprised that you aren't creaming your pants after moaning constantly about Warburton for so long. At least now your moaning is a bit more justified. Who would've been your captain? BOD who is maybe more uncertain to start, or POC who already has a Lions series loss on his cv?

"It will be a victory forged in Britains rugby Heartland"

Risca Rev wrote:

majesticimperialman wrote:For all the exhaltations of recent past great Captains, they have all failed when it mattered. Sam is the man and I believe he along with his compatriots will win the series with something to spare. Hows that for -vty

Now you can get on board or carry on whinging

RubyGuby

Posts: 5083
Join date: 2011-05-31
Location: UK


Sam Warburton? a great captain? Did not Wales "LOSE" 8 games on the trot with him as (CAPTAIN?)

It as been said on another thread that Owen Farrell is only in the squad because his dad Andy Farrell, is one of the coaches on the Lions tour.

If that is true, is Warren Gatland Gethin Jenkins dad? I mean why is he in the squad, he is not even first choice for his team toulon.

I do think you could be right though RugbyGuby, it may well be a white wash. But it will be Australia who will come out as winners.

With some think to spare.

I'll be honest, I'm surprised that you aren't creaming your pants after moaning constantly about Warburton for so long. At least now your moaning is a bit more justified. Who would've been your captain? BOD who is maybe more uncertain to start, or POC who already has a Lions series loss on his cv?

I Really dont know who my captain would have been to be honest. I am very dissapointed that Chris Robshaw as not been selected, like wise Tom Wood...Their are a number of players in the squad that i am shocked they have been included.....Matt Stevens, Dylan Hartley, Dan Lydate. Their are some players in the squad that i believe are their on reputation rather than on form.....BOD, POC, LYDATE, BOWE. Should they have got the call over other players?

But yes RiscaRev i am not surprised that Gatland as picked Warburton as Captain even though i have been saying he be would as soon as a Gatland was given the head coach job.( still think it is a mistake) Warburton as captain that is.

RubyGuby wrote:Still laughing at the bitterness and -vty on here regarding Gatland and his coaches choices. Stevens and Hartley aside I don't see much of a problem. I think the Lions will actually frighten the Aussies here with huge power and dynamism up front and a backline which will be difficult to break down. I actually think we will suffocate the Aussies and then overwhelm them with our power and pace. I can see us driving right through the middle and then going wide if need be. YES the Aussies have the dancing backs and potentailly more flair; however I think this will be a 0-3 series win for the men in Red. Warburton to be an outstanding leader and perhaps more importantly a winner. For all the exhaltations of recent past great Captains, they have all failed when it mattered. Sam is the man and I believe he along with his compatriots will win the series with something to spare. Hows that for -vty

Now you can get on board or carry on whinging

A Lions Whitewash?.....Impossible.

Anyone who has ever ventured into the Rugby section of V2 forum, knows that no Northern Hemisphere team will ever beat a Southern Hemisphere team when the referee also comes from the Southern hemisphere.

Nothing to do with selection but more the fact that the 6N was such a low standard I fancy Aus to be a different animal in this series. They will have been gunning for this since the RWC. I fancy them to win.

Standulstermen wrote:Nothing to do with selection but more the fact that the 6N was such a low standard I fancy Aus to be a different animal in this series. They will have been gunning for this since the RWC. I fancy them to win.

It might have been low standard but that french team put 33 points on Aus just before the 6 Nations so I think we need to get some perspective here rather than building Australia up to be world beaters

RubyGuby wrote:

Standulstermen wrote:Nothing to do with selection but more the fact that the 6N was such a low standard I fancy Aus to be a different animal in this series. They will have been gunning for this since the RWC. I fancy them to win.

It might have been low standard but that french team put 33 points on Aus just before the 6 Nations so I think we need to get some perspective here rather than building Australia up to be world beaters

But that really wasn't the French team that smoked and took coffee breaks through the 6N now, was it Ruby?

I wouldn't read too much into France's terrible run at all. They think in different ways, their motivations are isolated from most other 6N sides. They have their own agenda and they have serious - serious - intentions about next WC in Europe. Their true test this year was never going to be 6N...it's those three games coming up with New Zealand that interests them. We'll be able to more accurately read where France is in the grand scheme of things when those games happen.

To write any Australian sports side off is foolish,time after time in any number of sports they manage to pull it off against the odds.
Australia will start as favourites and rightly so.That's not to say the lions can't win but they will have to fight for everything.
They will be ready for us,will we be ready for them?

RubyGuby wrote:

Standulstermen wrote:Nothing to do with selection but more the fact that the 6N was such a low standard I fancy Aus to be a different animal in this series. They will have been gunning for this since the RWC. I fancy them to win.

It might have been low standard but that french team put 33 points on Aus just before the 6 Nations so I think we need to get some perspective here rather than building Australia up to be world beaters

They may not be world beaters but they did also go on from that defeat at the hands of the mercurial French to beat Wales & England on their own patches with a fullback at flyhalf.

gelodge - Its convenient to slot in the Aussies deficits when Wales were fielding 5th and 6th choice 2nd rows in that game and were depleted across. the field. This Lions series remains a 50/50 and IMO the Lions have enough to win - WE'll just have to wait and see

sickofwendy wrote:To write any Australian sports side off is foolish,time after time in any number of sports they manage to pull it off against the odds.
Australia will start as favourites and rightly so.That's not to say the lions can't win but they will have to fight for everything.
They will be ready for us,will we be ready for them?

Well said.

If this was staged in the UK & IRE then perhaps I would say the Lions are favourites... but this is away from home and against the 2nd ranked team in the world that whitewashed Wales the double 6N champs 4-0 last year... and did so with the worst injury bill of any tier 1 rugby union last year.

The lions will be underdogs, they can do it and I hope they do but head over heart I think AUS will come away series winners.

I was certainly more confident 4 years ago then I am now.

Being a lions fan is not easy... its like playing fantasy football and thinking your all-star team will conquer all. Its not that simple.

It doesn't matter how talented your side is. The 2001 side was easily more talented then the 1997 one.... easily (perhaps the greatest lions squad ever assembled).
I can't remember who but I recall one of the old boys on here saying the 77 lions was the best team he'd ever seen... and they still lost 1- to NZ and I know Alan (Emack) says the 55 lions were best ever (series drawn I think).

What matters is the combinations, hoping that your key players stay injury free before and during the tests (something that didn't happen in 01 & 05).

We don't know what is going on behind the scenes, if the players get on, how senior players react to Warburton etc.

In 97 we got mullered.... beat up for 2 games.. but somehow managed to win. In the 2nd test they scored 3 tries to our 0 but still lost!!!!!.. when was the last time a team which scored 3 tries more than the opposition and still lost??? I bet it was the 2nd lions test in 97 as I can't remember any other match like it.

RubyGuby wrote:"It will be a victory forged in Britains rugby Heartland"

Oh, the Watford triangle ?

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

sickofwendy wrote:To write any Australian sports side off is foolish,time after time in any number of sports they manage to pull it off against the odds.
Australia will start as favourites and rightly so.That's not to say the lions can't win but they will have to fight for everything.
They will be ready for us,will we be ready for them?

Well said.

Just for the record according to the bookies the Lions are favourite for the series and only 4/1 for a 3-0 victory.

gregortree wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:"It will be a victory forged in Britains rugby Heartland"

Oh, the Watford triangle ?

I was just quoting the BBC chap on the news; still it's nice to get a bite

Are those the same bookies which constantly have England as 3rd favourite at 7-1 whenever a FIFA world cup comes around???

fa0019 wrote:Are those the same bookies which constantly have England as 3rd favourite at 7-1 whenever a FIFA world cup comes around???

I dont watch wendyball, but the bookies are never far off, afterall its how they make a very successfull living.

I get confidence, I really do, I also get belief, or faith in your team, I really do.

But what about a sense of reality?

Why not just be confident in saying the Lions will win, why go for whitewash?

The bookies know fans will back the lions in the UK... just like England are backed heavily in England during the football world cup when in reality they don't have a chance in hell and haven't for a very very long time.

They become popular bets and the odds then decrease.... which makes them look more favourable then they actually are.

RubyGuby wrote:

gregortree wrote:

RubyGuby wrote:"It will be a victory forged in Britains rugby Heartland"

Oh, the Watford triangle ?

I was just quoting the BBC chap on the news; still it's nice to get a bite

I thought he might be referring to the PIs.

We're looking at a 3-0 series win for the Aussies I'm afraid.

Biltong wrote:I get confidence, I really do, I also get belief, or faith in your team, I really do.

But what about a sense of reality?

Why not just be confident in saying the Lions will win, why go for whitewash?

I went for whitewash as all I'd read was that it was going to be an Aus whitewash - The headline was to grab people in all honesty. I see this as a cracking contest which looks quite even to me and a contrast of styles, bot not as much of a contrast as people are making out. I believe there is strength in the Lions diversity and the -vty around them will serve to galvanise that team. I also sense that many are giving up on them which again will galvanise them. The -vty at warburton will help to produce strong performances. I think this team is capable of winning - Both sides could win 3-0 but they will be tight games each within 10 points in my opinion. Whitewash was a headline grabber to get people to look at the post. Hogwash is my response to most of Beshocked's threads.

tigger17 wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Are those the same bookies which constantly have England as 3rd favourite at 7-1 whenever a FIFA world cup comes around???

I dont watch wendyball, but the bookies are never far off, afterall its how they make a very successfull living.

Actually in my experience (I regularly look up the bookies odds when playing tippin comps) they're a lot better at predicting soccer than they are rugby.

However, Centrebet in Australia has the Lions as favourites - though the NZ TAB has it at evens.


Bookmakers set odds based partly on who they think will win, and partly on how they expect punters to bet - and if all the betting is going one way they'll lower the odds on that option and increase it on others to encourage diversified betting and "cover" themselves. So in the UK because they're expecting a lot of patriotic money on the Lions they'll have set the Lions odds a bit low. In Australia where rugby union is a minor sport they probably expect a lot of bets to come in from ex-pats. In NZ, where there is a large rugby fanbase, and we don't particularly "like" either side, the odds are even. Go figure.

Cyril on 606v2 wrote:We're looking at a 3-0 series win for the Aussies I'm afraid.

6-1 odds at Ladbrokes...

That will be an Aussie Gold(rush)wash then

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

tigger17 wrote:

fa0019 wrote:Are those the same bookies which constantly have England as 3rd favourite at 7-1 whenever a FIFA world cup comes around???

I dont watch wendyball, but the bookies are never far off, afterall its how they make a very successfull living.

Actually in my experience (I regularly look up the bookies odds when playing tippin comps) they're a lot better at predicting soccer than they are rugby.

However, Centrebet in Australia has the Lions as favourites - though the NZ TAB has it at evens.


Bookmakers set odds based partly on who they think will win, and partly on how they expect punters to bet - and if all the betting is going one way they'll lower the odds on that option and increase it on others to encourage diversified betting and "cover" themselves. So in the UK because they're expecting a lot of patriotic money on the Lions they'll have set the Lions odds a bit low. In Australia where rugby union is a minor sport they probably expect a lot of bets to come in from ex-pats. In NZ, where there is a large rugby fanbase, and we don't particularly "like" either side, the odds are even. Go figure.

Well explained Pete,

I think the whole “you never see a poor bookmaker” thing is used to somehow justify a favourites tag sometimes. But as you’ve explained, the reason they’re not poor is because they lower the odds on a team that has all the money on it, they know how much they stand to win/lose before the series starts based on any and all permutations, and no matter who wins, they come out with money, but the odds don’t actually reflect the chance of either team winning objectively.

In maths the sum of all permutations / probabilities always sum to 1.0.
But this never happens in the world of the betting shop.
Betting probabilties sum to, I don't know, say ~ 0.95.
The bookies keep the remaining 0.05 and so never lose.

gregortree wrote:In maths the sum of all permutations / probabilities always sum to 1.0.
But this never happens in the world of the betting shop.
Betting probabilties sum to, I don't know, say ~ 0.95.
The bookies keep the remaining 0.05 and so never lose.

No idea what that means. Good thing I never gamble.

GunsGerms wrote:

gregortree wrote:In maths the sum of all permutations / probabilities always sum to 1.0.
But this never happens in the world of the betting shop.
Betting probabilties sum to, I don't know, say ~ 0.95.
The bookies keep the remaining 0.05 and so never lose.

No idea what that means. Good thing I never gamble.

Wise move. Sadly I do know what it means. And hence I'm tempted to gamble on occasion, whenever I convince myself I know more than the bookie.


* One place I worked at in NZ had a sports betting syndicate - everyone put in $5 a week, and we took turns at betting. And we kept results stats for bragging rights. Over 8 years in the syndicate I ... broke even (which means I was in about the top 1/4 of punters at the NZ TAB - on average, most gamblers lose)

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

gregortree wrote:In maths the sum of all permutations / probabilities always sum to 1.0.
But this never happens in the world of the betting shop.
Betting probabilties sum to, I don't know, say ~ 0.95.
The bookies keep the remaining 0.05 and so never lose.

No idea what that means. Good thing I never gamble.

Wise move. Sadly I do know what it means. And hence I'm tempted to gamble on occasion, whenever I convince myself I know more than the bookie.


* One place I worked at in NZ had a sports betting syndicate - everyone put in $5 a week, and we took turns at betting. And we kept results stats for bragging rights. Over 8 years in the syndicate I ... broke even (which means I was in about the top 1/4 of punters at the NZ TAB - on average, most gamblers lose)

and as a rule all gamblers tell everyone about their great wins.


...but not about their losses.

I think I was doodling pictures of rugby balls and boobs on my copy book when we studied probability in maths class.

GunsGerms wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

gregortree wrote:In maths the sum of all permutations / probabilities always sum to 1.0.
But this never happens in the world of the betting shop.
Betting probabilties sum to, I don't know, say ~ 0.95.
The bookies keep the remaining 0.05 and so never lose.

No idea what that means. Good thing I never gamble.

Wise move. Sadly I do know what it means. And hence I'm tempted to gamble on occasion, whenever I convince myself I know more than the bookie.


* One place I worked at in NZ had a sports betting syndicate - everyone put in $5 a week, and we took turns at betting. And we kept results stats for bragging rights. Over 8 years in the syndicate I ... broke even (which means I was in about the top 1/4 of punters at the NZ TAB - on average, most gamblers lose)

and as a rule all gamblers tell everyone about their great wins.


...but not about their losses.

Very true. They tend to forget the losses in their own minds

GunsGerms wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

gregortree wrote:In maths the sum of all permutations / probabilities always sum to 1.0.
But this never happens in the world of the betting shop.
Betting probabilties sum to, I don't know, say ~ 0.95.
The bookies keep the remaining 0.05 and so never lose.

No idea what that means. Good thing I never gamble.

Wise move. Sadly I do know what it means. And hence I'm tempted to gamble on occasion, whenever I convince myself I know more than the bookie.


* One place I worked at in NZ had a sports betting syndicate - everyone put in $5 a week, and we took turns at betting. And we kept results stats for bragging rights. Over 8 years in the syndicate I ... broke even (which means I was in about the top 1/4 of punters at the NZ TAB - on average, most gamblers lose)

and as a rule all gamblers tell everyone about their great wins.


...but not about their losses.

I think I was doodling pictures of rugby balls and boobs on my copy book when we studied probability in maths class.

Very healthy that. I never got why straight men would draw Winkle on work rather than boobs

RubyGuby wrote:Still laughing at the bitterness and -vty on here regarding Gatland and his coaches choices. Stevens and Hartley aside I don't see much of a problem. I think the Lions will actually frighten the Aussies here with huge power and dynamism up front and a backline which will be difficult to break down. I actually think we will suffocate the Aussies and then overwhelm them with our power and pace. I can see us driving right through the middle and then going wide if need be. YES the Aussies have the dancing backs and potentailly more flair; however I think this will be a 0-3 series win for the men in Red. Warburton to be an outstanding leader and perhaps more importantly a winner. For all the exhaltations of recent past great Captains, they have all failed when it mattered. Sam is the man and I believe he along with his compatriots will win the series with something to spare. Hows that for -vty

Now you can get on board or carry on whinging

What a nasty and unpleasant post. Why be so defensive and paranoid? Your unpleasant attitude spoils these boards

ChequeredJersey wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

Pete C (Kiwireddevil) wrote:

GunsGerms wrote:

gregortree wrote:In maths the sum of all permutations / probabilities always sum to 1.0.
But this never happens in the world of the betting shop.
Betting probabilties sum to, I don't know, say ~ 0.95.
The bookies keep the remaining 0.05 and so never lose.

No idea what that means. Good thing I never gamble.

Wise move. Sadly I do know what it means. And hence I'm tempted to gamble on occasion, whenever I convince myself I know more than the bookie.


* One place I worked at in NZ had a sports betting syndicate - everyone put in $5 a week, and we took turns at betting. And we kept results stats for bragging rights. Over 8 years in the syndicate I ... broke even (which means I was in about the top 1/4 of punters at the NZ TAB - on average, most gamblers lose)

and as a rule all gamblers tell everyone about their great wins.


...but not about their losses.

I think I was doodling pictures of rugby balls and boobs on my copy book when we studied probability in maths class.

Very healthy that. I never got why straight men would draw Winkle on work rather than boobs

Winkle (an anatomical term) is censored but Boob is not? What about quim?

GunsGerms wrote:

gregortree wrote:In maths the sum of all permutations / probabilities always sum to 1.0.
But this never happens in the world of the betting shop.
Betting probabilties sum to, I don't know, say ~ 0.95.
The bookies keep the remaining 0.05 and so never lose.

No idea what that means. Good thing I never gamble.

Lets have a look at all the outcomes, the possibilities:

Aus results vs B&I (not necessarily in any order)
WWW, WLL, WWL, WDL, WDD, DDD, DDL, LLL, LLD (9 possible combos of WDL, or 3 squared)
(And that is without forecasting the actual sequence of results across the 3 tests).
If each outcome was exactly equal in probability, an 'honest' bookie would give you probability on each one of 0.111111r (or 9:1 odds)
9 of these sum to 1.0 = sum of all possible outcomes.
But of course the bookie wants a margin - so he might offer only 0.10 to each of say, 9 punters. Bookie pays out 0.90 to one lucky punter, keeps 0.10 for himself. BUT...
Then you factor in: well, draws are rare, so low probability of DDD, Lions Redwash not likely, so low probability on WWW, etc.
So not all 9 combos get the same weight.Shave all the prices on the 'long' side anyway, to get the punters sniffing - amazing how punters love a 'long' price... which is the flipside of the bookie's not giving full value.
Then watch which way the money comes in, adjust prices as you go.
Sum of all 9 possibilities will never reach 1.0, his system will ensure he keeps say 0.05 to 0.10, depending how competitive he wants to pitch his prices vs the other bookies.
Also try this in a simpler 6 dog race, see how close to 1.00 a bookie will push his odds.

my head hurts....

but thanks for explaining it