Your book doesn't have a -1 line....Never fear, Lippsman is here

Forum: NHL Betting
Author: [NHL Betting] Topic: Your book doesn't have a -1 line....Never fear, Lippsman is here
Lippsman PM Lippsman
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 78555
Zimbabwe
 
Lippsman
Participation Meter
Posted: 1/31/2013 8:50:46 PM
Not a problem at all, I can give you a formula to make your own -1 line. 

100x/(x+1)     where x = ml
 
if you plan on betting $100 on a game with -1.30 ml and +1.60 pl
 
 100(1.30)/(1.3 + 1)
=130/2.3
=$56 on the ml........therefore $44 on pl
 
works out to approx. +1.15 for the -1 spread

Or you can PM me your e-mail address and I will send you an excel spreadsheet that will calculate it for you.


amd PM amd
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 32239
California
 
amd
Participation Meter
Posted: 1/31/2013 9:03:45 PM
Thanks...I'll keep this in my back pocket this season
PhishBrigade PM PhishBrigade
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1200
Canada
 
PhishBrigade
Participation Meter
Posted: 1/31/2013 9:52:45 PM
Wow.  Never thought about it that way.  Thanks Lipps  
Slopscotch PM Slopscotch
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 584
 
Slopscotch
Participation Meter
Posted: 1/31/2013 9:58:18 PM
Professor Lipps


abadboycali PM abadboycali
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 9375
California
 
abadboycali
Participation Meter
Posted: 1/31/2013 9:58:52 PM
oh I used the -1 calculate website in baseball ... its work out well
pdouble PM pdouble
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7586
British
              Columbia
 
pdouble
Participation Meter
Posted: 1/31/2013 10:02:50 PM
 the man the myth the legend 
JMak22 PM JMak22
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 3015
New York
 
JMak22
Participation Meter
Posted: 1/31/2013 10:17:48 PM
Lipps you are easily one of the top 5 if not higher contributors to the NHL thread. 
JMak22 PM JMak22
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 3015
New York
 
JMak22
Participation Meter
Posted: 1/31/2013 10:18:21 PM
Scratch that Top 3 if not higher. 
QuebecNordiques PM QuebecNordiques
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1093
Canada
 
QuebecNordiques
Participation Meter
Posted: 1/31/2013 10:22:53 PM
Will_See PM Will_See
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 280
 
Will_See
Participation Meter
Posted: 1/31/2013 10:41:10 PM
Good job lips as usual. 
Lippsman PM Lippsman
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 78555
Zimbabwe
 
Lippsman
Participation Meter
Posted: 1/31/2013 11:47:42 PM
Glad you like it everyone, don't forget to PM me your e-mail addys so I can send you the spreadsheet.  Makes it much more easy.

MrZamboni PM MrZamboni
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 16428
California
 
MrZamboni
Participation Meter
Posted: 2/1/2013 11:33:21 AM
Is that the spreadsheet I sent you last year lipps? Mine doesn't work for some reason.
Niners13 PM Niners13
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1737
Ontario
 
Niners13
Participation Meter
Posted: 2/1/2013 12:08:08 PM
why would I ever bet -1/+1 in the NHL?


andarmac99 PM andarmac99
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16801
 
andarmac99
Participation Meter
Posted: 2/1/2013 12:15:16 PM
QUOTE Originally Posted by Niners13:

why would I ever bet -1/+1 in the NHL?




I don't get it either and have never heard a good explanation.


Lippsman PM Lippsman
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 78555
Zimbabwe
 
Lippsman
Participation Meter
Posted: 2/1/2013 6:35:52 PM
You wouldn't bet +1, you would wager -1.  

Reason being that if the game goes into OT you don't lose on a regulation line or PL and you get the juice way down.  This is for use on higher juiced faves. Tons of 1 goals gamed are played. 

That's why you would play it. 
Lippsman PM Lippsman
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 78555
Zimbabwe
 
Lippsman
Participation Meter
Posted: 2/1/2013 6:36:48 PM
QUOTE Originally Posted by MrZamboni:

Is that the spreadsheet I sent you last year lipps? Mine doesn't work for some reason.

This is the one I have been sending out for years.  Not sure which one you sent me.  Did you want me to e-mail it to you ?
andarmac99 PM andarmac99
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16801
 
andarmac99
Participation Meter
Posted: 2/1/2013 7:02:55 PM
QUOTE Originally Posted by Lippsman:

You wouldn't bet +1, you would wager -1.  

Reason being that if the game goes into OT you don't lose on a regulation line or PL and you get the juice way down.  This is for use on higher juiced faves. Tons of 1 goals gamed are played. 

That's why you would play it. 


But if someone has bet a high priced fav and the game went to OT they've made a bad bet. I admittedly don't have the numbers but it seems to me OT and SO are close to coinflips. They aren't even part of the game. In OT you are playing with 20% fewer players and a SO is a pure crapshoot. Longterm if you've got 100 favs that go to OT your going to lose money, thus you've made a bad bet.

All the -1 does it "appear" to cover for making a bad bet if it goes to OT. It may reduce some juice and turn losses into pushes but it also turns all 1 goal regulation wins (and possible -1.5 wins) from wins into pushes or losses. The regulation bet is IMO a far, far, better bet.
Lippsman PM Lippsman
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 78555
Zimbabwe
 
Lippsman
Participation Meter
Posted: 2/1/2013 7:15:09 PM
QUOTE Originally Posted by andarmac99:



But if someone has bet a high priced fav and the game went to OT they've made a bad bet. I admittedly don't have the numbers but it seems to me OT and SO are close to coinflips. They aren't even part of the game. In OT you are playing with 20% fewer players and a SO is a pure crapshoot. Longterm if you've got 100 favs that go to OT your going to lose money, thus you've made a bad bet.

All the -1 does it "appear" to cover for making a bad bet if it goes to OT. It may reduce some juice and turn losses into pushes but it also turns all 1 goal regulation wins (and possible -1.5 wins) from wins into pushes or losses. The regulation bet is IMO a far, far, better bet.

There are way too many OT games for my liking for regulation plays.  Also the games that go into OT the better team most of the time will have an advantage considering they were the so called better team. Better horses on the ice. 

Sometimes I will adjust this to a regulation if the goaltender I wager on is really bad in the SO's.  Hasek was a prime example of this.  I would always play the Wings or who the hell he played for in regulation, because he was just horrible in the SO.
wheaty PM wheaty
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 11071
 
wheaty
Participation Meter
Posted: 2/1/2013 7:22:22 PM
So, if i can't get regulation bets and you say lipps theory is a bad play what do i do? Lay the juice? Or get a new book lol... Seriously tho?
Posted using a mobile device.
andarmac99 PM andarmac99
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16801
 
andarmac99
Participation Meter
Posted: 2/1/2013 8:54:03 PM
QUOTE Originally Posted by Lippsman:


There are way too many OT games for my liking for regulation plays.  Also the games that go into OT the better team most of the time will have an advantage considering they were the so called better team. Better horses on the ice. 

Sometimes I will adjust this to a regulation if the goaltender I wager on is really bad in the SO's.  Hasek was a prime example of this.  I would always play the Wings or who the hell he played for in regulation, because he was just horrible in the SO.


In theory that sounds logical but the numbers don't play out that way. Here is a very rough example:

Last season all 14 non-playoff teams (theoretically bad teams) went a combined 134-148 in OT and SO games. Still a 48% winning percentage. If you had bet against all those teams in those games (assuming they were dogs) with the -1 line it would have saved you only 14 times over the whole season.

But the problem is those same 14 teams lost in regulation by exactly 1 goal a whopping 123 times.
Lippsman PM Lippsman
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 78555
Zimbabwe
 
Lippsman
Participation Meter
Posted: 2/1/2013 9:11:08 PM
QUOTE Originally Posted by andarmac99:



In theory that sounds logical but the numbers don't play out that way. Here is a very rough example:

Last season all 14 non-playoff teams (theoretically bad teams) went a combined 134-148 in OT and SO games. Still a 48% winning percentage. If you had bet against all those teams in those games (assuming they were dogs) with the -1 line it would have saved you only 14 times over the whole season.

But the problem is those same 14 teams lost in regulation by exactly 1 goal a whopping 123 times.

But that's the exact point I am making with the -1 line.  If you played the regulation line it would not make any difference in the outcome of OT at all. 

Because if you played the regulation line you would of already lost. 
The-OG-GunClapa PM The-OG-GunClapa
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 5488
Ontario
 
The-OG-GunClapa
Participation Meter
Posted: 2/1/2013 9:50:57 PM
Another breakdown of making a -1 line. This was used for creating -1 runlines but can be applied to hockey as well

This formula was posted in the past for getting a -1 Run Line:
 
Say the Money line is -190
 
Take 100/190 = 0.53
take the 0.53 and add 1  = 1.53
then take the 1.53 and divide it again..   100/1.53 = 65.39
now 65.39 is what you are going to risk on the ML... what ever the payout of that, you take that and risk it on the RL
and thats how you get the -1 RL

Forum: NHL Betting
You have entered the forum as a GUEST. 
You must login/register to post or reply.