You're saying when the spread is +1.5 there's a 4% chance of them losing by 1? You might be the dumbest individual on earth.
It is an approximation. I don't have the raw back tested numbers in front of me but I've done my research. The juice you give up on taking a 1.5 pt dog rather than the ML far exceeds the expected the expected value of that extra point.
What's your percentages on it look like since you are such a smart guy ?
0
It
Quote Originally Posted by tsw:
You're saying when the spread is +1.5 there's a 4% chance of them losing by 1? You might be the dumbest individual on earth.
It is an approximation. I don't have the raw back tested numbers in front of me but I've done my research. The juice you give up on taking a 1.5 pt dog rather than the ML far exceeds the expected the expected value of that extra point.
What's your percentages on it look like since you are such a smart guy ?
It is an approximation. I don't have the raw back tested numbers in front of me but I've done my research. The juice you give up on taking a 1.5 pt dog rather than the ML far exceeds the expected the expected value of that extra point.
What's your percentages on it look like since you are such a smart guy ?
Umm,, I'd probably deduct if the spread is 1.5 the most probable margins would be 1,2, or 3. Just like if the spread was 9 the most probable margins would be 8,9, or 10. Make sense?
You're "4%" is the percent of ALL games that end up being 1 pt games, whether the spread is 1 or 20. Obviously not many double digit spreads end up being 1 point games.
My God.
0
Quote Originally Posted by VegasVandal:
It is an approximation. I don't have the raw back tested numbers in front of me but I've done my research. The juice you give up on taking a 1.5 pt dog rather than the ML far exceeds the expected the expected value of that extra point.
What's your percentages on it look like since you are such a smart guy ?
Umm,, I'd probably deduct if the spread is 1.5 the most probable margins would be 1,2, or 3. Just like if the spread was 9 the most probable margins would be 8,9, or 10. Make sense?
You're "4%" is the percent of ALL games that end up being 1 pt games, whether the spread is 1 or 20. Obviously not many double digit spreads end up being 1 point games.
Umm,, I'd probably deduct if the spread is 1.5 the most probable margins would be 1,2, or 3. Just like if the spread was 9 the most probable margins would be 8,9, or 10. Make sense?
You're "4%" is the percent of ALL games that end up being 1 pt games, whether the spread is 1 or 20. Obviously not many double digit spreads end up being 1 point games.
My God.
Of course when a spread is a 1.5 pt spread their is a higher probability of it being closer to that number than any other given randomized game scenario. That is why I said 4% and not more like 2% which is around what any given game might be. You also have to factor into these percentage that THE FAVORITE is the team that wins by exactly 1 since it doesnt matter if the dog you take wins by 1 or 100 in this scenario.
If you are so dense that you cannot understand this concept than I am sorry but you can't educate those who are not willing to learn sometimes.
0
Quote Originally Posted by tsw:
Umm,, I'd probably deduct if the spread is 1.5 the most probable margins would be 1,2, or 3. Just like if the spread was 9 the most probable margins would be 8,9, or 10. Make sense?
You're "4%" is the percent of ALL games that end up being 1 pt games, whether the spread is 1 or 20. Obviously not many double digit spreads end up being 1 point games.
My God.
Of course when a spread is a 1.5 pt spread their is a higher probability of it being closer to that number than any other given randomized game scenario. That is why I said 4% and not more like 2% which is around what any given game might be. You also have to factor into these percentage that THE FAVORITE is the team that wins by exactly 1 since it doesnt matter if the dog you take wins by 1 or 100 in this scenario.
If you are so dense that you cannot understand this concept than I am sorry but you can't educate those who are not willing to learn sometimes.
You really think when the spread is -2 that when the favorite wins they win by 1 one out of 80 times?
How many times do they win by 2? 3? 20? 40?
Something close to that yes.
So you think the favorite wins by exactly one in this scenario what....10 out of 80 times in the tens of thousands of games that have been played or what? What exactly are you getting at here....
0
Quote Originally Posted by tsw:
You really think when the spread is -2 that when the favorite wins they win by 1 one out of 80 times?
How many times do they win by 2? 3? 20? 40?
Something close to that yes.
So you think the favorite wins by exactly one in this scenario what....10 out of 80 times in the tens of thousands of games that have been played or what? What exactly are you getting at here....
So you think the favorite wins by exactly one in this scenario what....10 out of 80 times in the tens of thousands of games that have been played or what? What exactly are you getting at here....
I'm saying when the spread is 1.5, the margin of victory will be 1 more than 4% of the time- I'd guess maybe 8-12? Could be more. It would need to be at least 13-14% or I'd agree the +105 w/b the way to go.
If you're unfortunate and bet 100 on the ML and it was a 1 pt loss, that's a -200 swing from taking the 1.5. Then you'd have to have a lot of games not end on 1 to make up for the 200- you'd make up +5 for each outright win or save 10 each time on a loss more than one.
I just know from studying my own results that for me buying 2 pts on +3 to +8 dogs is well well worth it. I've done the math countless of times.
Someone with a database of past games s/b able to run the numbers on the one point deal. Sorry to clutter the thread.
0
Quote Originally Posted by VegasVandal:
Something close to that yes.
So you think the favorite wins by exactly one in this scenario what....10 out of 80 times in the tens of thousands of games that have been played or what? What exactly are you getting at here....
I'm saying when the spread is 1.5, the margin of victory will be 1 more than 4% of the time- I'd guess maybe 8-12? Could be more. It would need to be at least 13-14% or I'd agree the +105 w/b the way to go.
If you're unfortunate and bet 100 on the ML and it was a 1 pt loss, that's a -200 swing from taking the 1.5. Then you'd have to have a lot of games not end on 1 to make up for the 200- you'd make up +5 for each outright win or save 10 each time on a loss more than one.
I just know from studying my own results that for me buying 2 pts on +3 to +8 dogs is well well worth it. I've done the math countless of times.
Someone with a database of past games s/b able to run the numbers on the one point deal. Sorry to clutter the thread.
Yea but that one result happens maybe once every 80 games. Ask yourself, Is that one win worth losing 15 cents of juice on the other 79 games ?
Hint: there is only one correct answer to this question
Like I said you always take the points and cover yourself even when it means pay a little extra. Notre Dame 76 SFA 75. I guess I got the correct answer.
0
Quote Originally Posted by VegasVandal:
Yea but that one result happens maybe once every 80 games. Ask yourself, Is that one win worth losing 15 cents of juice on the other 79 games ?
Hint: there is only one correct answer to this question
Like I said you always take the points and cover yourself even when it means pay a little extra. Notre Dame 76 SFA 75. I guess I got the correct answer.
Yet Vegas Vandal would tell you there was a only 4% chance of ND winning by 1. He thinks more likely winning margins for a 1.5 favorite are 8, 9, 26 etc lol
0
Yet Vegas Vandal would tell you there was a only 4% chance of ND winning by 1. He thinks more likely winning margins for a 1.5 favorite are 8, 9, 26 etc lol
So damn funny!! How dumb does that scrub vegasvandal look now? Hahaha. Won USC the other night with the short number and SFA today also. Hilarious post.
0
So damn funny!! How dumb does that scrub vegasvandal look now? Hahaha. Won USC the other night with the short number and SFA today also. Hilarious post.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
