Yes, I understand the same importance theory, however, van stated that headoverheart's method was 'horribly misguided'. If they both made the same plays, headoverheart would make more money than van would. But as I stated earlier, the most important thing in wagering on baseball is to wager on the dog the majority of the time.
The part I quoted in that post is horribly misguided - the part about "who cares if it is -160 or -170, if you think it is going to win bet it..."
And you are off on your math about him "making more money".... you are not weighting your results to EV.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Quote Originally Posted by nccashman:
Yes, I understand the same importance theory, however, van stated that headoverheart's method was 'horribly misguided'. If they both made the same plays, headoverheart would make more money than van would. But as I stated earlier, the most important thing in wagering on baseball is to wager on the dog the majority of the time.
The part I quoted in that post is horribly misguided - the part about "who cares if it is -160 or -170, if you think it is going to win bet it..."
And you are off on your math about him "making more money".... you are not weighting your results to EV.
Vanzack, when you shop for lines do you scalp or arbitrage bets? if so (especially on trading exchanges), do you believe that this strategy is better in the long run than handicapping games?
Yes I do, and yes I do.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Quote Originally Posted by kevk87:
Vanzack, when you shop for lines do you scalp or arbitrage bets? if so (especially on trading exchanges), do you believe that this strategy is better in the long run than handicapping games?
van - do you have a minimum % gain that you will try to achieve before you sell back pre start?
i would figure on MB 3% minimum due to commissions
So first I set my own lines for every game. Once again, not the line I expect to see for bettors, but the line I feel is the true expectation. This is calculated through empirical inputs like stats on pitching and hitting, but also some "gut" feel too. I toy with this formula over time, but it is all calculated within parameters that give me a final result - a line. Then I simply compare my line to any line that I can get in the marketplace. If my line is 8 - 15 cents off from the available line, I bet 1 unit - if my line is 16 cents or over the available line, I bet 1.5 unit.
If in the time since I bet the first bet on a side, the line moves and crosses over a threshold, I either sell the bet, lower the bet, or raise the bet. Example: I set the line for NYY vs TOR at NYY -140. The available line is -128. I bet 1 unit on NYY. Later in the day, the available line on NYY goes to -133 - at this point I sell my original NYY bet by betting on TOR and making sure money. In reverse - if the line goes to -124, I up my bet by .5 unit. I never shy away from selling a bet before a game no matter how much I think I like that game. If it crosses one of my thresholds, I sell, increase, or decrease without question.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Quote Originally Posted by KOAJ:
van - do you have a minimum % gain that you will try to achieve before you sell back pre start?
i would figure on MB 3% minimum due to commissions
So first I set my own lines for every game. Once again, not the line I expect to see for bettors, but the line I feel is the true expectation. This is calculated through empirical inputs like stats on pitching and hitting, but also some "gut" feel too. I toy with this formula over time, but it is all calculated within parameters that give me a final result - a line. Then I simply compare my line to any line that I can get in the marketplace. If my line is 8 - 15 cents off from the available line, I bet 1 unit - if my line is 16 cents or over the available line, I bet 1.5 unit.
If in the time since I bet the first bet on a side, the line moves and crosses over a threshold, I either sell the bet, lower the bet, or raise the bet. Example: I set the line for NYY vs TOR at NYY -140. The available line is -128. I bet 1 unit on NYY. Later in the day, the available line on NYY goes to -133 - at this point I sell my original NYY bet by betting on TOR and making sure money. In reverse - if the line goes to -124, I up my bet by .5 unit. I never shy away from selling a bet before a game no matter how much I think I like that game. If it crosses one of my thresholds, I sell, increase, or decrease without question.
Your system seems to lean more heavily on the favs winning than the dogs. Because if you and headoverheart wagered on the same games with the same lines, he would probably come out ahead of you with the extra winnings from the dogs. However, if the favs won at a much higher % than the dogs (which does not seem to be the case in MLB) then you would probably come out ahead of him. I don't think there is an advantage to flat betting. I think the best advice is to practice some sort of money management and bet the dogs the majority of the time.
0
Your system seems to lean more heavily on the favs winning than the dogs. Because if you and headoverheart wagered on the same games with the same lines, he would probably come out ahead of you with the extra winnings from the dogs. However, if the favs won at a much higher % than the dogs (which does not seem to be the case in MLB) then you would probably come out ahead of him. I don't think there is an advantage to flat betting. I think the best advice is to practice some sort of money management and bet the dogs the majority of the time.
I constantly see people say they flat bet baseball by using 1 unit as a base, and then risking enough to win 1 unit on a fav, and risking 1 unit on a dog. Example:
If you are betting a -115 fav, you bet 115 to win 100, and if you are betting a +160 dog, you bet 100 to win 160.
THIS IS NOT FLAT BETTING!!!!
Flat betting means that all of your bets have equal weighting, and this obviously puts high favs or high dogs at more importance than closer to even money favs and dogs.
I flat bet by taking my unit amount (1 in this example), and bet the amount that the risk + the win = double the unit size.
For example:
-120 fav: risk .91 to win 1.09
+150 dog: risk .80 to win 1.20
-200 fav: risk 1.33 to win .67
+180 dog: risk .72 to win 1.28
This way, every game has equal value and is true flat betting.
No surprise that you have a picture of OBAMA as your avatar. You guys are similar in your elitism and inablility to communicate good ideas in a public friendly way.
So, with interpolation of your numbers, if the odds are -110, then you bet 1.06??? Let's call this what it is, your system of betting, not some God sent definition of flat betting. Flat betting could be defined as "risking the same amount for each bet". Therefore, you do not flat bet. It looks to me like you average your bets around 100, which would be a no juice bet. To make your system work, you would need a bookie that did not take juice, or you need to adjust your numbers up to account for the -105 average.
0
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:
I constantly see people say they flat bet baseball by using 1 unit as a base, and then risking enough to win 1 unit on a fav, and risking 1 unit on a dog. Example:
If you are betting a -115 fav, you bet 115 to win 100, and if you are betting a +160 dog, you bet 100 to win 160.
THIS IS NOT FLAT BETTING!!!!
Flat betting means that all of your bets have equal weighting, and this obviously puts high favs or high dogs at more importance than closer to even money favs and dogs.
I flat bet by taking my unit amount (1 in this example), and bet the amount that the risk + the win = double the unit size.
For example:
-120 fav: risk .91 to win 1.09
+150 dog: risk .80 to win 1.20
-200 fav: risk 1.33 to win .67
+180 dog: risk .72 to win 1.28
This way, every game has equal value and is true flat betting.
No surprise that you have a picture of OBAMA as your avatar. You guys are similar in your elitism and inablility to communicate good ideas in a public friendly way.
So, with interpolation of your numbers, if the odds are -110, then you bet 1.06??? Let's call this what it is, your system of betting, not some God sent definition of flat betting. Flat betting could be defined as "risking the same amount for each bet". Therefore, you do not flat bet. It looks to me like you average your bets around 100, which would be a no juice bet. To make your system work, you would need a bookie that did not take juice, or you need to adjust your numbers up to account for the -105 average.
No surprise that you have a picture of OBAMA as your avatar. You guys are similar in your elitism and inablility to communicate good ideas in a public friendly way.
So, with interpolation of your numbers, if the odds are -110, then you bet 1.06??? Let's call this what it is, your system of betting, not some God sent definition of flat betting. Flat betting could be defined as "risking the same amount for each bet". Therefore, you do not flat bet. It looks to me like you average your bets around 100, which would be a no juice bet. To make your system work, you would need a bookie that did not take juice, or you need to adjust your numbers up to account for the -105 average.
0
Quote Originally Posted by snakebit1:
No surprise that you have a picture of OBAMA as your avatar. You guys are similar in your elitism and inablility to communicate good ideas in a public friendly way.
So, with interpolation of your numbers, if the odds are -110, then you bet 1.06??? Let's call this what it is, your system of betting, not some God sent definition of flat betting. Flat betting could be defined as "risking the same amount for each bet". Therefore, you do not flat bet. It looks to me like you average your bets around 100, which would be a no juice bet. To make your system work, you would need a bookie that did not take juice, or you need to adjust your numbers up to account for the -105 average.
interesting...so i'm gathering you care very little to nothing about line movement, "reverse" line movement, unpopular favorites
you set your own lines and bet off them
i actually work a little different and while i analyze the game and matchups, i really try and make sense of the line more than anything
take tonight:
SFG +123; Balt +120; TB +115; KC +109
all 4 of those lines are probably 10-15 cents lower than where i think they should be valued (current value above on MB, pinny opened each approx a dime higher). you would look to add more to the fave who's line moved in instead of looking to make a care for the small dog.
on face value, try and find reasons not to lay small chalk with the best team in baseball (Ari), the Jays over a spot starter, the Yankees (in general), the M's at home in a near pk game
i know i got off topic but figure there's enough eyes here to digress
always an interesting read van
0
interesting...so i'm gathering you care very little to nothing about line movement, "reverse" line movement, unpopular favorites
you set your own lines and bet off them
i actually work a little different and while i analyze the game and matchups, i really try and make sense of the line more than anything
take tonight:
SFG +123; Balt +120; TB +115; KC +109
all 4 of those lines are probably 10-15 cents lower than where i think they should be valued (current value above on MB, pinny opened each approx a dime higher). you would look to add more to the fave who's line moved in instead of looking to make a care for the small dog.
on face value, try and find reasons not to lay small chalk with the best team in baseball (Ari), the Jays over a spot starter, the Yankees (in general), the M's at home in a near pk game
i know i got off topic but figure there's enough eyes here to digress
Your system seems to lean more heavily on the favs winning than the dogs. Because if you and headoverheart wagered on the same games with the same lines, he would probably come out ahead of you with the extra winnings from the dogs. However, if the favs won at a much higher % than the dogs (which does not seem to be the case in MLB) then you would probably come out ahead of him. I don't think there is an advantage to flat betting. I think the best advice is to practice some sort of money management and bet the dogs the majority of the time.
Dude - you are wrong. I dont have the patience at this moment to write an essay with math proving it, but Im telling you math is on my side in this one, and not yours.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Quote Originally Posted by nccashman:
Your system seems to lean more heavily on the favs winning than the dogs. Because if you and headoverheart wagered on the same games with the same lines, he would probably come out ahead of you with the extra winnings from the dogs. However, if the favs won at a much higher % than the dogs (which does not seem to be the case in MLB) then you would probably come out ahead of him. I don't think there is an advantage to flat betting. I think the best advice is to practice some sort of money management and bet the dogs the majority of the time.
Dude - you are wrong. I dont have the patience at this moment to write an essay with math proving it, but Im telling you math is on my side in this one, and not yours.
No surprise that you have a picture of OBAMA as your avatar. You guys are similar in your elitism and inablility to communicate good ideas in a public friendly way.
So, with interpolation of your numbers, if the odds are -110, then you bet 1.06??? Let's call this what it is, your system of betting, not some God sent definition of flat betting. Flat betting could be defined as "risking the same amount for each bet". Therefore, you do not flat bet. It looks to me like you average your bets around 100, which would be a no juice bet. To make your system work, you would need a bookie that did not take juice, or you need to adjust your numbers up to account for the -105 average.
Sorry I cant communicate math in a "public friendly" way - it is what it is. If you dont like me personally, join the club, it is a long list here because you and all your clubmates dont want to take the time to think so you get offended instead.
And your second paragraph is obviously written by someone who hasnt taken the time or energy to understand what I am saying as all of your premises are wrong - and not my opinion - you are FACTUALLY wrong.
The definition of flat betting is that all games have equal relative weight. If you choose to define it differently be my guest. I define it the way it should be defined - but irregardless your math in your second paragraph is flawed.
GL, and I certainly hope I communicated that in a public friendly way and that you are now my friend.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Quote Originally Posted by snakebit1:
No surprise that you have a picture of OBAMA as your avatar. You guys are similar in your elitism and inablility to communicate good ideas in a public friendly way.
So, with interpolation of your numbers, if the odds are -110, then you bet 1.06??? Let's call this what it is, your system of betting, not some God sent definition of flat betting. Flat betting could be defined as "risking the same amount for each bet". Therefore, you do not flat bet. It looks to me like you average your bets around 100, which would be a no juice bet. To make your system work, you would need a bookie that did not take juice, or you need to adjust your numbers up to account for the -105 average.
Sorry I cant communicate math in a "public friendly" way - it is what it is. If you dont like me personally, join the club, it is a long list here because you and all your clubmates dont want to take the time to think so you get offended instead.
And your second paragraph is obviously written by someone who hasnt taken the time or energy to understand what I am saying as all of your premises are wrong - and not my opinion - you are FACTUALLY wrong.
The definition of flat betting is that all games have equal relative weight. If you choose to define it differently be my guest. I define it the way it should be defined - but irregardless your math in your second paragraph is flawed.
GL, and I certainly hope I communicated that in a public friendly way and that you are now my friend.
Van the Man, the only way that your way would come out ahead is if the dogs lost at an alarming rate. The juice that is won on dogs enables one to lose more often and still come out ahead. Thanks for the math lesson but I would rather make more money at the end of the day, month and season.
0
Van the Man, the only way that your way would come out ahead is if the dogs lost at an alarming rate. The juice that is won on dogs enables one to lose more often and still come out ahead. Thanks for the math lesson but I would rather make more money at the end of the day, month and season.
interesting...so i'm gathering you care very little to nothing about line movement, "reverse" line movement, unpopular favorites
you set your own lines and bet off them
i actually work a little different and while i analyze the game and matchups, i really try and make sense of the line more than anything
take tonight:
SFG +123; Balt +120; TB +115; KC +109
all 4 of those lines are probably 10-15 cents lower than where i think they should be valued (current value above on MB, pinny opened each approx a dime higher). you would look to add more to the fave who's line moved in instead of looking to make a care for the small dog.
on face value, try and find reasons not to lay small chalk with the best team in baseball (Ari), the Jays over a spot starter, the Yankees (in general), the M's at home in a near pk game
i know i got off topic but figure there's enough eyes here to digress
always an interesting read van
Line movements and reverse line movements I dont care about - because they have nothing to do with (in my opinion) results of games.
Unpopular favorites result in lines being off and in this case I bet the value created by them. I dont categorize, I just look at what lines are off of my line, and bet them.
If my line was sea -125, and the line opened at -125 and then moved to -109, I bet Sea when they cross my threshold of 8 cents (-117) and then a half unit more at -109 (the second threshold).
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Quote Originally Posted by KOAJ:
interesting...so i'm gathering you care very little to nothing about line movement, "reverse" line movement, unpopular favorites
you set your own lines and bet off them
i actually work a little different and while i analyze the game and matchups, i really try and make sense of the line more than anything
take tonight:
SFG +123; Balt +120; TB +115; KC +109
all 4 of those lines are probably 10-15 cents lower than where i think they should be valued (current value above on MB, pinny opened each approx a dime higher). you would look to add more to the fave who's line moved in instead of looking to make a care for the small dog.
on face value, try and find reasons not to lay small chalk with the best team in baseball (Ari), the Jays over a spot starter, the Yankees (in general), the M's at home in a near pk game
i know i got off topic but figure there's enough eyes here to digress
always an interesting read van
Line movements and reverse line movements I dont care about - because they have nothing to do with (in my opinion) results of games.
Unpopular favorites result in lines being off and in this case I bet the value created by them. I dont categorize, I just look at what lines are off of my line, and bet them.
If my line was sea -125, and the line opened at -125 and then moved to -109, I bet Sea when they cross my threshold of 8 cents (-117) and then a half unit more at -109 (the second threshold).
Van the Man, the only way that your way would come out ahead is if the dogs lost at an alarming rate. The juice that is won on dogs enables one to lose more often and still come out ahead. Thanks for the math lesson but I would rather make more money at the end of the day, month and season.
You have a noble goal, but your math is flawed and therefore you are destined to be a loser.
Sorry, but you have no understanding of the math I am presenting and worse than that is you are stubborn about your flawed logic being correct.
Every assumption you have made is wrong. Dogs, favs, it doesnt matter - I am putting equal weight on all bets I make - and therefore flat betting.
In order for you to win you will need to do better on your -200 and +200 bets as a group than you do on your -110 and +110 bets as a group. Does this somehow make sense to you? Are you better percentagewise when you bet at -200 or +200 than -110 or +110?
Because I know you dont realize it, but you are betting more on every bet that is farther away from 100 and you dont even know it.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Quote Originally Posted by nccashman:
Van the Man, the only way that your way would come out ahead is if the dogs lost at an alarming rate. The juice that is won on dogs enables one to lose more often and still come out ahead. Thanks for the math lesson but I would rather make more money at the end of the day, month and season.
You have a noble goal, but your math is flawed and therefore you are destined to be a loser.
Sorry, but you have no understanding of the math I am presenting and worse than that is you are stubborn about your flawed logic being correct.
Every assumption you have made is wrong. Dogs, favs, it doesnt matter - I am putting equal weight on all bets I make - and therefore flat betting.
In order for you to win you will need to do better on your -200 and +200 bets as a group than you do on your -110 and +110 bets as a group. Does this somehow make sense to you? Are you better percentagewise when you bet at -200 or +200 than -110 or +110?
Because I know you dont realize it, but you are betting more on every bet that is farther away from 100 and you dont even know it.
Van, I haven't done the math for the one method vs. the other but I just did some to analyze your NYY vs. Toronto example of selling off the bet. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I see no clear reason to sell the bet where you did.
Let's assume you bet the Yankees at -128, risking $1000. Factoring for 1% commission, this is a $1000 bet to win $773.44.
Then, as you said, the line moves to -133. I assume the Jays will now be at +132. Let's say you sell the bet by wagering $768 on the Jays. Here the scenario you now have:
* Yankees win. You win $773.44 from the original bet. You lose $768 from the second bet. You earn $5.44.
* Jays win. You lose $1000 from the original bet. You win $1002.87 from the second bet after the 1% commission is taken. You earn $2.87.
OK, so selling makes you money but does it make you more than if you had kept the original bet? If your line of -140 is accurate, you have identified a 5% ROI as compared to the line of -128. I would suggest never betting if the ROI is this low, but that's another story and everyone does it a little differently. Anyway, unless I'm screwing up the math, with a 5% ROI, you would be winning an average of $50 for every $1000 wagered on this bet. If you make this bet 1,000 times, on average you should win $50 each time. But if you sell off the bet, you are making between $5 and $2.
I am not sure if I am being a total moron and i mean to say that your ROI would be $5, not $50, for every $1000 wagered, but even if I did make this mistake, that $5 looks better than an amount between $2 and $5, on average.
Let me know what you think.
0
Van, I haven't done the math for the one method vs. the other but I just did some to analyze your NYY vs. Toronto example of selling off the bet. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I see no clear reason to sell the bet where you did.
Let's assume you bet the Yankees at -128, risking $1000. Factoring for 1% commission, this is a $1000 bet to win $773.44.
Then, as you said, the line moves to -133. I assume the Jays will now be at +132. Let's say you sell the bet by wagering $768 on the Jays. Here the scenario you now have:
* Yankees win. You win $773.44 from the original bet. You lose $768 from the second bet. You earn $5.44.
* Jays win. You lose $1000 from the original bet. You win $1002.87 from the second bet after the 1% commission is taken. You earn $2.87.
OK, so selling makes you money but does it make you more than if you had kept the original bet? If your line of -140 is accurate, you have identified a 5% ROI as compared to the line of -128. I would suggest never betting if the ROI is this low, but that's another story and everyone does it a little differently. Anyway, unless I'm screwing up the math, with a 5% ROI, you would be winning an average of $50 for every $1000 wagered on this bet. If you make this bet 1,000 times, on average you should win $50 each time. But if you sell off the bet, you are making between $5 and $2.
I am not sure if I am being a total moron and i mean to say that your ROI would be $5, not $50, for every $1000 wagered, but even if I did make this mistake, that $5 looks better than an amount between $2 and $5, on average.
should it not be 2 times "unit amount" or A1 not 2 times the "midpoint" or B1.
Data is in the B column, data headings are in the A column.
I wrote the first try above without actually doing it in excel - but if you take the corrected version (with the note for cell B4) it works - I actually did it in excel this time.
Sorry for the confusion.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Quote Originally Posted by lbcake:
VZ...
should it not be 2 times "unit amount" or A1 not 2 times the "midpoint" or B1.
Data is in the B column, data headings are in the A column.
I wrote the first try above without actually doing it in excel - but if you take the corrected version (with the note for cell B4) it works - I actually did it in excel this time.
Line movements and reverse line movements I dont care about - because they have nothing to do with (in my opinion) results of games.
Unpopular favorites result in lines being off and in this case I bet the value created by them. I dont categorize, I just look at what lines are off of my line, and bet them.
If my line was sea -125, and the line opened at -125 and then moved to -109, I bet Sea when they cross my threshold of 8 cents (-117) and then a half unit more at -109 (the second threshold).
they have zero to do with results (agreed) but they have everything to do with value IMO
i avoid sticky lines like the plague and really zero in on games where lines have moved away from "the easy play" assuming that the value is with the unpopular play. tonight, SFG, Balt, Minn, Tex fit that bill as being unpopluar "value" plays
in hindsight i regurgitated most of what you said only difference you set your own market whereas i allow the market to steer me to where i need to start my research
0
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:
Line movements and reverse line movements I dont care about - because they have nothing to do with (in my opinion) results of games.
Unpopular favorites result in lines being off and in this case I bet the value created by them. I dont categorize, I just look at what lines are off of my line, and bet them.
If my line was sea -125, and the line opened at -125 and then moved to -109, I bet Sea when they cross my threshold of 8 cents (-117) and then a half unit more at -109 (the second threshold).
they have zero to do with results (agreed) but they have everything to do with value IMO
i avoid sticky lines like the plague and really zero in on games where lines have moved away from "the easy play" assuming that the value is with the unpopular play. tonight, SFG, Balt, Minn, Tex fit that bill as being unpopluar "value" plays
in hindsight i regurgitated most of what you said only difference you set your own market whereas i allow the market to steer me to where i need to start my research
Van, I haven't done the math for the one method vs. the other but I just did some to analyze your NYY vs. Toronto example of selling off the bet. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I see no clear reason to sell the bet where you did.
Let's assume you bet the Yankees at -128, risking $1000. Factoring for 1% commission, this is a $1000 bet to win $773.44.
Then, as you said, the line moves to -133. I assume the Jays will now be at +132. Let's say you sell the bet by wagering $768 on the Jays. Here the scenario you now have:
* Yankees win. You win $773.44 from the original bet. You lose $768 from the second bet. You earn $5.44.
* Jays win. You lose $1000 from the original bet. You win $1002.87 from the second bet after the 1% commission is taken. You earn $2.87.
OK, so selling makes you money but does it make you more than if you had kept the original bet? If your line of -140 is accurate, you have identified a 5% ROI as compared to the line of -128. I would suggest never betting if the ROI is this low, but that's another story and everyone does it a little differently. Anyway, unless I'm screwing up the math, with a 5% ROI, you would be winning an average of $50 for every $1000 wagered on this bet. If you make this bet 1,000 times, on average you should win $50 each time. But if you sell off the bet, you are making between $5 and $2.
I am not sure if I am being a total moron and i mean to say that your ROI would be $5, not $50, for every $1000 wagered, but even if I did make this mistake, that $5 looks better than an amount between $2 and $5, on average.
Let me know what you think.
You are not being a total moron, in fact you have legitimate questions and are well thought out.
The problem is that my line is not absolute. So while I "think" I have identified a 5% ROI, there is a standard deviation of error built in to that that sure "no risk" profitability outweighs. The profits that I lock in overcome the standard deviation uncertainty of my line, which of course could be off - Im just speculating when setting my own line - it is not absolute.
My thresholds are not based purely on math - there is gut feel in there and personal tolerance.
GL
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Quote Originally Posted by lanastasis:
Van, I haven't done the math for the one method vs. the other but I just did some to analyze your NYY vs. Toronto example of selling off the bet. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I see no clear reason to sell the bet where you did.
Let's assume you bet the Yankees at -128, risking $1000. Factoring for 1% commission, this is a $1000 bet to win $773.44.
Then, as you said, the line moves to -133. I assume the Jays will now be at +132. Let's say you sell the bet by wagering $768 on the Jays. Here the scenario you now have:
* Yankees win. You win $773.44 from the original bet. You lose $768 from the second bet. You earn $5.44.
* Jays win. You lose $1000 from the original bet. You win $1002.87 from the second bet after the 1% commission is taken. You earn $2.87.
OK, so selling makes you money but does it make you more than if you had kept the original bet? If your line of -140 is accurate, you have identified a 5% ROI as compared to the line of -128. I would suggest never betting if the ROI is this low, but that's another story and everyone does it a little differently. Anyway, unless I'm screwing up the math, with a 5% ROI, you would be winning an average of $50 for every $1000 wagered on this bet. If you make this bet 1,000 times, on average you should win $50 each time. But if you sell off the bet, you are making between $5 and $2.
I am not sure if I am being a total moron and i mean to say that your ROI would be $5, not $50, for every $1000 wagered, but even if I did make this mistake, that $5 looks better than an amount between $2 and $5, on average.
Let me know what you think.
You are not being a total moron, in fact you have legitimate questions and are well thought out.
The problem is that my line is not absolute. So while I "think" I have identified a 5% ROI, there is a standard deviation of error built in to that that sure "no risk" profitability outweighs. The profits that I lock in overcome the standard deviation uncertainty of my line, which of course could be off - Im just speculating when setting my own line - it is not absolute.
My thresholds are not based purely on math - there is gut feel in there and personal tolerance.
I always thought I was good at math and puzzles but for the life of me I am having a hard time with the math on this one. Could you so kindly break it down for this moron. How did you get to this +180 dog: risk .72 to win 1.28.
Thanks
0
Van
I always thought I was good at math and puzzles but for the life of me I am having a hard time with the math on this one. Could you so kindly break it down for this moron. How did you get to this +180 dog: risk .72 to win 1.28.
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.
only difference you set your own market whereas i allow the market to steer me to where i need to start my research
Hot Forum Topics
