I bet on golf this morning for the first time. Made some parlay bets with Tiger Woods to win at 8 to 1.
All my other bets won so now I only need Tiger to win the Tourny to win over $1200. I spent $50.
I would like to hedge my bet if possible. I was just wondering if any new odds come out to bet on the touny winner again. If so, this time I`d bet no to tiger winning.
I doubt there`s any bets out there to help me hedge. If there is, please msg here. thanks
Go Tiger!
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
Hey guys,
I bet on golf this morning for the first time. Made some parlay bets with Tiger Woods to win at 8 to 1.
All my other bets won so now I only need Tiger to win the Tourny to win over $1200. I spent $50.
I would like to hedge my bet if possible. I was just wondering if any new odds come out to bet on the touny winner again. If so, this time I`d bet no to tiger winning.
I doubt there`s any bets out there to help me hedge. If there is, please msg here. thanks
I've seen you say this a few times, and must say I don't understand the logic, especially on this high odds bets. Let's suppose he was able to find Tiger v. the Field for essentially even money (obviously he won't, but let's suppose). He could now bet the field for 600 and guarantee himself a 600 payday (less some juice in there).
So, by not hedging, he is essentially betting 600 on Tiger to win. Is that a good bet for a 50 dollar player. Is that a bet he would/should routinely make? I could make a strong argument that's just silly not to at minimum guarantee some payout.
I've said this before too, I think it's like poker, whatever you've put in the pot on previous betting rounds is irrelevant, it's not your money anymore, but what you have in your stack, IS your money and you have to detach emotional attachment and make the right decision right now with the money that is yours. So, in my hypothetical case, 600 is HIS money, he could guarantee that and he needs to detach emotional attachment to his initial bets and make the right decision, right here and now.
Now, having said all that, this is usually only an issue when the initial bet is a very high odds bet. If you talking about hedging a regular game bet with a half-time bet, then I would agree with you that it's almost never the right thing to do, although I'll do it from time to time if I have a huge middle set up over some key numbers. But, I do think more often than not, doing that based solely on the numbers (rather than the feel of the game and what is the RIGHT bet for the 2nd) half, is probably a losing proposition.
0
Quote Originally Posted by AJLightning:
NEVER hedge....
I've seen you say this a few times, and must say I don't understand the logic, especially on this high odds bets. Let's suppose he was able to find Tiger v. the Field for essentially even money (obviously he won't, but let's suppose). He could now bet the field for 600 and guarantee himself a 600 payday (less some juice in there).
So, by not hedging, he is essentially betting 600 on Tiger to win. Is that a good bet for a 50 dollar player. Is that a bet he would/should routinely make? I could make a strong argument that's just silly not to at minimum guarantee some payout.
I've said this before too, I think it's like poker, whatever you've put in the pot on previous betting rounds is irrelevant, it's not your money anymore, but what you have in your stack, IS your money and you have to detach emotional attachment and make the right decision right now with the money that is yours. So, in my hypothetical case, 600 is HIS money, he could guarantee that and he needs to detach emotional attachment to his initial bets and make the right decision, right here and now.
Now, having said all that, this is usually only an issue when the initial bet is a very high odds bet. If you talking about hedging a regular game bet with a half-time bet, then I would agree with you that it's almost never the right thing to do, although I'll do it from time to time if I have a huge middle set up over some key numbers. But, I do think more often than not, doing that based solely on the numbers (rather than the feel of the game and what is the RIGHT bet for the 2nd) half, is probably a losing proposition.
So, by not hedging, he is essentially betting 600 on Tiger to win. Is that a good bet for a 50 dollar player. Is that a bet he would/should routinely make? I could make a strong argument that's just silly not to at minimum guarantee some payout.
Actually it'd be like betting 600 on Tiger at just under 2:1, so that's what you'd have to ask yourself if it was the right bet for you to make.
0
Quote Originally Posted by blairaj:
So, by not hedging, he is essentially betting 600 on Tiger to win. Is that a good bet for a 50 dollar player. Is that a bet he would/should routinely make? I could make a strong argument that's just silly not to at minimum guarantee some payout.
Actually it'd be like betting 600 on Tiger at just under 2:1, so that's what you'd have to ask yourself if it was the right bet for you to make.
Is that a good bet for a 50 dollar player. Is that a bet he would/should routinely make? .
You actually hit upon somthing very rarely mentioned in these hundreds of "to hedge or not to hedge" threads.. What does $50 or $1200 mean to you personally?
Is it a life changing # or simply daily chump change.. I know these are extremes but simply move the decimals around and ask the to hedge or not to hedge question,,, .50 cents to win $12? no brainer right,, let it ride. how about $5 to win $120? how about if the bet was $500 to win $12000?
Right now I see the field to beat Tiger is right around -500. Using very rounded #'s he needs to bet a dime to guarentee $200 paid back.
0
Quote Originally Posted by blairaj:
Is that a good bet for a 50 dollar player. Is that a bet he would/should routinely make? .
You actually hit upon somthing very rarely mentioned in these hundreds of "to hedge or not to hedge" threads.. What does $50 or $1200 mean to you personally?
Is it a life changing # or simply daily chump change.. I know these are extremes but simply move the decimals around and ask the to hedge or not to hedge question,,, .50 cents to win $12? no brainer right,, let it ride. how about $5 to win $120? how about if the bet was $500 to win $12000?
Right now I see the field to beat Tiger is right around -500. Using very rounded #'s he needs to bet a dime to guarentee $200 paid back.
Ice - It's the money and the odds. With every decision you make whether to hedge or not to hedge, you are essentially making a new bet. There's always going to be some "break even" amount of money that you could walk away with, it's yours, and if you do not hedge, you are making a new bet with it. So, let's look at my hypothetical and the real thing of -500 again.
At the hypothetical +100, his break even point is around 600. So, by not hedging, his new effective bet is to risk 600 on tiger at 2:1. That's probably not a bet that most or any 50 players would ever make. So it's probably best to hedge.
At the real -500, his break even point is around 200 as you point out. So, his new effective bet is to risk 200 on Tiger at 6:1. Obviously the 6:1 is a lot more attractive than the 2:1, so at -500 it becomes a lot less attractive to hedge. But, you still have to ask yourself, "is risking 200 a bet that I can/should be making, is 6:1 attractive enough to make me risk that much?"
0
Ice - It's the money and the odds. With every decision you make whether to hedge or not to hedge, you are essentially making a new bet. There's always going to be some "break even" amount of money that you could walk away with, it's yours, and if you do not hedge, you are making a new bet with it. So, let's look at my hypothetical and the real thing of -500 again.
At the hypothetical +100, his break even point is around 600. So, by not hedging, his new effective bet is to risk 600 on tiger at 2:1. That's probably not a bet that most or any 50 players would ever make. So it's probably best to hedge.
At the real -500, his break even point is around 200 as you point out. So, his new effective bet is to risk 200 on Tiger at 6:1. Obviously the 6:1 is a lot more attractive than the 2:1, so at -500 it becomes a lot less attractive to hedge. But, you still have to ask yourself, "is risking 200 a bet that I can/should be making, is 6:1 attractive enough to make me risk that much?"
The point of not hedging, is that if you're going to give back some of your profits, then why include that bet in the first place? Whatever you parlayed tiger with, just parlay those by themselves for $25, then put the other $25 on tiger, this way, if the other bets wins, you still guarantee a profit
0
The point of not hedging, is that if you're going to give back some of your profits, then why include that bet in the first place? Whatever you parlayed tiger with, just parlay those by themselves for $25, then put the other $25 on tiger, this way, if the other bets wins, you still guarantee a profit
The point of not hedging, is that if you're going to give back some of your profits, then why include that bet in the first place? Whatever you parlayed tiger with, just parlay those by themselves for $25, then put the other $25 on tiger, this way, if the other bets wins, you still guarantee a profit
You've totally missed the point. You're not "giving back profits" at all. It's not YOUR profit yet to give back. But, by hedging, as I said, there is some break even amount of money that is YOUR money. And, if you continue to let it ride, you have effectively made a new bet.
The 24:1 that he started out with is water under the bridge. It is totally irrelevant at this point.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Amp:
The point of not hedging, is that if you're going to give back some of your profits, then why include that bet in the first place? Whatever you parlayed tiger with, just parlay those by themselves for $25, then put the other $25 on tiger, this way, if the other bets wins, you still guarantee a profit
You've totally missed the point. You're not "giving back profits" at all. It's not YOUR profit yet to give back. But, by hedging, as I said, there is some break even amount of money that is YOUR money. And, if you continue to let it ride, you have effectively made a new bet.
The 24:1 that he started out with is water under the bridge. It is totally irrelevant at this point.
That's my opinion.....and they are like assholes....we all have them....and of course only mine stinks....
I see you preaching money management on here all the time. While this math may not be the most simple to compute, it's also not that hard. And, if you're going to practice good money management, part of that is knowing what you are risking at all times v. what the potential reward is. It's math that I think you need to go through.
So, I would change your commandment statement to "Never hedge, or not hedge, without fully understanding what you could walk away with now versus the odds you're getting by letting it ride"
0
Quote Originally Posted by AJLightning:
NEVER hedge....
NOTHING is a LOCK in gambling....
That's my opinion.....and they are like assholes....we all have them....and of course only mine stinks....
I see you preaching money management on here all the time. While this math may not be the most simple to compute, it's also not that hard. And, if you're going to practice good money management, part of that is knowing what you are risking at all times v. what the potential reward is. It's math that I think you need to go through.
So, I would change your commandment statement to "Never hedge, or not hedge, without fully understanding what you could walk away with now versus the odds you're getting by letting it ride"
I don't need to understand anything...I never do it! I never even consider doing it. My daddy didn't teach me much, but he did say NEVER parlay, NEVER hedge! Once you place a bet, that's it and you stick with that. Too me, that's good money management.
0
I don't need to understand anything...I never do it! I never even consider doing it. My daddy didn't teach me much, but he did say NEVER parlay, NEVER hedge! Once you place a bet, that's it and you stick with that. Too me, that's good money management.
... and "NOTHING IS A LOCK IN GAMBLING" is actually the best argument you could make for hedging.
As ice pointed out, it is a LOCK that he could walk away with about 200 bucks, that is a LOCK. That's a 4:1 profit on his initial investment of 50 bucks. It doesn't get anymore LOCK than that.
0
... and "NOTHING IS A LOCK IN GAMBLING" is actually the best argument you could make for hedging.
As ice pointed out, it is a LOCK that he could walk away with about 200 bucks, that is a LOCK. That's a 4:1 profit on his initial investment of 50 bucks. It doesn't get anymore LOCK than that.
Blue - the reason there's no possible winner is because everybody wants to put it either in the "always" or "never" category. When the right answer is sometimes it makes good money management sense and sometimes it doesn't, that's just fact. Now, my opinion is that the numbers will come out that it makes sense much more often to not hedge. But, especially with these real high odds payouts, I think the math is an exercise anyone lucky enough to find themselves in this situation should consider. Since this comes up so often, I've written up the math:
Let:
I = initial
H = hedge
1) you want to know how much you could walk away with, so let:
I_loss = I_win, when I loses N wins and vice versa, so:
-I_risk + H_reward = I_reward - H_risk,
we know I_risk and I_reward, we also know that H_reward=H_odds*H_risk,
where H_odds is given in decimal odds, so:
I_risk + H_odds*H_risk = I_reward - H_risk
solving for H_risk:
H_risk = (I_reward-I_risk)/(1+H_odds)
2) Find guaranteed profit:
Profit = H_reward - I_risk = I_reward - H_risk
3) Calculate new effective bet odds if not hedging:
Odds= I_reward/Profit
4) Ask yourself, "is risking Profit at Odds, a bet I would make
today?"
0
Blue - the reason there's no possible winner is because everybody wants to put it either in the "always" or "never" category. When the right answer is sometimes it makes good money management sense and sometimes it doesn't, that's just fact. Now, my opinion is that the numbers will come out that it makes sense much more often to not hedge. But, especially with these real high odds payouts, I think the math is an exercise anyone lucky enough to find themselves in this situation should consider. Since this comes up so often, I've written up the math:
Let:
I = initial
H = hedge
1) you want to know how much you could walk away with, so let:
I_loss = I_win, when I loses N wins and vice versa, so:
-I_risk + H_reward = I_reward - H_risk,
we know I_risk and I_reward, we also know that H_reward=H_odds*H_risk,
where H_odds is given in decimal odds, so:
I_risk + H_odds*H_risk = I_reward - H_risk
solving for H_risk:
H_risk = (I_reward-I_risk)/(1+H_odds)
2) Find guaranteed profit:
Profit = H_reward - I_risk = I_reward - H_risk
3) Calculate new effective bet odds if not hedging:
Odds= I_reward/Profit
4) Ask yourself, "is risking Profit at Odds, a bet I would make
Hedging may make sense occasionaly in longshot future bets, but it NEVER makes sense to hedge a parlay. If you parlay games with different start times with the intent on hedging if you win the first few, you are throwing money away
0
Hedging may make sense occasionaly in longshot future bets, but it NEVER makes sense to hedge a parlay. If you parlay games with different start times with the intent on hedging if you win the first few, you are throwing money away
I messed up how decimal odds work. I'm gonna have to relook at these formulas with better understanding of decimal odds, but by sanity check, I know I have this example coming out right:
Back to Avalon's case:
1) H_risk =(1200-50)/1.2 = 958 (-500 in decimal odds is 1.2)
2) Profit = 958(1.2-1)+50 = 1200-958 = 242
3) Odds = 1200/242 = just about 5:1
4) Today, right now, would I risk 242 dollars on Tiger at 5:1? That question, Avalon has to answer for himself. But, that, and only that is the right question. There really should be no philosophical debate.
0
I messed up how decimal odds work. I'm gonna have to relook at these formulas with better understanding of decimal odds, but by sanity check, I know I have this example coming out right:
Back to Avalon's case:
1) H_risk =(1200-50)/1.2 = 958 (-500 in decimal odds is 1.2)
2) Profit = 958(1.2-1)+50 = 1200-958 = 242
3) Odds = 1200/242 = just about 5:1
4) Today, right now, would I risk 242 dollars on Tiger at 5:1? That question, Avalon has to answer for himself. But, that, and only that is the right question. There really should be no philosophical debate.
Hedging may make sense occasionaly in longshot future bets, but it NEVER makes sense to hedge a parlay. If you parlay games with different start times with the intent on hedging if you win the first few, you are throwing money away
Now, that's a totally different topic, and I do agree with that. Betting parlays in the first place to try to set up a hedge, is going to be a losing proposition for sure, and that's simply because parlays are in general a losing proposition. That's much trickier math to show though.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Amp:
Hedging may make sense occasionaly in longshot future bets, but it NEVER makes sense to hedge a parlay. If you parlay games with different start times with the intent on hedging if you win the first few, you are throwing money away
Now, that's a totally different topic, and I do agree with that. Betting parlays in the first place to try to set up a hedge, is going to be a losing proposition for sure, and that's simply because parlays are in general a losing proposition. That's much trickier math to show though.
Hot Forum Topics
