Sports betting total odds 5% vig
Total Line Bets in MLB
WINNER SAMPLE SIZE PROBABILITY
Over 11315 46.63%
Under 11812 48.68%
Push 1139 4.69%
Total 24266 100.00%
Quote: nj2741Wanted to ask the math experts if betting the under is profitable with -105 odds instead of -110 given the stats below.Thank you
Total Line Bets in MLB
WINNER SAMPLE SIZE PROBABILITY
Over 11315 46.63%
Under 11812 48.68%
Push 1139 4.69%
Total 24266 100.00%
To be profitable at -105 you need to be right 105/205 percent of the time. So 51.2%. If you had bet every under in the above sample you would have a win to lose of 48.68 / (48.68+46.63) = 51.08%.
So not profitable. Flat betting you would be down 68.75 units.
Quote: unJonTo be profitable at -105 you need to be right 105/205 percent of the time. So 51.2%. If you had bet every under in the above sample you would have a win to lose of 48.68 / (48.68+46.63) = 51.08%.
So not profitable. Flat betting you would be down 68.75 units.
You are missing pushes. But still not profitable.
Can you flush that out? I excluded pushes from the denominator on purpose because they don’t matter. You don’t pay the vig on a push.Quote: FinsRuleYou are missing pushes. But still not profitable.
WIN 0.4636 units
Lose 0.4663 units
So, NO, this is not a profitable bet. It is close, though.
Quote: unJonCan you flush that out? I excluded pushes from the denominator on purpose because they don’t matter. You don’t pay the vig on a push.
Nope, you’re right. The explanation confused me, but the math was right.
Just divide the Under wins by the over wins and you get the number you are looking for (the amount of juice that makes this a break even bet).Quote: nj2741Can you guys do the math on -104 please?
Correct.Quote: FinsRuleLol. No. I’m going to bed. But my guess is that it makes it the tiniest bit profitable.
Quote: FinsRuleLol. No. I’m going to bed. But my guess is that it makes it the tiniest bit profitable.
I did the math because I’m a fool. Now I can sleep in peace. 50.98
Flat betting that sample at -104 would make you up 44.4 units. Past performance is not indicative of future results . . .Quote: nj2741You da man!so is it +ev?
(Mod edit. Mask your swears. This board is PG. Warning. )
Quote: unJonFlat betting that sample at -104 would make you up 44.4 units. Past performance is not indicative of future results . . .
44 units makes it sound better than it is. You’d be much better off investing that money instead of gambling it for that return. Unless you can get good comps.
Agreed. It’s 44.4 units over the course of 23,127 wagers. An absurdly low edge. I’m exhausted so may have messed up the formula, but I get a full Kelly bet of $9.41 if you had a $10k bankroll.Quote: FinsRule44 units makes it sound better than it is. You’d be much better off investing that money instead of gambling it for that return. Unless you can get good comps.
Well the results in what you posted are only like 0.6 standard deviations off of a coin flip. So I wouldn’t recommend you draw any glitch-in-the-matrix conclusions. Like FinsRule said, way better off investing the money.Quote: nj2741Eureka!!the wizard has found a glitch in the f $!#ing matrix.Daddy likes
Above is totally wrong. Never mind. It’s more than six sigma. I need coffee.
Quote: nj2741Why does everyone have to rain on my parade?with those mlb stats -104 wins all day
It’s really nothing noteworthy or even good. You’d have to bet on every single mlb game played for 11 years to be up 44 units. Nothing to see here
Then your Risk of Ruin would be non-negligible unless your bankroll was more than $21 million.Quote: nj2741What if each unit was 20k?
ETA:
The real problem is that this is not a natural phenomenon that is independent of your bets. $20k bets on MLB totals would probably move the line and eliminate this effect.
Quote: nj2741Why does everyone have to rain on my parade?with those mlb stats -104 wins all day
With those stats, it wins some days and loses other days. It almost never wins all day. You are getting somewhat close to a wizard approved betting system that works. Because no one offers -104 on MLB unders and because even if they did the edge is too close to zero, you'll have to dig a little further
Quote: nj2741What if each unit was 20k?
As long as you’re ok with putting $320,000 at risk each night for 11 years
