Wizard's secret sports betting strategy

A number of people have been asking me about my strategy in our handicapping contest. If I may toot my own horn, my record is 58-24 = 70.7%.

First, a confession. After I forgot to put in my picks for week 9, I asked Mission to just give me the first five underdogs on ths list in the future, if I forgot again. This is exactly what happened in week 14, when I went 5-0!

Second, a huge warning that you should not expect anything near going 71% using this strategy. Almost all my success is simply due to falling on the right side of the bell curve, or what some might call "good luck."

All that said, my strategy was simply to compare Mission's lines to the going market lines, in a search for soft lines. I consider Pinnacle to be the gold standard when it comes to the market of sports betting. Often Mission's lines were off of Pinnacle by a point or so, which is a lot in the NFL. The reason that parlay cards don't pay as well as off the board parlays is that player's have the luxury to do what I did -- using current information to bet against old lines.

The only handicapping I did was to prefer betting underdogs. For the first 12 weeks or so I only bothered to look at the underdog lines. That is why I missed that free two points on the total line of 23, or whatever it was. When it looked like I had a good chance of winning, I considered every line, but still went with underdogs about 75% of the time.

I believe that money can be made shopping around for weak lines here in Vegas, by comparing them to Pinnacle. This is easiest to do in lesser-bet sports and events. Here in Vegas, the market generally moves NFL point spreads to where they are supposed to be. I know people who do this, and I hope they won't be mad that I'm writing about this. Personally, I don't bother with it, because advantages are very thin, and you have to drive all over town to grab soft lines. To do it properly you should have runners (somebody who makes bets for others) to help you out.

I hope there are no hard feelings, as I admit that I was pretty lazy about this contest. I don't proclaim to have any handicapping skills, so don't even try.

Once Mission posts the week 17 lines I'll go through them and write about it as an example of my strategy, since I pretty much can't lose at this point.

There you have it -- the cat is out of the bag.

Quote: Wizard

First, a confession. After I forgot to put in my picks for week 9, I asked Mission to just give me the first five underdogs on ths list in the future, if I forgot again. This is exactly what happened in week 14, when I went 5-0!

I appreciate you bringing that up, Wizard!

The reason that I wanted that brought up is because StrictlyAP won HUGE on a $500 five-team parlay based upon The Wizard's Picks pursuant to this thread:

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/12224-huge-win-thanks-to-wizard/

However, what StrictlyAP did not know, and what I could not reveal, was that The Wizard had actually defaulted to his essentially pre-made (first five underdogs listed) Picks for that week as he had failed to alter his Picks when the time came to do so.

Essentially, then, the fortuitous win logged by StrictlyAP effectively did not come on Picks actively made by The Wizard, but in fact came on Picks that were little more than pick five random underdogs! The only thing preventing it from being completly random is:

1.) The teams had to be playing that week.

AND

2.) It had to be in the 1:00p.m. games on Sunday, otherwise, it would not be in the first five listed.

I have no idea how they decide to order the games that are all played at the same time, there probably is some set way, but I have never paid attention to what it is.

I would again like to congratulate The Wiz on winning the First Annual WoV Picks Game/Bet, and now that he has revealed his methodology and website for same, he's probably going to have to come up with a way to effectively, "Beat himself," next year as I am sure he won't be the only one doing that.

going to do this for college basketball?

Quote: Mission146

The reason that I wanted that brought up is because StrictlyAP won HUGE on a $500 five-team parlay based upon The Wizard's Picks pursuant to this thread:https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/12224-huge-win-thanks-to-wizard/.

Yes, that should go down as one of the best WoV stories. I believe he got 20 to 1, which I must say are lousy odds for a 5-teamer, so a win of $10,000. This is all thanks to the fact I was lazy on Saturday night and didn't get my picks in. Had I remembered, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have gone 5-0. Hopefully my slothfulness will earn me a beer should Strict ever make it to Vegas. He also kindly offered to contribute $100 to the next contest.

Blah blah blah...just tell me how much I owe the wizard after next week.

Kidding...70% is nothing to scoff at, well done wiz...I am just glad I finally crawled out of the basement

I spoke to wizard and he told me he would reveal his strategy after the contest - now I really feel stupid- the 10k relieves a little of that feeling but. Icant believe how it was done - the funny thing is I almost took it for 1000 but I was up 960 on video poker and decided if I was up 1000 I would but I could hit anything the last few pulls- oh well if anyone would like the 100 toward a different wov conference feel free to leave the ideas. Forgive the typos I'm on my iPhone. Thanks again wizard

All of us, including the Wizard know not to expect 70% all, any or even more than some, of the time, but you have to give credit to him for this run. GREAT JOB Mike!! This is the stuff legends (and tout servives) are made of.

Quote: Boz

All of us, including the Wizard know not to expect 70% all, any or even more than some, of the time, but you have to give credit to him for this run. GREAT JOB Mike!! This is the stuff legends (and tout servives) are made of.

Good point Boz. We pay 2 NFL cappers that have a very long track record of 55-60%. Anything above that is variance as the Wizard pointed out (good luck). Half of my picks come in Sunday or I would have done better in the contest with the Saturday deadline.

Any tout touting 65% + is either lying or using a small sample size (at -110 to win 100). The money line bets are a different story but this thread is NFL. Soccer and MLB use the ML as some good ML dog bets on NFL :-)

BOL and Happy Holidays to all....

As the runner up to the Wiz I'd like to say well done, it was a fun contest. I was hanging close for a while but just couldn't catch him. His underdog picking was becoming pretty obvious, and hard to argue with the success he had. The last few weeks I intentionally went the other way on some underdogs that I thought the Wiz might take, to try and catch him. 3 or 4 games alone in week 14 if I remember right, it proved my undoing. I think he won virtually every game where I went the other way on purpose. Obviously I had no way of knowing which games he'd be on. But I took some educated guesses and was right about which games (but wrong about the outcome obviously), several times, dammit. :) So again, well done Mike congrats. Impressive record. Also, I've thanked him before but kudos to Mission for running the whole shebang it was a lot of work for him I'm sure.

You're welcome, Vendman1!

Like I've said before, and I don't know why, but organizing stuff like this is a lot of fun for me!

Makes you wonder why we can't use Neil Silver's insights for sports betting, i.e. looking at a large body of pollsters (bookies, handicappers, etc. in this case) to discern the best picks.

Every casino near my home is offering a weekly football picking contest with prizes from free play to real money in the thousands; in the past I participated because the prize pool was very generous, now it's limited to top 20 winners or so and I quit since it's a waste of my time.

One of the beg sports handicappers I ever knew was Henry G. He was a bookie who beat the Kefaufer committee. But afterwards the heat in Miami was such that he moved to Baltimore and opened a pool room. He ran a small book at first but later was one of the biggest on East Coast. He even got calls offering him a nickle line from the Wiz's namesake. Baseball was Henry long suit. Won year after year, until like 1958 or 59. Baseball not my long suit. Anyway Henry would have a 4 team round robin, 3 winners already, Orioles blow 6 run lead in 9th. Everything that could go wrong went wrong that year. He was getting killed as a bookie too. Anyway the Giants and Dodgers were in a pennant race, 3 games to go. Henry cashed in his life insurance. Hit all 3 games, the playoff game between them , and all the World Series games. Came out $80,000 to the good.

Moral : No matter how good a handicapper you are, shit happens.


Last I saw of Henry G was in mid 1960's. He stopped in bowling alley to use pay phone. Later that year the Feds got him. And old customer from Miami was calling in bets to Henry. The guy had started embezzling and the Feds had the payphone tapped outside his
brokers office.

Almost always when the Feds nab you, you are going bye bye.

Quote: vendman1

As the runner up to the Wiz I'd like to say well done, it was a fun contest.

Thanks!

Quote:

kudos to Mission for running the whole shebang it was a lot of work for him I'm sure.

I agree! Three cheers to Mission for an outstanding job running the contest. I'm sure it took a lot of time.

Thanks, Wizard!

Quote: Wizard

Yes, that should go down as one of the best WoV stories. I believe he got 20 to 1, which I must say are lousy odds for a 5-teamer, so a win of $10,000. This is all thanks to the fact I was lazy on Saturday night and didn't get my picks in. Had I remembered, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have gone 5-0. Hopefully my slothfulness will earn me a beer should Strict ever make it to Vegas. He also kindly offered to contribute $100 to the next contest.

how is 20 to 1 lousy on a 5team parlay?

1,2,4,8,16

so a 5team parlay should only pay 16x. how did get get 20x?!
and if thats not right, where did i go wrong on the math?

edit:
or was it not handicapped and just the win?

try 2 4 8 16 32 and I am math illiterate.

Thank you for sharing your method.

For us sports betting newbies, could you please explain some of your terms/statements?

Quote: Wizard

my strategy was simply to compare Mission's lines to the going market lines, in a search for soft lines.

What is a "soft" line?

Quote:

I consider Pinnacle to be the gold standard when it comes to the market of sports betting.

So, this statement means that Pinnacle has the most accurate/true odds/lines?

Quote:

The only handicapping I did was to prefer betting underdogs.

How did you determine which teams were underdogs (or which underdogs to bet)?

One other question: What criteria did you use to determine your "confidence" picks?

Thanks!

Quote: tupp

So, this statement means that Pinnacle has the most accurate/true odds/lines?

Pinnacle is definitely known as a "sharp" book, meaning they will take big bets from sharp players. Another sharp book is CRIS. In Las Vegas, Cantor Gaming would qualify as a sharp book. Probably Wynn, LVH too?

Many books will not take big action from sharp players. These are known as square shops.

Sportsbook's set the opening line. The line will move based on the action- sharp players will set sharp lines. If the sportsbook doesn't have/want sharp players, then their line is being set by the public/squares.

Quote: MakingBook

Pinnacle is definitely known as a "sharp" book, meaning they will take big bets from sharp players. Another sharp book is CRIS. In Las Vegas, Cantor Gaming would qualify as a sharp book. Probably Wynn, LVH too?

Many books will not take big action from sharp players. These are known as square shops.

Sportsbook's set the opening line. The line will move based on the action- sharp players will set sharp lines. If the sportsbook doesn't have/want sharp players, then their line is being set by the public/squares.

Thank you for the explanation.

Could you please put it in simple terms -- as if you were explaining it to a child?

Thanks!

Based on your post, and with the knowledge of a "Nate Silver", you would think people could destroy the lines. I heard from Kim Lee, the guy who did the options work for Don S.'s wonging studies and provided some of the math to the "Kill Phil" series, that a lot of sports handicapping is just exaggerated, and some of Kim Lee's criticisms were directed at S. Wong.

So when you stated sharp players, are you talking about the "Nate Silver" types? Or people found on S. Wong's website like Steve Fezzik?

Quote: Buzzard

try 2 4 8 16 32 and I am math illiterate.

That assumes -- THIS IS A HUGE ASSUMPTION -- the true odds of each team winning it's respective game 1 in 2!!

Quote: Ardent1

That assumes -- THIS IS A HUGE ASSUMPTION -- the true odds of each team winning it's respective game 1 in 2!!

I believe this is a parlay vs. the spread, so it should roughly be 31:1 for fair odds.

Quote: tringlomane

I believe this is a parlay vs. the spread, so it should roughly be 31:1 for fair odds.

You need to reread Buzzard's post -- for the number to double from 2 to 4 to 8, etc, is based on the assumption each team has 1 in 2 chance of winning.

You may be addressing something else; I was just commenting how Buzzard's post can be treated like a Markov chain (commonly used in option pricing).

And, here's the point you may have missed, the 31:1 fair odds that you assert is still based on the assumption each team has a 1 in 2 chance of winning.

Quote: Ardent1

You need to reread Buzzard's post -- for the number to double from 2 to 4 to 8, etc, is based on the assumption each team has 1 in 2 chance of winning.

You may be addressing something else; I was just commenting how Buzzard's post can be treated like a Markov chain (commonly used in option pricing).

And, here's the point you may have missed, the 31:1 fair odds that you assert is still based on the assumption each team has a 1 in 2 chance of winning.

I am assuming the handicappers are doing their jobs right with regard to point spreads, so Buzz's assumption of 50% win percentage per game after the point spread is applied should be pretty valid here. If for some reason this parlay is not against the point spread...or they set terrible lines, then fair odds could definitely deviate from 31:1.

There is great danger in giving this info to a "cooler" like me... you have been warned!

Actually I have had a lifelong need for a bookie. I look like a cop or something and scare them off I think. I refuse to use the internet. So you are safe for now.

Quote: Ardent1

Based on your post, and with the knowledge of a "Nate Silver", you would think people could destroy the lines.

Coincidence: My Christmas gift from one of my sons was Nate Silver's The Signal and the Noise. Haven't started to read it yet. My son seems to think I would like books from New York Times writers; some he has given me have never been opened. Maybe I'll give this one a try.

Quote: Ardent1

Based on your post, and with the knowledge of a "Nate Silver", you would think people could destroy the lines. I heard from Kim Lee, the guy who did the options work for Don S.'s wonging studies and provided some of the math to the "Kill Phil" series, that a lot of sports handicapping is just exaggerated, and some of Kim Lee's criticisms were directed at S. Wong.

So when you stated sharp players, are you talking about the "Nate Silver" types? Or people found on S. Wong's website like Steve Fezzik?

Somebody remove this spam please before Steve gets another sucker to buy his picks !

What was Buzz's super secret betting strategy?
20-5 is pretty damn strong.

Dumb Luck and a short betting span !

Quote: Buzzard

Dumb Luck and a short betting span !

You deserve more credit than that.

Quote: MakingBook

You deserve more credit than that.

Probably but I have a natural hate for touts.

Most bookies I have know are sharp betters, so I really appreciate the compliment. THANKS !

Quote: Wizard

my strategy was simply to compare Mission's lines to the going market lines, in a search for soft lines.

In very straighforward, everyday terms, what is a "soft" line?

Quote: tupp

In very straighforward, everyday terms, what is a "soft" line?

A "soft" line is one that has not adjusted to the market, and is thus exploitable by a smart sport bettor. I'll try a couple examples, although I am no sport betting expert.

The Broncos are playing the Patriots on Sunday in Denver. The Broncos open as a 3 point favorite (-3). On the Friday before the game, Peyton Manning twists his ankle in practice and is declared "questionable" for the game on Sunday. Most of the sports books make an immediate adjustment, changing the Broncos to a 3-point underdog (+3). However, XYZ sports book gets the news late, and the -3 line remains on the board for an hour or so, after the other books have changed it. This is a "soft" line as any smart bettor who knows the current news, will immediately take the Patriots at +3 at XYZ and expect to have a better than 50% chance of winning the bet.

Most "soft" lines are not influenced by injuries, I just used that as an easy example. Most soft lines are just off by a point or a point-and-half compared to the going rates, due to large action coming in on one side or the other. For example, the over/under for Niners at Seahawks is set at 50 1/2 points. One book has a line of 49 1/2 for one reason or another. This would be a "soft" line that a smart bettor might take the over on. Basically the line is out of line with the market.

Someone who is better than me at explaining this should take over now!

Quote: AcesAndEights

A "soft" line is one that has not adjusted to the market, and is thus exploitable by a smart sport bettor. I'll try a couple examples, although I am no sport betting expert.

The Broncos are playing the Patriots on Sunday in Denver. The Broncos open as a 3 point favorite (-3). On the Friday before the game, Peyton Manning twists his ankle in practice and is declared "questionable" for the game on Sunday. Most of the sports books make an immediate adjustment, changing the Broncos to a 3-point underdog (+3). However, XYZ sports book gets the news late, and the -3 line remains on the board for an hour or so, after the other books have changed it. This is a "soft" line as any smart bettor who knows the current news, will immediately take the Patriots at +3 at XYZ and expect to have a better than 50% chance of winning the bet.

Most "soft" lines are not influenced by injuries, I just used that as an easy example. Most soft lines are just off by a point or a point-and-half compared to the going rates, due to large action coming in on one side or the other. For example, the over/under for Niners at Seahawks is set at 50 1/2 points. One book has a line of 49 1/2 for one reason or another. This would be a "soft" line that a smart bettor might take the over on. Basically the line is out of line with the market.

Thank you for the very lucid explanation! Very helpful.

So Wizard's basic method was to look for soft lines within those lines given by the WOV contest, and softness in the WOV contest lines was determined by comparing them to the Pinnacle lines?

Additionally, Wizard tended towards soft contest lines for underdogs -- those teams with "+" point lines, right?

Quote: Buzzard

Somebody remove this spam please before Steve gets another sucker to buy his picks !

Buzzard, learn to read or at least improve your reading comprehension skills.

It's clear (to most people) that I was asking a question -- the only person to bring up buying anything was YOU!!!!

Lastly, Buzzard why do you like to hijack threads???

Wizard, how did you determine your "confidence" picks?

Quote: MakingBook

You deserve more credit than that.

He does, and don't believe him for a second when he claims to be "math illiterate" either.