Super Bowl props 2014
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceYou are really hoping that he will tell you that you got good bets down aren't you? ;-)
And, yet, the casino lines move further and further.... -800 now...
I'm happy with my action thus far. I actually have a benjamin on the Broncos at -2.5 with a local Seahawks fan, and I'm less happy about that one than the two safety wagers I've made here...I think the "fair line" should be much closer to a pick 'em, but we went with the consensus sports book line...which has been influenced by heavy betting on the Denver side early.
Quote: AcesAndEightsI'm happy with my action thus far. I actually have a benjamin on the Broncos at -2.5 with a local Seahawks fan, and I'm less happy about that one than the two safety wagers I've made here...I think the "fair line" should be much closer to a pick 'em, but we went with the consensus sports book line...which has been influenced by heavy betting on the Denver side early.
You will probably win the safety wagers; I just don't think that you got a good price. The sportsbooks seem to agree with me. If our bet was for serious money I would probably lay off some or all of the action for a guaranteed profit (by betting at -800) but I am happy taking my variance on the $30 bet.
As for the game itself, if I lived in Vegas (or was there this past week) I would have been all over the Broncos at pick'em. Not because I think that they will win (although I do) but because I felt that the public would be all over Denver and the line would move. I would figure that I would have a decent shot at a middle, and, if not, I'm happy with my bet on them to win outright.
Unfortunately I don't get to Vegas until late next week, and by then the line will be more or less set in stone. I probably won't bet the game, because I don't want to lay points or big odds on Denver, and I don't really like Seattle that much (if the line REALLY moves I will take Seattle, but that seems unlikely)
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI probably won't bet the game, because I don't want to lay points or big odds on Denver, and I don't really like Seattle that much (if the line REALLY moves I will take Seattle, but that seems unlikely)
I think that as the game gets closer and the weather forecasts get more accurate, the line will move back toward Seattle.
I disagree. If I bet on sports, I would take Denver and ALL the points.
Seattle can't score (as a bitter Russel Wilson fantasy football owner) and Denver can't help but score.
Denver by 21 points, easily.
Second, the Wiz mentioned the sack bets. I couldn't find the stats for sacks but I am sure that Wilson is a good bet for getting caught in the endzone in a sack or holding penalty.
Quote: UTHfanInteresting.
I disagree. If I bet on sports, I would take Denver and ALL the points.
Seattle can't score (as a bitter Russel Wilson fantasy football owner) and Denver can't help but score.
Denver by 21 points, easily.
Second, the Wiz mentioned the sack bets. I couldn't find the stats for sacks but I am sure that Wilson is a good bet for getting caught in the endzone in a sack or holding penalty.
I'm sure that you can find someone to give you a VERY good price on Denver -21
* this pick is not guaranteed.
Quote: WizardNo offense to Bovada, but you always get the best lines on props here in Vegas. LOTS of square action.
Still standing by my prediction of no safety being -800, or there abouts, even in Vegas.
Quote: UTHfanit's my stone cold, bet the mortgage lock special guaranteed.*
* this pick is not guaranteed.
Lol. Reminds me of that simpsons episode. "But they both make such good arguments!" :) (And the Raiders, because they cheat)
Seriously, though... what would be the fair price on Denver -21? Seems like you should be able to get a VERY good price... a small bet could win you a lot, if you really think it has a good chance of happening.
Quote: UTHfanit's my stone cold, bet the mortgage lock special guaranteed.*
* this pick is not guaranteed.
I always like when Tout says if this LOCK loses, you get the next one for free.
Not too many 12+ point superbowl blowouts recently, but still.
Quote: AxiomOfChoice
Seriously, though... what would be the fair price on Denver -21? Seems like you should be able to get a VERY good price... a small bet could win you a lot, if you really think it has a good chance of happening.
I don't know but the LVH prop bet link I posted has Broncos -17.5 for +625.
Quote: UTHfanthe line is only 2.5. From what I've been able to absorb from the wiz, buying 7 points is normal.
Not too many 12+ point superbowl blowouts recently, but still.
You are looking to sell points, not buy them.
Do they do 1-team pleasers?
Quote: UTHfanit's my stone cold, bet the mortgage lock special guaranteed.*
* this pick is not guaranteed.
Well at least someone is confident in the Broncos. As a Denver fan living in Seahawk country, I'm not afraid to say that I'm a little bit scurred :)
| First score touchdown | Casino | Line | Fair | Adv |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| First score touchdown | MGM | -180 | -190 | 1.92% |
| Last score touchdown | MGM | -200 | -212 | 1.92% |
| 2-point conversion -- NO | MGM | -550 | -600 | 1.30% |
| Overtime -- NO | MGM | -1100 | -1840 | 3.47% |
| Safety -- NO | MGM | -1000 | -1846 | 4.35% |
| Under 7.5 punts | MGM | 150 | 131 | 8.23% |
| Largest lead over 14.5 | MGM | 115 | 100 | 7.50% |
| SEA scores in all four qtrs -- NO | MGM | -250 | -325 | 7.06% |
| DEN scores in all four qtrs -- NO | MGM | -230 | -242 | 1.53% |
More to come later. So far it is not looking like a good prop year.
Quote: WizardSorry I have been slow on this topic. I was in the LA area the last few days (no, I didn't see JuicieJennie) but just got back home with prop sheets in hand. I have not updated my analysis with the last season's games, but here are some bets that look good based on the 2000-2012 seasons.
First score touchdown Casino Line Fair Adv First score touchdown MGM -180 -190 1.92% Last score touchdown MGM -200 -212 1.92% 2-point conversion -- NO MGM -550 -600 1.30% Overtime -- NO MGM -1100 -1840 3.47% Safety -- NO MGM -1000 -1846 4.35% Under 7.5 punts MGM 150 131 8.23% Largest lead over 14.5 MGM 115 100 7.50% SEA scores in all four qtrs -- NO MGM -250 -325 7.06% DEN scores in all four qtrs -- NO MGM -230 -242 1.53%
More to come later. So far it is not looking like a good prop year.
For the overtime prop, does your fair line take into account the % of ALL NFL games that go into ot, or the % of games where the spread is -3 that go into ot?
The lower the game spread, the more evenly matched the teams are, and the better the chance of a close game.
Quote: michael99000For the overtime prop, does your fair line take into account the % of ALL NFL games that go into ot, or the % of games where the spread is -3 that go into ot?
All my props consider both the spread and total. The low spread indeed increases the probability of going into overtime.
Quote: FroggerWow, that's great, thanks. Doing all that work and sharing it with us is very generous.
You're welcome. My pleasure.
Quote: WizardAll my props consider both the spread and total. The low spread indeed increases the probability of going into overtime.
That's what I figured.
I guess -1800 just seemed way too high for a fair line on the No Overtime odds, but if that's what the numbers say ill trust it. Pretty much every book I've seen offers that prop much much
lower than -1800.
| Bet | fair line |
|---|---|
| First score TD | -168 |
| Last score TD | -195 |
| Safety | 1520 |
| Overtime | 1413 |
| 2-pt conversion | 628 |
| 3-pt MOV | 538 |
| Under 5.5 TD | -125 |
| Un 2.5 FG | 166 |
| Un 3.5 FG | -143 |
| Un 7.5 punts | 175 |
| Un 9 punts | -137 |
| Largest lead UN 14.5 | -107 |
| Team to score first wins | -162 |
| Team to score last wins | -207 |
| Game tied after 0-0 | 118 |
| Scoreless qtr | 341 |
| Sea scores in all four qtrs | 307 |
| Den scores in all four qtrs | 246 |
An enormous amount of work went into these lines. This is probably going to be the best hot tip you get from me all year. I'll try to add more props as I see what is out there.
Does the weather and/or atmosphere in NYC change things? The Broncos played in high altitude where FGs were easy, but with maybe some wind or snow, maybe FGs are tougher in New York? Just some thoughts. Again, incredible stuff. What is the market rate for this info if it were to be sold on the street with the pedigree?
can anyone comment on this one
Score first and result
seattle first/seatle win +250
denve first/ seatle win +350
seatle first/denv win +250
den first/den win +180
A I right that if u bet 100 on seattle to win ...on each of the 2 bets above.
or
you bet 100 on the denver wins scenarios....on each of the 2 possibilities above
it pays better than if you put 200 on moneyline? on either tream??
I really expect Denver to win first half. The question is going to be by how much they lead....
If you put $100 on sea first/ Seattle win it pays $250... But you lose for covering den first / sea wins. Total in pocket is $350
If you put $100 on den first / sea win it pays $350..., but you lose for covering sea first/ sea wins. Total in pocket $450
Quote: LarrySseattle first/seatle win +250
denve first/ seatle win +350
seatle first/denv win +250
den first/den win +180
I haven't looked at that specifically, but I've learned through the years these props with more than two possible outcomes carry a lot of juice and seldom have any positive EV choices. This particular one carries 13.1% house edge, on average. That is hard to overcome.
Quote: FroggerIs the Super Bowl played a little different than regular season games? Maybe it is just selective memory, but it seems like lots of Super Bowls have lots of punting early on as the teams get into game mode and get their butterflies out, and then there is lots of scoring later on. This could affect some props.
I think this absolutely true. In fact, the one prop I seek out each year is that there will be more points scored in the second half than the first half. Look at the SB results from previous years and this bet hits quite often. I think teams and coaches are afraid to make mistakes early and play conservatively.
Quote: Wizard
Safety 1520
So you think that the books offering no safety at -800 are nuts?
I'm not convinced that this sort of past-game analysis is very accurate for these types of wagers, particularly for rare events.
Also, does it take anything about the teams involved into consideration, or does it assume that all teams are equally likely to score safeties?
Quote: BeardgoatWell let's break it down. You can find SEA at + 120 so betting $200 would win you $240 plus get your $200 back. Total in your pocket $440
If you put $100 on sea first/ Seattle win it pays $250... But you lose for covering den first / sea wins. Total in pocket is $350
If you put $100 on den first / sea win it pays $350..., but you lose for covering sea first/ sea wins. Total in pocket $450
Thanks, Beard. There should be a gamble to english conversion somewhere for the rest of us.
as I said earlier, I will buy/sell/whatever all the points to get a denver winning by 13+ best results bet.
Also, is the Wiz basing his lines on seattle/denver's seasons or all games this season?
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceSo you think that the books offering no safety at -800 are nuts?
They are just trying to balance their action. Every square is betting the yes on a safety so they need the other side.
Quote:I'm not convinced that this sort of past-game analysis is very accurate for these types of wagers, particularly for rare events.
You're entitled to your opinion.
Quote:Also, does it take anything about the teams involved into consideration, or does it assume that all teams are equally likely to score safeties?
It takes into consideration the spread and total. With that bet, these things don't matter much and it comes pretty close to the average over all games.
Quote: WizardIt takes into consideration the spread and total. With that bet, these things don't matter much and it comes pretty close to the average over all games.
With the amount of data you have, what is your confidence interval and confidence level? (ie, "I am <confidence level> percent sure that that fair line is within <confidence interval>") A mean of observed results can be misleading without this information (and, with the same amount of data, these intervals are larger for rarer events -- which is where my concern comes from).
In other words, I don't doubt your analysis, but my question is -- are you sure you have enough data?
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceWith the amount of data you have, what is your confidence interval and confidence level? (ie, "I am <confidence level> percent sure that that fair line is within <confidence interval>") A mean of observed results can be misleading without this information (and, with the same amount of data, these intervals are larger for rarer events -- which is where my concern comes from).
In other words, I don't doubt your analysis, but my question is -- are you sure you have enough data?
Okay, since the 2010 season there have been 3,718 games played. 225 have had at least one safety, for a probability of 6.05%.
The standard deviation on that is p*(1-p)/n^0.5 = 0.0605 * 93.95 / 3718^0.5 = 0.000932.
A 95% confidence interval would have 1.96 standard deviations on either side.
I stated a fair line on the "yes" to be +1520 for this particular game, which equates to a probability of 6.17%. So, my 95% confidence interval on the probability is 6.17% +/- 1.83% = 4.34% to 8.00%.
I'd also like to add that in my opinion the most successful professional gamblers are the ones that do odd-ball stuff where they may not know the exact advantage.
Henry Gordon, first bookie I worked for, testified before the Kefauver Committee on gambling, beat that, the IRS , and the Feds. Not one day in jail. Ran a big book in Miami, then in Baltimore.
Also was a big gambler. Usually got the nickle line, sometimes not.
Two of his favorite sayings.
" I don't want nothing to do with an even bet "
" You will find your best value where no one else is looking. "
Quote: WizardThey are just trying to balance their action. Every square is betting the yes on a safety so they need the other side.
So if the fair line is 1520, then only having to lay -800 looks like a pretty good deal to me. Oh if I only lived in Vegas.... Guess I'll just have to bet on paper.
Quote: BuzzardJust make a mental bet. That way all you can lose is your mind.
And win a whole bucket of coulda/shoulda/woulda ofs...
Quote: darthvaderSo if the fair line is 1520, then only having to lay -800 looks like a pretty good deal to me. Oh if I only lived in Vegas.... Guess I'll just have to bet on paper.
The advantage is only 5.56%, actually. While a good bet in theory, nobody knows better than me that it has lost 3 out of the last 5 years.
I'll be on suicide watch if there is another one this year.
Quote: WizardOkay, since the 2010 season there have been 3,718 games played. 225 have had at least one safety, for a probability of 6.05%.
The standard deviation on that is p*(1-p)/n^0.5 = 0.0605 * 93.95 / 3718^0.5 = 0.000932.
A 95% confidence interval would have 1.96 standard deviations on either side.
I stated a fair line on the "yes" to be +1520 for this particular game, which equates to a probability of 6.17%. So, my 95% confidence interval on the probability is 6.17% +/- 1.83% = 4.34% to 8.00%.
I'd also like to add that in my opinion the most successful professional gamblers are the ones that do odd-ball stuff where they may not know the exact advantage.
Wizard, I ask this out of ignorance, not out of criticism
Do you make a bet in sports soley on math? If so ..does it work?
For me in the case of the safety, out of that 6 percent....I would be asking
were they all bad teams with poor records
were the teams that allowed it ....were they known to have a poor offensive line?
was the teams that got the 2 points always very good defensive teams?
did the teams have no running game which forced the QB to pass where it was apparent to all that the play was gonna be a pass.
In other words do questions like these have to be answered before accepting that 6 percent number as being applicable to these 2 teams playing next week?
All your calculations are way over my head so I cannot comment one way or the other on their validity mathmatically.But assuming they are correct....is that all thats needed for you to make a bet?
You might like to read Sharp Sports Betting by Stanford Wong. He is the one who got me interested in prop betting and he also seems to subscribe to the KISS philosophy.
What do you think for the main bet Wizard. Winner of superbowl with Denver at -2.5 or whatever the line is now and the over/under bet?
Quote: WizardThe advantage is only 5.56%, actually. While a good bet in theory, nobody knows better than me that it has lost 3 out of the last 5 years.
I'll be on suicide watch if there is another one this year.
Oh boy, poor choice of words, I think... sounds like your already committed, just waiting for the guards. ;o)
Pinnacle is offering Den/Sea to win Qtrs. Ties lose.
Sacks by DENVER Defense: Under 2.5 2.100 ... Over 2.5 1.775
Seattle 4th Down Conversion Successful: YES 2.560 ... NO 1.543
Game Line At Pinnacle DEN -2 2.010 ... SEA +2 1.917 ... O/U 47 both are 1.952
GL & GG
Quote: AceCrAAckersWhat do you think for the main bet Wizard. Winner of superbowl with Denver at -2.5 or whatever the line is now and the over/under bet?
Not much opinion. Anyone who knows me knows that I am an underdog bettor. If I were forced at gunpoint to bet the game straight up, it would be on Seattle. However, such a small spread doesn't bring out the underdog effect much.
On a personal note, I'm definitely pulling for Seattle. Lots of family roots there on my father's side.
Quote: WizardOkay, since the 2010 season there have been 3,718 games played. 225 have had at least one safety, for a probability of 6.05%.
The standard deviation on that is p*(1-p)/n^0.5 = 0.0605 * 93.95 / 3718^0.5 = 0.000932.
A 95% confidence interval would have 1.96 standard deviations on either side.
I stated a fair line on the "yes" to be +1520 for this particular game, which equates to a probability of 6.17%. So, my 95% confidence interval on the probability is 6.17% +/- 1.83% = 4.34% to 8.00%.
Ok, thanks. That's exactly what I was looking for. I wasn't quite sure because you said that it took the lines and totals into account (where do you get that historical data from, anyway? Is there a free source or do you pay for it? There are a few things that I've been interested in running...)
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceIs there a free source or do you pay for it? There are a few things that I've been interested in running...)
You're welcome. No, I had to hand enter every score of all 3,718 of those games. Actually, I paid rudeboyoi to do that last few years. No off the shelf data I know of tells you things like whether the first score was a TD or FG.
Quote: michael99000Every NFL game is its own entity, being played under different weather conditions than all other games, by a different set of 104 human beings who possess different skill sets and different strengths and weaknesses. Using historical NFL stats to predict the possibility of one type of play occurring doesn't make any sense. There are many factors unique to each individual football game and it's impossible to know how often, under the exact or even similar circumstances to which this Sundays game is being played under , there has been a safety. And I'm not just talking the spread and total because that tells you very little about each teams ability to produce a safety, or be the victim of a safety.
Really? How would you approach this bet?
Quote: WizardYou're welcome. No, I had to hand enter every score of all 3,718 of those games. Actually, I paid rudeboyoi to do that last few years. No off the shelf data I know of tells you things like whether the first score was a TD or FG.
Oh wow. No, I was talking about more pedestrian data. Home team, away team, spread, total, and final score.
Quote: 1arrowheaddrReally? How would you approach this bet?
With all due respect to the sharps whom the Wizard says wager on this, the true sharp play on this prop is to not bet it at all. The mistake being made in using the 6% occurrence rate of safeties to determine your fair line is that you're treating it as a completely random occurrence, as though it were a number in roullette. Nothing that occurs on a sports playing field after the coin flip is random. The players themselves cause each event to happen, along with the coaching decisions, and the weather. There is no way to know how often under the conditions we will have on Sunday, that a safety has occurred in a game.
For instance, how often has there been a safety in a game involving the leagues #1 defense? How often has there been a safety when the wind was blowing at > X mph ?
Anyone who studies the game of football knows there are specific sets of events that lead to a safety. The quality of the punters and the punt rush teams plays a huge role. The quality of the interior offensive lineman. Etc etc
If I had no choice but to bet it, I'd bet No just because of the math the wizard has outlined.
