SuperBowl NO Safety Prop?
Any sites that would give me historical odds/results?
Also, any site that can give me the full prop sheet for the 2018 SB?
Thank you!
I think you can expect to see -700 if you price shop well.
This year I'll bet it again but not for much. Most places will offer the no at -800 but you can find -600 to -750 if you shop around. The best prices are usually the morning before the game -- when the squares pour into town to watch the game and pound the yes side.
Quote: WizardThe dreaded "no safety" bet. I bet it every year. In the peak of my prop betting days, I bet around $16,000 on to win about $2,000. However, four Super Bowl safeties in a span of six years (2008, 2011, 2012, and 2013) rattled my confidence not just on this bet but Super Bowl prop betting in general. Overall, only about 5% of NFL games have a safety. However, is there something different about a Super Bowl? A topic debated to this day.
This year I'll bet it again but not for much. Most places will offer the no at -800 but you can find -600 to -750 if you shop around. The best prices are usually the morning before the game -- when the squares pour into town to watch the game and pound the yes side.
Taking the bad luck (no other word for it) out of it, any reason why not to bet at the levels you did in the past? Assume you see the SB the same as any other game in terms of it happening. I don’t think you fall on the side of the SB being a different animal in this regards.
Not trying to blow anyone’s play but is it just a percentage of bankroll play to not go all out on a play that provides such an advantage based on historical data?
I seem to recall that you posted scans of some books prop sheets for the last year or two. If you’re really looking for prop history, maybe that’s your path to finding it.
At any rate, will you be posting prop sheets again?
And perhaps more importantly, will you be taking member’s action?
Also, was looking at the Non-QB forward pass ( or if I recall reception). Looking for how to find +EV props really.
Quote: HLgrinder
Also, was looking at the Non-QB forward pass ( or if I recall reception). Looking for how to find +EV props really.
The expected value of any bet *should* be what the market value is. (If you could show that this isn't true you should have already earned millions; if you haven't already earned millions, it means *you* aren't very good at finding differences between EV and market price). Which means if you can beat market value, you should also be beating the house edge and have found something that is +EV. The market becomes clearer and clearer each day, but even on Monday there were some things to be found. Saw 1q over 9.5 +110 and under +100. Very hard to lose betting those
The bet you're be looking for is over 2.5 players with a pass attempt (back-up QBs would qualify)
Quote: TomG
The bet you're be looking for is over 2.5 players with a pass attempt (back-up QBs would qualify)
Is that only forward pass attempts?
Quote: NokTangIs that only forward pass attempts?
It's statistical pass attempts on the official NFL stats. So, it is only forward passes.
WILL THERE BE A SAFETY:
YES +600
NO -900
well maybeQuote: HLgrinderAny sites that would give me historical odds/results?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_safety_records#Super_Bowl_safeties
9 in 51
table of data I put together
| S Bowl # | game saftey | run count | probability after SB |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.000000 |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 0.000000 |
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.000000 |
| 4 | 0 | 0 | 0.000000 |
| 5 | 0 | 0 | 0.000000 |
| 6 | 0 | 0 | 0.000000 |
| 7 | 0 | 0 | 0.000000 |
| 8 | 0 | 0 | 0.000000 |
| 9 | 1 | 1 | 0.111111 |
| 10 | 1 | 2 | 0.200000 |
| 11 | 0 | 2 | 0.181818 |
| 12 | 0 | 2 | 0.166667 |
| 13 | 0 | 2 | 0.153846 |
| 14 | 0 | 2 | 0.142857 |
| 15 | 0 | 2 | 0.133333 |
| 16 | 0 | 2 | 0.125000 |
| 17 | 0 | 2 | 0.117647 |
| 18 | 0 | 2 | 0.111111 |
| 19 | 0 | 2 | 0.105263 |
| 20 | 1 | 3 | 0.150000 |
| 21 | 1 | 4 | 0.190476 |
| 22 | 0 | 4 | 0.181818 |
| 23 | 0 | 4 | 0.173913 |
| 24 | 0 | 4 | 0.166667 |
| 25 | 1 | 5 | 0.200000 |
| 26 | 0 | 5 | 0.192308 |
| 27 | 0 | 5 | 0.185185 |
| 28 | 0 | 5 | 0.178571 |
| 29 | 0 | 5 | 0.172414 |
| 30 | 0 | 5 | 0.166667 |
| 31 | 0 | 5 | 0.161290 |
| 32 | 0 | 5 | 0.156250 |
| 33 | 0 | 5 | 0.151515 |
| 34 | 0 | 5 | 0.147059 |
| 35 | 0 | 5 | 0.142857 |
| 36 | 0 | 5 | 0.138889 |
| 37 | 0 | 5 | 0.135135 |
| 38 | 0 | 5 | 0.131579 |
| 39 | 0 | 5 | 0.128205 |
| 40 | 0 | 5 | 0.125000 |
| 41 | 0 | 5 | 0.121951 |
| 42 | 0 | 5 | 0.119048 |
| 43 | 1 | 6 | 0.139535 |
| 44 | 0 | 6 | 0.136364 |
| 45 | 0 | 6 | 0.133333 |
| 46 | 1 | 7 | 0.152174 |
| 47 | 1 | 8 | 0.170213 |
| 48 | 1 | 9 | 0.187500 |
| 49 | 0 | 9 | 0.183673 |
| 50 | 0 | 9 | 0.180000 |
| 51 | 0 | 9 | 0.176471 |
| 52 | 4-Feb | 4-Feb | 4-Feb |
1st score a safety!
the Denver 2 points was funny still to watch!
Sally
I love thus guy.Quote: Ace2Since there have been 4 safeties in the last 9 years, about 80 years worth of safeties have been used over that period. So there won’t be another safety due for at least 71 years.
Quote: BozTaking the bad luck (no other word for it) out of it, any reason why not to bet at the levels you did in the past? Assume you see the SB the same as any other game in terms of it happening. I don’t think you fall on the side of the SB being a different animal in this regards.
Not trying to blow anyone’s play but is it just a percentage of bankroll play to not go all out on a play that provides such an advantage based on historical data?
At its all time high around 2007, my income was many times what it is now. I made too much to know how to spend it so it didn't bother me to lay out 250K on Super Bowl props including 16K on the no safety. It all fell down like a house of cards (pun intended) but that is a story for another day.
If I followed Kelly, which I should, I'd still lay out a bundle on the no safety. A problem with Kelly is some bets only come along once a year so if you lose, you can't just keep grinding it out but have to lick your wounds for a solid year before you get another chance at it.
Quote: WizardOverall, only about 5% of NFL games have a safety. However, is there something different about a Super Bowl? A topic debated to this day.
Are you aware of any more detailed analysis on the topic?
It seems to me that it'd be interesting to look at:
1) Safety rate vs quality of defenses, in particular sack rate
2) Safety rate vs QB ability to avoid sacks
(1) might suggest a higher safety rate for the SB. (2) might suggest lower. I doubt it'd be a huge difference, but the numbers might still be interesting. Maybe I'll look at (1) if I have a few free hours.
I expect to put five figures on no regardless.
Quote: WizardAt its all time high around 2007, my income was many times what it is now. I made too much to know how to spend it so it didn't bother me to lay out 250K on Super Bowl props including 16K on the no safety. It all fell down like a house of cards (pun intended) but that is a story for another day.
If I followed Kelly, which I should, I'd still lay out a bundle on the no safety. A problem with Kelly is some bets only come along once a year so if you lose, you can't just keep grinding it out but have to lick your wounds for a solid year before you get another chance at it.
I did that with Overtime. Nearly won it one year, but the kickoff went out of bounds. Took another ten years or so for it to finally hit.
Quote: SM777It's statistical pass attempts on the official NFL stats. So, it is only forward passes.
We'll see what the odds are...(with 2.5 as the number)
I'm assuming from your post it's both quarterbacks, which is two, so any other person be it a trick play or the starter gets injured(after attempting a pass) and replacement makes a pass attempt, botched punt, etc..
At first thought it seems like a fun prop to bet if someone has to bet such things, especially with some good odds.
Quote: NokTangWe'll see what the odds are...(with 2.5 as the number)
I'm assuming from your post it's both quarterbacks, which is two, so any other person be it a trick play or the starter gets injured(after attempting a pass) and replacement makes a pass attempt, botched punt, etc..
At first thought it seems like a fun prop to bet if someone has to bet such things, especially with some good odds.
From my years in the sportsbook, it's a very popular prop for the tourists to bet over and hope for something. They enjoy rooting for it.
Could be backup QB, some type of backwards pass by QB to the WR, who then throws it deep, anything really.
Quote: WizardAt its all time high around 2007, my income was many times what it is now. I made too much to know how to spend it so it didn't bother me to lay out 250K on Super Bowl props including 16K on the no safety. It all fell down like a house of cards (pun intended) but that is a story for another day.
If I followed Kelly, which I should, I'd still lay out a bundle on the no safety. A problem with Kelly is some bets only come along once a year so if you lose, you can't just keep grinding it out but have to lick your wounds for a solid year before you get another chance at it.
Thanks for the explanation. I was thinking of it as a value bet assuming the historical odds are 20/1 and you are paying less than half that. So I was thinking of it as more of what percentage of a bankroll would someone bet on a play like this.
But I also understand your point on how long it is between plays. Thanks again!
Quote: WizardAt its all time high around 2007, my income was many times what it is now. I made too much to know how to spend it so it didn't bother me to lay out 250K on Super Bowl props including 16K on the no safety. It all fell down like a house of cards (pun intended) but that is a story for another day.
If I followed Kelly, which I should, I'd still lay out a bundle on the no safety. A problem with Kelly is some bets only come along once a year so if you lose, you can't just keep grinding it out but have to lick your wounds for a solid year before you get another chance at it.
On the other hand, it doesn't really matter what the specific bet is, but the likelihood of winning and the odds.
If an event has a 1 in 10 chance of occurring and I can bet it at -600, for example, I don't care if that bet is on a safety in a game, Tim Bradley getting a broken leg, Trump not getting re-elected, that there's gonna be traffic on the freeway today, or whatever else you can supposedly bet on. So while you may only get one shot at a no-safety in a SB bet once a year, if you're looking for bets through out the year, you should be able to find several bets that are the same or similar through out the year, to smooth out the variance.
As far as if a safety is less or more likely to occur during a SB, I have no idea. Although, my 2 cents is that it is possible it's more likely since it isn't a typical game. It's super hyped up, it is (or should be) the two best teams in the NFL, it's a "do or die" game (pull out all the tricks in the book, don't save nothing), and I'm sure there's a degree of nervousness and anxiety for the players [although after a few minutes into the game, I don't think nerves would play a huge factor, mostly just before and during beginning]. I'd learn towards YES, a safety is more likely during the super bowl -- imagine being the center and you're pushed back to your own 1 yard line. Although that'd be the same for poor passes as well as fumbles and penalties.
Quote: djatcat Westgate
WILL THERE BE A SAFETY:
YES +600
NO -900
Caesars also has +600/-900.
I'm confused about bets like... "Team to score first in the game"... Eagles +115 ...Patriots -145. Wouldn't whomever wins the coin toss be the heavy favorite to score first in the game? Assuming the toss is random, that means it should be 50/50 on who the favorite is to score first in the game, correct? Yet you can get it at +115 odds? I could see perhaps if one team had the best defense in the league or something, but I don't think that's the case here...
Another intriguing bet... "Will there be a scoreless quarter" YES +320... NO -400. I don't have the statistical data, especially for playoff/super bowl games/etc, but I've gotta figure a scoreless quarter in the super bowl has worse odds than 4-1? Again - starting to do a little research in to super bowl quarter scores but off this is off the top of my head.
NUMBERS HELP: Last 15 super bowls there has been 4 games with a scoreless quarter (2014 & 2007 & 2004 & 2003)... Prior data might be skewed due to rule changes/etc, but I would think most would agree that the rule changes help with teams scoring more to get higher scores? There's just SO MANY ways to look at the data though. You could do super bowls, then you could include conference finals, then you could look at the teams individually to see their scoreless quarters, etc... So many numbers on numbers I could find 10 arguments FOR and 10 more AGAINST any particular bet. How does one know what the real base line is?
Quote: RomesI love the No Safety, but always hate how much you have to stuff on it to make so little, of course. I was going to start making a heavy bet on this every year some years back but the Wiz's tale of poor variance scared me off that train =P. Though years back when I wanted to make this bet I didn't have the proper bankroll to bet what I wanted to, so perhaps the fear was a good thing to keep me from over betting!
I'm confused about bets like... "Team to score first in the game"... Eagles +115 ...Patriots -145. Wouldn't whomever wins the coin toss be the heavy favorite to score first in the game? Assuming the toss is random, that means it should be 50/50 on who the favorite is to score first in the game, correct? Yet you can get it at +115 odds? I could see perhaps if one team had the best defense in the league or something, but I don't think that's the case here...
Another intriguing bet... "Will there be a scoreless quarter" YES +320... NO -400. I don't have the statistical data, especially for playoff/super bowl games/etc, but I've gotta figure a scoreless quarter in the super bowl has worse odds than 4-1? Again - starting to do a little research in to super bowl quarter scores but off this is off the top of my head.
Whoever* not whomever. Le sigh.
I don't know how likely a team is to score when they receive the kick off, on their opening drive. I think you may be putting too much emphasis or advantage on that, though. Also, if they go 3 n out, now the enemy team is in a much better field position than if they were to receive first.
Quote: RomesNUMBERS HELP: Last 15 super bowls there has been 4 games with a scoreless quarter (2014 & 2007 & 2004 & 2003)... Prior data might be skewed due to rule changes/etc, but I would think most would agree that the rule changes help with teams scoring more to get higher scores? There's just SO MANY ways to look at the data though. You could do super bowls, then you could include conference finals, then you could look at the teams individually to see their scoreless quarters, etc... So many numbers on numbers I could find 10 arguments FOR and 10 more AGAINST any particular bet. How does one know what the real base line is?
Git gud. That's how.
whom·ev·erQuote: RSWhoever* not whomever. Le sigh.
ho͞omˈevər/Submit
pronounformalliterary
used instead of “whoever” as the object of a verb or preposition.
Perhaps I am... but in my unexperienced eyes that makes quite the difference. Look at live betting the game. Say the Eagles get the ball first... Well then on the live bet "first team to score" the eagles will go negative (aka favorite) maybe like -150 or something. So the favorite to score first (again baring any exceptional defenses or offences and assuming the teams are "close" to even enough - which the spread is within 1 TD) would be decided mainly by the coin toss, which is a 50/50...Quote: RSI don't know how likely a team is to score when they receive the kick off, on their opening drive. I think you may be putting too much emphasis or advantage on that, though. Also, if they go 3 n out, now the enemy team is in a much better field position than if they were to receive first.
[sarcasm]Great advice. Thanks![/sarcasm]Quote: RSGit gud. That's how.
Quote: Romeswhom·ev·er
ho͞omˈevər/Submit
pronounformalliterary
used instead of “whoever” as the object of a verb or preposition.
Bruh.
"Wouldn't whomever wins the coin toss be the heavy favorite to score first in the game? "
I....I can't even. #Facepalm #DappingOnMyHaters
I Can Forgive A Misuse Of Whomever/Whoever, Just Please Don't Pretend To Be Smart And Start Typing Like This.
Quote: RomesPerhaps I am... but in my unexperienced eyes that makes quite the difference. Look at live betting the game. Say the Eagles get the ball first... Well then on the live bet "first team to score" the eagles will go negative (aka favorite) maybe like -150 or something. So the favorite to score first (again baring any exceptional defenses or offences and assuming the teams are "close" to even enough - which the spread is within 1 TD) would be decided mainly by the coin toss, which is a 50/50...
[sarcasm]Great advice. Thanks![/sarcasm]
I'm not really sure, although I'd think the odds wouldn't change that drastically.
Quote: speedycrapLet's focus on football. No English class please.
He's been hanging around DonS over on that blackjack forum to much.
Quote: RomesNUMBERS HELP: Last 15 super bowls there has been 4 games with a scoreless quarter (2014 & 2007 & 2004 & 2003)
Last year the first quarter was scoreless, my buddy hit that prop
Quote: JohnzimboLast year the first quarter was scoreless, my buddy hit that prop
If I were betting that prop, and I might be, I would be solidly on Yes, there will be a scoreless quarter.
They changed the rules this year on how they review a completed pass. I have never seen so many scores taken back in a single season. Add the Eagles awesome defensive performance against my beloved Vikes, and I think it's a good bet.
Quote: RomesI'm confused about bets like... "Team to score first in the game"... Eagles +115 ...Patriots -145. Wouldn't whomever wins the coin toss be the heavy favorite to score first in the game?
No
Quote: RomesAssuming the toss is random, that means it should be 50/50 on who the favorite is to score first in the game, correct? Yet you can get it at +115 odds?
If the Eagles start the game receiving the opening kick, they should be around 56-58% to score first. If the Patriots start the game receiving, they should be around 64-66% to score first (or 34-36% for the Eagles. If half the time the Eagles are slight favorites with fair odds of -130 and half the time they are dogs with fair odds of +190, the fair odds of the bet would be around +120
Quote: RSOn the other hand, it doesn't really matter what the specific bet is, but the likelihood of winning and the odds.
If an event has a 1 in 10 chance of occurring and I can bet it at -600, for example, I don't care if that bet is on a safety in a game, Tim Bradley getting a broken leg, Trump not getting re-elected, that there's gonna be traffic on the freeway today, or whatever else you can supposedly bet on. So while you may only get one shot at a no-safety in a SB bet once a year, if you're looking for bets through out the year, you should be able to find several bets that are the same or similar through out the year, to smooth out the variance.
Last August Kelly Criterion said to bet up to 80% of our entire bankrolls on Mayweather -- and we could find plenty of places that would book that action. Someone with a paid off house, job, investments, and cash in the bank should have been betting $500,000 or more on one single circus act, according to that formula. There is no way something like that could ever be smoothed out (for good or bad).
There will be -700 favorites all the time that are good bets, but they'll almost never be as easy to find as the no safety or no overtime.
P.S. These stats do not include their SB losses to GB in ‘96 or to the Bears in ‘85.
I believe the optimal Kelly bet is 55%. Advantage divided by payout (on a to-1 basis, not on a for-1 basis)Quote: WizardIf we assume a 5% probability of a safety and laying 8 to 1 against, the advantage is 6.875%. The optimal Kelly bet is 6.11% of bankroll.
Quote: smoothgrhAt the end of the game, no dry pants among the safety prop bettors!!!
Yeah those 2 plays around the goal line were very close. Could have even had a holding call down there for a safety
Quote: WizardIf we assume a 5% probability of a safety and laying 8 to 1 against, the advantage is 6.875%. The optimal Kelly bet is 6.11% of bankroll.
95% chance to win 1, 5% chance to lose 8 (on an 8-unit bet), so your EV is:
0.95 - (0.05*8) = 0.95 - 0.4 = 0.55 units
0.55 / 8 = 6.875% = advantage
kelly = advantage/pay_to_one
.06875 / (1/8) = 0.06875*8 = 0.55 = 55%
optimal kelly bet is 55% of BR, unless i done messed somethin up?
Quote: RSkelly = advantage/pay_to_one
as an approximation, kelly = advantage/variance is what I thought it was, where advantage keeps its % designation. Perhaps pay-to-one serves where the variance is unknown, but odds are constructed out of probability, not variance, so this seems like an apples and oranges thing.
it would seem 55% can be ruled out in any case, I mean, come on!
Quote: AussieWhat did the No get down to on the safety market? What was the best odds available. I saw online sports books with +900 for the yes. Did the no get down far enough to arb it?
I bet it twice at -700 and -800.
