Super Bowl 55
Poll
 | 5 votes (26.31%) | ||
| | 1 vote (5.26%) | ||
| | 2 votes (10.52%) | ||
| | 4 votes (21.05%) | ||
| | 3 votes (15.78%) | ||
| | 1 vote (5.26%) | ||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| | 1 vote (5.26%) | ||
| | 3 votes (15.78%) |
19 members have voted
Quote: speedycrapQuote: unJonI’ll take they other side of it. Please confirm. Happy to escrow with someone or let it stand on honor to pay after game. Please confirm. [/qDear ]Wizard,it is a confirmed bet. I have KC -4 even money. You have TB. US$30.
? Your post is messed up with quotes. We have a bet?
Station Casinos
South Point group
Boyd Gaming
As long as I'm at it, here are a couple from last year.
Boyd Gaming (2020)
Stations (2020)
From Speedycrap
Re: Super Bowl 55 US$30 bet KC -4 even (My pick)
Dear Sir:
I wonder whether I have a bet with which one of you or both of you. Please confirm. Thanks.
Regards
Speedy
Quote: speedycrapTo: Wizard and UnJon
From Speedycrap
Re: Super Bowl 55 US$30 bet KC -4 even (My pick)
Dear Sir:
I wonder whether I have a bet with which one of you or both of you. Please confirm. Thanks.
Regards
Speedy
You have a bet with me. You have KC-4 I have TB +4. Both at even money.
Quote: speedycrapTo: Wizard and UnJon
We never closed the deal on a bet.
Cofirm bet US$30. Winnings will be settled within 72 hours with paypal?? OK???Quote: unJonYou have a bet with me. You have KC-4 I have TB +4. Both at even money.
Thanks Wizard for the clearance. NO bet confirmed.Quote: WizardWe never closed the deal on a bet.
Quote: speedycrapCofirm bet US$30. Winnings will be settled within 72 hours with paypal?? OK???
I don’t have PayPal. Can do Venmo, Zelle or Amazon e-gift card. Any of those work?
No problem, we will find a way to settle. I will learn a new way to send/receive money.Quote: unJonI don’t have PayPal. Can do Venmo, Zelle or Amazon e-gift card. Any of those work?
Quote: speedycrapNo problem, we will find a way to settle. I will learn a new way to send/receive money.
Bet confirmed. For the record, if I win, will ask that you pay Mike to be used towards next spring fling fund.
No problem at all.Quote: unJonBet confirmed. For the record, if I win, will ask that you pay Mike to be used towards next spring fling fund.
Hmmm....Quote: WizardI just uploaded three Super Bowl 55 prop sheets. Enjoy.
Station Casinos
South Point group
Boyd Gaming
I downloaded Westgate, William Hill and Circa. Of all six, do you have a preference which I use for the bets I’m gonna PM you about?
Quote: DJTeddyBearI downloaded Westgate, William Hill and Circa. Of all six, do you have a preference which I use for the bets I’m gonna PM you about?
You may choose, but stay consistent with a single source.
Here is the link to the historical data: https://nflscorigami.com/
The line for the "No" is -1400. Smash this?
https://twitter.com/FDSportsbook/status/1357406501980286976/photo/1
. I think that the possibility of such a high scoring game for both teams opens up a reasonable chance of a scoragami. I’m not sure -1400 is such a good bet.Quote: ActuarialSaw a very interesting prop bet that seems very mispriced. Fan Duel sportsbook has a "scorigami" bet - a bet that the two scores will form a unique combination (not permutation) that has never been seen before in NFL history.
Here is the link to the historical data: https://nflscorigami.com/
The line for the "No" is -1400. Smash this?
https://twitter.com/FDSportsbook/status/1357406501980286976/photo/1
Cool link. Every cell in the graph shows the first and last times it happened with links to the box scores. Cool.Quote: Actuarial...Here is the link to the historical data: https://nflscorigami.com/
The line for the "No" is -1400.
FYI: The ‘Yes’ is +1100.
Quote: ActuarialSaw a very interesting prop bet that seems very mispriced. Fan Duel sportsbook has a "scorigami" bet - a bet that the two scores will form a unique combination (not permutation) that has never been seen before in NFL history.
Here is the link to the historical data: https://nflscorigami.com/
The line for the "No" is -1400. Smash this?
Quote: SOOPOO. I think that the possibility of such a high scoring game for both teams opens up a reasonable chance of a scoragami. I’m not sure -1400 is such a good bet.
very interesting - I acknowledge SOOPOO's point but there is also the thing that the 13 scorigamis in the last 2 years reduced the chance for one this year
without considering those 2 points, I figured the edge this way -
and the 2 important things are - the edge is not as large as many might estimate - and also, it's a very unpopular kind of bet - risking much to win a small amount - anyway here goes -
if anyone finds any errors - please edit and correct
there were 13 scorigamis in the last 2 seasons - 9 in 2020 - 4 in 2019 - there were a total of 526 games in the 2 years including playoff games
that is what I used, the only stats on it I could get, and that works out to be one scorigami every 40.46 games
so, I used the number 40 - to cut down on making the math more mistake prone and also to be more on the conservative side
if a player lost one bet of $1400 and won the other 39 bets he would have a profit of $2500
his total action would have been (40 * 1400) = $56,000
his edge would be only be 4.46% ...........................($2500 divided by $56,000)
it's a pretty nice edge - not fantastic for a sporting event - but maybe not such a great bet when considering that it's not very enjoyable for many to risk so much to win so little
the link is to every single NFL score in case anybody makes this bet and wants to check it out:
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/game-scores.htm
*
Quote: ActuarialThe line for the "No" is -1400. Smash this?
Smash, I did. I'm in a rush to get out the door, but I'll write up my method later today or tomorrow.
Bottom line is my probability of a scorigami is 0.010736. Fair odds on the yes are 92 to 1.
Quote: WizardSmash, I did. I'm in a rush to get out the door, but I'll write up my method later today or tomorrow.
Bottom line is my probability of a scorigami is 0.010736. Fair odds on the yes are 92 to 1.
I'll take 75-1 for as much money as you will let me bet on the yes! Mike.... I am sure you are not factoring in the huge increase in missed extra points, huge increase in both two point successes and failures, etc..... These increase scoragamis since the first many decades these rules did not exist! (Longer XP, thus more 2pt conversions, helmet to helmet fouls, less offensive holding calls, more roughing calls, ball starts on 25, not 20, etc....) It is not implausible for the loser to have the highest score ever by a losing team.... a scorigami!
I guess Flutie will always have that on him for Patriots QB comparisons.Quote: billryanThe only thing Tom Brady has not accomplished in his storied career is a drop kick.
Quote: WizardSmash, I did. Fair odds on the yes are 92 to 1.
I'm going to put this out there - if I'm mistaken in any way I apologize - but I don't think I'm mistaken
if the fair odds are 92/1 and the book offers -1400
and a player wins 92 times betting $1,400 he will win $9,200 - and if he loses one time he will lose $1,400 - his net profit is $7,800
his total action (93 * $1,400) is $130,200
his edge is 5.99% ($7,800 divided by $130,200)
the edge is still not large
for comparison purposes - a winning player who can hit 57% on traditional against the spread bets in the NFL has an edge of 8.8%
on the scorigami bet:
if he bets $10,000 his dollar expectation is to average $599 profit on the bet in the long run
if he bets $1,400 his dollar expectation is to average $83.86 profit on the bet in the long run
if he bets $1,000 his dollar expectation is to average $59.90 profit on the bet in the long run
it's a lot of money to risk for a comparatively small edge and small profit
I still don't think it's a great bet - but that comes down to a matter of opinion - obviously others could have a different opinion
*
Quote: billryanThe only thing Tom Brady has not accomplished in his storied career is a drop kick.
That is exactly why Doug Flutie is a better NFL player than Brady.
Quote: SOOPOOI'll take 75-1 for as much money as you will let me bet on the yes! It is not implausible for the loser to have the highest score ever by a losing team.... a scorigami!
the highest score ever by a losing team is 51 - not impossible but I would say very, very unlikely for the loser to score more than that
more important - as you can see from the image - the highest Super Bowl scores have been way, way less than the highest playoff and highest regular season scores, and that might be what Mr. Wizard is looking at
the obvious reason for this is the much larger sample size - but it also is likely to have to do with the increased pressure in the Super Bowl - which IMO is much more likely to affect the offense than the defense
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-scoring_NFL_games#:~:text=The%20Washington%20Redskins%20and%20the,outscored%20the%20Giants%2072%E2%80%9341.
Quote: WizardSmash, I did. I'm in a rush to get out the door, but I'll write up my method later today or tomorrow.
Bottom line is my probability of a scorigami is 0.010736. Fair odds on the yes are 92 to 1.
I think I didn't correctly account for the fact that a non-tied score can happen two ways. For example, there has never been a score of 5 to 6 in an NFL game. However, that could happen two ways in the Super Bowl:
TB 5 -- KC 6
TB 6 -- KC 5
Looking at games from 1994 (when the two-point conversion rule began) to 2018, the probability of a given side having a total of five points is 0.000396762. The probability of a given side having a total of six points is 0.021187113.
Since there are two combinations for a 5-6 score, I contend a decent estimate of the probability is 2*0.000396762*0.021187113 = 0.00001681.
Doing this for every set of scores that hasn't happened yet, I get a probability of 0.017925, or 1 in 55.
Any comments?
| Total | Total | Combined Probability |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | 170 | 0.013490 |
| 1 | 0 | 0.000000 |
| 2 | 2 | 0.000159 |
| 3 | 303 | 0.024044 |
| 4 | 0 | 0.000000 |
| 5 | 5 | 0.000397 |
| 6 | 267 | 0.021187 |
| 7 | 420 | 0.033328 |
| 8 | 29 | 0.002301 |
| 9 | 188 | 0.014918 |
| 10 | 706 | 0.056023 |
| 11 | 32 | 0.002539 |
| 12 | 123 | 0.009760 |
| 13 | 646 | 0.051262 |
| 14 | 530 | 0.042057 |
| 15 | 128 | 0.010157 |
| 16 | 434 | 0.034439 |
| 17 | 892 | 0.070782 |
| 18 | 91 | 0.007221 |
| 19 | 282 | 0.022377 |
| 20 | 860 | 0.068243 |
| 21 | 511 | 0.040549 |
| 22 | 189 | 0.014998 |
| 23 | 548 | 0.043485 |
| 24 | 821 | 0.065148 |
| 25 | 118 | 0.009364 |
| 26 | 267 | 0.021187 |
| 27 | 673 | 0.053404 |
| 28 | 382 | 0.030313 |
| 29 | 131 | 0.010395 |
| 30 | 336 | 0.026662 |
| 31 | 578 | 0.045866 |
| 32 | 61 | 0.004841 |
| 33 | 146 | 0.011585 |
| 34 | 394 | 0.031265 |
| 35 | 200 | 0.015870 |
| 36 | 71 | 0.005634 |
| 37 | 163 | 0.012934 |
| 38 | 265 | 0.021028 |
| 39 | 30 | 0.002381 |
| 40 | 50 | 0.003968 |
| 41 | 146 | 0.011585 |
| 42 | 78 | 0.006189 |
| 43 | 25 | 0.001984 |
| 44 | 58 | 0.004602 |
| 45 | 85 | 0.006745 |
| 46 | 7 | 0.000555 |
| 47 | 16 | 0.001270 |
| 48 | 47 | 0.003730 |
| 49 | 35 | 0.002777 |
| 50 | 5 | 0.000397 |
| 51 | 15 | 0.001190 |
| 52 | 14 | 0.001111 |
| 53 | 1 | 0.000079 |
| 54 | 4 | 0.000317 |
| 55 | 6 | 0.000476 |
| 56 | 6 | 0.000476 |
| 57 | 2 | 0.000159 |
| 58 | 3 | 0.000238 |
| 59 | 5 | 0.000397 |
| 60 | 0 | 0.000000 |
| 61 | 0 | 0.000000 |
| 62 | 2 | 0.000159 |
| Total | 12602 | 1.000000 |
For any given score combination that has never happened, I take 2*probability(score 1)*probability(score 2). Sum that up for every unseen score and you get my answer in the previous post.
I'll save the forum some trouble and offer my own criticism:
1. This does not take into account the probability a team scores a total of one point. Yes, the NFL has such a thing as a one-point safety. Since no team has ever had a total of one at the end of the game, my method assigns a probability of zero to this. To end the game with one point, would take scoring ONLY a one-point safety in the entire game.
2. This assumes the two individual team scores are independent of each other. In reality, I think there is a negative correlation. If one team scores a LOT of points, like over 50, it is probably at the expense of the other team scoring very little.
My defense is factoring in these criticisms would have had a very marginal effect, but significantly increased the difficulty and complexity of the analysis.
Quote: WizardTo expand, this table shows the count, from 1994 to 2018, of individual team scores and the probability.
Total Total Combined Probability 0 170 0.013490 1 0 0.000000 2 2 0.000159 3 303 0.024044 4 0 0.000000 5 5 0.000397 6 267 0.021187 7 420 0.033328 8 29 0.002301 9 188 0.014918 10 706 0.056023 11 32 0.002539 12 123 0.009760 13 646 0.051262 14 530 0.042057 15 128 0.010157 16 434 0.034439 17 892 0.070782 18 91 0.007221 19 282 0.022377 20 860 0.068243 21 511 0.040549 22 189 0.014998 23 548 0.043485 24 821 0.065148 25 118 0.009364 26 267 0.021187 27 673 0.053404 28 382 0.030313 29 131 0.010395 30 336 0.026662 31 578 0.045866 32 61 0.004841 33 146 0.011585 34 394 0.031265 35 200 0.015870 36 71 0.005634 37 163 0.012934 38 265 0.021028 39 30 0.002381 40 50 0.003968 41 146 0.011585 42 78 0.006189 43 25 0.001984 44 58 0.004602 45 85 0.006745 46 7 0.000555 47 16 0.001270 48 47 0.003730 49 35 0.002777 50 5 0.000397 51 15 0.001190 52 14 0.001111 53 1 0.000079 54 4 0.000317 55 6 0.000476 56 6 0.000476 57 2 0.000159 58 3 0.000238 59 5 0.000397 60 0 0.000000 61 0 0.000000 62 2 0.000159 Total 12602 1.000000
For any given score combination that has never happened, I take 2*probability(score 1)*probability(score 2). Sum that up for every unseen score and you get my answer in the previous post.
I'll save the forum some trouble and offer my own criticism:
1. This does not take into account the probability a team scores a total of one point. Yes, the NFL has such a thing as a one-point safety. Since no team has ever had a total of one at the end of the game, my method assigns a probability of zero to this. To end the game with one point, would take scoring ONLY a one-point safety in the entire game.
2. This assumes the two individual team scores are independent of each other. In reality, I think there is a negative correlation. If one team scores a LOT of points, like over 50, it is probably at the expense of the other team scoring very little.
My defense is factoring in these criticisms would have had a very marginal effect, but significantly increased the difficulty and complexity of the analysis.
Have you thought about testing this distribution against the actual final scores over the same period to check the goodness of fit?
Quote: unJonQuote: WizardTo expand, this table shows the count, from 1994 to 2018, of individual team scores and the probability.
Total Total Combined Probability 0 170 0.013490 1 0 0.000000 2 2 0.000159 3 303 0.024044 4 0 0.000000 5 5 0.000397 6 267 0.021187 7 420 0.033328 8 29 0.002301 9 188 0.014918 10 706 0.056023 11 32 0.002539 12 123 0.009760 13 646 0.051262 14 530 0.042057 15 128 0.010157 16 434 0.034439 17 892 0.070782 18 91 0.007221 19 282 0.022377 20 860 0.068243 21 511 0.040549 22 189 0.014998 23 548 0.043485 24 821 0.065148 25 118 0.009364 26 267 0.021187 27 673 0.053404 28 382 0.030313 29 131 0.010395 30 336 0.026662 31 578 0.045866 32 61 0.004841 33 146 0.011585 34 394 0.031265 35 200 0.015870 36 71 0.005634 37 163 0.012934 38 265 0.021028 39 30 0.002381 40 50 0.003968 41 146 0.011585 42 78 0.006189 43 25 0.001984 44 58 0.004602 45 85 0.006745 46 7 0.000555 47 16 0.001270 48 47 0.003730 49 35 0.002777 50 5 0.000397 51 15 0.001190 52 14 0.001111 53 1 0.000079 54 4 0.000317 55 6 0.000476 56 6 0.000476 57 2 0.000159 58 3 0.000238 59 5 0.000397 60 0 0.000000 61 0 0.000000 62 2 0.000159 Total 12602 1.000000
For any given score combination that has never happened, I take 2*probability(score 1)*probability(score 2). Sum that up for every unseen score and you get my answer in the previous post.
I'll save the forum some trouble and offer my own criticism:
1. This does not take into account the probability a team scores a total of one point. Yes, the NFL has such a thing as a one-point safety. Since no team has ever had a total of one at the end of the game, my method assigns a probability of zero to this. To end the game with one point, would take scoring ONLY a one-point safety in the entire game.
2. This assumes the two individual team scores are independent of each other. In reality, I think there is a negative correlation. If one team scores a LOT of points, like over 50, it is probably at the expense of the other team scoring very little.
My defense is factoring in these criticisms would have had a very marginal effect, but significantly increased the difficulty and complexity of the analysis.
Have you thought about testing this distribution against the actual final scores over the same period to check the goodness of fit?
Oh never mind. It looks like you are using the historical data to generate this.
Quote: unJonOh never mind. It looks like you are using the historical data to generate this.
Yes, I am. Every NFL game from 1994 to 2018.
Quote: WizardI think I didn't correctly account for the fact that a non-tied score can happen two ways. For example, there has never been a score of 5 to 6 in an NFL game. However, that could happen two ways in the Super Bowl:
TB 5 -- KC 6
TB 6 -- KC 5
Looking at games from 1994 (when the two-point conversion rule began) to 2018, the probability of a given side having a total of five points is 0.000396762. The probability of a given side having a total of six points is 0.021187113.
Since there are two combinations for a 5-6 score, I contend a decent estimate of the probability is 2*0.000396762*0.021187113 = 0.00001681.
Doing this for every set of scores that hasn't happened yet, I get a probability of 0.017925, or 1 in 55.
Any comments?
You keep ignoring the fact that scoring is way up due to recent rules changes and rule interpretations as well. And missing an XP or making a 2 point conversion is how most new 'scorigamis' will be made.
It would be if you did stock analysis taking the last 50 years about what happens when a stock is heavily shorted (USED to tend to go down) and try that next week! Things are DIFFERENT now! Just like in the NFL.
Quote: SOOPOOYou keep ignoring the fact that scoring is way up due to recent rules changes and rule interpretations as well. And missing an XP or making a 2 point conversion is how most new 'scorigamis' will be made.
It would be if you did stock analysis taking the last 50 years about what happens when a stock is heavily shorted (USED to tend to go down) and try that next week! Things are DIFFERENT now! Just like in the NFL.
Mike ran it on data through 2018. It would be a good test to see if 2019 and 2020 had a statistically significant number of scoragomis.
https://www.williamhill.us/pro-football-championship-55-notable-general-prop-bets/
This was a novel prop bet mentioned in this article:
The prop of “will a missed field goal hit the upright” is currently listed at YES +370 and NO -450.
-So it has to be a field goal attempt, has to hit the upright, and miss for yes to win.
https://www.williamhill.us/pro-football-championship-55-most-popular-prop-bet-sides/
-Tom Brady no rushing TD prop is the most popular (by dollars):
After opening at -250, ‘NO’ on Brady’s rushing touchdown prop has soared to -440 with ‘YES’ at +360. In fact, ‘NO’ Brady rushing touchdown is the most popular prop bet side as of now at William Hill in terms of total dollars wagered.
Quote: billryanIn the unlikely event of a one-point safety, do you think the books would pay off on a safety bet or would this be a different bet?
I was going to say, "A safety is a safety," but that would be like saying that a kicked extra point is a "1-point field goal." In fact, the rules for a try after a touchdown say, "If a kick results in a field goal by the offense, one point is awarded."
I wonder if anyone has ever tried to claim something like this:
"I bet on 'last score of the game is a field goal/safety,' and the last score of a game was an extra point, which the rulebook says is a "field goal."
Quote: SOOPOOYou keep ignoring the fact that scoring is way up due to recent rules changes and rule interpretations as well. And missing an XP or making a 2 point conversion is how most new 'scorigamis' will be made.
My analysis is based on games since 1994, when the two-point conversion rule came along.
The argument that this should be a high scoring game and more likely to be a Scorigan is a decent one, but there is no easy and agreeable way to adjust for that. I think my estimate is a very good starting point. If I had to actually bet, I'd put the probability at about 2%.
Quote: ThatDonGuyI wonder if anyone has ever tried to claim something like this:
"I bet on 'last score of the game is a field goal/safety,' and the last score of a game was an extra point, which the rulebook says is a "field goal."
Along those lines, an argument could be made for winning a bet on "even" in roulette if the ball lands in zero. Zero is an even number.
Quote: billryanIn the unlikely event of a one-point safety, do you think the books would pay off on a safety bet or would this be a different bet?
This is highly unlikely but the general idea can come up. Maybe 5-8 years ago there was a SuperBowl with a prop bet on the number of kickoffs. Let’s say the line was 9.5. There were 9 traditional kickoffs plus a free kick after a safety. I forget how that was graded but it was at least arguable both ways.
So...Quote: WizardAlong those lines, an argument could be made for winning a bet on "even" in roulette if the ball lands in zero. Zero is an even number.
Single zero is even?
Double zero is odd???
LOL 🤪
. I can’t really argue with you about the final guess of 2%. Just the added likelihood of missed XP due to it being moved back 15 yards is a big deal. Since you have the data.... what is number of 2 point conversion attempts in 1994 and 1995 compared to 2019 and 2020?Quote: WizardMy analysis is based on games since 1994, when the two-point conversion rule came along.
The argument that this should be a high scoring game and more likely to be a Scorigan is a decent one, but there is no easy and agreeable way to adjust for that. I think my estimate is a very good starting point. If I had to actually bet, I'd put the probability at about 2%.
Quote: TinManThis is highly unlikely but the general idea can come up. Maybe 5-8 years ago there was a SuperBowl with a prop bet on the number of kickoffs. Let’s say the line was 9.5. There were 9 traditional kickoffs plus a free kick after a safety. I forget how that was graded but it was at least arguable both ways.
That's a little different. The NFL rules specifically differentiate between a "kickoff" and a "safety kick"; "A kickoff puts the ball in play at the start of each half, after a try, and after a successful field goal" (6-1-1(a)); "A safety kick puts the ball in play after a safety" (6-1-1(b)). NCAA Football rule 4-16-6 also specifically limits a "kickoff" to the start of a half, after a try, and after a successful field goal - not after a safety. The distinction needs to be made as, in both sets of rules, you cannot punt on a kickoff but you can on a kick after a safety.
Little-known fact: if the kicking team punts the kick after a safety, it can recover the ball if it goes at least 10 yards, just like on a kickoff.
Quote: WizardAlong those lines, an argument could be made for winning a bet on "even" in roulette if the ball lands in zero. Zero is an even number.
that's funny
I'm imagining a movie where comedian Kevin Hart gets into a big dispute with the Pit Boss by claiming he won his even bet when zero came
(~:\
*
Quote: SOOPOOwhat is number of 2 point conversion attempts in 1994 and 1995 compared to 2019 and 2020?
This new page answers just that, except conversions MADE.
2020 had 126
2019 had 108
Quote: WizardI just added prop sheets for MGM, Wynn, TI, and William Hill to my Super Bowl Proposition Bets page.
Are you going to tell us, which, if any, you have $$ riding on?
Quote: SOOPOOAre you going to tell us, which, if any, you have $$ riding on?
As usual, I have first and last score to be touchdowns, both both teams combined and individually. No two-point conversion. Most of my money is piggy-backing on somebody and I don't know his big bets yet.
Sorry for no tips this year. I perceived very little value. Might be because not as much square action this year.
I'm dutching on the color of liquid that will be poured on the winning coach
spreading $100 this way
$65 on orange at +150........................payout........................$162.50.............................net profit.............................$62.50
$35 on lime/green/yellow at +350.................................................payout........................$157.50.............................net profit.............................$57.50
I guess red got in there at +165 because that's the predominant color of the Bucs
red has not been the color in the past 20 years, maybe never
*
