+120 Moneyline Sports Bet

Under the assumption that in, say, the NHL, one team can beat the other on any given day* is in fact wisdom, and it seems to be, where does this assumption reliably quantify? It seems to me most matchup's fair bet might be 6:5, or certainly 5:4, with very few matchups having a team with a 4:3 edge. Some contests look like 4:3 or even greater, sure, but not too many I'm thinking. 

If 5:4 holds up for the most part, then this means a +125 moneyline bet is a fair bet in such a contest, and +130 or more favors the underdog bet. In other words, at 5:4 the favorite wins 5 out of 9 games, the underdog 4/9. 

math for moneyline bet of $100 taking the +125 underdog side:
-100*5/9+125*4/9 = 0 

Are my assumptions all wet? Is my math faulty?

*NFL commissioner from 1946-1959 Bell is credited with the famous saying, “On any given Sunday, any team in the NFL can beat any other team.”

If +125 is the "true line," then that team would have a 100/225 = 4/9 = 44.44% chance of winning.

For underdogs in general, if x is the true line, then the probability of winning is 100/(100+x).

Quote: Wizard

If +125 is the "true line," then that team would have a 100/225 = 4/9 = 44.44% chance of winning.

For underdogs in general, if x is the true line, then the probability of winning is 100/(100+x).

Thanks, will try to memorize that

that does confirm I was right on the math, but as far as the assumptions ...

If +125 is fair, you’d have a 2.22% edge at +130

(130 + 100) / (125 + 100) - 1

Quote: odiousgambit

Thanks, will try to memorize that

that does confirm I was right on the math, but as far as the assumptions ...

. The assumptions were ridiculous. To imply the Sabres had a 40+ % chance to win a game once Eichel was injured is just plain wrong.

Quote: SOOPOO

. The assumptions were ridiculous. To imply the Sabres had a 40+ % chance to win a game once Eichel was injured is just plain wrong.

who's talking about Buffalo?

I did say in some cases the contests look like the odds should be 4:3 or even greater [like 3:2]

now the Sabres have won 10/35 making the general odds 2.5:1 against winning ... against someone else down in the pack I have to think 3:2 might be a fair bet. They do win 'some' games! I am a rookie at this so appreciate the feedback

............................

I've considered something similar to this before with both the NHL and the MLB

I looked at about 100 games for each league and tracked the results for teams that paid in the neighborhood of +125 to +160
my thinking was that these teams might have a good chance of winning and would be profitable

it didn't work out well
I didn't see any profitability
another idea bit the dust

it gave me a healthy respect for how accurately the combination of the books and the betting public prices these games




*

supposedly sharps like betting the NHL for opportunities that tend to develop

not sure what you look for myself

Well, Soopoo, after we dissed them the Sabres promptly went on to beat the Capitals 5-2 last night. Yep, that any one team can beat the other on any given day is proved again. 


We turned our noses up at a +333 opening line to take Buffalo on the moneyline. Using the Wizard's formula,  100/(100+x), the implied chances of such an outcome were 0.23 or obviously roughly one chance in 4, implied fair odds being 3:1 against. That they won doesn't mean the oddsmaker was wrong of course, just like in poker a bad beat doesn't mean betting big on your very good hand was wrong necessarily. Where do you draw the line though? Never pass up +400? +500?


Rather than worry about longshots, instead I'm still wondering where to put the chances when closely matched teams play. Once it's clear one team is favored, you should get past that -110 on both sides you sometimes see and should you take interest at 5:4 implied? I realize it can't be that easy though.

Quote: odiousgambit

Well, Soopoo, after we dissed them the Sabres promptly went on to beat the Capitals 5-2 last night. Yep, that any one team can beat the other on any given day is proved again. 


We turned our noses up at a +333 opening line to take Buffalo on the moneyline. Using the Wizard's formula,  100/(100+x), the implied chances of such an outcome were 0.23 or obviously roughly one chance in 4, implied fair odds being 3:1 against. That they won doesn't mean the oddsmaker was wrong of course, just like in poker a bad beat doesn't mean betting big on your very good hand was wrong necessarily. Where do you draw the line though? Never pass up +400? +500?


Rather than worry about longshots, instead I'm still wondering where to put the chances when closely matched teams play. Once it's clear one team is favored, you should get past that -110 on both sides you sometimes see and should you take interest at 5:4 implied? I realize it can't be that easy though.

If that game (Sabres-Washington) is played again with same rosters, same goalies, etc., maybe the Sabres win 1 in 4 or 5. The talent level difference is huge. But, yes, 1 in 4 occurrences happen.... 1 in 4 times! On any given night the shot that hits the post caroms in versus out. Or the goalie makes a save with the num of his stick. Or the ref misses the obvious penalty. Variance happens.

If you think you can find a line that the oddsmakers made an error on by making the odds too long, go for it! I do not expect your overall results to be favorable.