Thread Rating:

Poll

No votes (0%)
No votes (0%)
No votes (0%)
No votes (0%)
1 vote (6.25%)
1 vote (6.25%)
2 votes (12.5%)
7 votes (43.75%)
1 vote (6.25%)
4 votes (25%)

16 members have voted

lilredrooster
lilredrooster
  • Threads: 232
  • Posts: 6504
Joined: May 8, 2015
Thanked by
Mission146
July 9th, 2021 at 3:01:12 AM permalink
.....................


I have bet all the major sports

I have found:


the NHL the most difficult to win at - so difficult that I've given up trying

MLB is the 2nd most difficult - haven't quite given up yet

NBA is the 3rd most difficult

NFL is the 4th most difficult or 2nd easiest to win at if you look at it that way

NCAAB - college basketball is the easiest for me to win at



and yes, I know that I may not have made a sufficiently large # of bets for this to have any value to anyone else

but I believe it is true for me and it has value for me




haven't really tried college football
too many teams for me to keep track of
seems to be very unpredictable but I'm aware others such as Redietz know a lot more than me about it and are profitable there

next question - why bet college basketball then - just as many teams as college football
answer - more comfortable with b-ball - feel I know it better



.
Last edited by: lilredrooster on Jul 9, 2021
Please don't feed the trolls
unJon
unJon
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 4574
Joined: Jul 1, 2018
Thanked by
Mission146
July 9th, 2021 at 3:52:59 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

Good points. I tend to poo-poo such factors, but I am not a handicapper.

easy enough to test if you have some years before last season. Run a comparison to see if there was a change in “home field advantage,” and see if the bookies captured it equally as well.
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
  • Threads: 121
  • Posts: 10941
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
Thanked by
Mission146
July 9th, 2021 at 4:57:32 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

What kind of false patterns do you think it would cause?



If you believe travel through time zones has a negative effect, teams like the Devils, Rangers, Islanders, etc… had no inter time zone travel I believe. And way fewer flights than usual.

Lack of fans (may) have decreased ‘home ice’ advantage.
lilredrooster
lilredrooster
  • Threads: 232
  • Posts: 6504
Joined: May 8, 2015
Thanked by
Mission146odiousgambit
July 9th, 2021 at 5:37:58 AM permalink
.....................


in your NFL data you showed that betting just road dogs gave the bettor a 2.57% edge - not a large edge but certainly very significant (see link)

in your data here re the NHL you shows that betting only dogs leaves the house with only a .66% edge

and betting only roadies leaves the house with only a 0.38% edge

it seems that it would be very possible that betting only road dogs would give the bettor a small edge as it does in the NFL

any possibility of calculating that?.............it would be very interesting - to me anyway





https://wizardofodds.com/games/sports-betting/nfl/



.
Please don't feed the trolls
ksdjdj
ksdjdj
  • Threads: 94
  • Posts: 1707
Joined: Oct 20, 2013
Thanked by
Mission146unJon
July 10th, 2021 at 3:56:01 AM permalink
About 3-5 years ago I used to bet on "overtime, for non-conference (out-of-conference) games". I made roughly $20,000 before the book effectively barred my action (by limiting my bets to $50 per game).

Even though I used other information, these were the main articles that I used for reference:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/to-make-the-playoffs-hockey-teams-play-not-to-win/
https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/blackhawks/ct-overtime-blackhawks-spt-0215-20170214-story.html

-----
Here are some newer ones that I found interesting enough.

https://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-central-division-loser-point-importance-2020-21/
https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/1931344

Note: There are plenty more that I could list, but it is fairly easy to find those using a search engine.
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
  • Threads: 326
  • Posts: 9557
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
Thanked by
Mission146
July 10th, 2021 at 5:14:52 AM permalink
Thanks for doing all that work on this, Wizard. Interesting the oddsmakers tended to bend towards presumed less heavily bet direction, but still keep the house edge

one typo spotted, "bets on the under did bet"

better I think
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!”   She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
TomG
TomG
  • Threads: 16
  • Posts: 2426
Joined: Sep 26, 2010
Thanked by
Mission146
July 10th, 2021 at 1:50:49 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

I plan to add more fun facts to the page tomorrow. For now, I welcome all questions, comments, and corrections. Thank you.



Underdogs do better than favorites. Home teams do better than road teams. That makes me think home underdogs would be a good subset to look at. Any information on how they do?

Anything on comparing home ice advantage in conference games to out of conference games?
itsmejeff
itsmejeff
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 58
Joined: Aug 6, 2012
Thanked by
Mission146
July 10th, 2021 at 4:00:40 PM permalink
re: time of goal

You can get time of goals through the NHL public API, but you would need to do it for every game individually. That is thousands of games to iterate through. I have been working on a database for a specific team to see how they play in certain situations. Kind of stopped because need new battery for laptop that holds the sql db.

https://github.com/dword4/nhlapi - API documentation
billryan
billryan
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 16282
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
Thanked by
Mission146
July 10th, 2021 at 4:26:36 PM permalink
The Islanders play multiple away games against the Rangers and Devils that are an hour bus ride from their home. They also play games in Washington, Philadelphia, and Boston that are fairly quick train rides away.
Teams like Vegas fly to every away game.
Over the course of a season that has to make a difference.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1491
  • Posts: 26435
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
Thanked by
Mission146
July 10th, 2021 at 8:47:40 PM permalink
Quote: ksdjdj

About 3-5 years ago I used to bet on "overtime, for non-conference (out-of-conference) games". I made roughly $20,000 before the book effectively barred my action (by limiting my bets to $50 per game).



Was this at 5dimes?
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
lilredrooster
lilredrooster
  • Threads: 232
  • Posts: 6504
Joined: May 8, 2015
Thanked by
Mission146
July 11th, 2021 at 1:43:54 AM permalink
Quote: TomG

Underdogs do better than favorites. 𝐇𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐦𝐬 𝐝𝐨 𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐫𝐨𝐚𝐝 𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐦𝐬.. That makes me think home underdogs would be a good subset to look at.

Anything on comparing home ice advantage in conference games to out of conference games?




incorrect

road teams do better than home teams

the data showed the house edge against road teams as only 0.38%

the house edge against home teams was shown as 3.96%

as I indicated earlier, the best subset, just as in the NFL, would be road dogs

there's a very good chance they are profitable, but only by a tiny % - or if they are unprofitable it would be by a very, very tiny %


your 2nd point is a very good one
I would speculate that considering road dogs just in Conference games would further benefit their %



.
Last edited by: lilredrooster on Jul 11, 2021
Please don't feed the trolls
TomG
TomG
  • Threads: 16
  • Posts: 2426
Joined: Sep 26, 2010
Thanked by
Mission146
July 11th, 2021 at 12:29:01 PM permalink
Quote: lilredrooster

incorrect

road teams do better than home teams

the data showed the house edge against road teams as only 0.38%

the house edge against home teams was shown as 3.96%

as I indicated earlier, the best subset, just as in the NFL, would be road dogs

there's a very good chance they are profitable, but only by a tiny % - or if they are unprofitable it would be by a very, very tiny %


your 2nd point is a very good one
I would speculate that considering road dogs just in Conference games would further benefit their %



.



Wizardofodds page shows home teams losing 3.9% of action and home teams losing 5.2%. The discrepancy should show that there is really nothing there. It is just a matter of betting the better price.
lilredrooster
lilredrooster
  • Threads: 232
  • Posts: 6504
Joined: May 8, 2015
Thanked by
Mission146
July 11th, 2021 at 12:43:16 PM permalink
Quote: TomG

Wizardofodds page shows home teams losing 3.9% of action and home teams losing 5.2%. The discrepancy should show that there is really nothing there. It is just a matter of betting the better price.




I hadn't seen that when I posted

it will be interesting to read the Wiz's explanation of that discrepancy - I have a feeling that the WOO page is inaccurate but I can't say I'm 100% sure

I think generally in sports the home fave is overbet

also, the WOO page was calculated with a higher house edge than what he just posted

I believe because the action is light you can pay less juice with the right books or prolly most of the books for the NHL and MLB


.
Please don't feed the trolls
ksdjdj
ksdjdj
  • Threads: 94
  • Posts: 1707
Joined: Oct 20, 2013
Thanked by
Mission146
July 11th, 2021 at 5:51:21 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

Was this at 5dimes?


No, it was this one here .

---
Strategy (incomplete):
Even though it wasn't asked, below are some parts of the strategy that I used (that I can remember):

1. Bet on a lot of non-conference games
2. Bet on some non-division games (game in the same conference but a different division) especially if the teams are "more than a few points away from each other in the standings" (in other words a team having a "good" season vs a team having a "not-so-good" season).
3. Bet smaller early in the regular season, and bet more and /or/ "have bigger bets" later in the regular season..
Note: For one of my main reasons for doing this, see here (link is from my previous post in this thread).
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1491
  • Posts: 26435
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
Thanked by
Mission146
July 11th, 2021 at 9:24:48 PM permalink
Quote: lilredrooster

it will be interesting to read the Wiz's explanation of that discrepancy - I have a feeling that the WOO page is inaccurate but I can't say I'm 100% sure.



The original page was based on three seasons of data and then I updated it when the last season ended last week.

It currently shows the home teams did better, with a 3.91% house edge, compared to 5.18% for road teams. Perhaps the last season flipped it.

I think in general, over all sports, there isn't a strong betting bias either way. Maybe I'll look carefully at other sports and make an Ask the Wizard question out of it.

I do recall that away teams do better in the NFL. However, in Wong's Sharp Sports Betting, he recommends home underdogs.

Does this address the "discrepancy"? Are there two things I have said that contradict?
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
lilredrooster
lilredrooster
  • Threads: 232
  • Posts: 6504
Joined: May 8, 2015
Thanked by
Mission146
July 12th, 2021 at 2:14:16 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

The original page was based on three seasons of data and then I updated it when the last season ended last week.

It currently shows the home teams did better, with a 3.91% house edge, compared to 5.18% for road teams. Perhaps the last season flipped it.

I think in general, over all sports, there isn't a strong betting bias either way. Maybe I'll look carefully at other sports and make an Ask the Wizard question out of it.

I do recall that away teams do better in the NFL. However, in Wong's Sharp Sports Betting, he recommends home underdogs.

Does this address the "discrepancy"? Are there two things I have said that contradict?




I don't understand why the data shown on page 3 of this thread is so different from the data on the WOO site
the data on page 3 represents almost 4,000 games
it shows a 0.38% house edge betting road teams and a 3.96% house edge betting home teams
the data on the WOO site represents about 1,000 more games but to me that is not significant enough to account for the great difference
I also don't understand why you used a 4.55% overall house edge on the WOO page and a 2.17% overall house edge on the data presented on page 3 of this thread



Edit: I think I just got what you're saying. you're saying that the last season that you added caused the dramatic difference - from a 0.38% house edge on the roadies to a 5.18% house edge on the roadies. wow!!! that last season must have been a lot different than the other seasons. is that correct?





as far as a strong bias goes - your WOO NFL page shows a 2.17% positive return betting road dogs (linked)
that seems pretty strong to me - almost a 7% improvement over random betting -

but it may just be the NFL - I'm not sure





https://wizardofodds.com/games/sports-betting/nfl/





.



.
Last edited by: lilredrooster on Jul 12, 2021
Please don't feed the trolls
lilredrooster
lilredrooster
  • Threads: 232
  • Posts: 6504
Joined: May 8, 2015
Thanked by
moses
April 20th, 2022 at 5:35:53 AM permalink
____________


it looks like a very good bet in the NHL tonight__________the Colorado Avalanche over the Seattle Kraken

a great team against a terrible team

the Avalanche on vegasinsider.com - right now - are between - 294 to -345 - depending on the book ________not a bet I'm interested in

but on the puck line - 1.5 - they gain about twice as much as usual and are -125 to -133 depending on the book

the Avalanche are averaging 1.27 more goals per game then the Kraken

and they are giving up .7 less goals then the Kraken

the last 2 times they played, in November and January - the Avalanche outscored the Kraken by a combined total of 5 goals

the down side of the bet is that it looks like this game will have no effect on the playoffs - not a lot of motivation for the Avalanche - but also not much for the Kraken - you can't have everything

I'll take it



.
Last edited by: lilredrooster on Apr 20, 2022
Please don't feed the trolls
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
  • Threads: 326
  • Posts: 9557
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
April 20th, 2022 at 6:58:24 AM permalink
I look at the -1.5 puck line bet a lot. Done well with it, but small sample size so no conclusions

if you are into live betting, there is a crucial point at which the line should change because the goalie was pulled, making winning by 2 points more likely than it was before the pull, in a one point lead situation. [The team that's behind is still correct to go for it as everybody knows]

The oddsmakers know to change the odds for the -1.5 bet on a goalie pull. However, if you can get your bet down just before the pull that is likely to be +EV. There is risk that you bet and then the team behind scores before the goalie pull, ugh. And if the oddsmakers are on the ball, they seem to just shut down all betting at this stage just before I might bet ... not always though.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!”   She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
April 20th, 2022 at 2:04:55 PM permalink
Rooster: What you described has been a huge trend in hockey this year.

A couple of questions. Avalanche have clinched a playoff spot. The trend has continued for teams already clinched but not quite as good. In other sports, teams start resting players. I'm not not that option exists in hockey. Do you agree?

2nd question. I don't remember this many teams playing above .600 this late in the season. Usually maybe one or two make it to March above .600. It seems like the NHL is split between very good and very bad teams this year. Do you agree?
lilredrooster
lilredrooster
  • Threads: 232
  • Posts: 6504
Joined: May 8, 2015
April 20th, 2022 at 2:14:26 PM permalink
Quote: moses

Rooster: What you described has been a huge trend in hockey this year.

A couple of questions. Avalanche have clinch a playoff. The trend has continued for teams already clinched but not quite as good. In other sports, teams start resting players. I'm not not that option exists in hockey. Do you agree?

2nd question. I don't remember this many teams playing above .600 this late in the season. Usually maybe one or two make it to March above .600. It seems like the NHL is split between very good and very bad teams this year. Do you agree?
link to original post




Moses:

I'll be honest - I'm no expert on hockey - I just liked what I saw in those stats that I indicated - I can't give a good answer to your questions

I think what I saw on the moneyline - -300 or so indicates they're still considered pretty strong right now against the Kraken

the Avalanche may be resting players, but so may the Kraken - they're completely out of the playoffs

maybe since I'm not an expert I shouldn't have posted this - there are things I may not be seeing - hope nobody really plunged because of my pick - tend to doubt it

anyway if I lose it won't be the first sports bet I've lost________________(~:\


.
Please don't feed the trolls
mcallister3200
mcallister3200
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 3577
Joined: Dec 29, 2013
Thanked by
odiousgambit
April 20th, 2022 at 2:20:35 PM permalink
Quote: odiousgambit



The oddsmakers know to change the odds for the -1.5 bet on a goalie pull. However, if you can get your bet down just before the pull that is likely to be +EV. There is risk that you bet and then the team behind scores before the goalie pull, ugh. And if the oddsmakers are on the ball, they seem to just shut down all betting at this stage just before I might bet ... not always though.
link to original post



I think the fact that there’s something like an 8 second delay from a live game to “live tv” and then another delay between them accepting/rejecting the bet makes that unlikely. Sounds good in theory but probably get freerolled a lot, if within those 15 seconds the goalie is gone they’ll reject it and offer a different price, if he’s not yet they accept it but you might have bet into a bad line with stale info/odds.

Personally I would only bet at stops in play live betting so I don’t get free-rolled, at least in sports where something that materially changes the odds can happen within 10 seconds (football, basketball, baseball for sure.)
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
April 20th, 2022 at 2:45:57 PM permalink
Rooster: The trend I picked up on was betting the puck line on teams above .600 vs teams below .500. The other stipulation was a home team had to be above .600 at home and the road team had to be below .500 away. And vice versa. It was like 14-2 since March.

Once the teams clinched it has still be a money maker. But not nearly as good as before they clinched. I will review the entire season before hockey starts next year.
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
April 20th, 2022 at 2:58:44 PM permalink
1. The fewer number of games played (i.e., superior points percentage).
2. The greater number of games won in regulation (not including games won in overtime or a shootout).
3. The greater number of games won in regulation and overtime (not including games won via shootout).
4. The greater number of games won in any fashion.
5. The greater number of points earned in games between the tied clubs. If two clubs are tied, and have not played an equal number of home games against each other, points earned in the first game played in the city that had the extra game shall not be included. If more than two clubs are tied, the higher percentage of available points earned in games among those clubs, and not including any "odd" games, shall be used to determine the standing.
6. Goal differential.
7. Goals scored.

Tie breaker rules #2, #6, #7 may well have something to do with the recent trend.
lilredrooster
lilredrooster
  • Threads: 232
  • Posts: 6504
Joined: May 8, 2015
April 20th, 2022 at 3:07:45 PM permalink
______________-


nice stuff Moses

looks like you are going to find an edge - and that's not easy


.
Please don't feed the trolls
ksdjdj
ksdjdj
  • Threads: 94
  • Posts: 1707
Joined: Oct 20, 2013
April 20th, 2022 at 5:25:09 PM permalink
Very Important: The info below, does not take into account that Avalanche have "Clinched Best Record in Conference" and Kraken are "Eliminated from Playoff Contention", and any other "how hard they will try to win the game (motivation)" factors.

Had a look at the Avalanche / Kraken game today and here are the values^^^ I got (see methods below).

^^^: These are my "raw values" , they could possibly contradict each other since I am using multiple methods, and some methods have not been converted into a "chance to win the game -%" because of time, difficulty, and / or lack of knowledge in "doing those conversions".

----
Elo Method (adjusted for "~54% average home team advantage"):
Avalanche: 71.05% chance to win
Kraken: 28.95% chance to win

----
"Pythagorean-Theorem" Method (based on current seasons scores, for and against);
Avalanche: Expected to win 66.13...% or*** 67.77...% of regular season games
Kraken: Expected to win 35.60...% or*** 36.96...% of regular season games

***: Two slightly different formulas used

Note 1: I know how to convert this for the NFL, but I don't know how to convert this to a "single game % chance" for the NHL.

Note 2: Using the figures above, Kraken are about 1.7 to 2.7 wins below and Avalanche are 3.5 to 4.7 wins above expectations, at this point in the reg. season.

---
"First goal" Method

Avalance: 59% to 61%
Kraken: 39% to 41%

Note 1: I do know at least one way of converting this to an "overall chance of winning the game" (but it is very time consuming, so probably won't do it).

Note 2: After the first goal, these % can change slightly (because on average teams will play differently when they are tied, in front, or behind, see eg below)

eg: If both teams had a 50% chance of scoring the 1st goal, and then Team A scores it, Team B will probably go to somewhere between 51% to 54% to score the 2nd goal (at least on the occasions that a 2nd goal is eventually scored)

----
Other info:
I had a recreational bet on Avalanche @ $1.35 / or about -286

But, I think there is value in the "tie in regulation" bet that I had @ $5.42 / +442, because I estimated the chance to be ~20% for a tie.
Last edited by: ksdjdj on Apr 20, 2022
ksdjdj
ksdjdj
  • Threads: 94
  • Posts: 1707
Joined: Oct 20, 2013
April 20th, 2022 at 7:27:02 PM permalink
Quote: ksdjdj

(snip)
---
"First goal" Method

Avalance: 59% to 61%
Kraken: 39% to 41%

Note 1: I do know at least one way of converting this to an "overall chance of winning the game" (but it is very time consuming, so probably won't do it).

Note 2: After the first goal, these % can change slightly (because on average teams will play differently when they are tied, in front, or behind, see eg below)

eg: If both teams had a 50% chance of scoring the 1st goal, and then Team A scores it, Team B will probably go to somewhere between 51% to 54% to score the 2nd goal (at least on the occasions that a 2nd goal is eventually scored)
(snip)
link to original post


Assuming my "pre-game" first goal estimates were "close to accurate", I would estimate the chances for the 2nd*** goal to be:
Avalanche: 62% to 65%, and Kraken: 35% to 38%

***: I started writing this after Kraken scored first, but before they scored again

and now my 3rd^^^ goal estimated chances to be:
Avalanche: 63% to 65.5%, and Kraken: 34.5% to 37%

^^^: After knowing that Kraken scored the 1st two goals.

Note: These estimates are "by the numbers / statistics only" type estimates, so can be "way off" if you notice things "in game" (see eg)
eg: "maybe Avalanche### are using their number 2 goalie and / or defense, at the moment?".

###: This is just a hypothetical example (may or may not be true for this game, as I haven't checked).

----
Update ( The "time this update was written" was after the 4th goal, but before the start of the 2nd period):

My 4th goal estimated chances would have been:
Avalanche: 62.4% to.64.5% ,and Kraken 35.5% to 37.6%

My 5th goal estimated chances are:
Avalanche: 61.7% to.63.6% ,and Kraken 36.4% to 38.3%

Reminder: When estimating who will score "the next goal", there is always a chance of "no more goals for the rest of the game" (except for games that are currently tied).
Last edited by: ksdjdj on Apr 20, 2022
ksdjdj
ksdjdj
  • Threads: 94
  • Posts: 1707
Joined: Oct 20, 2013
April 21st, 2022 at 6:12:06 AM permalink
The ESPN article/"story" below is probably an important read for anyone who likes to bet on things like the "tie in regulation" (like me).
https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/33777472/nhl-playoff-watch-standings-update-race-seeding-continues-east
ksdjdj
ksdjdj
  • Threads: 94
  • Posts: 1707
Joined: Oct 20, 2013
April 21st, 2022 at 2:20:42 PM permalink
For anyone who likes to bet on "very short favorites" (or "very long dogs") below are the raw % I have for the Red Wings / Panthers game

22.1% / 77.9%

Note: This is just a simple "ELO %", and I haven't taken into account things like "incentive to win", players' injured/out, and any other factors you can think of.

----
I had the following bets for this game and one other game:

(1a): To win $300 on Panthers (-2.5 Puck Line) @ -123 (Recreational bet, made before I did the above "ELO %s")
(1b): For the Red Wings / Panthers game, to win $2,480 on the draw @ +620 (I think the odds should be closer to about +540)

(2): For the Blackhawks / Kings game, to win $2,005 on the draw @ +401 (I think the odds should be between +360 and +370)
Last edited by: ksdjdj on Apr 21, 2022
lilredrooster
lilredrooster
  • Threads: 232
  • Posts: 6504
Joined: May 8, 2015
April 21st, 2022 at 2:55:37 PM permalink
____________


wow!!!!!___________the Panthers on vegasinsider.com are between -588 and -667 on the moneyline

I have never, ever seen a moneyline like that on any sport - I only follow the major pro leagues - and not all the time though


.
Please don't feed the trolls
moses
moses
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 659
Joined: Sep 23, 2013
April 21st, 2022 at 3:55:22 PM permalink
Quote: lilredrooster

____________


wow!!!!!___________the Panthers on vegasinsider.com are between -588 and -667 on the moneyline

I have never, ever seen a moneyline like that on any sport - I only follow the major pro leagues - and not all the time though


.
link to original post



They are 32-6 at home.
ksdjdj
ksdjdj
  • Threads: 94
  • Posts: 1707
Joined: Oct 20, 2013
April 21st, 2022 at 7:13:44 PM permalink
Quote: mcallister3200

Quote: odiousgambit



The oddsmakers know to change the odds for the -1.5 bet on a goalie pull. However, if you can get your bet down just before the pull that is likely to be +EV. There is risk that you bet and then the team behind scores before the goalie pull, ugh. And if the oddsmakers are on the ball, they seem to just shut down all betting at this stage just before I might bet ... not always though.
link to original post



I think the fact that there’s something like an 8 second delay from a live game to “live tv” and then another delay between them accepting/rejecting the bet makes that unlikely. Sounds good in theory but probably get freerolled a lot, if within those 15 seconds the goalie is gone they’ll reject it and offer a different price, if he’s not yet they accept it but you might have bet into a bad line with stale info/odds.

Personally I would only bet at stops in play live betting so I don’t get free-rolled, at least in sports where something that materially changes the odds can happen within 10 seconds (football, basketball, baseball for sure.)
link to original post


(I have written about something similar before on this forum "ages ago", for live tennis betting):
I remember betting live with an online betting company that I could "just get a bet on in time", before they changed the odds for their "to win game X - live tennis betting", and made a "killing" doing that ( $500 per bet per account, up to 4 times per game, as long as the score on the "leading player was 30 pts or less", then they would let you bet on the current game).

Note 1: Their terms and conditions were written poorly for this back then, so I thought I had a good chance of getting paid (and did get paid doing this)

Important - Note 2: Extremely unlikely that this opportunity will happen again (one reason is because most sports books write "protections against this type of play" in their T+Cs)
ksdjdj
ksdjdj
  • Threads: 94
  • Posts: 1707
Joined: Oct 20, 2013
Thanked by
unJon
April 24th, 2022 at 6:45:43 PM permalink
A local online book ("Australian book") gave me +450*** for the Avalanche to win the Stanley Cup, and +225*** to "be one of the teams to play in the Stanley Cup".

***: Had to have equal parts on both bets, got on $480 in total (tried to get $400 "each way", but they cut me back to $240 "each way", because it was a promotion).

---
I haven't had these (yet) but the other potentially good bets are (after "boosting the odds"):

1) Hurricanes to win conference (including play-offs): +650###, and the equivalent of +325 "to make it to the conference final" (if you bet "each-way").

###: Was +550 with that book, before getting the "boosted odds"

2) Flames to win conference (including play-offs): +400^^^, and the equivalent of +200 "to make it to the conference final" (if you bet "each-way").

^^^: Was +350 with that book, before getting the "boosted odds"

Note: Looking to hear if anyone thinks these are "good value (or not)" before I decide to bet on these.
unJon
unJon
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 4574
Joined: Jul 1, 2018
Thanked by
ksdjdj
April 24th, 2022 at 7:26:37 PM permalink
Assume the non boosted future odds had a 30% house edge and go from there.
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
ksdjdj
ksdjdj
  • Threads: 94
  • Posts: 1707
Joined: Oct 20, 2013
April 24th, 2022 at 7:51:53 PM permalink
Quote: unJon

Assume the non boosted future odds had a 30% house edge and go from there.
link to original post


Probably going to have the bet on the hurricanes (reasons below)

Did it a similar way to what you suggested and I think the fair odds should be about +658 (it was about a 14.3% implied house edge, when I added up all the odds)

I think the “each way odds” are good overall, even though the win still has a slight house edge (about 1.1% house edge for the “to win...” portion of the bet, using this method of calculation)

——
Just had 400 each way on the hurricanes to win “conference final”@ +650 and “to make conference final” @ +325

——
Spelling not checked carefully, as this was sent from phone
unJon
unJon
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 4574
Joined: Jul 1, 2018
Thanked by
ksdjdj
April 24th, 2022 at 7:57:30 PM permalink
All makes sense.
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
ksdjdj
ksdjdj
  • Threads: 94
  • Posts: 1707
Joined: Oct 20, 2013
April 27th, 2022 at 5:23:25 PM permalink
For tonight's Coyotes / Stars game: I had a $2,700 bet on the Stars @ -270 (to win the game in regulation)
After "looking carefully at the estimates" below, I canceled the above bet

I also had a "smallish - for fun bet" on the Stars to win in overtime @ -125 (bet results in a push, if game ends in regulation or goes to shootout).

----
My Estimates (for Stars) :

Non-adjusted - win chance: 67.25% , based on raw ELO ratings mixed with a 54.3% average home adv. (this figure does not include subjective things, like "will/need to win", "heart*** " , etc)

***: not this kind of heart

"Adjusted for subjective factors" - Win Chance ( including any potential overtime): ~72.0% (This figure is based on exactly 6 goals scored in regulation, because I didn't have time to work it out for any other total)

First goal (when 6 on 6, inc goalie): ~60%

Overtime goal % (... 4 on 4, inc goalie): ~56.5%

----
Update (~1820, Pac Time):

If anyone is wondering why I originally had the bet on the Stars @ -270, it was because I used the high^^^ end of my "first goal estimated chance figure".

^^^: about 66% chance (the 60% figure was my lower end estimate)

—-
Update after game:

Lost $250 on the overtime bet
Last edited by: ksdjdj on Apr 27, 2022
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
  • Threads: 121
  • Posts: 10941
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
April 28th, 2022 at 4:18:13 AM permalink
Quote: lilredrooster

____________


wow!!!!!___________the Panthers on vegasinsider.com are between -588 and -667 on the moneyline

I have never, ever seen a moneyline like that on any sport - I only follow the major pro leagues - and not all the time though


.
link to original post

There are hundreds of examples in the NBA of shorter odds than that! I think last night Bucks were -900 or so. That was free money! (Levine and Caruso both out).
ksdjdj
ksdjdj
  • Threads: 94
  • Posts: 1707
Joined: Oct 20, 2013
May 10th, 2022 at 4:20:12 PM permalink
I didn't put "much work" in the bets below (I mainly just looked at pinnacle odds and converted them to "roughly fair chances" from that)

Bets ("Tonight's" games):
Money Line = ML

1) "Multi-bet" ("All-up") 150 to win 758 (ML) on: "Hurricanes x Maple Leafs x Wild" (so odds of about +505^^^)

^^^: Fair odds were around +460 (when I had the bet about 10-12 hours ago, not including the "bonus rule", at the end of this post)

2) "Single-Bet" 800 to win 400 (ML) on: Oilers### (odds -200***).

###: I thought this game had a "good chance of being a high scoring game" , so on average that would slightly increase the EV of the "bonus rule" (see end of this post).

***: Fair odds were about -203 (not including the EV of the "bonus rule", see below)

Bonus rule: With the book that I had these with, all ML bets (or relevant parts thereof for "multi-bets") are counted as winners if any team that I am on are 3 (or more) goals in front at any stage of the game.

----
Update (~2052, Pac Time):

"Cashed Out" both the bets below:

1) "Multi-bet"... : 92.72 returned from the original 150, lost 57.28.

2) "Single-Bet"... : 190.77 returned from the original 800, lost 609.23.
Last edited by: ksdjdj on May 10, 2022
  • Jump to: