10 point automatic win.

Quote: Mission146...

(Complete snip of all our previous replies)
link to original post

I am going by memory here (since I can't find my spread-sheet that had this info) but I would guess^^^ that -250 to -150 is the cutoff for the promotion being "neutral EV" for the one mentioned in the OP (when betting blindly, and assuming the long -term RTP for a bet is a flat 95% before adjusting for the promo, no matter which team you back).

^^^: This guess is based on a similar promo that I did in the past where around -400*** was the cutoff when betting "blindly" (it was a "7-point in front at any time, and go on to lose" promo).

***: This is a rough figure for that promo as well, because of things like not enough data / sample size too small.

As you probably noticed SF had been 10 points up before Chicago won the game 10-19. However the game will probably be remembered for the torrential rain and puddles all over the pitch!

Using this promo, you could have turned one fave' and two 'dogs from losers to winners so far today (the Texan's*** game ended in a tie, too).

***: I receive a deal (obviously not as good) which is, being up 17 (or more) and paid straight away, so I collected on the Texans.

Also, this week is already past the average for the seasons that I did the work on for "up 10 points...".

----
Update (after Giants/Titans game):

Now it is at least 4 games this week (two fave's and two 'dogs).

On an unrelated note, I wanted the Titans to win by exactly 2 (or 3) in that game (it was roughly an 18% chance of the field goal missing, going by the "live odds").

Result of bets so far using this promotion:

WINS

Browns -105 vs. Panthers. $95 win.
49ers -300 vs. Bears. $33 win
Titans -240 vs. Giants. $41 win (early win)
Chargers -175 vs. Raiders. $57 win.
Commanders -155 v. Jags. $64 win.
Eagles -180 vs. Lions. $55 win.
Bills -135 vs. Rams. $74 win.


LOSSES

Cardinals +230 vs. Chiefs. $100 loss
Jets +250 vs. Ravens. $100 loss
Packers -125 vs. Vikings. $100 loss
Bengals -260 vs. Steelers. $100 loss

TBD

Buccs -120 vs. Cowboys

So I'm up about $19 so far. Depending on the Buccs game, I'll end up ~$100 up or down. I can't really complain about that, but next time I'll approach it differently.

Quote: TinMan

Result of bets so far using this promotion:

WINS

Browns -105 vs. Panthers. $95 win.
49ers -300 vs. Bears. $33 win
Titans -240 vs. Giants. $41 win (early win)
Chargers -175 vs. Raiders. $57 win.
Commanders -155 v. Jags. $64 win.
Eagles -180 vs. Lions. $55 win.
Bills -135 vs. Rams. $74 win.


LOSSES

Cardinals +230 vs. Chiefs. $100 loss
Jets +250 vs. Ravens. $100 loss
Packers -125 vs. Vikings. $100 loss
Bengals -260 vs. Steelers. $100 loss

TBD

Buccs -120 vs. Cowboys

So I'm up about $19 so far. Depending on the Buccs game, I'll end up ~$100 up or down. I can't really complain about that, but next time I'll approach it differently.
link to original post

Not including tonight’s game (which hasn’t happened yet!) I won $31. I don’t have the exact odds for the underdogs I didn’t bet on, but I’ll estimate a $300 profit had I just taken all underdogs.
I was limited to $50 per bet. Are you capped at $100? Or two separate accounts?

(I also made $38 on the Bills Thursday night but that was 7 points, which didn’t come into play as Bills won anyway).

Quote: ksdjdj

Using this promo, you could have turned one fave' and two 'dogs from losers to winners so far today (the Texan's*** game ended in a tie, too).

***: I receive a deal (obviously not as good) which is, being up 17 (or more) and paid straight away, so I collected on the Texans.

Also, this week is already past the average for the seasons that I did the work on for "up 10 points...".

----
Update (after Giants/Titans game):

Now it is at least 4 games this week (two fave's and two 'dogs).

On an unrelated note, I wanted the Titans to win by exactly 2 (or 3) in that game (it was roughly an 18% chance of the field goal missing, going by the "live odds").
link to original post

The first thing is that I wanted to let you know that my analysis did NOT include games in which a team led by ten and ultimately tied, which may be a mistake on my part and is, perhaps, the difference that we are getting. I'm still going to go with my analysis without correcting for that as it not only doesn't matter much, but part of my EV analysis involves swinging losses into wins, (i.e. also saving money in addition to winning) so ties would also unnecessarily complicate my formula for something that really doesn't change much.

Looking at this promotion in the context of blanket dogs, here is what I am getting for this week so far:

All Bets: $250 * 16 = $4000

(Moneylines are per VegasInsider's Draftkings closing lines)

Seattle +250 (Not closed + Unresolved)

Dallas: LOSS -$250

New York Giants: +200---Straight win: +$500

Green Bay: LOSS -$250

Arizona: LOSS -$250

Raiders: LOSS -$250

Falcons: +210---Win by Stipulation +$525

Bears: +215---Straight Win +$537.50

Steelers: +265---Straight Win +$662.50

Lions: LOSS -$250

Patriots: LOSS -$250

Jets: LOSS -$250

Jaguars: LOSS -$250

Browns +100---Straight Win +$250

Texans: +250---Win by Stipulation +$625

Rams: LOSS -$250

Sum of Losses: -$2250

Sum of Straight Wins: $1,950

Sum of Stipulation Wins: $1,150

Bets Floating: $250

Line Floating: Seahawks +250

Breakdown:

Without the promotion, the bettor relies upon only straight wins and is currently down $300 with a $250 to win $625 bet floating on the Seahawks. If this bet would win, then the bettor will profit $625 and ultimately be up $325. If this bet would push, then the bettor is down the $300 they currently are. If this bet would lose, then the bettor is down $550. Naturally, being a relatively large underdog, the most likely result is that this bet would lose.

With the promotion, the bettor is presently ahead (1950 + 1150) - 2250 = $850. The bettor has the Seahawks bet of $250 floating, so the worst case scenario is that bet just loses without winning by stipulation. If this happens, then the bettor will have turned a -$550 slate of games into a +$600 slate of games with the $1150 stipulation swing. If the Seahawks straight win or win with stipulation, then what would have been a +$325 week becomes a +$1,475 week.

The other possibility is the Seahawks and Broncos tie without the Seahawks ever leading by ten, in which event, the $250 float pushes and the bettor is up the $850 that they are presently ahead as opposed to ultimately losing $300.

Based on the four seasons that I have completed, swinging two underdogs from losses (or a loss and push, in this case) to a win is a slightly better than expected week of 16 games. Taking the mean average for the four years that I have analyzed, we would expect 1.328 underdogs to swing in a 16 game slate...though I imagine that adding in the 2021 data (after I have compiled that) will swing that rate slightly upwards, but doubtful all the way to 1.5 games expected.

Any given week, which will be illuminated in my full analysis, is going to depend on the lines, of course, especially weeks in which only a single underdog flip turns a loss into a win, of which there are plenty. Hypothetically, if we didn't flip the Texans AND they had lost the game, then we would incur a slight loss if the Seahawks lose without the result being flipped by the stipulation.

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: TinMan

Result of bets so far using this promotion:

WINS

Browns -105 vs. Panthers. $95 win.
49ers -300 vs. Bears. $33 win
Titans -240 vs. Giants. $41 win (early win)
Chargers -175 vs. Raiders. $57 win.
Commanders -155 v. Jags. $64 win.
Eagles -180 vs. Lions. $55 win.
Bills -135 vs. Rams. $74 win.


LOSSES

Cardinals +230 vs. Chiefs. $100 loss
Jets +250 vs. Ravens. $100 loss
Packers -125 vs. Vikings. $100 loss
Bengals -260 vs. Steelers. $100 loss

TBD

Buccs -120 vs. Cowboys

So I'm up about $19 so far. Depending on the Buccs game, I'll end up ~$100 up or down. I can't really complain about that, but next time I'll approach it differently.
link to original post

Not including tonight’s game (which hasn’t happened yet!) I won $31. I don’t have the exact odds for the underdogs I didn’t bet on, but I’ll estimate a $300 profit had I just taken all underdogs.
I was limited to $50 per bet. Are you capped at $100? Or two separate accounts?

(I also made $38 on the Bills Thursday night but that was 7 points, which didn’t come into play as Bills won anyway).
link to original post

I'm obviously not going to disclose who, and it's not me, but I know someone who can get $250 bets down with this promotion. For that reason, my full analysis is based on $250, but it will be easy enough for someone to use a different amount with my tables that will be included in the full analysis. Simply take any profits (or losses, in the case of favorites for 2017) and multiply by 0.4 if you want to know it for $100 bets as opposed to $250.

Mission, you ABSOLUTELY need to include a win via the promotion that ended in a tie!!!! The Texans game on a $250 bet would have WON $600 or so instead of a push! That alone turns the promo markedly positive!

I think DK limits your bet size depending on what your tier is. I’m the second from lowest, and barring some surprise offers, I won’t make it to the next tier.

Quote: SOOPOO

Mission, you ABSOLUTELY need to include a win via the promotion that ended in a tie!!!! The Texans game on a $250 bet would have WON $600 or so instead of a push! That alone turns the promo markedly positive!

I think DK limits your bet size depending on what your tier is. I’m the second from lowest, and barring some surprise offers, I won’t make it to the next tier.
link to original post

I think what I will do then is go through all games that ended in a tie and tag it on the end of the thing as an addendum, then work the numbers in. I am simply not going to redo all of the calculations on a season-by-season basis all over again for the following reasons:

1.) It takes forever.

2.) Over the course of five seasons, it really doesn't change much. Yes, it changes a lot in one game in one week.

3.) This promotion could end up being reworked such that a tie is a tie.

So, the final numbers for the five years will reflect ties as that will not be hard to do, provided I do it separately. There will be a table added to the end of the main work. For one thing, only five games ended in ties over the entire five year sample. It's possible that it wouldn't have even changed anything, but we will see if either team led by ten. Actually, if both teams led by ten, then that is the one condition that will switch both sides from a push to a win, so that might be interesting.

In terms of the future of this promotion, I suspect that this promotion may see continued offerings into the future, but might eventually only become applied to underdogs and might also only change a loss to a push if your team leads by 10+ and loses. Even with that change alone, underdogs would still be long-term profitable on this promotion.***

***Alternatively, why not do that adjustment for favorites, as well? The sportsbook would still maintain a reasonable edge if the favorites simply became pushes, based on the data I have so far.

DK does seem to adjust betting limits on promos based on tier status/previous bets. I was capped at $100 for this promotion. It sounds like some people got higher or lower limits.

When I signed up for DK they had a promotion where you got $1 back for every $25 in bets. I guess that’s a 25x roll over. Up to $1000. Basically $25k coin-in got you $1k real money you can withdraw. The process of realizing that $1000 in promo money (which I did realize all of it profitably) generated a lot of promos.

Quote: TinMan

DK does seem to adjust betting limits on promos based on tier status/previous bets. I was capped at $100 for this promotion. It sounds like some people got higher or lower limits.

When I signed up for DK they had a promotion where you got $1 back for every $25 in bets. I guess that’s a 25x roll over. Up to $1000. Basically $25k coin-in got you $1k real money you can withdraw. The process of realizing that $1000 in promo money (which I did realize all of it profitably) generated a lot of promos.
link to original post

If you have something similar to that in the future, you can probably combine it with promotions at other books (specifically new signup stuff and also Odds boosts) and do offset betting such that you offset yourself to most likely guarantee some sort of (overall) profit.

You're going to want the boosts on dogs and you want to bet such on the favorite to exactly cover it if the dog loses while the dog, with the boost, results in a greater profit on that bet than the amount you are losing on the favorite.

So they are allowing the same type bet Thursday night on Chiefs Chargers. But 7 points, not 10. I took the UNDERDOG Chargers at + 160. I’m just hoping they get the ball first and score a TD, in their otherwise 38-24 loss….

What's the maximum you can bet on this?

Quote: SOOPOO

So they are allowing the same type bet Thursday night on Chiefs Chargers. But 7 points, not 10. I took the UNDERDOG Chargers at + 160. I’m just hoping they get the ball first and score a TD, in their otherwise 38-24 loss….
link to original post

SEVEN POINTS!!!???

Yeah, it's a ridiculous advantage, but I'm not going to do a full analysis on it because the ten point is advantageous enough to prove the case.

Also, this analysis is already 65 pages long and I still have general observations, potential questions and conclusion to get into!

Quote: AxelWolf

What's the maximum you can bet on this?
link to original post

It apparently depends on the person in question and seemingly is related to player status.

Quote: AxelWolf

What's the maximum you can bet on this?
link to original post

For me $50. I’m Silver Tier. Next level is Gold Tier. I’m not really close and doubt I’ll make it by January unless I would actively (-EV) bet to get there.
I think Gold would be limited at $100, and the next tier up $250. I think even one tier up from me is putting $5k a week into action, with a lot of that (most?) being -EV.

Quote: Mission146

Quote: SOOPOO

Mission, you ABSOLUTELY need to include a win via the promotion that ended in a tie!!!! The Texans game on a $250 bet would have WON $600 or so instead of a push! That alone turns the promo markedly positive!
(snip)
link to original post

I think what I will do then is go through all games that ended in a tie and tag it on the end of the thing as an addendum...
(snip)
link to original post

The tables below may be of use, if you haven't already finished looking for tie games:

Note: as stated in my other posts, I haven't double-checked anything (so my figures could be wrong).

2017	Lead by 10+ ....
1	2
2	1
3	1
4	2
5	2
6	3
7	1
8	0
9	1
10	2
11	2
12	1
13	3
14	2
15	2
16	0
17	0

2018	Lead by 10+ ....
1	3
2	2
3	3
4	4
5	1
6	1
7	2
8	0
9	1
10	3
11	5
12	2
13	2
14	1
15	1
16	2
17	2

2019	Lead by 10+ ....
1	4
2	1
3	2
4	3
5	1
6	3
7	0
8	2
9	1
10	2
11	3
12	0
13	5
14	3
15	1
16	3
17	2

2020	Lead by 10+ ....
1	3
2	4
3	3
4	2
5	5
6	2
7	3
8	4
9	3
10	2
11	2
12	2
13	3
14	1
15	1
16	2
17	1

2021	Lead by 10+ ....
1	3
2	3
3	2
4	3
5	4
6	1
7	1
8	2
9	1
10	0
11	0
12	2
13	1
14	1
15	3
16	2
17	4
18	2

Thank you very much!

After I get done with tie games, and probably after this is published, I might compare my games per week to yours. Without having double-checked anything, we don't really know what is right and what is wrong, and over a five year sample, it's really not going to make a ton of difference to miss one game here or there anyway.

Underdogs are such a tremendous advantage that nobody should even contemplate blanket favorites, though there could be spots and situations where favorites can be good (as we discussed, less lay = better opportunity for favorite to be good) it's not even close overall and a game here or there won't change it.

It also turns out that 2017 may have been strange, in this regard, as not only did a mere eight favorites flip, but many of the ones that did weren't particularly beneficial. 2018 was the only other year in which one favorite not flipping (that did flip) would have resulted in a net loss, all else on par with historical data. In the last two years, favorites were a landslide advantage, at least in sports betting terms, but still nothing compared to dogs.

Quote: SOOPOO

So they are allowing the same type bet Thursday night on Chiefs Chargers. But 7 points, not 10. I took the UNDERDOG Chargers at + 160. I’m just hoping they get the ball first and score a TD, in their otherwise 38-24 loss….
link to original post

This isn't a full analysis (since it is only based on the first score being a TD) but my estimates would be:

27.5% to 32.5% chance of a +3.5 dog (with a 54.5 O/U for the game) scoring first with a TD (so the first 7 pts, usually).
Then you would roughly have an estimated 25% to 30% chance of losing*** the game (if up by 7 points some time within the 1st half),

***: The chance of losing is probably a bit higher, because the team started the game as a 'dog.

So, you can get a rough figure from this by multiplying 25% x 27.5% and 30% x 32.5% to get the, lower and upper bound estimates of losing after being up a TD, which are 6.875% and 9.75% respectively.

Important: This analysis does not take into account the many other ways a team can be up by 7+, and go on to lose. So you will almost certainly find that my lower bound estimate is "too low", and there is a chance that my upper bound estimate is also "too low".

After having had my slaves (ksdjdj and Mission) do the hard work, I will certainly just be betting all the underdogs if I have this opportunity going forward.

Tonight was particularly bad. I risked 50 to win 18. The 50 on the Seahawks would have paid over 100. I did have a hedge bet on Seattle to win with Smith passing for over 200. He finished at 195. Needed Metcslf to get a paltry 40 receiving yards to complete 3 leg parlay. He got 36.

It’s gonna be agony for me betting against the Bills next week if this offer reappears. But I’m committed!


I can’t say it loud enough….

THANK YOU MISSION AND ksdjdj!

SooPoo, is the 10 point offer just for NFL or can it be used on college games?

Quote: SOOPOO

After having had my slaves (ksdjdj and Mission) do the hard work, I will certainly just be betting all the underdogs if I have this opportunity going forward.

Tonight was particularly bad. I risked 50 to win 18. The 50 on the Seahawks would have paid over 100. I did have a hedge bet on Seattle to win with Smith passing for over 200. He finished at 195. Needed Metcslf to get a paltry 40 receiving yards to complete 3 leg parlay. He got 36.

It’s gonna be agony for me betting against the Bills next week if this offer reappears. But I’m committed!


I can’t say it loud enough….

THANK YOU MISSION AND ksdjdj!
link to original post

You're quite welcome! I don't know quite how to feel about being called a slave given the associated BDSM implications, but if you meant in the context of being a mere pawn in your grand game of Chess, then I suppose that's fine. Perhaps, with luck, I shall be marched all the way forward and transformed, well, I guess I would prefer a Rook, given my gender.

On the other hand, I wouldn't mind having a bigger Bishop, even if it meant being one.

Quote: DRich

SooPoo, is the 10 point offer just for NFL or can it be used on college games?
link to original post

Not it.

My full analysis (NFL) should be published within the next few days, maybe a little longer; it's an absolute beast.

Quote: DRich

SooPoo, is the 10 point offer just for NFL or can it be used on college games?
link to original post

So far I have only seen it on a few NBA games, one of which it helped me win, and this week's NFL games. As I mentioned earlier, they already have offered it for 7 points on the upcoming Thursday night game. Without this offer I would have assuredly picked the Chiefs, but because of the offer I bet on the Chargers, I think I got +160. If they offer it for the rest of the NFL games I'll of course post about it. They sent me an email letting me know how nice they were to have this offer as 4 games that would have lost won.

Quote: ksdjdj

Quote: SOOPOO

So they are allowing the same type bet Thursday night on Chiefs Chargers. But 7 points, not 10. I took the UNDERDOG Chargers at + 160. I’m just hoping they get the ball first and score a TD, in their otherwise 38-24 loss….
link to original post

This isn't a full analysis (since it is only based on the first score being a TD) but my estimates would be:
(snip)
link to original post

Quick analysis (because i am about to go to work):

The swap*** point would be about 100/285 chance for the Chargers to be better value (assuming the ML was +160/-200 when you had the bet).

***: By this I mean, it would be better overall to swap to the Chiefs, if you thought the Chiefs had 185/285 chance(or better) @ -200.

If you could get +375/-500 on the Bills game you mentioned, BUT with the same "7-point + lead promo", then the estimated cutoff would would be about 100/570 chance for the 'dog.

Note: Again, rough figures/estimates.

----
Spelling not checked

Quote: ksdjdj

Quote: ksdjdj

Quote: SOOPOO

So they are allowing the same type bet Thursday night on Chiefs Chargers. But 7 points, not 10. I took the UNDERDOG Chargers at + 160. I’m just hoping they get the ball first and score a TD, in their otherwise 38-24 loss….
link to original post

This isn't a full analysis (since it is only based on the first score being a TD) but my estimates would be:
(snip)
link to original post

Quick analysis (because i am about to go to work):

The swap*** point would be about 100/285 chance for the Chargers to be better value (assuming the ML was +160/-200 when you had the bet).

***: By this I mean, it would be better overall to swap to the Chiefs, if you thought the Chiefs had 185/285 chance(or better) @ -200.

If you could get +375/-500 on the Bills game you mentioned, BUT with the same "7-point + lead promo", then the estimated cutoff would would be about 100/570 chance for the 'dog.

Note: Again, rough figures/estimates.

----
Spelling not checked
link to original post

Pretty sure it was + 160 and -190.

Line has moved to +175 and -205.

So if I had waited I’d have gotten +175. Oh well….

Hey, hey, who wants to look into the belly of the beast?:

https://wizardofodds.com/online-gambling/sports-betting/interesting-nfl-promotion

This one is huge. If you're interested in the specific games in question, I offered a little bit of a breakdown as to what the situation was when the losing team in question led by ten, or more. I would think that some people might want to look for certain correlations in that, so they can have fun, though I don't think the sample size will be big enough for anything conclusive along those lines.

That said, if they want to go pre-2017 and analyze more games, then maybe, but I'm not sure how relevant those would be given various rule changes and such.

If you're not interested in the specific game situations, then I would still recommend reading everything except the actual game listings. I want to say it's only a 20(ish) minute read if you ignore those parts, maybe less.

In any event, I STRONGLY recommend reading the, "Questions That Could Be Asked," section as it pretty well condenses thoughts that I had as this project unfolded.

Quote: Mission146

Hey, hey, who wants to look into the belly of the beast?:

https://wizardofodds.com/online-gambling/sports-betting/interesting-nfl-promotion
(snip)
link to original post

Great article Mission

Quote: ksdjdj

Quote: Mission146

Hey, hey, who wants to look into the belly of the beast?:

https://wizardofodds.com/online-gambling/sports-betting/interesting-nfl-promotion
(snip)
link to original post

Great article Mission
link to original post

Holy cow! That looks like more than a 40 hour work week to put that article out. I’m frankly embarrassed that I didn’t immediately see the HUGE advantage of taking underdogs. I will surmise that variance is much lower taking favorites. As of this moment, the offer is only available for Thursday, at 7 points.

Quote: ksdjdj

Quote: Mission146

Hey, hey, who wants to look into the belly of the beast?:

https://wizardofodds.com/online-gambling/sports-betting/interesting-nfl-promotion
(snip)
link to original post

Great article Mission
link to original post

I appreciate that; thank you very much!

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: ksdjdj

Quote: Mission146

Hey, hey, who wants to look into the belly of the beast?:

https://wizardofodds.com/online-gambling/sports-betting/interesting-nfl-promotion
(snip)
link to original post

Great article Mission
link to original post

Holy cow! That looks like more than a 40 hour work week to put that article out. I’m frankly embarrassed that I didn’t immediately see the HUGE advantage of taking underdogs. I will surmise that variance is much lower taking favorites. As of this moment, the offer is only available for Thursday, at 7 points.
link to original post

Thank you for noticing; it took me just north of thirty total hours to do, so if you add in the time to get pictures and publish it, we might be close! I don't know how long it takes the amazing staff of these websites to make everything look as good as it does, but I promise you this, my Google Drive version of this article is difficult to even look at, much less read!

You weren't the only one who failed to immediately realize that underdogs are as powerful as they are. I've seen various things where people have reported their results, including people who consider themselves advantage bettors and most of them just seemed to go with the Picks that they'd have liked anyway.

Same offer now available for week 2!

Quote: SOOPOO

Same offer now available for week 2!
link to original post

I bet all 13 underdogs. It was AGONY pushing the button for the Jets, but I did it! A lot of BIG underdogs this week….. not available as of yet for the two MNF games. Probably later or some different offer.

Here are some "historical data" and "past live data" links that are probably not needed now, but may have been more helpful before the "Mission article".

"Comparison link" (I wanted to find one like this, but for the NFL): Comparison_with_NBA

"Closest link to the one above" (It is basically the same, except I can only go back to the start of the current season??):Similar_to_NBA_link_above

"Most complete NFL one, I have found so far" (It is probably the best NFL one overall, but it is very clunky, IMO): Most_complete_so_far

Quote: Mission146

(snip)
https://wizardofodds.com/online-gambling/sports-betting/interesting-nfl-promotion
(snip)
link to original post

With this promo, I just worked out roughly how good you would have to be at picking favorites, to make the overall EV "a better bet for the favorite, compared to always picking 'dogs" (see below).

Over the period in the "Mission article", you would have needed at least 105.1% RTP (before adding on the value of the promo).for favorites, to make the overall EV higher than backing the 'dog.

As a comparison, you would have needed an RTP of at least 84.9% (before adding on the value of the promo).for 'dogs, to make the overall EV higher than backing the favorite.

Note 1: Assuming that the overall RTP is 95%, overall.

Note 2: This is just another way to illustrate how strong the promo is for the 'dog.

Note 3: The only thing I would have done differently (if I was as good at writing articles as Mission) would be to use 95% RTP as the base value for both the 'dog and the favorite (but as you can see above, that is still no where near good enough to switch from the 'dog to the fav').

---
Lastly, I will expand on "Note 3" later, if anyone asks me to.

Quote: SOOPOO

So they are allowing the same type bet Thursday night on Chiefs Chargers. But 7 points, not 10. I took the UNDERDOG Chargers at + 160. I’m just hoping they get the ball first and score a TD, in their otherwise 38-24 loss….
link to original post

They may not win by that much (14 points), but I have the Chiefs better value*** too, at the current spread of -3.5 to -4.0.

***: I have the Chiefs -5 and the Chargers +7, the reason I use two figures is because I estimated the game using two different methods (I used the -5 figure, since I could only find value in backing the Chiefs, ATM).

----
FYI: using the same two methods of working out an estimate, the other teams I am targeting this week are:

Dolphins @ +3.5 (I think they should be +2.5 to +3.0)

Bucs @ -3 / odds +105 (... -6.5 to -4.5)

Cowboys @ +7.5 (... +1 ^^^ to +4 ^^^)

^^^: These estimated lines attempt to take into account the starting QB being out for the Cowboys

Seahawks @ +10 (,,, +4 to +7 ).

---
Lastly, here are some teams that I did the work on, but I don't think there is enough value (for either team):

Rams @ -10.5 (... -13 to -9)

Bills @ -10.0 (I think they should be -10 to -8)

Quote: ksdjdj

With this promo, I just worked out roughly how good you would have to be at picking favorites, to make the overall EV "a better bet for the favorite, compared to always picking 'dogs" (see below).

Over the period in the "Mission article", you would have needed at least 105.1% RTP (before adding on the value of the promo).for favorites, to make the overall EV higher than backing the 'dog.

As a comparison, you would have needed an RTP of at least 84.9% (before adding on the value of the promo).for 'dogs, to make the overall EV higher than backing the favorite.

Note 1: Assuming that the overall RTP is 95%, overall.

Note 2: This is just another way to illustrate how strong the promo is for the 'dog.

Note 3: The only thing I would have done differently (if I was as good at writing articles as Mission) would be to use 95% RTP as the base value for both the 'dog and the favorite (but as you can see above, that is still no where near good enough to switch from the 'dog to the fav').

---
Lastly, I will expand on "Note 3" later, if anyone asks me to.
link to original post

Quote clipped to remove the quote of myself and for relevance)

That's excellent work; thank you! I definitely appreciate you expanding on the point that I was making that someone would have to believe that they are borderline clairvoyant to want the favorites on this one. Granted, it would be quite understandable for those who didn't dive into it as much as I did, but I couldn't imagine reading my analysis (not to pat myself on the back) and still picking the favorite.

I would be curious as to the expansion of Note 3. The one thing that I noticed is that the percentage gap between favorites hitting and underdogs hitting significantly narrowed in the last few seasons of the study; we went from two (or more) dogs to every favorite in 2017 and 2018, then eventually seemed to close that gap until we ended up at a difference of only one last season.

My theory on that was that the home teams aren't being given as much of an automatic odds boost as years past, so consequently, you have fewer underdogs (particularly away underdogs) who should actually be slight favorites or Pick 'Ems. I guess I should have probably looked at historical data on how many Away Dogs there were in 2021 (raw number) compared to 2017 (raw number) and then compare the percentages, but I didn't think of it. Actually:

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/trends/ats_trends/?sc=is_away_dog&range=yearly_2021

It looks like 169 Away Dogs for the 2021 NFL Season, so we can at least compare that to 2017. It looks like 159 for 2017, so apparently, my theory on that is not correct. While a limited sample size, there were actually MORE Away Dogs in 2021 than there were in 2017, so assuming it's not just variance, that means that the away team is more likely to be the Underdog, so home teams are more likely to be favored.

Okay, you're going to have to give it to me on Note 3 because I can't figure it out!

Quote: Mission146

Quote: ksdjdj

(snip)
Note 3: The only thing I would have done differently (if I was as good at writing articles as Mission) would be to use 95% RTP as the base value for both the 'dog and the favorite (but as you can see above, that is still no where near good enough to switch from the 'dog to the fav').
(snip)
link to original post

Quote clipped to remove the quote of myself and for relevance)

That's excellent work; thank you! I definitely appreciate you expanding on the point that I was making that someone would have to believe that they are borderline clairvoyant to want the favorites on this one. Granted, it would be quite understandable for those who didn't dive into it as much as I did, but I couldn't imagine reading my analysis (not to pat myself on the back) and still picking the favorite.

I would be curious as to the expansion of Note 3. The one thing that I noticed is that the percentage gap between favorites hitting and underdogs hitting significantly narrowed in the last few seasons of the study; we went from two (or more) dogs to every favorite in 2017 and 2018, then eventually seemed to close that gap until we ended up at a difference of only one last season.

My theory on that was that the home teams aren't being given as much of an automatic odds boost as years past, so consequently, you have fewer underdogs (particularly away underdogs) who should actually be slight favorites or Pick 'Ems. I guess I should have probably looked at historical data on how many Away Dogs there were in 2021 (raw number) compared to 2017 (raw number) and then compare the percentages, but I didn't think of it. Actually:

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/trends/ats_trends/?sc=is_away_dog&range=yearly_2021

It looks like 169 Away Dogs for the 2021 NFL Season, so we can at least compare that to 2017. It looks like 159 for 2017, so apparently, my theory on that is not correct. While a limited sample size, there were actually MORE Away Dogs in 2021 than there were in 2017, so assuming it's not just variance, that means that the away team is more likely to be the Underdog, so home teams are more likely to be favored.

Okay, you're going to have to give it to me on Note 3 because I can't figure it out!
link to original post

The simple answer is, that I think that on average, the lines shift towards favorites more than 'dogs (when comparing the opening line to the closing line).

Note : I haven't got any data to back me up, so I am just going by memory and experience, over the years.

Do you know if the ML info in the link_here is based on closing lines***, or not?

***: If yes, then I think my point could be valid, and if no, then I apologize.

Note: I still believe that the closing line odds are generally the most accurate estimate, and it my be a lot harder (nearly impossible?) to find other odds, too.

----
Update (~1230, Pac Time):

(See strike-through above) I think we will find that at least part of my reasoning was wrong, as I managed to open the raw data that was used to get those odds, and it looks like it had a lot more info than just the closing odds (FYI, it took more than 1/2 an hour to open).

Quote: SOOPOO

So they are allowing the same type bet Thursday night on Chiefs Chargers. But 7 points, not 10. I took the UNDERDOG Chargers at + 160. I’m just hoping they get the ball first and score a TD, in their otherwise 38-24 loss….
link to original post

Congrats on the win for this game (no matter what happens now).

I just need the Chiefs to come back and win by exactly 2 or 3, to win my bet on the game.

Quote: ksdjdj

(snip)
"Most complete NFL one, I have found so far" (It is probably the best NFL one overall, but it is very clunky, IMO): Most_complete_so_far
link to original post

According to the "win probability calc" above, the Chargers would have a ~27.4% chance of losing when they were up by 10, near the start of the 2nd quarter (assuming they were +4.0 'dogs, to start the game).

Just won $80 on Chargers. I love this offer!

Great win, SOOPOO

----
My Chiefs 3 pt bet got up , too.

Now I just have to get most of my "correlated college plays***" up, to have an awesome start to the betting weekend

***: Every year for a few seasons now I seem to be able to get on heavily "correlated lines and totals", for college football (until the book's realize their mistakes, and then seem to "forget again, at the start of the next season"?).

Examples for one game I got on this week, would be:

MICHIGAN VS CONNECTICUT
Connecticut +46.5 / Under 57.5 @ +245
Michigan -46.5 / Over 57.5 @ +270

Note 1: there are 3 other games this week, that are close to the game mentioned above in " line / total " %' s, which I have also had a bet on.

Note 2: I mainly mention this because, "correlated plays" and the "3pt margin" bets that I have, are probably the only other ways that I can think of where anyone could consistently get an estimated % return similar to the promo that you are getting .

----
Update (~2130, Pac Time):
I know players are expected to take some serious hits, but the Chargers QB showed great fortitude to continue play, after getting injured.

Quote: ksdjdj

Update (~2130, Pac Time):
I know players are expected to take some serious hits, but the Chargers QB showed great fortitude to continue play, after getting injured.
link to original post

It was admirable but I always wonder when an injured player continues is it good for the team. Is an injured player going to be more productive than their backup?

Quote: DRich

Quote: ksdjdj

Update (~2130, Pac Time):
I know players are expected to take some serious hits, but the Chargers QB showed great fortitude to continue play, after getting injured.
link to original post

It was admirable but I always wonder when an injured player continues is it good for the team. Is an injured player going to be more productive than their backup?
link to original post

A coach is always making the decision on whether the player will be more productive than his backup. Herbert three a PERFECT pass down the middle on their last drive, which at least temporarily would make the decision correct. A previous play when he just threw the ball away rather than loping for an easy first down showed the opposite.

Frankly, without a diagnosis (bruised ribs? broken ribs? just a contusion?) he shouldn’t have been out there. If I’m the owner I don’t want him out there. Down 10 with that short amount of time to go they only have a percent or two chance to win, anyway.

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: DRich

Quote: ksdjdj

Update (~2130, Pac Time):
I know players are expected to take some serious hits, but the Chargers QB showed great fortitude to continue play, after getting injured.
link to original post

It was admirable but I always wonder when an injured player continues is it good for the team. Is an injured player going to be more productive than their backup?
link to original post

A coach is always making the decision on whether the player will be more productive than his backup. Herbert three a PERFECT pass down the middle on their last drive, which at least temporarily would make the decision correct. A previous play when he just threw the ball away rather than loping for an easy first down showed the opposite.

Frankly, without a diagnosis (bruised ribs? broken ribs? just a contusion?) he shouldn’t have been out there. If I’m the owner I don’t want him out there. Down 10 with that short amount of time to go they only have a percent or two chance to win, anyway.
link to original post

I thought the same thing.

I won $160 betting the dog on the Thursday game. Early win kicked in again. Thurs game was 7 points rather than 10.

DK just sent me an email with the same up 10 promo for week 2. All games eligible. They upped my limit from $100 to $200. 13 games so looks like I’ll have $2600 in action on the dogs.

Let’s hope this week goes as well as last week.

Good luck all and thanks for the analysis on the best way to maximize this juicy promo

Quote: TinMan

I won $160 betting the dog on the Thursday game. Early win kicked in again. Thurs game was 7 points rather than 10.

DK just sent me an email with the same up 10 promo for week 2. All games eligible. They upped my limit from $100 to $200. 13 games so looks like I’ll have $2600 in action on the dogs.

Let’s hope this week goes as well as last week.

Good luck all and thanks for the analysis on the best way to maximize this juicy promo
link to original post

Same here…. Except still limited to $50. What ‘dynasty level’ are you? I don’t think the two MNF were included in that offer. I’m sure there will be some offer for MNF.

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: TinMan

I won $160 betting the dog on the Thursday game. Early win kicked in again. Thurs game was 7 points rather than 10.

DK just sent me an email with the same up 10 promo for week 2. All games eligible. They upped my limit from $100 to $200. 13 games so looks like I’ll have $2600 in action on the dogs.

Let’s hope this week goes as well as last week.

Good luck all and thanks for the analysis on the best way to maximize this juicy promo
link to original post

Same here…. Except still limited to $50. What ‘dynasty level’ are you? I don’t think the two MNF were included in that offer. I’m sure there will be some offer for MNF.
link to original post

If I’m reading this correctly, I’m Bronze status. Most of the way to Silver Status but not there yet.

Separately, for some of the games this week the DK line is much worse than other books. Eg, I’ve held off on betting Falcons +370 when 2 other books have them at +400. I’m watching the lines to see if they come into closer alignment before betting.

Quote: TinMan

If I’m reading this correctly, I’m Bronze status. Most of the way to Silver Status but not there yet. I don’t find their rewards program terribly transparent. Caesars has less generous promos but when you want to know what you get for each level, it’s easy to find out.

Separately, for some of the games this week the DK line is much worse than other books. Eg, I’ve held off on betting Falcons +370 when 2 other books have them at +400. I’m watching the lines to see if they come into closer alignment before betting.
link to original post

I went to VegasInsider and looked at some games (closing) Moneylines for last year's NFL season. I sampled about four total weeks of games. What seems to be the case is that DraftKings often has the worst line on Underdogs and rarely has the best. The bigger the Underdog, the more that this tendency tends to present, at least, in the sample that I looked at.

Another thing to keep in mind is, at least I would hope, anyone who read my page is going to want underdogs on this promotion...it's probably just a drop in the bucket, but if people are spreading the word, (though I am sure there are others out there who already knew) then there should be more action coming in on Underdogs relative to normal. Of course, that could all be getting lost in the fact that they almost certainly have more action than normal all around because of this promotion.

Quote: TinMan

Quote: SOOPOO

Quote: TinMan

I won $160 betting the dog on the Thursday game. Early win kicked in again. Thurs game was 7 points rather than 10.

DK just sent me an email with the same up 10 promo for week 2. All games eligible. They upped my limit from $100 to $200. 13 games so looks like I’ll have $2600 in action on the dogs.

Let’s hope this week goes as well as last week.

Good luck all and thanks for the analysis on the best way to maximize this juicy promo
link to original post

Same here…. Except still limited to $50. What ‘dynasty level’ are you? I don’t think the two MNF were included in that offer. I’m sure there will be some offer for MNF.
link to original post

If I’m reading this correctly, I’m Bronze status. Most of the way to Silver Status but not there yet.

Separately, for some of the games this week the DK line is much worse than other books. Eg, I’ve held off on betting Falcons +370 when 2 other books have them at +400. I’m watching the lines to see if they come into closer alignment before betting.
link to original post

Good thinking. I lost out on Chargers because I only got +160. If I know what I want to bet on (say I know I want Browns ML against the Jets) I’ll look at my 5 sites and bet the best line. But for the offer like the 10 point one I just make the bets as soon as I am allowed.

I hate that I bet on the Falcons but I did!!!!

I can't see the full odds on VI for DK, but here is a run-down of the odds with DK, for all the 'dogs this week:

Note 1: Even though we know that " on average, 'dogs are enormous value compared to favorites", you can be forgiven to bet on either team, if the odds are +120 or less for the 'dog.
For example, if I "really liked" the Giants this week @ -120, then I would probably back them (especially if DK had the best, or = best odds for them, at the time).

Note 2: The "?" next to the DK odds mean I guessed the odds, as I can't see the full odds for DK, and I can't get the page to scroll left or right (I preferred the old VI website).

Note 3: DK = odds not in brackets, and best odds for the 'dog are in brackets.

Jets: +220? (+235 best, at another site)
Saints: +120 ( +120 and = best )
Panthers: +105? (+110 ...)
Steelers: +120 ( +120 and = best )
Dolphins: +160 ( +160 and = best )
Commanders: +100? (+105 ...)
Seahawks: +350 ( +350 and = best )
Texans: +390? (+400 ...)
Cardinals: +190? (+200 ...)
Cowboys: +260? (at least +275? ...)
Bears: +360? (at least +375? ...)
Titans: +360? (at least +365? ...)
Vikings: +110? (+120 ...)
Chargers: +160? (+175 ...)
Falcons: +360? (+410 ...) ^^^

^^^: I put the Falcons at the bottom on purpose, because I wanted to analyze the game a bit further.

Anyway, according to VI, FD currently have the ML for the Falcons @ +410, and the Rams @ -556.
That equates to a fair line of about +432/-432 (if we assume that FD, was "perfect at estimating a fair ML", before the Vig).
Unfortunately, we couldn't have the bet with FD, because this promotion was with DK, so we had to take +360.
Using the "FD fair line" above, as the "correct estimate", we would expect to get an average RTP of ~86.5% @ +360 for the 'dog, and 99% @ -455 for the Fav' (with DK).
But using the information in Mission article###, we can estimate that the gross average added value### for this promotion is about: 25.4% for 'dogs and 9.8% for Favs'.
###: If I have used the info correctly.
So, using those figures we get a total estimated RTP for this game:
with the Falcons being: 86.5% + 25.4% = 111.9%
and the Rams being: 99% + 9.8% = 108.8%

Conclusion:
From this we can see that betting the Falcons with this promo is still the better bet, even if we assume that the FD odds are the ones that are "closer to fair" (before the vig ).

----
Extra:

Below is how I would bet the Falcons, and similar games, if I could get the same promo with DK.
Wait as long as possible to bet, if DK currently had the worst odds for the Falcons.

Potential Pros: The odds may go out for the Falcons' with DK, closer to kick-off.

Potential Cons: The promotion on offer could be removed, between the time it is originally offered, but before you get any potential odds shift in your favor.

----
Other:

My 1st "correlated double" this week got up , I just need 'Bama to win by 50 + *** , and Wisconsin to win by 38 + *** (since it is already over the pre-game totals, for those games).

***: I had about 33% more on the "dog x under", but I should net a profit of ~$2000 per game if the "fav x over" connects.