[WIZARD] Edge Play

Going to need the Wizards input on this one.

Living in Ontario we have a provincial sports lottery where upon odds are released daily around 6am for certain sporting events, much like Vegas does. They certainly don't offer anywhere near as much selection, and you must bet a minimum of 3 games per ticket. Not sure on the rules regarding links around here so I won't do it. If you search "Pro Line" it will come up.

The lines they offer are never changed throughout the day.This leads to certain situations where betting on a team, or in this case "parlaying" 3 selections where the line has not been readjusted, leads to a player +EV. Comparing these lines to Pinnacle, the sportsbook, you can calculate the edge, winning probability, proper bet, etc based off their line. For example...

Lets say in theory, using decimal odds, that Pinnacle has the New York Yankees paying 6.75-1 to win a game. If I were to receive a line of 6.95-1, it's +EV in my favor. I realize you would never receive those odds on any baseball game, I was just using it as an example.

My friend has been arguing with me that it is a fallacy, and it is actually not +EV. He claims that I'm assuming Pinnacle has the "correct" line on the game, when it isn't the truth. He agrees it could be +EV if the "edge" was much much higher. He also says that by having to Parlay 3 games together that unless the edges reached such a huge amount, they could never be +EV.

We obviously disagree on this and he told me to ask The Wizard. So if he could chime in and settle it, then great. Also looking for others opinions.

I think your friend is closer to correct than you are. Once the line comes out, unless there is a major story like an injury (which you could then definitely take advantage of), the lines are adjusted based on the public's wagers. I don't think the wagering public creates any type of +EV.

I would be looking for important injury, illness, benching, suspensions, etc., more than the line adjusting because too many people are betting one way or another.

ZCore13

Quote: UltimateHoldem

Going to need the Wizards input on this one.

Living in Ontario we have a provincial sports lottery where upon odds are released daily around 6am for certain sporting events, much like Vegas does. They certainly don't offer anywhere near as much selection, and you must bet a minimum of 3 games per ticket. Not sure on the rules regarding links around here so I won't do it. If you search "Pro Line" it will come up.

The lines they offer are never changed throughout the day.This leads to certain situations where betting on a team, or in this case "parlaying" 3 selections where the line has not been readjusted, leads to a player +EV. Comparing these lines to Pinnacle, the sportsbook, you can calculate the edge, winning probability, proper bet, etc based off their line. For example...

Lets say in theory, using decimal odds, that Pinnacle has the New York Yankees paying 6.75-1 to win a game. If I were to receive a line of 6.95-1, it's +EV in my favor. I realize you would never receive those odds on any baseball game, I was just using it as an example.

My friend has been arguing with me that it is a fallacy, and it is actually not +EV. He claims that I'm assuming Pinnacle has the "correct" line on the game, when it isn't the truth. He agrees it could be +EV if the "edge" was much much higher. He also says that by having to Parlay 3 games together that unless the edges reached such a huge amount, they could never be +EV.

We obviously disagree on this and he told me to ask The Wizard. So if he could chime in and settle it, then great. Also looking for others opinions.

Unless you tell us what the three team parlay pays, we cannot answer your question. I think the Canadian bets on sports have a HUGE vig built in.

Quote: SOOPOO

Unless you tell us what the three team parlay pays, we cannot answer your question. I think the Canadian bets on sports have a HUGE vig built in.

a 3 team parlay pays whatever odds you are getting. so 3 lines of -125 would basically be 1.8x1.8x1.8xwager. The payout is not set like a Vegas 3 team point spread at 6-1.

Quote: Zcore13

I think your friend is closer to correct than you are. Once the line comes out, unless there is a major story like an injury (which you could then definitely take advantage of), the lines are adjusted based on the public's wagers. I don't think the wagering public creates any type of +EV.

I would be looking for important injury, illness, benching, suspensions, etc., more than the line adjusting because too many people are betting one way or another.

ZCore13

Lines are often incorrect from the start too. Often times the line will open up on Pinnacle at 1.80/-125, where as I'm getting 2.00/+100 on the same sporting event.

Quote: UltimateHoldem

a 3 team parlay pays whatever odds you are getting. so 3 lines of -125 would basically be 1.8x1.8x1.8xwager. The payout is not set like a Vegas 3 team point spread at 6-1.

OK... then what is the spread used?

If one team is -125 the other team is surely not +125.
Give a real example of 3 games, and what the money line on both the favorite and underdog was.

If it is a pointspread line, are they all -110?

That would be a more important factor to me. The large sportsbook odds makers are usually pretty good. An opening line differnce like that would be something I would surely look for.

ZCore13

Quote: SOOPOO

OK... then what is the spread used?

If one team is -125 the other team is surely not +125.
Give a real example of 3 games, and what the money line on both the favorite and underdog was.

If it is a pointspread line, are they all -110?

Using Soccer matches from today

Chelsea Vs Reading

Offshore Odds:
Chelsea Win: 1.60
Tie: 4.44
Reading Win: 6.46

My Odds:
Chelsea Win: 1.30
Tie: 4.25
Reading Win: 7.00

The +EV comes from the inflated odds of a Reading win. My edge is 8.4% on this game. If I did this with 3 games that were all equal to the above example, it would still technically be +EV for me despite having to parlay them. It would obviously be more valuable if you could bet each game individually, but you can't. The only thing that suffers from having to parlay 3 games is your win %.

Quote: UltimateHoldem

Using Soccer matches from today

Chelsea Vs Reading

Offshore Odds:
Chelsea Win: 1.60
Tie: 4.44
Reading Win: 6.46

My Odds:
Chelsea Win: 1.30
Tie: 4.25
Reading Win: 7.00

The +EV comes from the inflated odds of a Reading win. My edge is 8.4% on this game. If I did this with 3 games that were all equal to the above example, it would still technically be +EV for me despite having to parlay them. It would obviously be more valuable if you could bet each game individually, but you can't. The only thing that suffers from having to parlay 3 games is your win %.

It is only +EV if you believe that the likelihood of Reading winning makes getting 7.00 odds a +EV bet. Because some offshore book has you getting 6.46 instead of 7 does NOT mean 7 is +EV, it only means 7 is better than getting 6.46. Since there are 3 outcomes, W, L or T, it makes it more complicated to figure out the EV of any of the bets.

Quote: SOOPOO

It is only +EV if you believe that the likelihood of Reading winning makes getting 7.00 odds a +EV bet. Because some offshore book has you getting 6.46 instead of 7 does NOT mean 7 is +EV, it only means 7 is better than getting 6.46. Since there are 3 outcomes, W, L or T, it makes it more complicated to figure out the EV of any of the bets.

We will agree to disagree then. There are certain instances where the edge is so small that it would not warrant a bet depending on your bankroll. If the odds of 3 specific games were 5.75-1, and you got 5.76-1 on all 3 but had to parlay them, then yes, it's not worth it. When it reaches a certain level it becomes profitable.

From what I remember about sports betting in Canada, the parlay odds were horrific.

Playing the "stale" lines on NFL parlay cards is a known advantage play. I'm fairly confident that blind betting numbers that moved on or off the 3 or 7 would have an advantage. My first encounter with this occurred in September as some casinos released a parlay card before Week 1 of the college season that included Week 1 NFL games that didn't take place for 10 days. The NFL games saw movement of as many as 3.5 points on the spread or total.

Looking into this a bit, it very well could be +EV, if we take Pinnacle odds to be the true likelihood of events occurring. Obviously that's a bit risky to do, but from what I read about sportsbetting, Pinnacle has pretty reliable lines. Unfortunately, it looks like the +EV picks vs. the Pinnacle line are the significant underdogs, so...even if this is mildly +EV, it's going to be very, very high variance.

For example, the three +EV picks with comparison to the Pinnacle line for the English Premier league today are:

Reading
Westham United
Norwich City

On these parlay tickets you don't recieve the original wager back right? If thats the case, this set of three teams will give you about a 104 for 1 payout and would occur about 1 in 83 times if we believe the Pinnacle odds to be accurate future results.

So a $2 wager would look like this:

(0.0120501498)*($207.90) - (0.9879498502)*($2) = $0.5413

So, yeah, if you scout stuff out well, it could make you a little bit of money. But that's under the somewhat significant assumption that Pinnacle odds are a reliable estimate of what is going to happen AND it's likely that the +EV picks are going to be the underdogs, so your variance in a 3-team parlay is going to be very, very high, so you would need a large bankroll to mitigate swings.

Quote: tringlomane

Looking into this a bit, it very well could be +EV, if we take Pinnacle odds to be the true likelihood of events occurring. Obviously that's a bit risky to do, but from what I read about sportsbetting, Pinnacle has pretty reliable lines. Unfortunately, it looks like the +EV picks vs. the Pinnacle line are the significant underdogs, so...even if this is mildly +EV, it's going to be very, very high variance.

For example, the three +EV picks with comparison to the Pinnacle line for the English Premier league today are:

Reading
Westham United
Norwich City

On these parlay tickets you don't recieve the original wager back right? If thats the case, this set of three teams will give you about a 104 for 1 payout and would occur about 1 in 83 times if we believe the Pinnacle odds to be accurate future results.

So a $2 wager would look like this:

(0.0120501498)*($207.90) - (0.9879498502)*($2) = $0.5413

So, yeah, if you scout stuff out well, it could make you a little bit of money. But that's under the somewhat significant assumption that Pinnacle odds are a reliable estimate of what is going to happen AND it's likely that the +EV picks are going to be the underdogs, so your variance in a 3-team parlay is going to be very, very high, so you would need a large bankroll to mitigate swings.

Not all edges fall under large underdogs. In Ontario a "Tie" on an NFL game is if either team wins by 3 or less points. As with College Basketball its if either team wins by 5 or less points. This creates a lot of edges also. The size of your bet is proportionate to the winning % of the individual parlay. If you use your example of the 3 soccer games today, the chances of it hitting are very slim, thus a smaller bet. And the whole premise behind having the edge is that when it does hit you're compensated for it more than you should have been. The variance is high it's true, but in any given year you can find a mix of high win%/low win% parlays. I average about 20% of my starting bankroll in profit per year.

Edit: As far as mitigating swings, using a Kelly betting pattern keeps you out of harms way.

Quote: UltimateHoldem

Using Soccer matches from today

Chelsea Vs Reading

Offshore Odds:
Chelsea Win: 1.60
Tie: 4.44
Reading Win: 6.46

My Odds:
Chelsea Win: 1.30
Tie: 4.25
Reading Win: 7.00

The +EV comes from the inflated odds of a Reading win. My edge is 8.4% on this game. If I did this with 3 games that were all equal to the above example, it would still technically be +EV for me despite having to parlay them. It would obviously be more valuable if you could bet each game individually, but you can't. The only thing that suffers from having to parlay 3 games is your win %.

Yeah, let's look at this in more detail to figure out what the Vig is. In the case of the offshore folks, you would bet .625 to win a $1 on Chelsea, .225 to win a $1 if they tied, and .15477 to win a dollar on a redding win. The total amount you need to bet to win a $1 is $1.005024. The house vig is only 0.5%

In Ontario, the vig is 13% (1/1.30 + 1/4.25+1/7). = It takes $1.129525 to win $1.

Now say you instead alter your bet based on the true odds. This is clearly the Reading win. So, you bet $15.48 to win $108.36 in Canada for the 8.4% player advantage that you calculate.

Quote: boymimbo

Yeah, let's look at this in more detail to figure out what the Vig is. In the case of the offshore folks, you would bet .625 to win a $1 on Chelsea, .225 to win a $1 if they tied, and .15477 to win a dollar on a redding win. The total amount you need to bet to win a $1 is $1.005024. The house vig is only 0.5%

In Ontario, the vig is 13% (1/1.30 + 1/4.25+1/7). = It takes $1.129525 to win $1.

Now say you instead alter your bet based on the true odds. This is clearly the Reading win. So, you bet $15.48 to win $108.36 in Canada for the 8.4% player advantage that you calculate.

I agree with the above.
Also you cannot assume that the 6.46 are the correct odds.
Even if you are correct and there is +EV and there other +EV on long shots which you have to parlay 3 times then the Variance is huge.
Even with +10% EV on a 3 bet parlay longshots your bet should be tiny under kelly.
So even under your assumptions not an AP opportunity

Quote: AceTwo

I agree with the above.
Also you cannot assume that the 6.46 are the correct odds.
Even if you are correct and there is +EV and there other +EV on long shots which you have to parlay 3 times then the Variance is huge.
Even with +10% EV on a 3 bet parlay longshots your bet should be tiny under kelly.
So even under your assumptions not an AP opportunity

It's quite clearly an advantage play. Even with the monstrous variance on the specific parlay that someone posted earlier, it would still warrant a wager under an adjusted Kelly betting pattern and a modest bankroll.

I'd like the Wiz's opinion about calling it "an advantage play", because I doubt it qualifies. For example, he feels that "No Safety" in the Super Bowl is a better bet than the lines suggest, but I don't think he'd consider it an actual "advantage" play.

I agree. I don't think it can be called AP or +EV. It's finding the best line for a bet. People do that every day.

ZCore13

Bump.