NHL - inefficient market?

I know that hockey is the "thinnest" and least followed segment of the sports wagering markets.

Just wondering if The Wiz (or anyone else) has tried to create a simulation model and is it possible to profitably bet hockey over the long haul?

The interesting thing is there are a few markets that are crazy about hockey betting.

It would be interesting to compare Las Vegas sportsbooks or common American internet sportsbook's odds with the sites commonly used in Canada, Russia, or Scandinavian Countries (among others). In these countries (particularly Canada) NHL betting often outweighs anything else. Canada even has a government-run sportsbook which has heavy betting on the NHL, although these are 'lottery' style with forced parlays. But I imagine their odd-setters are very focused on the NHL, unlike the US, and creating some very realistic odds that are good for comparison.

I don't know too much about sports betting so these are just comments. I only bet recreationally on sports.

Quote: bmt

Just wondering if The Wiz (or anyone else) has tried to create a simulation model and is it possible to profitably bet hockey over the long haul?

Nope, sorry. I don't think I've ever made a hockey bet in my life.

Most of the provincial governments here in Canada run a sports lottery called Proline where you can indeed pick a parlay of anywhere from 3 to 6 events. These events are whatever's playing that night and in the winter months include NFL Football, NHL hockey, NBA basketball, NCAA basketball and football.

The odds are published a couple of days in advance. You can pick a team to win a lot (different definition for a different sport), win, tie, lose, or lose alot. The multiplier is posted. So for example, if Indianapolis Colts is playing say Kansas City, you might see the Win column for Indianapolis at 1.1 and the win column for Kansas City at 3.2. Your win is calculated as your bet times the multiplier for the individual wins in the parlay and the potential win is published when the merchant spits out your ticket. You can also pick over / under bets as part of the parlay.

Back to the question at hand. I've found that the hockey events pretty much follow the odds set in Vegas except the payout is a bit worse.

Oh, that's an easy one: there's no such thing as hockey.

There is something called hockey, a sport in which the objective is to allegedly drive a rubber disk, known as "the puck," inside a net half as big as the man defending it. This "sport" is shown during the winter olympics and medals are even awarded to allegedly victorious teams. The only problem is that no one has ever seen the legendary "puck" actually used in a game. I've watched most carefully a few times and, as far as I could tell, it was all men with sticks driving air over the ice.

Now, you can see reproductions of the mysterious "puck" at sporting goods stores. But that proves nothing. I mean, you can buy reproductions of other mythical objects like the Loch Ness Monster or Bigfoot, you can even buy ceramic unicorns. Meaning "the puck" is as much an artist's rendering of an unexisting object as, say, a sculpture of a noble politician.

My theory is that hockey is a ruse to 1) lure wrestling fans to the winter olympics and 2) fill whatever tiny TV void the cable sports networks have without an actual major sport over the course of a year.

In other words: no real "puck" no way to really know the score. Who'd place a bet under such conditions? You might as well bet at baseball (this is a failed sport rather than an imaginary one).

BTW :P

Quote: Nareed

Oh, that's an easy one: there's no such thing as hockey.

Not in mexico - there's no such thing as ice there. I could say the same about soccer - a boring sport mostly about people chasing a ball over a hectare of grass and a few times a game, there's a shot on the net, and wow, the score is nil-nil again! Let's pay each player millions of dollars!!! Excitement. I don't get it. I prefer to watch paint dry.

When one of the broadcast networks in the USA attempted to broadcast hockey, they put a bright dot on the puck so that people can see it. The puck does magically appear when you buy an HDTV and it does appear in replays.

Nareed though, you are right in one way -- the results are fairly difficult to predict.

Quote: boymimbo

Not in mexico - there's no such thing as ice there.

Oh, there is. The current Cacique of the Capital provides, free of direct charge, skating rinks from early December to mid February completely free of any direct charge. In the summer he provides, free of direct charge, pools and piles of sand.

I even saw a hockey "game" live once. It was between two amateur "teams" in a local "league." I saw no "puck" there either.

Quote: boymimbo

I could say the same about soccer - a boring sport mostly about people chasing a ball over a hectare of grass and a few times a game, there's a shot on the net, and wow, the score is nil-nil again! Let's pay each player millions of dollars!!! Excitement. I don't get it. I prefer to watch paint dry.

Don't get me started on sucker, I mean Soccer. It's a game without any clear objective. Of course I've heard the allegation the objective is to drive the ball into the net, but I just don't believe it. I mean, this happens so seldom given the huge ratio of ball-to-net size to make it clear that can't possibly be the objective.

On the other hand the fans get most excited when a shot comes near the net, but they don't keep score on that.

And on the third hand all players eventually engage in histrionic displays to make even the hammiest actors feel subtle. During these displays, which involve a re-enactment of all famous assasination scenes of the theater piled together, the soccer thespians often get rewarded by the showing of a yellow or a red card from the middle-aged man in the black shorts who is on the field to show this cards and blow a whistle. But these displays neither determine the result, nor are featured at sports awards shows.

So, no clear objective in sucker, I mean Sucker.

Quote: boymimbo

When one of the broadcast networks in the USA attempted to broadcast hockey, they put a bright dot on the puck so that people can see it. The puck does magically appear when you buy an HDTV and it does appear in replays.

I've seen footage of Bigfoot, too. :)

Then there's baseball, a failed sport. The objective is clear: to bore the audence to death. Of course no baseball game, even the most boring ones, has ever achieved its goal. Therefore it's a failed sport :P

I've also ahve something to say about Basketball, car racing and track and field. But I'm sure you're not interested.