Back to the future sport almanach strategy

This is somehow related to the timemachine thread here on elsewhere.

Suppose that you own a future sport almanach listing all exact scores of future sport games. In contrast to the movie, you don't use the almanach on sport bettingon other books (after a certain time no sport book will take your bet anymore). You chose something more sustainable and start to make your own book. What odds would you give for each game ? Although you know the winning team beforehand, you cannot give zero odds on the winning team and infinite odds on the losing team as it would reveal your knowledge of the result basically for free. How would you need to run the book, assuming there is an efficient market ?

I have the funny feeling that although you know who's winning, you have no other choice as giving the current market odds If you would bias your offered odds against the true winner smart bettors will pick it up and bet to that side. In the end you wouldn't have an advantage over all the other books which is kind of contradictory as you do have the knowledge of the true winner....

Quote: MangoJ

This is somehow related to the timemachine thread here on elsewhere.

Suppose that you own a future sport almanach listing all exact scores of future sport games. In contrast to the movie, you don't use the almanach on sport bettingon other books (after a certain time no sport book will take your bet anymore). You chose something more sustainable and start to make your own book. What odds would you give for each game ? Although you know the winning team beforehand, you cannot give zero odds on the winning team and infinite odds on the losing team as it would reveal your knowledge of the result basically for free. How would you need to run the book, assuming there is an efficient market ?

I have the funny feeling that although you know who's winning, you have no other choice as giving the current market odds If you would bias your offered odds against the true winner smart bettors will pick it up and bet to that side. In the end you wouldn't have an advantage over all the other books which is kind of contradictory as you do have the knowledge of the true winner....

I would give slightly worse odds. You can't assume people will suddenly realize you have the sports almanac lol

Same way as I'd fix a race (or engage in past-posting), if I was into being a race-fixer (or could & would wager "past-post"): Selectively, with few events rather than the same amount from repeated variation from market behavior, so to remain within the background noise of "scat happens." And definitely NOT involving big chunks of as many as six events at once; 'cause that'd be really stupid, even for fraternity brothers, whether the concern is over enforcement or just for market acceptance of Madam Fatima's Laundrymat, Bikini Car-Wash, and Sports Book.

[If not already familiar with the reference to "6" & "frat bros" type " 2002 Breeder's Cup Betting Scandal " into your choice of search engines - commonly known as the "Fix-6" incident. I'm a bit new here to presume to be posting links. But sometimes someone DOES know the "future" ...and managed to frack-it-up.]

deleted by me - duplicate post

I think the easier is to bet against other Books.
You can do a few combination bets for small wager upto the maximum payout of the book.
There are many bookies out there and by the time they figure you out you would be filthy rich.
You can also bet on the Stock Market for companies that own Sports teams.
And you might make it filthy rich on a single bet (say the $ Billion challenge offered by Warren Buffet)

Becoming the Bookie and offering slightly better odds (better than the market) for the loser will also just attract the 'smart' bettors looking for the best odds.
If you are worried about been 'made', you put on a few games (say 1 out of 10) the opposite way.

Whatever you do it would be very difficult NOT to make at least $100 million before anyone suspects you.

So now, where do I get one of those time machines !!!!

I agree with A2. I would spread my action around with multiple bookies.
And, I would spread in a few losing bets as cover. Most weeks I would pick a major favorite for a huge bet, and then throw in a few small bets that lose. But every so often, have my big bet lose, but have many of my smaller bets win, so that I still end up for the week.
If this type of action was spread between 10 books, it would take them forever to figure it out, especially if the winning bet, and the losing bets, were split between books each week.

Of course one could do some minor parlay that turns out big at some high-limit book. Do it once - okay. Do it twice ? No way...

Anyway, that was not the focus of the question. It was more out of curiosity how a good handicapper can actually improve the books performance - and if there is any limit to it. It seems that even with a perfect handicapper (i.e. knowing the results of the game) a bookie in a market environment long term profit is not trivial.

This is (at least for me) rather surprising, as the optimal book strategy is not obvious. It seems that even the perfect knowledge book needs to offer some kind of "bluff" bets: Bets that will surely lose but will mask the winning bets.

Say, there is a public coin flip and several books offer odds on the result. The best books on the market offer 1.99:1 on the flip for both sides. The back-from-the-future bookie knows the coin flip result. Is he restricted to the market view, i.e. is forced to offer say 1.995:1 on both sides ? (But then any other book could do that, at it is a coin flip). Can he offer 3:1 on the losing side, when history shows that all 3:1 bets lose anyway ? Which odds should it offer for optimal performance ? Is the knowledge of the coin flip result of any long term value (it must be, but by how much ?)

You would set up the computer system to go into error mode sporadically when people try making winning bets. Might as well set it up so winning bets becomes bets for the losing side and hope they take it.