[StevieG]

Interesting to see this here. The same argument came up at Covers a few years back with people insisting that only losers pay the vig.

So I came up with this thought experiment. Suppose the house decided to run a promotion - every Sunday, for the first round of games, they make one a "no juice" special, but they do not reveal what the game will be before hand. So everyone still bets the the -110 but in one case the winners will actually get paid as if it were +100.

If all you picked were losers then you would never know what game was juice free. Only a winner would be able to identify the juice free game.


Now, if someone can come up with a similar situation in which the winner can't tell which game had the juice, I'll agree that both sides pay the vig.

Until then, I'm sticking to the idea that only winners pay the vig.