Who pays the vig: The loser or the winner?? - Page 6

plus_man · #51 02-02-2006, 08:20 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Wrong. If you make 10 bets and lose 10 bets and go broke, when did you pay the vig again?

[/ QUOTE ]

you paid when you made your bet. you should have only paid in sum what the lucky winner won in sum. homedog has a good explanation in this thread.

plus_man · #52 02-02-2006, 08:25 PM

the loser pays. it is semantics in a way. If you go 10 out of 10 on bets, you don't pay one cent. You don't get back what you risked but you dont pay. books make their money off of vig not winners. So that means they make their money off of _______. thank you.

DeucesUp · #53 02-02-2006, 09:08 PM

I'm taking bets on the outcome of the SuperBowl cointoss. It's confirmed to be a fair coin. I'm offering +100 on heads and -120 on tails because I know my clients love tails and I will take balanced action.

Who's paying the vig? Does it matter who wins?
.
.
.
.
.
I think the vig is the difference between the odds you "should" be getting and the odds you're given and it's paid when you make the bet. In my mind there are 2 reasonabe definitions of "should". 1.) The true odds of the outcome - in this case +100. or 2.) The fair market odds you could get if you entered into a vigless transaction with the bettors on the other side - in this case the midpoint between the offers -110. Trying to define where the money comes from after the result has been decided is all just semantics.

NajdorfDefense · #54 02-06-2006, 12:52 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wrong. If you make 10 bets and lose 10 bets and go broke, when did you pay the vig again?

[/ QUOTE ]

you paid when you made your bet. you should have only paid in sum what the lucky winner won in sum. homedog has a good explanation in this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. If I lose every bet I make, I never, ever pay the vig.
You either don't understand gambling, or don't understand the definition of the term 'vig' or 'vigorish.' It has a standard definition, you cannot change it to mean whatever you wish. You are wrong.

Naj

Mr_J · #55 02-06-2006, 02:57 AM

Actually you are the one who is wrong. You pay the vig when you place the bet, since you will only ever get 91% back (assuming -110). It doesn't matter if you win or lose, you still pay it. It's no different that playing slots or a $10+1 poker tournament. If less than 100% of your bet/buyin etc is returned to the prize pool, you pay vig/rake no matter whether you lose or not.

Mr_J · #56 02-06-2006, 03:05 AM

Craig, both losers and winners pay the vig. I can understand why people think only the winner pays, but it's not correct. Every bettor accepts that if they do win, they only receive 91% of their bet back (assuming -110). As soon as they place this bet, they lose 4.5% of the value of the bet no matter what the actual outcome is. Saying that one or the other pays is not recognizing what EV is.

Poker gives a perfect example of what I mean. Say I play a tournament that has a $10 buyin plus a $1 fee ($10+1). Now whether I win or lose, I still pay $1 to the house. This is undeniable. You are paying $11 with a maximum return of $10. This is EXACTLY the same as betting at -110. For every $11 you bet, you will see a maximum return of $10.

craig · #57 02-06-2006, 03:30 AM

But, when the loser loses he doesn't pay an extra 9%? The fee for a tournament and the vig are not the same thing. Also, rake and the fee for a tournament are not the same thing either. Who pays the rake, the winners or the losers? It definitely isn't everyone that contributed to the pot. The reason I ask is that the rake is closer to the vig, than a house fee for a tournament is.

craig

ubercuber · #58 02-06-2006, 04:54 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think we can verify who (winner or loser) is paying the vig without knowing what the true value of the wager was.

[/ QUOTE ]

This makes the most sense to me.

On a 50-50 with both sides paying -110 you are both sacrificing a measure of expectation. Your profit, or loss, on the wager is measured before the wager is placed... with juice included.

faithdrool · #59 02-06-2006, 05:43 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Actually you are the one who is wrong. You pay the vig when you place the bet, since you will only ever get 91% back (assuming -110). It doesn't matter if you win or lose, you still pay it. It's no different that playing slots or a $10+1 poker tournament. If less than 100% of your bet/buyin etc is returned to the prize pool, you pay vig/rake no matter whether you lose or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. You pay the vig when you make the wager, not when the wager is graded.

VarlosZ · #60 02-06-2006, 06:55 AM

Everyone pays the vig, and it's not close. BobJoeJim explained why perfectly.

The vig is the mechanism by which the house skews the EV in it's favor. That's it's function, that's all it does, that's what it is -- thinking of it any other way is pointless. You pay when you place the apparently -EV wager, and that should be intuitively obvious to everyone on a poker message board.