Probably a Dumb Question...

RukusDad · #1 10-11-2006, 01:41 AM

What will pay better in the long run picking SU at 75%, including Favs and Dogs, or picking against the spread at 55%??? Seems to be about the rate I pick at and have been playing ATS mostly. Thinking about playing SU from now on and paying the extra juice on Favs but getting better returns on Dogs. Any info appreciated. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Howling · #2 10-11-2006, 02:16 AM

If you are a +EV capper, than money line makes the most

EDIT: dogs moneyline, favs spread

silentbob · #3 10-11-2006, 08:25 AM

[ QUOTE ]
dogs moneyline, favs spread

[/ QUOTE ]
Can someone please explain why? I don't think this is covered in the FAQ anywhere.

rjp · #4 10-11-2006, 09:59 AM

It's the old game of risk versus reward.

UNDERDOGs on the money line typically provide a higher expected value than against the spread. In some cases the money line has a negative expectation, yet you have an edge with the point spread. Make sure you can calculate these odds before you start taking every UNDERDOG against the money line. Taking the UNDERDOG on the money line, however, incorporates higher risk. Using my money management plan I will usually only take UNDERDOGs against the money line if I feel they should be at least 50/50 to win the game outright. Most of the time the money lines on these UNDERDOGs provides a higher expected value, and my risk is roughly the same with wagers against the spread (I expect to win them about as often).

Like UNDERDOGs there are some cases where favorites provide a higher expected value on the money line over the point spread. These are typically lines that land on key numbers (like 3). More often than not, however, your best bet is against the spread as the payout is typically much higher. Your odds of winning are lower, but combined with other bets against the spread and you've got a good chance at making more money. When a favorite loses outright they obviously lose against the spread, so by taking the point spread over the money line you've got a better chance at making up these losses over the short term.

They key? Never say never, and it's really about risk versus reward. UNDERDOGs on the money line = higher risk compared to UNDERDOGs against the spread, and FAVs against the spread = higher risk compared to FAVs against the money line. Over the long term the UNDERDOGs against the money line and FAVs against the spread are likely to have earned in more money (assuming you can withstand the natural fluctuations).

silentbob · #5 10-11-2006, 10:26 AM

Okay, that makes sense. But at the beginning of a sports season (especially in college), where handicapping is probably a huge PITA due to the relatively large turnover in players (as compared to the pros), wouldn't it make more sense to bet underdogs against the spread?

rjp · #6 10-11-2006, 10:33 AM

silentbob, if you have an edge with the DOG then it (at worst) makes sense to take them against the spread. This is, in fact, how I bet most DOGs. If you are willing to accept more risk for a little more expected value then take the money line. Taking into account team turnover should be a part of the handicapping process.

Freerollin` · #7 10-11-2006, 10:38 AM

RJP, you're only discussing football when you say

[ QUOTE ]
I will usually only take UNDERDOGs against the money line if I feel they should be at least 50/50 to win the game outright.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct? Is this entire thread about football?

rjp · #8 10-11-2006, 12:10 PM

Yes, football and basketball. Baseball is a different beast. You get many more opportunities so your risk isn't as high.