Should I hedge this "bet"? What is the highest EV move? - Page 2

DrJ · #11 01-08-2007, 02:53 PM

Alright, the matchup has been set and it is Da Bears vs Seattle. I was pretty much set on not hedging, but this gigantic spread has me again waivering...

9 points is a pretty large window to hit 150%. What percentage of the time does a team cover a 9 point spread and still lose?

MCS · #12 01-08-2007, 03:17 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Well, one way would be to assume that Team B covers the spread 50% of the time. Convert the money line into a winning percentage--for example, if they're +150, then they win the game outright 100/250 = 40% of the time. So that means they cover but don't win 10% of the time (50-40).

Note that I am ignoring the possibility of a push, which happens moderately often with spreads of 3 and 7, and 4 to some degree, but that doesn't change things much.

[/ QUOTE ]

JasonK · #13 01-08-2007, 03:59 PM

Did you sell tickets to the NFC Championship game in Chicago?

DrJ · #14 01-08-2007, 04:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well, one way would be to assume that Team B covers the spread 50% of the time. Convert the money line into a winning percentage--for example, if they're +150, then they win the game outright 100/250 = 40% of the time. So that means they cover but don't win 10% of the time (50-40).

Note that I am ignoring the possibility of a push, which happens moderately often with spreads of 3 and 7, and 4 to some degree, but that doesn't change things much.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm looking at the odds on USAToday, and the money line is 110. It seems that it's roughly the same for all of these contests, even though some have much smaller spreads. I guess I just have no clue how to figure this stuff out, hehe...

DrJ · #15 01-08-2007, 04:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Did you sell tickets to the NFC Championship game in Chicago?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. So it totally hinges on this one game.

I'm very confident in their chances this weekend, so I'm just being greedy and wondering what the chances of getting that 150% would be. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

JasonK · #16 01-08-2007, 04:23 PM

Chicago has about an 80% chance to win according to the ML.

MCS · #17 01-08-2007, 09:58 PM

You're looking at the wrong numbers then; your paper might not carry the info you need. Those numbers are the juice you have to pay to bet the spread. Go to www.pinnaclesports.com and check out the numbers there.

DrJ · #18 01-09-2007, 01:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You're looking at the wrong numbers then; your paper might not carry the info you need. Those numbers are the juice you have to pay to bet the spread. Go to www.pinnaclesports.com and check out the numbers there.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, now I get it. The money line is +355 for Seattle, so their projected odds of winning the game are 100/455 or 22%. Assuming it's 50/50 against the spread, it breaks down as follows:

Odds Bears win and cover spread: 50%
Odds Bears win and Seattle covers: 28%
Odds Seattles wins outright: 22%

Thanks for the help, I think I can now make an educated decision!

DrJ · #19 01-09-2007, 04:18 PM

One last bother.

Since the money line is so big and they're estimating about 80% chances of the Bears winning, I could actually guarantee about 80% of my money in this scenario, correct?

Say the amount we're talking about here is 1K.

I could take $175 and wager it against the money line against. If the Bears win, I lose that $175, so I keep $825 of my money. If the Bears lose, I would have 4.55 times that $175, or 796.25.

Since my EV is about $780 on the original $1000 according to the money line, it looks like this is actually slightly positive EV?

Is my math correct here?

DrJ · #20 01-09-2007, 04:54 PM

I have to be leaving out something - the way I see it with a ML of -410 on Da Bears and +370 on Seattle you could do the following:

Bet $820 on Chicago, for a win of $200 if Chicago wins.
Bet $200 on Seattle, for a win of $940 if Seattle wins.

It cost you $1120 to win $1140.

I'm obviously missing something here, they must take a percentage somewhere?