|
|
#21
09-19-2006, 02:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Help: should I hedge the 4th leg of my teaser?
Wouldn't variance be much lower on just circling 2 teamers?
I'm not trying to rock the boat, but it seems you could put larger % with a comparable RoR and see a greater gain in bankroll effectively. 
|
|
#22
09-19-2006, 02:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Help: should I hedge the 4th leg of my teaser?
[ QUOTE ]
If I'm not mistaken each of those teasers has the same EV with the only difference being variance. Why people don't just bet more on every two teamer befuddles me. Can someone clear this up for me? [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] You're wrong, which goes without saying.
|
|
#24
09-19-2006, 02:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Help: should I hedge the 4th leg of my teaser?
[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't variance be much lower on just circling 2 teamers? I'm not trying to rock the boat, but it seems you could put larger % with a comparable RoR and see a greater gain in bankroll effectively. [/ QUOTE ] Correct, there is no reason to be betting 3-teamers at +180 or 4-teamers at +300 instead of 2-teamers at +100. On the rare occasion that there are 5+ teams Wongable, a risk analysis would be needed to determine the appropriate weighting for 5-/7-teamers.
|
|
#26
09-19-2006, 02:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Help: should I hedge the 4th leg of my teaser?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I like the new ImBen MO. Provide useful information. Then troll harder than ever. Solid. [/ QUOTE ] That's how I do. [/ QUOTE ] Weak. I expect [censored] that's how I roll... Bitch.
|
|
#27
09-19-2006, 03:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Help: should I hedge the 4th leg of my teaser?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Wouldn't variance be much lower on just circling 2 teamers? I'm not trying to rock the boat, but it seems you could put larger % with a comparable RoR and see a greater gain in bankroll effectively. [/ QUOTE ] Correct, there is no reason to be betting 3-teamers at +180 or 4-teamers at +300 instead of 2-teamers at +100. On the rare occasion that there are 5+ teams Wongable, a risk analysis would be needed to determine the appropriate weighting for 5-/7-teamers. [/ QUOTE ] Math: At +100, +180, +300 and +500, with each tease representing a 27% advantage on a presumed fair line, the chance of winning each game you bet is .77. The edge on all the bets is similar, but it does increase the more teams you bet: Teams(x)///Win % (.77^x)///Paid Odds (Odds and %)///Edge __2_________0.5929_______+100 (0.5000)_________0.0929 __3_________0.4565_______+180 (0.3571)_________0.0994 __4_________0.3515_______+300 (0.2500)_________0.1015 __5_________0.2707_______+500 (0.1667)_________0.1040
|
|
#28
09-19-2006, 04:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Help: should I hedge the 4th leg of my teaser?
[ QUOTE ]
Math: At +100, +180, +300 and +500, with each tease representing a 27% advantage on a presumed fair line, the chance of winning each game you bet is .77. The edge on all the bets is similar, but it does increase the more teams you bet: Teams(x)///Win % (.77^x)///Paid Odds (Odds and %)///Edge __2_________0.5929_______+100 (0.5000)_________0.0929 __3_________0.4565_______+180 (0.3571)_________0.0994 __4_________0.3515_______+300 (0.2500)_________0.1015 __5_________0.2707_______+500 (0.1667)_________0.1040 [/ QUOTE ] Interesting. The expected value doesn't increase linearly with win%. I take back what I said above. 3-,4-teamers may have merit in some situations. Keep in mind that each leg does not inherently have the same probability of covering. Rarely will even one team have a percentage as high as 77%, the default in your example. Last weekend, Chicago -1.5 had a much greater edge than any of the other Wongable teams. A risk analysis showed that betting a larger amount on only the teasers involving Chicago was optimal as opposed to betting a flat amount on all permutations.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
