Daliman's Wong Teasers, Season Deux: Week 8 - Page 4

LogistX · #31 11-01-2007, 07:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Dali, another question. For examples I will use Denver and San Diego. For a substantial length of time this week San Diego was -7.5 and Denver was +2.5, which are wongs.

However, they have currently been pushed to -7 and +3, respectively.

Can one tease the games to -1 and +9 or are the lines now moving to their "true" value so they were never wongs to begin with? If you had teased them at their earlier lines would this movement suggest you actually made an -EV bet?

[/ QUOTE ]
Except in very rare cases, I would not bother teasing these games anymore. Let's take the SD game as an example:
if you believe that the "true" line on the SD game is -7, then it is not a wong.
if you believe that the "true" line on the SD game is -7.5, then if you can get -7, betting straight already has value.

According to SSB, I believe the break even point for a half point on the 7 is 15 cents. So this bet would already be +EV if it was accurately handicapped to -7.5. I'm not sure how that would compare with a teaser, but I would suspect betting straight is better or comparable since you aren't getting that 15c in the teaser anymore.

LogistX · #32 11-01-2007, 07:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Except in very rare cases, I would not bother teasing these games anymore.

[/ QUOTE ]
Or if the line moved again before Sunday.

LogistX · #33 11-01-2007, 08:03 PM

I actually find the alternative interesting. I brought it up in another thread and I didn't feel that it was adequately answered:
The SD game opened at -7 and it appeared that it moved to -7.5 simply to balance the lines/increase the edge of the books. SD appears to be BSPish this week. In that case, I'm leaning toward the game being accurately handicapped at -7 rather than -7.5. Wonging the -7.5 seems bad to me. The fact that road favs are often bet up may account for why they historically have been the worst performing wong subset.

Daliman · #34 11-01-2007, 08:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Dali, another question. For examples I will use Denver and San Diego. For a substantial length of time this week San Diego was -7.5 and Denver was +2.5, which are wongs.

However, they have currently been pushed to -7 and +3, respectively.

Can one tease the games to -1 and +9 or are the lines now moving to their "true" value so they were never wongs to begin with? If you had teased them at their earlier lines would this movement suggest you actually made an -EV bet?

[/ QUOTE ]
Except in very rare cases, I would not bother teasing these games anymore. Let's take the SD game as an example:
if you believe that the "true" line on the SD game is -7, then it is not a wong.
if you believe that the "true" line on the SD game is -7.5, then if you can get -7, betting straight already has value.

According to SSB, I believe the break even point for a half point on the 7 is 15 cents. So this bet would already be +EV if it was accurately handicapped to -7.5. I'm not sure how that would compare with a teaser, but I would suspect betting straight is better or comparable since you aren't getting that 15c in the teaser anymore.

[/ QUOTE ]
What he said. Wongs are meant to beat sharp lines. You may still have a +EV bet, but less so.

Thremp · #35 11-01-2007, 09:41 PM

What lines open at are almost completely immaterial.

kdog · #36 11-01-2007, 11:04 PM

OK, let's try again then.
[ QUOTE ]
I actually find the alternative interesting. I brought it up in another thread and I didn't feel that it was adequately answered:
The SD game opened at -7 and it appeared that it moved to -7.5 simply to balance the lines/increase the edge of the books. SD appears to be BSPish this week. In that case, I'm leaning toward the game being accurately handicapped at -7 rather than -7.5. Wonging the -7.5 seems bad to me. The fact that road favs are often bet up may account for why they historically have been the worst performing wong subset

[/ QUOTE ]

Now if the part in bold is correct then I would agree with you that this is probably not a good teaser selection. You would be giving up an extra 1/2 point on the least profitable subset(road favorites)for BS teasers. But...

What leads you to believe the line moved to 7.5 for any reason other than action on San Diego? Sports Insights latest numbers show SD getting 81% of the bets which makes the line move totally logical in which case SD is a wong teaser play. Assuming the line holds of course.

LogistX · #37 11-02-2007, 01:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Sports Insights latest numbers show SD getting 81% of the bets which makes the line move totally logical in which case SD is a wong teaser play. Assuming the line holds of course.

[/ QUOTE ]
The fact that the line opened at -7 and appears to have moved based on the action is exactly why I do not like this teaser play. It seems they increased from -7 to -7.5 to balance the books, etc. based on overwhelming action on SD. Perhaps I'm completely mistaken here, but it seems like I'm teasing a -7.5 line that should really be at -7.

Nostrawho? · #38 11-02-2007, 02:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sports Insights latest numbers show SD getting 81% of the bets which makes the line move totally logical in which case SD is a wong teaser play. Assuming the line holds of course.

[/ QUOTE ]
The fact that the line opened at -7 and appears to have moved based on the action is exactly why I do not like this teaser play. It seems they increased from -7 to -7.5 to balance the books, etc. based on overwhelming action on SD. Perhaps I'm completely mistaken here, but it seems like I'm teasing a -7.5 line that should really be at -7.

[/ QUOTE ]

Logistx, I think this is all based on an individual's subjective analysis on each game. By that I mean if your projection favored SD by 7.5 or more, you would consider them a wongable play regardless of opening line. The opposite applies here too where even if the line moved to 7.5 and became "wongable" and you thought the true line stood closer to the dog, you wouldn't wong regardless because there is more value in taking +7.5 than would be to wong down to -1.5 with another play having to be made even if the other play were wongable based on your subjective analysis. I am agreeing with you essentially and I know you've thought of this but its honestly just a subjective topic as far as wongable teasers go. A wong to one man may not be a wong to the next, based on perspective of each.

LogistX · #39 11-02-2007, 02:20 PM

I think you're right. I guess my point was that if wongs are meant to beat sharp lines then this doesn't appear to be a sharp line since it's moving based on action and not on proper handicapping. However, that is based on my perception which may not correlate with some one else's or even be correct.

Nostrawho? · #40 11-02-2007, 02:26 PM

Well its not like this is a move from 6.5 to 7, in that case I would say that 81% of the action being on SD would not suffice for a big move like that to the 7. However from 7 to 7.5, I would say 81% is pretty good evidence that this is not as +EV a wong as people would like it to be. That being said I guess my conclusion is that I think people just WANT this game to be wongable.