Betting Tiger in the masters

If anyone wants a perfect example where the odds dont reflect reality, but rather reflect the propensity of a the public to bet a certain side...this is it.

Woods is a fave at 8-1 having not won in years. "The man" knows the public doesnt need incentive to bet on woods. So they limit their exposure and say "you want to bet on tiger....be my guest....I offer 8-1 and you will be thrilled with it"

He should be around 15-1 at least. There are other golfers who recently won this year that are double digits. But the public doesnt need to be sold they will take what they are offered.

I think you're probably right LarryS. But the thing is, the public isn't often wrong or when they are wrong it isn't usually by nearly as much. They're only sometimes wrong. Not often enough to find a lot of good bets IMHO. I can only find a few that I consider to be really good bets. I can't find a lot of them.

The key issue in using the Tiger odds to one's advantage is to find a book where money on one golfer not only lowers his odds, but raises the odds slightly on others. Many books just take the money and simply lower the odds on the golfer who got slammed. The rest of the odds stay the same, so it's an ongoing degradation of odds.

I can vouch for Westgate as being a place that will pump up the odds of other golfers if they get slammed on one. I don't bet enough golf (hardly any, actually) to render an opinion on other LV or offshore books. If someone has some experience, please chime in.

Obviously, although it's Woods' course, you can't take him at 8-1. Or 10-1. Or 12-1. Prior to the heyday of Tiger Woods, Jack Nicklaus at 9-1 was as low as anybody was in a major. Woods was routinely lower than this through his career, and ridiculously lower than that in the Masters. There was a 5-2 in there during his dominant run, and if I recall correctly, money came in on Woods anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Half Smoke

I think you're probably right LarryS. But the thing is, the public isn't often wrong or when they are wrong it isn't usually by nearly as much. They're only sometimes wrong. Not often enough to find a lot of good bets IMHO. I can only find a few that I consider to be really good bets. I can't find a lot of them.

---

if it wasnt for the public being wrong the books would be out of business.

the sharp money takes their share....and the books need the public to make up the difference. The good ole "public" will eat up the 8-1 and the books know it.

following "the public" for me is generally not a good method in handicapping.

"The public" isn't easy to identify or define. "Sharp money" is, I think, more myth than reality. The fact is, money moves numbers. That money, to the extent it is undefined and unidentified, yields no clue to its degree of "publicness" or "smartness." Money could come from the Koch brothers on a bender, a Hong Kong billionaire inheriting his dad's estate and deciding he'll bet the NCAA tourney that weekend, or a hundred Americans who think they know what they're doing. Unless you absolutely know the source of the money that moves the numbers, you really can't tell it's pedigree or IQ.

thats interesting and I dont pretend to know more than you. But if lines move very late, istnt it helpful to view that and know that...especially when it moves at multiple books across the board. A rich shiek on a bender generally wont seek out 10 sports books and spread his money around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LarryS

thats interesting and I dont pretend to know more than you. But if lines move very late, istnt it helpful to view that and know that...especially when it moves at multiple books across the board. A rich shiek on a bender generally wont seek out 10 sports books and spread his money around.

---

That's true enough, but it's also true that since MGM and CET are umbrellas for 10 properties apiece, numbers moving at one of the mega-corp books means it moves at all of them simultaneously. Same with Boyd, or Stations, or Cantor property books, or William Hill books. In addition, books are no longer required to take money to move lines. They can simply move lines if they choose to, based on other books getting slammed. So from a technical perspective, one book in LV getting slammed could move all of the numbers at every property.

This basically could not (by rule) and would not (by choice) happen 30 years ago.

Tiger Woods 9/1
Dustin Johnson 11/1
Jordan Spieth 14/1
Justin Thomas 15/1
Rory McIlroy 15/1
Justin Rose 16/1
Phil Mickelson 18/1

These are odds I got on the top 7 yesterday from vegasinsider.com


Maybe to some this might seem a sucker bet. But what I'm going to propose seems to me like a great bet. And I have to admit I don't know a great deal about professional golf. Anyway here goes:

take Tiger out and bet equal money on the next 6. If any one of the next 6 wins you will get more than an even money payback except on Dustin Johnson which will get you even money.

only 2 ways to lose. an extreme longshot will beat you, which I would say is certainly possible but not greatly probable.
or Tiger beats you which I would say is very improbable.



Comments?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Half Smoke

Tiger Woods 9/1
Dustin Johnson 11/1
Jordan Spieth 14/1
Justin Thomas 15/1
Rory McIlroy 15/1
Justin Rose 16/1
Phil Mickelson 18/1

These are odds I got on the top 7 yesterday from vegasinsider.com


Maybe to some this might seem a sucker bet. But what I'm going to propose seems to me like a great bet. And I have to admit I don't know a great deal about professional golf. Anyway here goes:

take Tiger out and bet equal money on the next 6. If any one of the next 6 wins you will get more than an even money payback except on Dustin Johnson which will get you even money.

only 2 ways to lose. an extreme longshot will beat you, which I would say is certainly possible but not greatly probable.
or Tiger beats you which I would say is very improbable.



Comments?

---

"Possible but not greatly probable" is a phrase without precision and, therefore, without meaning.

This is probably a good way to go broke. It's at least 50/50 someone else wins. You're talking about skipping five of the top 10 golfers in the world.