Professional Sportsbetting

[mickeycrimm]

Mickey,

You have the right idea here but your EV calculation is wrong. You didn't subtract out the losing bets. Also remember you are paying the juice.

You are making two bets at 110 to win 100.

8% of the time you hit the middle and win 200. 92% of the time you win one bet and lose one bet, win 100 and lose 110 for a net
loss of 10. To calculate EV you need to include all outcomes and the probability for each one.

EV = (.08*200) + (.92* -10) = 16 - 9.2 = 6.8. You are betting 220 so the ROI is 6.8 / 220 = 3.4%.

You are using a "push chart". Not to be confused with "push/fold chart" which is a poker thing. The push chart gives the percent of games that end in a point spread push. Here we have that 3 point NFL favorites will push in 8% of their games. Can you post a link to the chart you used? The website that I used for a push chart has shut down.

Half Smoke put it up a while back. It might have come from covers.com

[mickeycrimm]

I put up the wrong chart. Here it is:

[cyberbabble]

I'm not trying to start an argument. This is definitely a positive bet. I understand the calculation for what you call risk/reward. The important thing here is understanding how to use the push chart to understand that it is a positive bet.

I'll add a couple of comments that someone might find interesting.

Not all middles are profitable. fav-1.5 and dog+2.5 is a middle around the 2. This not betable because the 2 doesn't hit frequently enough to cover the cost of the juice.

3, 6, 7, 10, and 14 are called key numbers because these are the most common margins of victory. Middles around these numbers are potentially profitable. Bookies are reluctant to move lines around key numbers because they don't want to set up middle possibilities. In the modern era bookies use the juice to adjust the line. You might see +3-110 at one book and +3.5-130 at another. These are the same line. You gain 1/2 point but the bookie maintains his advantage using -130 as the juice. (-130 is for illustration, I don't remember the exact number).

Chances of finding a middle like above in the real world are basically zero. Bookies don't allow them. There are many people (and bots) looking for this sort of thing. If one were to appear it would be bet out of existence almost immediately.

[kewlJ]

I thank you both, mickeycrimm and cyberbabble for this discussion and information. Very interesting.

When I first saw mickey's chart today when I was out, my first though was "ok, maybe middling has more value than I thought". Especially with those most common outcome lines of 3 points, and a little less the 7, 14 and 10. If you can middle those lines with different books, I can see some value.

And I think that is more or less what cyberbabble is saying as well. Not every line, but certain lines, it can be advantageous.

I wish there were more discussion like this and all the recent sportsbetting discussion that people might benefit by.

[Treeshade]

Mickey,

You have the right idea here but your EV calculation is wrong. You didn't subtract out the losing bets. Also remember you are paying the juice.

You are making two bets at 110 to win 100.

8% of the time you hit the middle and win 200. 92% of the time you win one bet and lose one bet, win 100 and lose 110 for a net
loss of 10. To calculate EV you need to include all outcomes and the probability for each one.

EV = (.08*200) + (.92* -10) = 16 - 9.2 = 6.8. You are betting 220 so the ROI is 6.8 / 220 = 3.4%.

You are using a "push chart". Not to be confused with "push/fold chart" which is a poker thing. The push chart gives the percent of games that end in a point spread push. Here we have that 3 point NFL favorites will push in 8% of their games. Can you post a link to the chart you used? The website that I used for a push chart has shut down.

I miss the push fold chart l, min opening from every position with 18 bigs behind, and tilting regs after I rathole their 1.5 bb only to return and do it again. Lmao Choo- Choo Imsakid lololol

[Treeshade]

If everyone is sports betting then it’s probably not that good. First mover advantage applies to advantage play as well.

[mickeycrimm]

I'm not trying to start an argument. This is definitely a positive bet. I understand the calculation for what you call risk/reward. The important thing here is understanding how to use the push chart to understand that it is a positive bet.

I'll add a couple of comments that someone might find interesting.

Not all middles are profitable. fav-1.5 and dog+2.5 is a middle around the 2. This not betable because the 2 doesn't hit frequently enough to cover the cost of the juice.

3, 6, 7, 10, and 14 are called key numbers because these are the most common margins of victory. Middles around these numbers are potentially profitable. Bookies are reluctant to move lines around key numbers because they don't want to set up middle possibilities. In the modern era bookies use the juice to adjust the line. You might see +3-110 at one book and +3.5-130 at another. These are the same line. You gain 1/2 point but the bookie maintains his advantage using -130 as the juice. (-130 is for illustration, I don't remember the exact number).

Chances of finding a middle like above in the real world are basically zero. Bookies don't allow them. There are many people (and bots) looking for this sort of thing. If one were to appear it would be bet out of existence almost immediately.

I used the -3 as an example to show the edge. Of course you won't be finding a whole lot of 3's to middle.

According to the chart the -2 will land on that number 3% of the time. That would be a cost of 33.3333 units with a payoff of 20 units so definitely not playable.

According to the chart the only other playable single number is the -7.

After that I would think you have to look for 2 numbers, like -4 on one side and +5 on the other.

[tableplay]

I'm not trying to start an argument. This is definitely a positive bet. I understand the calculation for what you call risk/reward. The important thing here is understanding how to use the push chart to understand that it is a positive bet.

I'll add a couple of comments that someone might find interesting.

Not all middles are profitable. fav-1.5 and dog+2.5 is a middle around the 2. This not betable because the 2 doesn't hit frequently enough to cover the cost of the juice.

3, 6, 7, 10, and 14 are called key numbers because these are the most common margins of victory. Middles around these numbers are potentially profitable. Bookies are reluctant to move lines around key numbers because they don't want to set up middle possibilities. In the modern era bookies use the juice to adjust the line. You might see +3-110 at one book and +3.5-130 at another. These are the same line. You gain 1/2 point but the bookie maintains his advantage using -130 as the juice. (-130 is for illustration, I don't remember the exact number).

Chances of finding a middle like above in the real world are basically zero. Bookies don't allow them. There are many people (and bots) looking for this sort of thing. If one were to appear it would be bet out of existence almost immediately.

I used the -3 as an example to show the edge. Of course you won't be finding a whole lot of 3's to middle.

According to the chart the -2 will land on that number 3% of the time. That would be a cost of 33.3333 units with a payoff of 20 units so definitely not playable.

According to the chart the only other playable single number is the -7.

After that I would think you have to look for 2 numbers, like -4 on one side and +5 on the other.

One would have to be quick on their feet (several books open in their corresponding browser windows), but I would think that in-game middling would present opportunities that would not be present pre-game - total speculation on my part.

[Gottlob]

There are many people (and bots) looking for this sort of thing. If one were to appear it would be bet out of existence almost immediately.

You, know, I've been concluding that, in general, for many years. People like Redietz just couldn't bear the idea that casinos were a lot bigger than him, whatever mental horsepower he could muster.

Players like to think that they're "under the radar", but, hey, those so-called "stupid casinos", weren't on anybody's "radar" at all. In other words, nothing happened in a casino that wasn't thoroughly engineered or otherwise orchestrated.


P.S. I like your numerals concatenated as 3671014 = 17*2*107971 ---> 17*2*10[6+1]9[1+6]1 ---> 1/(7/2), or 1/(2/7), and, 1961, or 1691.

[kewlJ]

I don't want to pick on Red any more. I still believe he made a living for many years involved with sports betting. Not sure how much we are talking about be cause he hasn't really shared that.

In his day, shopping for lines was basically living in Las Vegas during the football season (which he says he did) and visiting all the books every day or several times a day. Now it is a completely different beast as players can do that, plus books from all over the word, from a desk in a room in the middle of nowhere. I think he resents that. As he does the bonuses and all the other things players are doing to grab an advantage. In short he just resents that it is 2023 and lots of other ways to make a buck from his day.

And I see a very similar attitude with some of the old school card counter blackjack players from 20-30 years ago. It is just the way it is. Even outside of gambling, I'll bet if you talk to some old school football players that don't like the changes to football. Can't hit the QB. Can't hit a receiver over the middle. All that stuff. Baseball rules are changing too. pitch clock this year, computerized strike zone on the horizon. There will be many pitchers from 20 years ago that hate these changes.

This is basically where I see red. He doesn't like these changes and things players can do to turn a buck. I am sure he will dispute this in a long post but that is what I see.

[MDawg]

REDietz, both you and AccountInQuestion have laid down more than enough evidence to establish that UNKewlJ is lying once again - fabricating all these sports bet.

Guess who said this UNKewlJ?

He's pretty much a pathological liar you can't believe anything he says. But also probably a sociopath and they have no guilt no shame no embarrassment. They simply make up lies to cover the other lies.

Could it be perhaps that well known AP you used to think is on your side?

But it was so well said I decided to just adopt it for myself.

[Rob.Singer]

I don't want to pick on Red any more. I still believe he made a living for many years involved with sports betting. Not sure how much we are talking about be cause he hasn't really shared that.

In his day, shopping for lines was basically living in Las Vegas during the football season (which he says he did) and visiting all the books every day or several times a day. Now it is a completely different beast as players can do that, plus books from all over the word, from a desk in a room in the middle of nowhere. I think he resents that. As he does the bonuses and all the other things players are doing to grab an advantage. In short he just resents that it is 2023 and lots of other ways to make a buck from his day.

And I see a very similar attitude with some of the old school card counter blackjack players from 20-30 years ago. It is just the way it is. Even outside of gambling, I'll bet if you talk to some old school football players that don't like the changes to football. Can't hit the QB. Can't hit a receiver over the middle. All that stuff. Baseball rules are changing too. pitch clock this year, computerized strike zone on the horizon. There will be many pitchers from 20 years ago that hate these changes.

This is basically where I see red. He doesn't like these changes and things players can do to turn a buck. I am sure he will dispute this in a long post but that is what I see.

Why would you in any way shape or form, think anyone anywhere cares one iota about what your opinion is about someone else?

It has already been established that just about everything you write about is either laced with fabrications or is an outright lie. So I suggest you refrain from writing any more of your attention-seeking BS about others.

[kewlJ]

You have already suggested it many times Rob. Like everyone else, I just pay no attention to what you say. YOU are NOT going to drive me from this forum, with your bitterness and jealousy.

[mickeycrimm]

I just snapped to something about middling. When working that rollover money it looks like you can possibly take all the variance out of it. In KJ's case a 100K wager gets a 21K bonus.

So if you lay the favorite for $300 at -7 and take the dog for $300 at +7....then you will cash a ticket for $573. That's a cost of $27 per $600 wager.

You would need to make that same bet 167 times to clear a 100K wager.

167 X 27 means a cost of $4.5K to collect 21K in bonuses.

Doing it this way guarantee's you will win 50% of your bets.

And you might find some half point or 1 point middles while you are at it.

[redietz]

Quite the evolution in thinking by Mr. Crimm since earlier in this thread. Mickey, feel free, at any time, to say "Redietz, cough, gag, ahem, was correct." You may go to "AP Hell" for admitting that, but I hear AP Hell is a very crowded place, so it'll be okay.

I'm a little busy right now, but I will give some hints tomorrow morning as to what sports and when to work off those bonuses via middles shooting for best effect. I'm feeling magnanimous because the book club meeting went better than expected.

Follow-up lunch is next week in case Boz or any folks are in the vicinity of Johnson City.

And mickey, it's okay. Remember the Fonz.

[Rob.Singer]

You have already suggested it many times Rob. Like everyone else, I just pay no attention to what you say. YOU are NOT going to drive me from this forum, with your bitterness and jealousy.

Drive you from the forum? Huh??
Why would I want to be responsible for making my and others' personal giggle-producer and whipping post, disappear?

If anything....WE WANT MORE!!

[kewlJ]

I just snapped to something about middling. When working that rollover money it looks like you can possibly take all the variance out of it. In KJ's case a 100K wager gets a 21K bonus.

So if you lay the favorite for $300 at -7 and take the dog for $300 at +7....then you will cash a ticket for $573. That's a cost of $27 per $600 wager.

You would need to make that same bet 167 times to clear a 100K wager.

167 X 27 means a cost of $4.5K to collect 21K in bonuses.

Doing it this way guarantee's you will win 50% of your bets.

And you might find some half point or 1 point middles while you are at it.

Here is the specifics of it Mickey. My bonus money is at 4 different book (the bulk of it at 3). Each of those 3 have a rule against wagering both sides of the same game. You can do it, but it doesn't count against the rollover. So I would have needed to be betting one side at one book and the other side at another. This would limit the chance of finding just the right line at the right book for middling.

Complicating a little further is the 5% Vig on Friday nights is only at one book. So this middling attempt would have ended up one side at one book at 5% vig and the other side at a second book with 10% vig. Still do-able but it gets harder and like I said limits the opportunities, because the lines would have to fall just perfectly at the small number of books involved

I really thought I could do just as well, just playing through the rollover doing things like betting away favorites and teams getting 3.5, 7.5 and piggybacking Druff's picks. Time will tell.

[mickeycrimm]

Quite the evolution in thinking by Mr. Crimm since earlier in this thread. Mickey, feel free, at any time, to say "Redietz, cough, gag, ahem, was correct." You may go to "AP Hell" for admitting that, but I hear AP Hell is a very crowded place, so it'll be okay.

I'm a little busy right now, but I will give some hints tomorrow morning as to what sports and when to work off those bonuses via middles shooting for best effect. I'm feeling magnanimous because the book club meeting went better than expected.

Follow-up lunch is next week in case Boz or any folks are in the vicinity of Johnson City.

And mickey, it's okay. Remember the Fonz.

What were you correct about? You never mentioned negative middles. You didn't show the math of negative middles. I did it for you.

[redietz]

A few posts up you were saying how APs shouldn't be wasting their time using middles shooting as a way to work off bonuses. Now you're into it. LOL. I get a kick out of you. You think you discovered something? C'mon, man. This is all SOP. It is truly bizarre that you think you are brightest bulb in the universe.

Just because you're being a maroon, I'll not post what sports should be utilized when for optimal middles shooting. Blame yourself, mick. I suspect you'll be using the least efficient sport. Good luck with that.

Lunch next week will feature some debunking of the Walters how-to chapters -- what he has right, what he has wrong. Why the chapters' context is faulty, which is why he probably included them. He knew, of course. A little bit of math will be involved, which is fine since folks who taught college stats will be at the lunch. I'll post the location in case you can make it.

Have a good one.

[kewlJ]

A couple posts up I wrote I was betting away favorites, when I meant away teams getting points, particularly +3, +3.5, +7.5.