interesting hedging opportunities

[kewlJ]

In December I made 2 wagers for NFL teams to win their conferences.

Ravens $400 @ +300 (return $1600) and Detroit Lions $365 @ 8-1 (return $3285).

I now have slight hedging opportunities on both.

The Ravens wager is small money so probably not worth hedging, But I see 2 options. I could bet the Chiefs at +155 For about $600. This would be a total wager of $1000, guaranteeing a return of $1530 or $1600 for a profit of $530 - $600. If it were bigger money I would consider this. Option 2 is I could wager $260 on the Chiefs @ +155, guaranteeing a break even wager if Chiefs win or +1000 if Ravens win which I think is most likely. Again, not really big enough money to be concerned about losing so I will most likely just let my bet ride basically getting +300 on a team that is currently -175 for the game.

The Lions wager is a little more intriguing to me. I made this wager because I knew neither the Eagles (whom I root for), nor the Cowboys had a chance to beat 49ers. They both lost badly to SF during the year and would again in a playoff meeting. If any team could beat them it would be the Lions. I don't really think the Lions will but they have a shot because the Lions have a good run defense (weak in pass defense), so they will force Purdy to have a decent game. And they will put pressure on Purdy like Baltimore did when Purdy threw 4 interceptions, so we will see if he is up to it.

I would like to hedge this game but betting the 49ers at -320 isn't very appealing. Had the 49ers lost to the Packers Saturday, which looked a real possibility throughout the game there would have been a real hedging opportunity to guarantee a win of decent money, but I don't see much now. It just looks like I have a +250 team for the game at 8-1. which is good value. Good value on both games if I don't hedge.

Am I missing anything, that could present a better opportunity for my situation? Anyone? Anyone? Beuller?

[Mission146]

KewlJ,

It seems to me that you were making these bets recreationally as you have stated that you often do on sports.

I'll consider the question of the Ravens closed as you state that is small money for you.

In terms of the Lions, instead of thinking of it as a futures bet: think of it as it stands, you are now getting the Lions 8-1 to beat the 49ers. You have said that you don't like the 49ers line; we would assume that line has the normal vig anyway. I would also add that, if the Ravens (TO WIN) amount is small potatoes for you, then don't worry about the amounts to be won, but rather, the amounts to be lost. You only stand to lose $365 on the Lions bet, which is small potatoes if $1,600 is.

I'd just let it ride; I think the only reason that you're contemplating this is because you don't think the Lions are particularly likely to beat the 49ers. As it stands, you'd have to bet $1168 just to cover the $365, right? If this was a +250 bet, then profits would be $2,920, which is considerably more than the profit you would be getting by hedging for $1168 just to cover the $365. That's not even counting implied probabilities into the mix, so the covering for $1,168 to only end up with $1,387, in profits, if the Lions win doesn't even account for the fact that the Lions are more likely than not to lose.

Honestly, if you wanted to do anything, then maybe just make a bet with someone. If the books have the Lions at +250, (DraftKings seems to be +260), then you might be able to find someone who would love to bet the Lions, with you, if you give them a line of +280.

If you did this and would accept a $500 bet, and the Lions win, then your profits on the ticket would be $2,920 of which you would pay them $1,400 (profits) for total profit (to you) of $1,520. If the Lions lose, then your Lions future bet would lose and you would have an overall profit of $135 because of the $500 this person lost to you.

I think you should just let it ride, but there are potential ways to hedge that don't involve the sportsbooks. If you want to hedge, then just give them a better line than they could get on the Lions, but make sure that their +ODDS are less than the -ODDS that you'd have to take if you wanted to straight up bet the 49ers. Basically, you can make your own line.

I still don't recommend this. You should probably just let it ride.

[Don Perignom]

I could bet the Chiefs at +155

Circa has Chiefs +165. Also possibly Superbook (Westgate). The app is not launching for me atm.

That would give you the hedge at a low vig.

I don't see any ideal options on the 49ers. BetOnline is -315.

[kewlJ]

KewlJ,
It seems to me that you were making these bets recreationally as you have stated that you often do on sports.

Actually no. These wagers were made in conjunction with my current bonus playthrough (bonus whoring). And that is an important distinction that I hadn't initially considered. The advantage or profit from the playthrough is coming from the bonus money. So rather than looking at these two wagers independently, when considering the bigger picture, it is a chance to get xxxx amount of action down and guarantee some profit from this segment of the playthrough. That is a whole other case for hedging.

I am going to keep an eye on the moving lines for now. As Don noted the Chiefs line is moving up which would benefit a hedge. The 49ers line has not budged as yet, but all indications are that a key player Samuel Deebo will be ruled out later this week, which could cause a slight line movement down, also in my favor.

[Don Perignom]

Chiefs are now +176 at Circa.

This is an obscure sportsbook, but Atlantis (Nevada) has Ravens -180.

[kewlJ]

Chiefs are now +176 at Circa.

This is an obscure sportsbook, but Atlantis (Nevada) has Ravens -180.

I am not a Redeitz type expert. But in looking at the point spread line, the Ravens are -3.5. Isn't home field advantage supposedly worth 3 point? Take away that and the Ravens and Chiefs are even? I think the Ravens are better than the Chiefs and that line should be higher, maybe 5. Maybe as high as 6. This would put the moneyline at over +200. I don't expect that kind of movement because of public sentiment. It is the Chiefs...two time Superbowl winner (including last year) almost annual conference championship game participant (all as a home team).

So while it won't get to where I beleive it should be, I am still waiting and watching and hoping for movement up. It is only Tuesday.

[Don Perignom]

Isn't home field advantage supposedly worth 3 point?

Sagarin uses 2.45 as a default for NFL games.

So while it won't get to where I beleive it should be, I am still waiting and watching and hoping for movement up. It is only Tuesday.

At Pinnacle, the midpoint is now 186. On that basis and looking at other books, I think best value is Ravens -180 at Atlantis.

But that doesn't help your situation.

Edit: VSIN indicates Ravens -175 at Stations, but they changed their app so I can't see without logging in. That would be a teensy-weensy arb opportunity with Circa still holding at Chiefs +176.

[kewlJ]

I don't need the absolute best value, Don. I have never been a guy who spends all week searching for the absolute best line. One of the problems is you don't know exactly what the peak is, until it has been hit and starts to retreat from it.

Lets just see what happens. It is only Tuesday.

[Don Perignom]

I don't need the absolute best value, Don. I have never been a guy who spends all week searching for the absolute best line.

My objective is to find those things without a one-week search.

[kewlJ]

So one of these lines has been moving for me, KC currently at +170 and I think may go a bit higher. Injury reports have Baltimore getting Andrews back, while KC offensive lineman is definitely out. I am still holding hoping for movement to +175 or +180.

The other line is moving against me, currently at SF -325. Other books have it as much as -350, so I feel like it is going the wrong way. Detroit's tight end La porta is definitely out, replaced by Zach Ertz who just signed 2 days ago, which could cause further line movement away from me. With the 49ers we are waiting to hear about Deebo Samuel. If he is out, the line could move back in my favorite slightly. I think he is out and I think they already KNOW he is out. But I am not waiting. I just hedged this bet at -325, which I absolutely hate doing.

So now my 49ers/Det bet is at 49ers win = even. Detroit wins = +1660

Once I hedge the Ravens/KC bet that will be KC wins about even, Balt wins +965

In total I will be going from possibility of losing $765, if both lost and winning $4100 if both won to possibility of breaking even if both lose and winning $2625 if both win. And of course, somewhere in between if one wins and one loses.

Since these wagers are part of my bonus playthrough and I am trying to break even or win, while hitting the play through, these hedges just make sense, even though I hate the concept of hedging and particularly hedging at -325. Yuk.

It is not big money, but it is about the playthrough.

[kewlJ]

The 49ers money line has continues to move higher, now at -350, so I made the right call locking in my hedge bet last night. Deebo Samuel returned to practice today which was probably the reason for continued movement. I have my doubts as to how healthy he is, how much he will actually play. We will see.

I am still watching the KC chiefs line who I need to bet to hedge that wager. It is currently up to +175. And the point line up to +4. I could opt to hedge my bet with the point line, creating a "middle" area of Baltimore winning by 1,2,3,4 points, where I would win both bets (push at +4). I would love +4.5, but I think +4 and +175 ML may be the peak.

I am also still considering just letting that bet ride (Baltimore at +300) for a team currently at -200. That is a pretty strong value. If only Patrick Mahomes wasn't on the opposing side.

[cyberbabble]

Why hedge?
You have two very good bets on two out four possible outcomes.
Go with your initial views. You can't win every bet.

[kewlJ]

Why hedge?
You have two very good bets on two out four possible outcomes.
Go with your initial views. You can't win every bet.

Very true. And if I wasn't doing this bonus whoring, play through thing, I would be thrilled at just having these two bets that are now very +EV.

The fact is that these kinds of wagers should not have been made in conjuction with what I am doing with the bonus play through. That was me reverting back to degen -EV wagering and thinking I know something about sports.

But since they have been made and are alive now, I have a change to guarantee a win or break even (non loss) while getting down a significant amount of play and that is what the whole bonus whoring, play through is about. Getting through the play through or rollover requirements eating away as little as possible of the bonus money. So that is what I am trying to do.

[redietz]

Well, let me see if some deep mathematical analysis a la APing can help. Set up a few spread sheets. It may take me a few hours.

Or wait, I can do the obvious! That took, what eight, maybe nine seconds? LOL.

KewlJ, is there anything preventing you from doing the obvious? You can tease the two "villain" teams to cover your initial investments. Since either of your teams winning provides you with a breakeven, and that is your concern, why not? Plus you add the (unlikely but possible) option of Chiefs +11 covering but not winning outright, while SF wins outright, in which case you would win the Ravens future and win the teaser. Not likely, but possible.

The moneyline parlaying of the villain teams has been implied in previous posts.

Of course, some sites, which I will not blatantly name, allow buying of points and the parlaying of those teams at odds that are superior to using teasers, especially if they are using promotional parlay boosters. I might opt for this, if you have accounts at sites offering it. For example, I could currently parlay KC +8 with SF +1 at -108 at one site.

It's helpful that your initial wagers can cover a complete hedge of the initial wagers if the Ravens win.

Personally, I think the KC/Ravens game is a coin flip, and I don't think Detroit has much of a shot, but you did a fine job with these investments.


P.S. I realize that Axelwolf could have come up with these same recommendations in four seconds. APs are, after all, a superior species. Mickey Crimm could have done the same in six seconds, unless he consulted with "Spanky." Then he'd be in a dead heat with Axelwolf at four seconds flat.

[cyberbabble]

Books are touchy about people making offsetting bets when they have open rollover requirements.
You won't be making any exactly offsetting bets but you may be giving them a chance to freeroll you.
If they win it's OK, bet stands. If you win it's a violation of the rules.
Read the rules and fine print.

[redietz]

Books are touchy about people making offsetting bets when they have open rollover requirements.
You won't be making any exactly offsetting bets but you may be giving them a chance to freeroll you.
If they win it's OK, bet stands. If you win it's a violation of the rules.
Read the rules and fine print.

Excellent caveat. I would hedge on a separate site whenever possible. I think, if push comes to shove and you can use just one site (no real excuse for this), the teaser option is better as it's a separate and different bet that wouldn't necessarily be considered a hedge.

[kewlJ]

Red is correct. That is why I use multiple books. In this situation, I am even considering using a B & M sportsbook to offset my final bet if need be, but I would prefer to have it count as roller at one of the books I am currently rolling over.

Red, since you commented, I was hoping you would have put aside all the other nonsense and commented on this situation earlier. It is not big money, but I think it is still an interesting situation.

BTW, I have offset a wager by betting opposite sides at the same off shore book, several times in the past and never had any consequences. If you are wondering why I would do that, it was because at that particular time, I held Dan Druffs picks (NFL) in high regard and wanted to tag along, despite that I have alread placed bets on the other side. Unfortunately Druff has a habit of not making his picks until 5 minutes before kick off (by design, probably).

[redietz]

Red is correct. That is why I use multiple books. In this situation, I am even considering using a B & M sportsbook to offset my final bet if need be, but I would prefer to have it count as roller at one of the books I am currently rolling over.

Red, since you commented, I was hoping you would have put aside all the other nonsense and commented on this situation earlier. It is not big money, but I think it is still an interesting situation.

BTW, I have offset a wager by betting opposite sides at the same off shore book, several times in the past and never had any consequences. If you are wondering why I would do that, it was because at that particular time, I held Dan Druffs picks (NFL) in high regard and wanted to tag along, despite that I have alread placed bets on the other side. Unfortunately Druff has a habit of not making his picks until 5 minutes before kick off (by design, probably).

I've never run into negative consequences on the wagers themselves, but there is a possibility you get graded/defined differently as a bettor when you hedge wagers at the same book. Your particular wagers here aren't large enough to bother anyone, but if they were 20 or 30 times that size, then people might eyeball you a bit more closely.

[Don Perignom]

I'm in on the Chefs at +208, Circa.

[kewlJ]

I'm in on the Chefs at +208, Circa.

I went ahead and hedged the game by taking the Chiefs (of Chefs....googly moogly) +4.5 instead of the money line. So Now I am hoping for a Ravens win of 1-4 points to win both wagers.

Ravens FG on last play of the game would work. So would the Ravens being up by 10 in the fourth with the Chiefs scoring a TD in last minute but not recovering the on-sides kick.