[fitguy67]

I just discovered something very interesting (and potentially long-term exploitable) about -1RLs: "roll your own" vs. "pre-packaged"

I just discovered at Pinny that the book charges you a "tax/surcharge/premium", call it what you will, for providing the convenience of a -1RL. I would not be surprised at all if most others do the same. So next time you have the opportunity to directly hit a -1RL...i suggest investigating the "roll your own option" with the same book first.

Last night for the NYY-1, ML was -168 and RL was +121...so to win 100, doing it yourself involves
*ML..................-76.02/+45.25
*RL-1.5.............-45.25/+54.75
Total.................-121.27/+100
meaning the -1RL has odds of -121.27

Here's the kicker...if you hit -1RL from the pull down menu it clearly shows -123 for the "pre-packaged" equivalent bet.

The 1-2 cents charge here is not insignificant over a season. From now on, when it comes to -1RL bets, I'll no longer just take the "convenient" ones, just cuz they're there...at least not until i've taken a few secs to calculate and compare the odds on the synthetic vs. the available -1RL line.
_______________________
I originally posted the above in one of the baseball-handicapping forums, but thot' it might be more generally useful here...

I'd like to get further feedback of how widespread (and how expensive is the convenience) at other books.
________________________
Serious drivers prefer standard transmission...i suspect that serious bettors, once wised-up will prefer to "roll their own" -1RLs (or at least consider the hidden cost of the pre-packaged versions we've become accustomed to using).

[killawookie]

It's the same way if you dutch two hockey teams to win in regulation as opposed to taking the No OT prop.. you get a few cent more for doing the work

[G-manFan]

Fitguy, in your example how do you find the right amount to win in your ML or to risk in your RL to wager for exactly $100. I use the same process to construct my -1 RL but just split my bet in half (ie $50). But by doing it my way I'm no longer betting to win just 1unit its always 1.x units.

Thanks

[fitguy67]

nice contribution, KillaWook...there are lots of little "cents-savings" to be had like that...just for being aware/knowledgeable/willing enough to consider unorthodox slightly less-convenient alternatives that most aren't even aware of (ie. being as "sharp" in bet-placement as we try to be in bet-selection)

[G-manFan]

Looks like 5 Dimes charges a variable rate for the "pre-packaged -1 RL". Just looking at a few of today's games:
Phillies RL -1 "package" -121, DIY -121
Braves RL -1 "package" -117, DIY -113
Mets RL -1 "package" +106, DIY +118
Rockies RL -1 "package" +107, DIY +121

As you stated, it's definitely worth doing it yourself......

[SlickRick1382]

Thanks for posting that in LTA's thread. Glad my question was able to provide something of benefit to others.

Even though it's only 1-2 cents or more, depending on the game / book, in the long run the savings cant' be ignored when you take into account the entire baseball season.

Definitely a great find that some people may of not noticed and took for granted. Appreciate the work buddy

[dj_destroyer]

The totals also come into play in RL pricing so always make sure to do your calculations just to be sure.

As in g-manfan's numbers, you can see there is no difference in the Phillies game but up to 14 cents in the Rockies play. Again, always do your calcs.

Great post, fitguy. Love to see you improving your game exponentially. Keep it up.

[fitguy67]

Fitguy, in your example how do you find the right amount to win in your ML or to risk in your RL to wager for exactly $100. I use the same process to construct my -1 RL but just split my bet in half (ie $50). But by doing it my way I'm no longer betting to win just 1unit its always 1.x units.

Thanks

if you're in american-style mode (ie. "to win" for faves/"to risk" for dogs) this website-calculator works fine
for the usual case where ur betting on the fave with a fixed "to win" target...it's what I used to calculate the numbers in post#1

http://sportsobjective.com/wordpress/?page_id=3167

but if instead you want to control the overall "to risk" amount of the bet follow this procedure (...explained here with the same ML=-168/RL=+121 example...assuming your aiming at a $100 risk)
*divide your desired total risk, say $100, by the decimal-format ML-odds [here 1.595=(-100/-168)+1]... this tells us how much to bet on the ML...[here it's $62.70=100/1.595]
*then calculate the win on that ML-bet...here it's $37.31=62.70*(1.595-1)...that's the 1.595 payout per $ less the $1 stake
*voila!...the return on your ML bet [here it's $37.31] is the amount to bet on the RL...

[fitguy67]

The totals also come into play in RL pricing so always make sure to do your calculations just to be sure.

As in g-manfan's numbers, you can see there is no difference in the Phillies game but up to 14 cents in the Rockies play. Again, always do your calcs.

Great post, fitguy. Love to see you improving your game exponentially. Keep it up.

dj...could you elaborate on the link between totals and rl pricing...i sense another "edge" or "market imperfection" to be exploited

[btw, sorry to abandon that whole (or is it "hole") jv-challenge-sort-of-thing...could never really figure it out...so i just looked at my watch, yawned, and slipped out the door]

[dj_destroyer]

dj...could you elaborate on the link between totals and rl pricing...i sense another "edge" or "market imperfection" to be exploited

[btw, sorry to abandon that whole (or is it "hole") jv-challenge-sort-of-thing...could never really figure it out...so i just looked at my watch, yawned, and slipped out the door]

Not a problem. He lost his roll fairly quickly... I ended barely above water. I think he was more interested in the SBR contest we did which he lost his ass once again coming in last out of 4. I only came second but profited a handful of units or so.

I haven't done extensive research, but I've noticed for a long time that the runline prices can be different from game to game.

Ex.: Right now, the Rays are priced -133 on the ML and +170 on the RL while the Rockies are also paying -133 on the ML but +152 on the RL. The total in the Rays game is quite low at 7 whereas the Rockies total is sitting at 9.5.

Obviously, games with higher totals have a higher chance of a team winning by two. Plenty of examples in other sports such as the NHL where low-total games will have lower odds for the game to go to DRAW (go to OT using Pinnys rules); or using the same game, the +1.5 paying less than it normally would in a 'normal-total' game. On the other end, high-total hockey games will offer the RL favourite at lower odds. A final example is how low-total soccer games pay less on draws.

If you can find bookies to take these correlated bets, there is much money to be made, even if the odds are terrible to begin with (such as Proline). Finding locals with no clue is a goldmine. I took one dude for $1800 before he cut me off playing correlated parlays only. It was hilarious really.

[fitguy67]

Looks like 5 Dimes charges a variable rate for the "pre-packaged -1 RL". Just looking at a few of today's games:
Phillies RL -1 "package" -121, DIY -121
Braves RL -1 "package" -117, DIY -113
Mets RL -1 "package" +106, DIY +118
Rockies RL -1 "package" +107, DIY +121

As you stated, it's definitely worth doing it yourself......

damn, it's amazing the variance in the invisible "scalp"...from zero to 14 points on just a small sampling...

the moral of the story is ALWAYS CHECK & compare/NEVER JUST ASSUME what i had always assumed previously to today, that any difference would be due to rounding

[metsy]

Good ideas here. The only thing I can't figure out is the middle/scalp. Even using the calculator and then buying a 1/2 point on the RL of the other team to bring it to one point as well, the lines are still 10 off. Just tried with Mets/Astros. Mets ML is -114. RL is 145. After using the calculator with a bet of $100, it says ML risk $53.27, RL risk $46.73, and as shown in the calculator it brought the odds to US 121.03. So now we have a METS -1RL at +121.03. So now if I go to bet the Astros RL and bring it down to +1 instead of 1.5, it shows +1 at 130. So still about a 10 point loss there. Any other way? Very interesting.

damn, it's amazing the variance in the invisible "scalp"...from zero to 14 points on just a small sampling...

the moral of the story is ALWAYS CHECK & compare/NEVER JUST ASSUME what i had always assumed previously to today, that any difference would be due to rounding

[baskets]

great thread. very enjoyable

worthwhile thread

[dj_destroyer]

Good ideas here. The only thing I can't figure out is the middle/scalp. Even using the calculator and then buying a 1/2 point on the RL of the other team to bring it to one point as well, the lines are still 10 off. Just tried with Mets/Astros. Mets ML is -114. RL is 145. After using the calculator with a bet of $100, it says ML risk $53.27, RL risk $46.73, and as shown in the calculator it brought the odds to US 121.03. So now we have a METS -1RL at +121.03. So now if I go to bet the Astros RL and bring it down to +1 instead of 1.5, it shows +1 at 130. So still about a 10 point loss there. Any other way? Very interesting.

We're not betting both sides...

[fitguy67]

Good ideas here. The only thing I can't figure out is the middle/scalp. Even using the calculator and then buying a 1/2 point on the RL of the other team to bring it to one point as well, the lines are still 10 off. Just tried with Mets/Astros. Mets ML is -114. RL is 145. After using the calculator with a bet of $100, it says ML risk $53.27, RL risk $46.73, and as shown in the calculator it brought the odds to US 121.03. So now we have a METS -1RL at +121.03. So now if I go to bet the Astros RL and bring it down to +1 instead of 1.5, it shows +1 at 130. So still about a 10 point loss there. Any other way? Very interesting.

dj's right...if books were good natured volunteer money-holders/referees (ie. collected no vig/juice for providing the service) you could work a -1RL calc'n both ways and they'd differ only by the +/- sign...but with the rake it won't balance...by exaclty the amount of the rake

a good analogy is this...take 1000 usd to the bank and "exchange" it for cad equivalent...then take the cad you just received and exchange it for usd...guaranteed you have less than 1000...you'll lose a surprisingly high single-digit amount with each "cycle"...that loss is due mostly to the "bid-asked spread"=the difference between the price that applies depending on the bank's side of the deal (they always sell what you wanna buy at a higher price than they'd buy it from you if you were selling)...exactly analogous to vig/juice...

[fitguy67]

From now on, if you'd like to report on your "off the shelf" vs. "do it yourself" rates, we'll follow along in the tradition of Gman's post#5
so state the info in the following format

1. the book
2. the game
3. ML odds
4. (-1.5)RL odds
5. OTS (off-the-shelf) odds
6. DIY (do-it-yourself) odds
-->7. GASP! (Gain Available To Sharp Player)...or DDUB (Dumb Donation To Unscrupulous Book)...

I'll keep posting here whenever i have occasion to look at a -1RL, whether i play it or not...if anyone wants to add to this ad-hoc "database" your contributions are welcome.

here goes,

Pinnacle, NYM/HOU-1, -148 ml, +147 rl, -103 ots, -100.41 diy........+2.59 gasp!