calculating edge help

[thesoxman101]

Say Boston is -130 and Detroit is +110

The no vig line is -/+ 118 then.

If you bet Boston at -110 how can you calculate how much your edge is?

[hutennis]

ImProb for -118.7 no vig line is 54.28%
You are getting it for -110 or 52.38%

your edge = market IP/your IP -1 = 54.28%/52.38 - 1 = 3.62%

[thesoxman101]

thanks a lot. I'm reading a book right now and it says,

"Sportsbook understand that a cent is worth less as the line gets farther from +100, so they offer wider spreads as a result."

I'm not sure 100% what this means, is there a way someone can illustrate this more with an example?

[hutennis]

Lines -130/+110 and -240/+200 carry essentially the same vig, but -240/+200 has a wider spread - 40c instead of 20c b/c it's farther from 100

[thesoxman101]

Thanks, do you always compare the line you're betting on, against the no vig line when trying to find your edge?

So in this case -118.7 and not -130. Why?

[hutennis]

Thanks, do you always compare the line you're betting on, against the no vig line when trying to find your edge?

So in this case -118.7 and not -130. Why?

B/c you need to compare your cost to the number that is closest to actual probability of your result.
In a absence of crystal ball that would give us actual, implied probability of a no vig line is that number

EV = (profit * win prob) - (risk * lose prob)

Win prob + lose prob must equal 100% and we get 100% form IPs of +/-118.7.

We dont get 100% from -130/+110 line probabilities b/c this line is created by books by applying profit margin to 118.7, so it's muddied by a vig and thus can not be used for EV calculations.
What if they decide to have 8% margin? Then line would be -144/+101.
Would you compare your cost to -144 then?

[hutennis]

Couple of more things on this subject.

Lets say you can get -130/+110 favorite for -120.
If you compare your cost to -130 it would appear that you have an edge.
In fact you dont. You still have -EV bet b/c -120 is more expensive than -118.7.
You pay much less commission on that bet, though.

All of the above is how it is done when you line shopping, i.e getting actual line that is cheaper than what is consider to be a benchmark.

When you handicap your own line it's a bit different.
Now you don't have an actual line that is cheaper.
You only have a line in your mind that you think is better than benchmark.
Now you calculate your edge not vs novig, b.c you can not be paid with no vig number, but vs the posted line of the side you assume you have an edge against.

So, in your example, let's say you think that fair line for that set up is -140/+140.
Now, since -130 is the best line you can get anywhere, you bet it and calculate your edge vs this number.
-/+118.7 becomes irrelevant since from your POV it is a wrong number.
Your market is where YOU believe market should be - -140.

So edge calculation for your edge in this case will look like this

edge = IP of market (-140) / IP of your cost (-130) -1 = 58.33/56.52 -1 = 3.21%

I hope you understand and see difference.

[thesoxman101]

Thanks, whats the intuition behind the IP of market / IP of cost - 1 formula though?

[hutennis]

There is no intuition here. It is a simple arithmetic.
That's the way we were taught to find percentage difference between two numbers.

you can also do it like this

(IP of market - IP of cost) / IP of cost

(58.33-56.52)/56.52 = 3.2%

Same thing.

[Shonner]

If you want to see it in numbers (it may be easier to understand) you can calculate it like this:

Probability of a -130/110 favorite winning: .54274
Probability of a -130/110 favorite losing: .45726

If you bet $110 to win $100, here is your Expected Value:

Winning: .54274*100 (potential winnings): $54.274
Losing: .45726*(110) (potential loss): ($50.2986)

Your expected value is: $3.98

When you divide your EV of $3.98 by your risk amount of $110, you get 3.62%

But let's not forget if your closing number isn't sharp, this is useless.

[Shonner]

Good point by hutennis above, people think that beating the closing line will make you money. But it's not about beating the closing line, it's about beating the no-vig line.

[thesoxman101]

So the edge is the percent change in the no vig probability and the vig implied probability you get on the line?

[hutennis]

If you line shopping and have the line that is better than no vig benchmark
If you handicap, then it is between your imaginary number and your real cost.

[Shonner]

So the edge is the percent change in the no vig probability and the vig implied probability you get on the line?

I think you are over thinking it. Stop worrying about definitions and understand how to apply what was said...re-read this post and it shows you everything you need to know.

Also, a tip...while the comments about coming up with your own line and using that instead of the "sharp" line are correct, I would strongly advise against that. Unless you have a system or something out of this world, like nearly every capper out there, you won't be able to consistently set your own lines that are sharper than what's out there. Use Pinny and/or Matchbook no vig lines.

[hutennis]

I think you are over thinking it. Stop worrying about definitions and understand how to apply what was said...re-read this post and it shows you everything you need to know.

Also, a tip...while the comments about coming up with your own line and using that instead of the "sharp" line are correct, I would strongly advise against that. Unless you have a system or something out of this world, like nearly every capper out there, you won't be able to consistently set your own lines that are sharper than what's out there. Use Pinny and/or Matchbook no vig lines.

I'm not advising anybody to come up (handicap) own lines. I, personally, prefer line shopping every day of the week.
The only reason it is there is to show the difference in edge calculation when one uses existing lines vs lines he handicapped. came up with or whatever the term one wants to use.
It goes without saying that the first priority of any handicapper is not how to calculate an edge on a lines he came up with, but to make sure that any kind of edge is there to begin with. Thanks god it is not my problem.

[thesoxman101]

So line shopping you compare with the no vig line though...

54.28%/52.38 - 1 = 3.62%

I'm just curious why you do that because you're paying more than that, you're paying for the -130 in the original example, not -118. So the edge is 3.62 percent but you're paying for the -130?

[hutennis]

I'm not paying for -130. By line shopping, I'm paying for -110, and when I compare it with -118 I get my edge.

Listen, if after I laid it all down for you in a very comprehensive manner you are still asking this sort of questions, you are either pulling my leg, which is not nice, or genuinely unable to get your mind around it, in which case sportsbetting is not something you would want to take on in general, cause this hobby may prove to be too expensive.

Either way, I don't really see any point in continuing any farther.

GL

[thesoxman101]

Never mind, I understand. Thanks for the help.

[indio]

Good point by hutennis above, people think that beating the closing line will make you money. But it's not about beating the closing line, it's about beating the no-vig line.

There is no such thing as a no-vig line. It doesn't exist. A bookmaker sets arbitrary prices on a sporting contest. The combined prices of the contestants will be over 100%, that's how they attempt to eek out a profit by having a line good enough to either ensure a profit no matter what, or to have a position on a side that's favorable. Money will dictate the shifting of these prices. All your trying to do is make wagers that are long term profitable.

You cant have a "no-vig" line because its impossible to know what that is, it's all speculative. I can know precisely what the "vig" or "edge" is on a wager involving dice or cards, because it's probability is proven and exact by math. That can never happen in a sporting contest, so it doesn't exist. Only market prices exist, which change. They go up and down, but your position and price are assured when you make a purchase.

[hutennis]

I agree, there is no way to pinpoint true market price the same way as roulette expectation can be calculated, but, as I said, in a absence of a crystal ball, whatever is produced by formulas applied to -105/-105 at pinnacle is close and good enough.
I'd say gigantic profits books are able to eek out while doing what they are doing combined with the fact that almost everyone who is trying to compete with that impossible to pinpoint number which is hiding somewhere between -105 and -105 (or any other variation of it) loses are very compelling evidence for that.

So if you call their "no vig" speculative, what would you call product of your (sry for generalization) handicapping efforts? Wet dream?
If you are not self biased in your analysis and apply the same standards to yourself as you do to them, it must be a right term.
Is not it?

[u21c3f6]

Here is how I see it and have applied it (successfully) for over 30 years. Odds on horse racing, harness racing, dog racing, jai alai and sporting events are not like the odds on dice, cards, roulette etc. As indio pointed out above, the latter items do not have mathematically fixed odds. I am under the impression that most people believe that a sporting event that has closing odds of -110 (-105) on each side, that each side has a 50% chance of winning. If that was true, then no amount of handicapping would allow one to win except for extreme luck or a small sample. It would be a coin flip. You cannot simultaneously believe that the closing line is 50/50 and then believe you have a "secret" formula for selecting more winners.

In brief, the way I see it and have applied it successfully is as follows: While the overall stats for sporting events are 50/50, it does not apply to the individual games. There is actually a bell curve of stats such that individual games may actually have a 70/30, 60/40, 50/50, 40/60, 30/70 etc chance of winning thus creating the 50/50 chance for the group as a whole.

My job has always been to find the criteria that the public may use to overestimate or underestimate the chances of one of the sides. That criteria helps me identify wagers in the subset of events that do not fall in the 50/50 (or odds posted for horse racing etc) group.

When I "handicap" (for lack of a better term), I am almost certainly looking at different criteria than most. The very few times that I actually discuss my wagers, I usually "shock" the person I am talking to. For example, at the track I was asked who did I wager on by an acquaintance and I told him. He then asked me who was riding him and I said I don't know! He proceeded to read me the riot act on how the jockey was a very important handicapping factor and that I couldn't seriously think I could make money without taking the jockey into account. I tried to explain to him that for my selections the jockey was already taken into account in the odds.

At Jai Alai, when I told a very good friend of mine who used to be one of the handicappers that had his selections placed at he bottom of the game pages in the program what I look for and how I wager, he told me that I shouldn't do it that way. He then explained to me how it should be done. What he explained to me was exactly what I was seeing in the odds and assumed what the public was doing which helped me locate those wagers that were being under estimated enough to show a profit. At that point trying to explain to this "expert" was going to be fruitless so I suggested a demonstration. He selected and I selected and let's see what happens. Before the night was over (yes, a very small sample but he could now "see" and understand what I was talking about and that it had merit) we formed a partnership and did things my way at two different Jai Alai frontons very successfully.

There is just so much to write on this but I will end with this: I think most go wrong because they are trying to select the winner of a single event. What I try to do is not select the winner but to draw my selections from that subset of events that have criteria that will be over or under estimated by the public. I am not sure that last sentence is clear but I can't think of another way to state it at the moment.

Joe.

[indio]

I agree, there is no way to pinpoint true market price the same way as roulette expectation can be calculated, but, as I said, in a absence of a crystal ball, whatever is produced by formulas applied to -105/-105 at pinnacle is close and good enough.
I'd say gigantic profits books are able to eek out while doing what they are doing combined with the fact that almost everyone who is trying to compete with that impossible to pinpoint number which is hiding somewhere between -105 and -105 (or any other variation of it) loses are very compelling evidence for that.

So if you call their "no vig" speculative, what would you call product of your (sry for generalization) handicapping efforts? Wet dream?
If you are not self biased in your analysis and apply the same standards to yourself as you do to them, it must be a right term.
Is not it?

I'm really starting to wonder if the 37 states in our republic that once had sterilization laws on the books were on to something.

[hutennis]

I'm really starting to wonder if the 37 states in our republic that once had sterilization laws on the books were on to something.

If you have an argument to make - make an argument.
If you have an argument to consider - consider an argument.
If you want to attack or be sarcastic about argument - be my guest.
By why do you feel an urge to make a personal attack every time?
Why are you attempting to undermine a speaker's argument by attacking the speaker instead of addressing the argument?
Ad hominem is something that is very typical in high school cafeterias, but that's where is should be left
if you want to be taking more or less seriously by others in the rest of your life.
Its fallacy, it's weakness, it's wrong!

[indio]

but that's where is should be left
if you want to be taking more or less seriously by others in the rest of your life.

If I want to be taking more or less seriously by others in the rest of my life?

I'll stand by my original statement. There were 37 states in our republic with sterilization laws on the books. Perhaps they had the right idea. I for one pray you never have or never will have children. Since I'm laying 2/5 you get laid less than 3 times a decade, we should be safe in that realm.

If you want to be taken more seriously, I suggest you learn some grammar and some math. You seem to fail miserably at both in many of your posts. I mean, you're obvious lack of basic cognitive functions should alert you to the fact that NOBODY gives a rats ass what you have to say.

[hutennis]

Look, it is fairly simple.

Here is the statement I made.

I agree, there is no way to pinpoint true market price the same way as roulette expectation can be calculated, but, as I said, in a absence of a crystal ball, whatever is produced by formulas applied to -105/-105 at pinnacle is close and good enough.
I'd say gigantic profits books are able to eek out while doing what they are doing combined with the fact that almost everyone who is trying to compete with that impossible to pinpoint number which is hiding somewhere between -105 and -105 (or any other variation of it) loses are very compelling evidence for that.

According to you, this statement is so ridiculously, outrageously bad that person who made it deserves to be sterilized.
For some reason, you would not care to explain why.

If you insist on making nazy-like remarks without backing them up with at least something, you are just an useless, angry loser.
And the fact that you speak english better than me changes nothing about it.

[korbal29]

hey hutennis, I might be in a select minority but I am fan of yours for those reasons: I admire the way you lay out your thoughts and
arguments (clear, concise and to the points). the concepts are way over my head since I am just a recreational bettor but I do love back and
forth challenging arguments. What I find very funny is those smart posters they seem irritated by THE WAY you lay out everything.I do have
to admit that sometimes it comes across as arrogant and stuck up type way of saying the whole thing but that is just a perception and IMO one
should concentrate what`s at stake not the way it is said

[hutennis]

What I find very funny is those smart posters they seem irritated by THE WAY you lay out everything.I do have
to admit that sometimes it comes across as arrogant and stuck up type way of saying the whole thing but that is just a perception and IMO one
should concentrate what`s at stake not the way it is said

That's the whole point.

There is nothing wrong in being sarcastic or what you may call arrogant when it comes to opposite argument.
There is nothing wrong with sticking it up, as long as you stick it up with argument of your own.
There is nothing personal in it. It is simply a debate format, so to speak.
Brightest people in a world are debating issues all the time and they take no prisoners doing it.

But once your only argument is "you are fakking moron" then the fakking moron you are.
There is a big difference between "you are an idiot" and "your position is idiotic"
But once you say "your position is idiotic" you better have something very non-idiotic to back it up with.
And if you don't have it - shut up. Shut up and think. Think about WHY "you are a fakking moron" or
"people like you need to be sterilized" are the only arguments you got left.
This way you give yourself a chance to learn something and become better.

[cyberbabble]

hutennis -
Good posts on the math of calculating novig line, edge, etc.

[sayhey69]

no reason why the "no-vig line" is the true line

[hutennis]

no reason why the "no-vig line" is the true line

Nobody said it is.
But there are a lot of reasons why it is close enough to be considered a benchmark for certain calculations.

[indio]

According to you, this statement is so ridiculously, outrageously bad that person who made it deserves to be sterilized.
For some reason, you would not care to explain why.

If you insist on making nazy-like remarks

Nazy like? Wow, you seem to embarrass yourself more and more every time you respond. Were you trying to imply Nazi like? What exactly was Nazi like? (Even a monkey would probably know how to spell Nazi correctly). The sterilization laws I referred to were American states laws, and were all in place long before there even was a National Socialist Party. These laws were famously endorsed by former Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes who stated that "three generations of idiots is enough", obviously foreseeing the end results of your bloodlines. As I scroll my remarks, I don't see any references made to European Jewry, Bolshevism, Aryan supermen, Lebensraum, or anything else that could be defined as specifically "nazy-like".

So, in addition to your proven lack of math skills, statistical probabilities, and horrific grammar, we can now add history to your ever growing list of subjects you are lacking in basic understanding of. All the while, making yourself out to be some sort of intelligent authority, with your swarmy, little sarcastic jabs, that just make you even more pathetic.

We've already exposed your math errors with details, so we've now moved on to your character, which is obviously lacking. You are a clueless idiot. That is not a personal attack, that is a statement of fact in the sheer clinical usage of the term.

[hutennis]

Well, I guess nothing is left for me but to tell you to go fakk yourself.
This has to be the only style of discussion you are accustom to so I'm forced to use it.

I hope my substandard english is not obscuring the message.

[Shonner]

There is no such thing as a no-vig line. It doesn't exist.

1000% incorrect, I agree with what hutennis said.

[Shonner]

1000% incorrect, I agree with what hutennis said.

Only thing I will say that in an inefficient market, I could see why a "no vig" line does not matter much. In theory, in an efficient market, if you bet the no vig closing line with the same $ amount each time, you'd have a $0 profit in the long run. That's why the no vig line is impt.

[Inkwell77]

I hear about beating the no vig closer JUST by line shopping, but I have yet to witness any person in the US who does this consistently and is not banned from the majority of the US facing books. I'm sure they exist, but there are very few I would imagine.
There are ways around it, sure, but if you live in the US and don't live in Las Vegas or Reno this seems almost impossible with the current books offered. If you have agents at the "non-US" books that is obviously different and you might be able to make it work.

People who create their own lines in whatever they specialize in are probably doing it "right" in terms of future revenue, but obviously a lot more risk is implied. For these people I would imagine the no-vig line does not matter much except for being interesting to look at.