[jolmscheid]

Hey guys...once you know the zero vig. line, how much does one need to BEAT this line by in order for it to be profitable longterm?

I have done some looking around for this, but cannot find a definitive answer...

[jolmscheid]

Your help and insight would be greatly appreciated as always!

[yisman]

Seems to me that if you beat the no vig line at all, it's profitable.

[xyz]

Just bet whenever you can find a game that is +EV. Passing up on any of them just decreases your profit. Of course you would need to size your bets correctly. You can read up on Kelly for that.

[jolmscheid]

Thanks xyz and yisman...so if I can beat the no-vig line by even 1 cent, it is a +EV bet?

[jolmscheid]

For example, the no vig line on a baseball game is +110 / -110....so if I can get +111 or -109, it is +EV? Thanks much...I really appreciate the insight

[yisman]

Yes sir.

[LT Profits]

For example, the no vig line on a baseball game is +110 / -110....so if I can get +111 or -109, it is +EV? Thanks much...I really appreciate the insight

Yes but your edge would only be about 0.2%, so keep that in mind when calculating your stake.

[uva3021]

if you use kelly than you bet your edge. To filter out wagers, not having to deal with fractions of a percent edge, you can set an arbitrary minimum edge

[jolmscheid]

Perfect...so every 1 cent I can beat the no vig line by is a .2% edge correct?

[LT Profits]

Perfect...so every 1 cent I can beat the no vig line by is a .2% edge correct?

No, pennies become less valuable as the odds get bigger.

[Masu485]

But doesn't the vig force you to have to beat the CL by more than just 1 cent? Don't you need to beat it by enough to negate the vig, plus get your edge?

[jgilmartin]

But doesn't the vig force you to have to beat the CL by more than just 1 cent? Don't you need to beat it by enough to negate the vig, plus get your edge?

Yes. You have to calculate the no vig line first, and then beat that by at least 1 cent.

[Justin7]

The no-vig line is an estimate, and not exact.

If Pinny is dealing -104/-104, Greek has -110/-110 and Cris has -110/-100, the no-vig line is -100/-100. That does *not* mean that +101 will have value. The fair line is typically within the range of the major books -- in this case somewhere between -104 and +104 for either side.

BTCL is a pretty good tool to estimate your edge on bets placed before a major market move... But I wouldn't use it to justify betting a side at +101 in the above example.

[illfuuptn]

The no-vig line is an estimate, and not exact.

If Pinny is dealing -104/-104, Greek has -110/-110 and Cris has -110/-100, the no-vig line is -100/-100. That does *not* mean that +101 will have value. The fair line is typically within the range of the major books -- in this case somewhere between -104 and +104 for either side.


BTCL is a pretty good tool to estimate your edge on bets placed before a major market move... But I wouldn't use it to justify betting a side at +101 in the above example.

Bad example. Because it's only true when both sides are the same. But when it's -120/+110 the no-vig is not - and + 115.

[Justin7]

Bad example. Because it's only true when both sides are the same. But when it's -120/+110 the no-vig is not - and + 115.

I used that example precisely because it was simple.

Even if the market were consistent at -116 was the mean no-vig price on the home team, I would not blindly bet -115 or +117.

[uva3021]

some standard error has to be included to account for market fluctuations, any edge over the standard error is probably where one should consider making a wager

for simplicity, make the standard error the overround

[jolmscheid]

So maybe 5 cents or better possibly? Obviously this is very hard to find on major sports but would just be good to know...thanks for the help everyone

[illfuuptn]

You need to reread many posts itt. Obviously pretty much any time you beat the no-vig is +ev(which usually happens because you bet early, not because you find a rogue number). But getting
-180 when the closing no-vig is -185 is wayyyyy less of an edge than getting -100 when the closing no-vig is -105

[chunk]

Is it fair to say that one would be willing to pay market price(no perceived mathematical edge ) or even in rare circumstances a premium price based on "other" factors or information? Could get blasted by the math guys here, but just curious.

[Jontheman]

To answer Chunk... Yes, obviously more so on early lines the market price is not going to be the "correct" price. In the betting backwaters of minor sports the market price sometimes NEVER reflects the true probabilities of each outcome. It's just that nobody noticed or bothered to work it out (except those of us that look ). Don't assume that the market price (even on late lines and major sports) is unbeatable or infallible...

If the early line is off enough, and your bankroll big enough then you'd hoover up every line in the market, - best available or not. I've done this on occasion, although we're talking tiny markets, not NFL handicaps.

Or to answer your question more quickly - market price is not the same as no perceived mathematical edge.

If I've misread it and you're asking if you'd ever place a bet where you DO believe you have no mathematical edge, then the answer is obviously no, other than for arbing/trading purposes or to rectify your own staking error.

[hutennis]

if you use kelly than you bet your edge.

Excuse my ignorance, but is not it when I use Kelly I win my edge?

[LT Profits]

Excuse my ignorance, but is not it when I use Kelly I win my edge?

Correct, you bet TO WIN your edge. Therefore, you are betting less on underdogs.

[chunk]

This is enough to put me in deep depression.

[goblue12]

For example, the no vig line on a baseball game is +110 / -110....so if I can get +111 or -109, it is +EV? Thanks much...I really appreciate the insight

-109 would be -EV

You would need +105/-104 or better.

[chunk]

Beating the closing line......what a crock. Efficient market, blah, blah. Find an acceptable play on the probability plane and play it at an an acceptable price. End of story.

[illfuuptn]

This honestly isn't a troll post. Kc tomorrow pretty much all the way up to -120 is a +ev play. Sometimes it just doesn't come close to being efficient out there.

[evo34]

This honestly isn't a troll post. Kc tomorrow pretty much all the way up to -120 is a +ev play. Sometimes it just doesn't come close to being efficient out there.

Curious: Where do you think you differ significantly from the market: Davis, Hochevar, offenses, bullpens?

[illfuuptn]

Curious: Where do you think you differ significantly from the market: Davis, Hochevar, offenses, bullpens?

The market just gave too much credit to the teams' records. In reality it was essentially identical pitchers vs. two polar opposite offenses. The Rays' offense is pretty awful and the Royals' offense is very good.

[xyz]

-109 would be -EV

You would need +105/-104 or better.

How is +105 +EV when the no vig line is +110?

[LT Profits]

How is +105 +EV when the no vig line is +110?

I think he misinterpreted the guy's post thinking he said the actual line before the no-vig calc was -110/-110

[Pancho sanza]

How much faith do you place in the no vig line?

If its 100 %, then bet whenever you beat the no vig line, even if its 1 cent.

[God1]

The market just gave too much credit to the teams' records. In reality it was essentially identical pitchers vs. two polar opposite offenses. The Rays' offense is pretty awful and the Royals' offense is very good.

.08 difference in wOBA is polar opposite offenses? I think you can also make a good case that the Rays' offense has slightly underperformed so far this season. You didn't even bother to mention the significant defensive advantage the Rays have. I'd also disagree with your assertion that davis and hochevar are on equal ground(I grade davis as worse)

[illfuuptn]

Okay bro. Who smashed the line movement in that game?Oh was it the Royals? Yeah it was wasn't it.

[God1]

Okay bro. Who smashed the line movement in that game?Oh was it the Royals? Yeah it was wasn't it.

I never said I disagreed with your conclusion(I don't), but the reasons you gave to get to your conclusion were grossly illogical, which is even more grave than the accuracy of the actual conclusion reached brah