[DeluxeLiner]

Since gambling has started, there have been way more unders than overs.. but if you bet every under in sports, you will go broke because of the vig. The vig will just eat you up at the end. So this is what you do to avoid it...

When pinny has an NFL game total at 36.5 ov -105-- 36.5 un -105, all you have to do is get a 36.5 un even somewhere and you have a + even bet going for you here.

if pinny has a hockey total 5.5 ov -110---5.5 un even, all you have to find is a un 5.5 +105 or better and you will take the money over the long haul.

if pinny has a mlb total of 8.5 ov -115--8.5 un +105, just find a un 8.5 +110 and you are good to go.

Just beat pinnys closing line by 5 cents or more is all you need and play every under in every sport, BUT it must be 5 cents better or you DO NOT play it. IF not 5 cents better, you LAY OFF IT..

there have been close to 51% unders since the mid to early 90`s, thats when the research was done. so if you bet ever under in all 4 major sports at 5 cents better than actual 10 cent line, you will show a profit for sure.. 100%

because sometimes you will have un 8.5 +125 also and at 51% you will win, but you will also have some un 9.5 -110 and so on.. but at 51% unders with the 5 cents better, you win $$$ for sure.

I want to discuss this and I would like to know if this gives a legit edge.

[rookie]

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/Betting+Tool...alculator.aspx

[DeluxeLiner]

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/Betting+Tool...alculator.aspx

This is helpful when the line moves. Don't just post a calculator that everyone has access to, how useless.

[rookie]

This is helpful when the line moves. Don't just post a calculator that everyone has access to, how useless.

You don't need the total to change to calculate the edge. Example: MLB Under 8 -108 (pinnacle). If you bet under 8 +100 you have 1.39% edge considering pinnacle line to be accurate.

[reno cool]

One of the dangers would be the following:
If you take a book say Pinnacle and you assume their avg line is accurate thats not the same as assuming the subset of those lines that can be found at a better price somewhere else is as accurate. Hopefully thats not too wordy. I still like the strategy overall.

[Munson15]

Would love to see Ganchrow take a look at this. It seems too simple to be profitable, and puts all its stock in Pinnacle having a 'perfect' line on all sports.

[ConnieDotey]

ya. that's what i want to share here.

[Ganchrow]

Would love to see Ganchrow take a look at this. It seems too simple to be profitable, and puts all its stock in Pinnacle having a 'perfect' line on all sports.

If you can consistently bet at a price better than fair value, you'll make money.

Fair value on totals is, in many sports slightly skewed in favor of the under.

IN the NFL, for example, the under has hit at rate of about 50.24% since 1991 with a standard deviation of about 0.73%

One important consideration, as Reno Cool pointed out, is the degree to which a substantially off-line at a book other than Pinnacle is negatively correlated with the accuracy of the Pinnacle line. This will tend to be much a function of the book in question and the order of line moves.

For example, an off-line (vereus that of Pinnacle) of a few hundred dollars that has recently appeared at Matchbook might well be worth picking off.

On the other hand, if the Greek has just moved the price on it's total from o-110/u-110 to o-120/u+100, while Pinnacle yet to move off its' -105, caution would certainly be in order.

[Munson15]

One of the dangers would be the following:
If you take a book say Pinnacle and you assume their avg line is accurate thats not the same as assuming the subset of those lines that can be found at a better price somewhere else is as accurate. Hopefully thats not too wordy. I still like the strategy overall.

You would take a line close to game time, correct?

[Munson15]

If you can consistently bet at a price better than fair value, you'll make money.

Fair value on totals is, in many sports slightly skewed in favor of the under.

IN the NFL, for example, the under has hit at rate of about 50.24% since 1991 with a standard deviation of about 0.73%

One important consideration, as Reno Cool pointed out, is the degree to which a substantially off-line at a book other than Pinnacle is negatively correlated with the accuracy of the Pinnacle line. This will tend to be much a function of the book in question and the order of line moves.

For example, an off-line (vereus that of Pinnacle) of a few hundred dollars that has recently appeared at Matchbook might well be worth picking off.

On the other hand, if the Greek has just moved the price on it's total from o-110/u-110 to o-120/u+100, while Pinnacle yet to move off its' -105, caution would certainly be in order.

Thanks for the response. I know Greek has strictly -110 pricing so I'd guess not many opportunities would arise using their line. Are they as much a 'gold standard' as Pinnacle when it comes to setting the market? And, finally, the same question I asked Reno, the line to use would be close to face/kickoff, tip or first pitch? Thanks again.

[DeluxeLiner]

The only place you might be able to pull this off is matchbook, and you would need to take into account the take that matchbook gets. That is such a low edge, it would be too much variance for me and I am not sure I am up for betting that much with swings. Are there any sports that hit at a better rate than 50.24. Hockey or maybe NBA?

[xyz]

I think any time you can get better than fair value is a good play. If you get the bet in 12 hours before the game starts, the line may move further to your flavor or against it at closing. Over the long haul, it should even out.

Thanks for the response. I know Greek has strictly -110 pricing so I'd guess not many opportunities would arise using their line. Are they as much a 'gold standard' as Pinnacle when it comes to setting the market? And, finally, the same question I asked Reno, the line to use would be close to face/kickoff, tip or first pitch? Thanks again.

[Munson15]

I think any time you can get better than fair value is a good play. If you get the bet in 12 hours before the game starts, the line may move further to your flavor or against it at closing. Over the long haul, it should even out.

Thank you I may try it out. Would love to have Ganchrow's stamp of approval.

[smitch124]

I think any time you can get better than fair value is a good play. If you get the bet in 12 hours before the game starts, the line may move further to your flavor or against it at closing. Over the long haul, it should even out.

Interesting point, the same one that is valid in betting baseball games before you see the lineups. Missing players will end up working in your favor and against it enough to even up in the long run.

[MonkeyF0cker]

Thank you I may try it out. Would love to have Ganchrow's stamp of approval.

If you do it, do not use Nicky's example. Make sure you beat fair value (the no-vig line). If an NBA Pinny over closes at 192 -110 and you bet 192 -105 elsewhere, you are making a negative expectation wager.

[Munson15]

I thought the original concept was to get a line 10 cents better, but looking back I see he only wanted 5 cents. That would mean 192 +100 using your example would be the target.

[hajune]

The edge is not enough. You will be wasting your time. Find a method that works and stick to it, not what you are doing. You will son get tired of nickel diming this. Profits if there are any will be at a mimimum and take a long time to build.

[xyz]

I think both MonkeyF0cker and Nicky are correct here. Nicky is using Pinnacle line, which is a dime line. So if you get 5 cents better than the Pinnacle under line, that would equal to the no vig line, which agrees with MonkeyF0cker's point below. Nicky's point is that unders hit slightly more than 50%, so if you can get in at the no vig price, you will make money long term.

The emphasis here is long term. You would want as mechanical of a way as you can get to carry out this strategy. Otherwise the ups and downs would drive you insane.

If you do it, do not use Nicky's example. Make sure you beat fair value (the no-vig line). If an NBA Pinny over closes at 192 -110 and you bet 192 -105 elsewhere, you are making a negative expectation wager.

[u21c3f6]

Here is how I would look at this (your opinions/experiences may vary).

If the unders perform as written and if you could beat the Pinny line (assuming it is accurate) on ALL unders by 5 cents or more, then you would have a profitable system.

The problem is if you cannot beat the line for ALL unders, you will be left with a subset of unders. There is no guarantee that this subset will perform as written. In fact, I would suggest that the answer may be the opposite. There must be a reason why you can beat the under line on some but not others. The ones you can’t beat may outperform the ones you can beat.

Joe.

[Munson15]

Here is how I would look at this (your opinions/experiences may vary).

If the unders perform as written and if you could beat the Pinny line (assuming it is accurate) on ALL unders by 5 cents or more, then you would have a profitable system.

The problem is if you cannot beat the line for ALL unders, you will be left with a subset of unders. There is no guarantee that this subset will perform as written. In fact, I would suggest that the answer may be the opposite. There must be a reason why you can beat the under line on some but not others. The ones you can’t beat may outperform the ones you can beat.

Joe.

Joe, you make a good point, but I have a question. If the Pinnacle line is accepted as the most accurate, and it shows a particular under for 8 runs at -110, and you bet under 8 runs at -105 or better, aren't you betting an under that is more likely to hit and therefore, the subset you are playing would be stronger than ALL unders?

[reno cool]

Joe, you make a good point, but I have a question. If the Pinnacle line is accepted as the most accurate, and it shows a particular under for 8 runs at -110, and you bet under 8 runs at -105 or better, aren't you betting an under that is more likely to hit and therefore, the subset you are playing would be stronger than ALL unders?

not necessarily, the assumption is that the Pinnacle line is accurate overall only. Look at it this way:
1.Pinnacle line is -105 and it is the best line anywhere. Say the avg line at other books your viewing is -108
2. Pinnacle line is -105 and other books best line is 100 with avg line being -105

In which case would the under hit more often. I would guess that assuming both would hit equally is a mistake.

[MonkeyF0cker]

I think both MonkeyF0cker and Nicky are correct here. Nicky is using Pinnacle line, which is a dime line. So if you get 5 cents better than the Pinnacle under line, that would equal to the no vig line, which agrees with MonkeyF0cker's point below. Nicky's point is that unders hit slightly more than 50%, so if you can get in at the no vig price, you will make money long term.

The emphasis here is long term. You would want as mechanical of a way as you can get to carry out this strategy. Otherwise the ups and downs would drive you insane.

Actually, the only time 5 cents off a dime line equals the no vig line is at -105/+105. Per my example of a closing line of -110 on a Pinny under, the no vig line is actually -/+104.76. So beating the closer by 5 cents at -105 does not beat fair value. You are actually giving up about 0.11% in edge. If unders in the NFL hit at 50.24% as Ganch stated earlier, then you have an edge of 0.13% on that wager. And that's assuming a lot. This doesn't account for the standard deviation of 0.73% that Ganch mentioned either. There could certainly be a case of random walk here where these results regress to 50% in the future. It also assumes that the market and/or linesmakers will continue to undervalue unders in the same manner in the future. These are awfully dangerous assumptions. It certainly wouldn't get my stamp of approval.

[xyz]

Thanks for the correction, MonkeyF0cker. I am learning Is there a formula for computing the no vig price given the fav and dog prices? Thanks for your help.

Actually, the only time 5 cents off a dime line equals the no vig line is at -105/+105. Per my example of a closing line of -110 on a Pinny under, the no vig line is actually -/+104.76. So beating the closer by 5 cents at -105 does not beat fair value. You are actually giving up about 0.11% in edge. If unders in the NFL hit at 50.24% as Ganch stated earlier, then you have an edge of 0.13% on that wager. And that's assuming a lot. This doesn't account for the standard deviation of 0.73% that Ganch mentioned either. There could certainly be a case of random walk here where these results regress to 50% in the future. It also assumes that the market and/or linesmakers will continue to undervalue unders in the same manner in the future. These are awfully dangerous assumptions. It certainly wouldn't get my stamp of approval.

[LT Profits]

Thanks for the correction, MonkeyF0cker. I am learning Is there a formula for computing the no vig price given the fav and dog prices? Thanks for your help.

Let's say Pinny has the following:

8 Over -125
8 Under +115

-125 has an equivalent win% of 55.6% (125/225)
+115 has an equivalent win% of 46.5% (100/225)

This gives us an "overround" of 102.1% (55.6 + 46.5)

So No Vig Line = (55.6/102.1)/(46.5/102.1) = +/-119.4

[Ganchrow]

Thanks for the correction, MonkeyF0cker. I am learning Is there a formula for computing the no vig price given the fav and dog prices? Thanks for your help.

Also see the US2FAIR() and DEC2FAIR() array functions of my http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/handicappe...ate-excel.html.