[Sawyer]

Arbitrage/Surebet is waste of money if you're betting the other side at pinnacle..

Why?

Because the side you bet on Pinnacle will usually lose and your Pinnacle bankroll will decrease slowly.

Let's say odds are like this at Pinnacle,

Jack to win -164
Mike to win +140

You find "Jack to win" bet at -120 in another bookie.

Now, you can bet both sides and make a surebet (arbitrage) and guarantee the profit with zero risk. However, this is waste of money, why?

Because, the value bet is on other bookie. The bet you placed at Pinnacle is not a value bet. Time to time, you will have winning streaks in Pinnacle but over the long haul, you will lose more often and bets you lost at Pinnacle will drain your bankroll slowly..

At the end of the month,

You will have a situation like this:

Oh, very nice I made 5k net profit this month.

Total Money Won from other books: +15k
Total Money Lost (and deposited) at Pinnacle: -10k

Let me ask you. What if you didn't placed any wager at Pinnacle in order to cover other side?

You would be +15,000 up.

BECAUSE PINNACLE LINES ARE SHARPER!

[zorba74]

Are you aware of any "robot software" that allows one to search for middles and automatically bet them?

I hear they exist (guys hire programmers) but they obviously aren't advertised. Also, don't sportsbooks have countermeasures for this?

Please let me know if you can shed any light on the subject.

Thanks.

[hutennis]

Arbitrage/Surebet is waste of money if you're betting the other side at pinnacle..

Why?

Because the side you bet on Pinnacle will usually lose and your Pinnacle bankroll will decrease slowly.

Let's say odds are like this at Pinnacle,

Jack to win -164
Mike to win +140

You find "Jack to win" bet at -120 in another bookie.

Now, you can bet both sides and make a surebet (arbitrage) and guarantee the profit with zero risk. However, this is waste of money, why?

Because, the value bet is on other bookie. The bet you placed at Pinnacle is not a value bet. Time to time, you will have winning streaks in Pinnacle but over the long haul, you will lose more often and bets you lost at Pinnacle will drain your bankroll slowly..

At the end of the month,

You will have a situation like this:

Oh, very nice I made 5k net profit this month.

Total Money Won from other books: +15k
Total Money Lost (and deposited) at Pinnacle: -10k

Let me ask you. What if you didn't placed any wager at Pinnacle in order to cover other side?

You would be +15,000 up.

BECAUSE PINNACLE LINES ARE SHARPER!

This makes so little sense that I don't even know where to begin with it.

I'm really leaning toward considering it some kind of joke or maybe a level, couse anyone with anything remotely close
to a reasonable intelligence simply can not come up with such an idiotic idea.

[Sawyer]

This makes so little sense that I don't even know where to begin with it.

I'm really leaning toward considering it some kind of joke or maybe a level, couse anyone with anything remotely close
to a reasonable intelligence simply can not come up with such an idiotic idea.

Do you have the proof? I have. I don't think you're making arbitrage bets between a square book and pinnacle, otherwise you would understand me. %99 of arbitrage/surebet players are complaining about same thing. Their balance in other books increase while they're losing money at Pinnacle. I had to deposit my Pinnacle account twice this month.

[muffins]

Reasonable proposition, Pinnacle drives the market price on a lot of sports and is arguably (provably?) the most efficient price so all you are doing when surebetting with Pinnacle is betting with another book that has been slow to move its price to the most current/most efficient price (assuming efficiency increases as we get closer to closing time/price).

I would agree that if the only reason you bet a Pinny price is because another book had a surebet price then you will lose in the long-run at Pinny at around the 2.5% of their over-round.

[u21c3f6]

Unless your wagers are at the max allowed, your example has one betting the same amount on a sure thing as one would would bet on somethng that may have on average a 50% chance of winning. If max wagers are not a problem, you are almost always better off arbitraging from a bankroll point of view.

Joe.

[hutennis]

Do you have the proof? I have. I don't think you're making arbitrage bets between a square book and pinnacle, otherwise you would understand me. %99 of arbitrage/surebet players are complaining about same thing. Their balance in other books increase while they're losing money at Pinnacle. I had to deposit my Pinnacle account twice this month.

Look.
If you would say something like:
"Hey people! Don't miss the forest behind the trees. Taking -120 has a larger EV by itself than arbitraging -120/+140."

then I would understand the argument although there is still enough to say about benefits of a risk free proposition from a stand point of BR management.

But your point is a ridiculous one about "losing money on Pinnacle", "draining BR slowly", "winning 15k instead of 5k" like it is somehow a guaranteed outcome and some other nonsense like that.

It is amazingly stupid.

[Sawyer]

Some people really lack of mathematical knowledge here. Let me tell again.

But I don't expect you to understand because I can see you don't have any real experience about this subject.

Please, only speak if you're making arbitrage bets for long time. Don't want to discuss it with people who don't have any idea about it.

Example

Let's say X bet is listed -200 at Pinnacle. If you're picking this at -125, you will make money over long haul. However, while winning at one book, you will lose on another bookie, pinnacle. Therefore, if you know you're betting clearly a value side on another bookie, betting other side at Pinnacle for arbitrage is waste of money.

I said I have a proof. I lived it. Since April, I loaded other bookie accounts only once, when making first deposit. However, I reloaded my pinnacle account many many times since while I was winning one side in other bookie, I was losing at Pinnacle.

Second, it's not very kind to call something "stupid" because you don't agree with it. A very rude behaviour, not very polite really..

[hutennis]

Some people really lack of mathematical knowledge here. Let me tell again.

But I don't expect you to understand because I can see you don't have any real experience about this subject.

I say I have proof and you're still talking, lol.

Math Lesson #1

Let's say X bet is listed -200 at Pinnacle. If you're picking this at -125, you will make money over long haul. However, while winning at one book, you will lose on another bookie, pinnacle. Therefore, if you're sure you're betting clearly a value side on another bookie, making an arbitrage is waste of money.

I said I have proof. I lived it. Since April, I loaded other bookie accounts only once, when making first deposit. However, I reloaded my pinnacle account many many times since while I was winning one side in other bookie, I was losing at Pinnacle.

Second, it's not very kind to call something "stupid" because you don't agree with it. A very rude behaviour, not very polite really..

First, I did not call you stupid. That would not be nice.
I called your argument stupid because it deserves it.
There is a difference there.

Now to your point.

So now it's -200 on pinny and -125 at another book.
Nice! why not make it -200 +150? That would be even better case for you.
Where are you getting such a ridiculously large difference?
Are you building you argument on a fantastic hypothetical that is simply unavailable in a real life?
Can we talk some real situations?

Since April, I loaded other bookie accounts only once, when making first deposit. However, I reloaded my pinnacle account many many times since while I was winning one side in other bookie, I was losing at Pinnacle.

Common. That's not even funny.
When you make risk free arbitrage you don't consider your sides separately.
You count them together. And when you count them together you either break even or win.
You never lose tho. Your balances may go out of order but you don't lose money.
All you need to restore the order is to take money from "winning" account and put it in a "losing" one thus restoring the balance.
Your overall balance growth steadily with no drawdowns at all.
I feel funny even explaining you that. It is almost embarrassing.

[sayhey69]

why give pinny part of your winnings?

[Sawyer]

Example #2

Let me show another example, I hope you understand this time.

Side-A listed -183 (1.546) at Pinnacle.
Side-B listed +155 (2.55) at Pinnacle.

We find Side-A at -125 (1.800) in another book.

It's a %5.52 surebet. You can cover both sides and enjoy %5.52 surebet.

I say betting other side at Pinnacle is not necessary.

Why? Because our balance will be negative in Pinnacle.

We're betting -125. (Using -125 as example for all bets in order to calculate easier)

A %63 win rate in other book means a %37 lost percentage in Pinnacle.

%37 x 2.55 = Losing money at pinnacle
1.80 x 63 = 115.2 Winning money in other bookie

Very simple.

I'm saying, when making a surebet/arbitrage, why cover the other side at Pinnacle?

[Sawyer]

why give pinny part of your winnings?

Exactly. That's what I'm talking about. Bingo!

[hutennis]

why give pinny part of your winnings?

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It is almost painful!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


You REALLY don't understand or just kidding?
Tell me you are kidding, please!

[sayhey69]

cant tell if youre trolling or not and cant believe this is even considered thread worthy. 1 bet is +ev, 1 bet is -ev. why would you make the -ev bet?

[Sawyer]

Where are you getting such a ridiculously large difference?
Are you building you argument on a fantastic hypothetical that is simply unavailable in a real life?
Can we talk some real situations?

It's a real situation. I got all betting tickets in my betting history.

Common. That's not even funny.
When you make risk free arbitrage you don't consider your sides separately.
You count them together. And when you count them together you either break even or win.
You never lose tho. Your balances may go out of order but you don't lose money.
All you need to restore the order is to take money from "winning" account and put it in a "losing" one thus restoring the balance.
Your overall balance growth steadily with no drawdowns at all.
I feel funny even explaining you that. It is almost embarrassing.

The real embarrassing thing is to tell you this 4th time.

LoL. Of course you never lose two. While losing money at one bookie (Pinnacle), you win on other bookie so your overall profit increases. But you can maixmize your profits by not covering other side at Pinnacle.

Your overall balance growth steadily with no drawdowns at all. Yes..but you can increase your profits by not covering other side at Pinnacle.

[hutennis]

Example #2

Let me show another example, I hope you understand this time.

Side-A listed -183 (1.546) at Pinnacle.
Side-B listed +155 (2.55) at Pinnacle.

We find Side-A at -125 (1.800) in another book.

Is this real find or just for the sake of a argument?

[Sawyer]

cant tell if youre trolling or not and cant believe this is even considered thread worthy. 1 bet is +ev, 1 bet is -ev. why would you make the -ev bet?

Bingo!

Because he don't care since our overall balance growth steadily with no drawdowns at all. He is not interested in maximizing/increasing profits

[hutennis]

It's a real situation. I have all betting tickets as proof if you're interested. Just shoot me your mail.



The real embarrassing thing is to tell you this 4th time.

LoL. Of course you never lose two. While losing money at one bookie (Pinnacle), you win on other bookie so your overall profit increases. But you can maixmize your profits by not covering other side at Pinnacle.

Your overall balance growth steadily with no drawdowns at all. Yes..but you can increase your profits by not covering other side at Pinnacle.

Oh boy.

The very good reason not to cover I see is that -125 bet with Pinnacle at -183 will be canceled as bad line 9 times out of ten or even more often leaving you with one side with -EV.

[Sawyer]

Oh boy.
The very good reason not to cover I see is that -125 bet with Pinnacle at -183 will be canceled as bad line 9 times out of ten or even more often leaving you with one side with -EV.

No, I had many arbitrage bets like -115, +135, -125/+147, -135/+150 but not cancelled.

[hutennis]

cant tell if youre trolling or not and cant believe this is even considered thread worthy. 1 bet is +ev, 1 bet is -ev. why would you make the -ev bet?

OK. Let's talk about EV.

Let's take it from OP -164/+140 with -120 available elsewhere.

Since -120, although having a great value is still not a sure bet and can lose, proper BR management is in order.
For that we use Kelly and according to most agressive full Kelly we need to win our full edge.

Our edge is 10% so with 1000 BR the max bet we can place is 120 to win 100.
Our EV in $$ would be (100*60%) - (120*40%) = $12

With sure bet -120/+140 we don't have BR management considerations since we can't lose, and thus can put all our money at work.
That would be putting 540 at -120 and 450 at +140

Now our EV in $$ will be (90 * 40%) - (0 * 60%) = $36

So, although single bet EV is larger than arbitrage, the fact that we can apply smaller +EV to much larger amounts
gives us 3 times more cash.

Please, before you start jumping on that "trolling" bandwagon, make sure that you yourself are qualified to determine what is or is not
"thread worthy" and that your understanding of EV concept is worthy of anything at all.

[sayhey69]

sounds good. where can i find free and instantaneous book to book transfers and the guarantee that my bet on the non-pinny book wont be cancelled?

[hutennis]

why give pinny part of your winnings?

Exactly. That's what I'm talking about. Bingo!

I believe I have explained thoroughly why this, along with whole OP, is borderline idiotic and exhibits the complete cluelessness about
cornerstone concepts of sports betting.

As far as this

where can i find free and instantaneous book to book transfers and the guarantee that my bet on the non-pinny book wont be cancelled?

I'm sure this is not a problem at all for OP who live in UK.
That makes his all revelations even more head scratching.

BTW, what sounds good?
This?

Please, before you start jumping on that "trolling" bandwagon, make sure that you yourself are qualified to determine what is or is not
"thread worthy" and that your understanding of EV concept is worthy of anything at all.

[hutennis]

Some people really lack of mathematical knowledge here. Let me tell again.

But I don't expect you to understand because I can see you don't have any real experience about this subject.

Please, only speak if you're making arbitrage bets for long time. Don't want to discuss it with people who don't have any idea about it.

That's correct

Some people do really lack lack of mathematical knowledge here and this knowledge is on such a basic level it is scarry.

And I do agree, breath should not be held expecting them to ever understand this basic stuff.

Some of them are ignorant and condescending at the same time which is kind of funny.

[Sawyer]

I can't understand why Hutennis is so agressive. He acts like a troll, lol. "Ignore" button is very useful against trolls.

I had an interesting experience with my arbitrage/surebets between other books and pinnacle and wanted to share it. Well, if you don't want to cover your bet at Pinnacle, it's up to you. But over long haul, you may left a fortune on the table. Yes, your overall bankroll will grow no problem but why not maximize your profits? While withdrawing money from other books, you reload your pinnacle account over and over again. I lived this. My this idea is based on my experiences. Not talking about theories here..

Surebet is a great way to win money but if the odds you're betting are "value bets", you will make money anyway.

Regards,

Sawyer

[hutennis]

I can't understand why Hutennis is so agressive. He acts like a troll, lol. "Ignore" button is very useful against trolls.

I had an interesting experience with my arbitrage/surebets between other books and pinnacle and wanted to share it. Well, if you don't want to cover your bet at Pinnacle, it's up to you. But over long haul, you may left a fortune on the table. Yes, your overall bankroll will grow no problem but why not maximize your profits? While withdrawing money from other books, you reload your pinnacle account over and over again. I lived this. My this idea is based on my experiences. Not talking about theories here..

Surebet is a great way to win money but if the odds you're betting are "value bets", you will make money anyway.

Regards,

Sawyer

This is amazing.

Where am I being aggressive? Why am I "trolling"? What the hell is wrong with you?
If anything I'm very helpful.

I just gave you an iron clad, mathematical prove that your understanding of what ever is that you "lived through" is completely erroneous.
I thoroughly explained you why and how it works.
I basically gave you a blueprint for making way more money than you currently making with great opportunities that you say you are able to find on a consistent basis.

Did you even read my post with EV calculations?
If yes, how can you say what you are saying?
Who is leaving money on the table?
Do you still don't understand that you reload your pinny account not with your but with somebody else's money?

God, books have it tooooooo easy!!!!!

[u21c3f6]

Sawyer, Do you agree that one can use their whole bankroll on a sure thing arbitrage but can only wager a small fraction of their bankroll on the +EV side only?

Joe.

[muffins]

With sure bet -120/+140 we don't have BR management considerations since we can't lose, and thus can put all our money at work.

The amount of bankroll you can put on the non-pinny surebet book is the same as the amount that Sawyer can put on as you both would be putting your total balance at that book on. Your bankroll will have to be split across a large number of books to take advantage of surebet opportunities in a timely manner. You would empty the balance at that book, which would be lucky to be 5% of your total bankroll (and less for you than Sawyer as part of your bankroll is at Pinny).

You also run a very real risk of palpable error cancelling your wager, which Sawyer does not (if it is cancelled your EV is -2.5%, his is zero).

[sayhey69]

im still trying to figure out which books will guarantee they wont cancel my off line bet. im not too comfortable putting ~50% of my roll on a -ev bet until i have that guarantee. can you name some books that do that?

[muffins]

The other thing being ignored is the nature of surebet opportunities, they arise much more often on minor events/markets and therefore Kelly would rarely come in to play as the amounts that you can get on are very limited in any case. Kelly would only come in to play if you're operating a very small bank and in that case arbitrage is a very low return for a lot of work.

[hutennis]

The amount of bankroll you can put on the non-pinny surebet book is the same as the amount that Sawyer can put on as you both would be putting your total balance at that book on.

You are wrong.

His bet will always have Kelly limitations.
Arbitrage will not.

im still trying to figure out which books will guarantee they wont cancel my off line bet. im not too comfortable putting ~50% of my roll on a -ev bet until i have that guarantee. can you name some books that do that?

You also run a very real risk of palpable error cancelling your wager, which Sawyer does not (if it is cancelled your EV is -2.5%, his is zero).

All this risk of canceling business question you should address to OP.
I'f fully aware of it and even pointed it out here.

The very good reason not to cover I see is that -125 bet with Pinnacle at -183 will be canceled as bad line 9 times out of ten or even more often leaving you with one side with -EV.

Apparently, OP has no problem with that as he also indicated

No, I had many arbitrage bets like -115, +135, -125/+147, -135/+150 but not cancelled.

If that's the case, then I'm absolutely right and he is absolutely wrong. End of story.

[Inspirited]

i'm leaning a bit towards hutennis here. my world is spinning .

[hutennis]

i'm leaning a bit towards hutennis here. my world is spinning .

The subject in this thread is probably least controversial and required the least amount of sophistication/knowledge/common sense I've ever participated in on this forum. Its not even close
to market efficiency, trading vs contract bets or anything like that.

It is really as simple as 5*5=25 and you are just "leaning a bit".
Well, I'm glad you do at least that much.
You are certainly leaning in a right direction.

You should also examine the reasons why you ever been not sure.
You answer that and then you are really on your way.

[sayhey69]

since were stuck in the world of hypotheticals ill throw this one out. suppose we have a 100k roll. pinny is at -164/+140 and the book A is at -120/-110. limit is 500 and the line will move to -180/+120 after we bet it once at book A. how do we maximize ev? and how do you recommend betting this situation?

[hutennis]

since were stuck in the world of hypotheticals ill throw this one out. suppose we have a 100k roll. pinny is at -164/+140 and the book A is at -120/-110. limit is 500 and the line will move to -180/+120 after we bet it once at book A. how do we maximize ev? and how do you recommend betting this situation?

After you took advantage of +140/-120 gift in a manner I specified above and line moved, what else do you see there that would indicate profitable opportunity? How can you maximize something that does not exists?
Why did you put 100k number there? what does it have to do with anything?

[sayhey69]

why not max it at -120 w/o hedge and make more ev?