[theangryelf]

Ok so I have a +ev question and I've read a bunch of threads and I'm just trying to grasp this concept. So going back to last weeks Den/NE game the line opened up at 7.5 Den -130/ NE +110. Now I know that the game can not push therefore there is no need to factor in push prob. So I know that I have a 50/50 chance of hitting this game so Den would be +100 and NE would be +100. So would it be positive EV if I were to bet NE on the opener or would I first have to remove the vig off the opening lines?

If I remove the vig I would then get Den -118.68 /NE +118.68. If that was the case, would NE still be +EV, I'm a little confused.

Thanks for the help,

Elf

[hutennis]

Ok so I have a +ev question and I've read a bunch of threads and I'm just trying to grasp this concept. So going back to last weeks Den/NE game the line opened up at 7.5 Den -130/ NE +110. Now I know that the game can not push therefore there is no need to factor in push prob. So I know that I have a 50/50 chance of hitting this game so Den would be +100 and NE would be +100. So would it be positive EV if I were to bet NE on the opener or would I first have to remove the vig off the opening lines?

If I remove the vig I would then get Den -118.68 /NE +118.68. If that was the case, would NE still be +EV, I'm a little confused.

Thanks for the help,

Elf

Yes it will be, since probability of winning (according to what you say you know) is 50% and thus fair payoff is 100.
Due to vig, you just going to be paid less when you win. 110 instead of 118.
There is not much to be confused here.

You just need to make sure that there is no confusion in what is a really important part - your estimates of implied probability.

[theangryelf]

Yes it will be, since probability of winning (according to what you say you know) is 50% and thus fair payoff is 100.
Due to vig, you just going to be paid less when you win. 110 instead of 118.
There is not much to be confused here.

You just need to make sure that there is no confusion in what is a really important part - your estimates of implied probability.

So for this given example, is my implied probability incorrect? I mean you obviously can not push therefore it would be 50% for each side right? Now for instance, if the line dropped to 7, using the half point calculator (I understand it's a bit dated) the push prob for 7 is 5.72%. So now would i subtract 2.86 from each side to become Den -121.54/NE +115.82 with the vig removed?

[hutennis]

So for this given example, is my implied probability incorrect? I mean you obviously can not push therefore it would be 50% for each side right?

Absolutely wrong.

According to 5Dimes no vig line +/-118.7, the probability of NE covering is 45.73.
If odds makers thought that probability is 50% then line on NE would be -110 instead of +110

[theangryelf]

Absolutely wrong.

According to 5Dimes no vig line +/-118.7, the probability of NE covering is 45.73.
If odds makers thought that probability is 50% then line on NE would be -110 instead of +110

now im confused

[hutennis]

What confuses you? Tell me more

[theangryelf]

ok i went back and did my math and removing the vig is what I said +/- 118.7. Therefore, at that point i am done because there is 0% of a push at that number correct?

[theangryelf]

i guess my next question is, when the line moved to 7 do i figure out the no-vig line for that number or do i apply the push prob for 7 on the opening number?

[theangryelf]

So for this given example, is my implied probability incorrect? I mean you obviously can not push therefore it would be 50% for each side right? Now for instance, if the line dropped to 7, using the half point calculator (I understand it's a bit dated) the push prob for 7 is 5.72%. So now would i subtract 2.86 from each side to become Den -121.54/NE +115.82 with the vig removed?

My math was off, if the line moved to 7 then the odds for Den would now be Den -115.8/ NE +115.8? With the no-vig.

[hutennis]

ok i went back and did my math and removing the vig is what I said +/- 118.7. Therefore, at that point i am done because there is 0% of a push at that number correct?

No, you are not done.
Now you need to convert +/-118.7 number into implied probability of winning.
-118.7 corresponds to 54.27% probability
+118.7 corresponds to 45.73% probability.

Why do you believe that probability of winning is 50/50 and not the numbers above?

[theangryelf]

No, you are not done.
Now you need to convert +/-118.7 number into implied probability of winning.
-118.7 corresponds to 54.27% probability
+118.7 corresponds to 45.73% probability.

Why do you believe that probability of winning is 50/50 and not the numbers above?

sorry, i had those numbers written down and did not include them. Ok so later on in the odds history the line was still 7.5 Den-140/NE+120. the implied probabillity for those is Den 58.33/NE 45.45. Now do I need to break those down to no-vig like the opener or would I be safe to assume NE is a slight +ev

[hutennis]

Good question, is not it?
That's what I had in mind when I posted

You just need to make sure that there is no confusion in what is a really important part - your estimates of implied probability.

[theangryelf]

Good question, is not it?
That's what I had in mind when I posted

Huh? So now a i correct?

[hutennis]

sorry, i had those numbers written down and did not include them. Ok so later on in the odds history the line was still 7.5 Den-140/NE+120. the implied probabillity for those is Den 58.33/NE 45.45.

You always want to know no vig implied probability (which is in case of -140/+120 would be 56.2/43.8) so you have a clear benchmark
to compare all your estimates with.
And every time your estimate is better than no vig IP you have to prove your case to yourself.

Now do I need to break those down to no-vig like the opener or would I be safe to assume NE is a slight +ev

What would be the reason for that assumption?
Why would you ever assume that posted lines have any kind of +EV?

[theangryelf]

You always want to know no vig implied probability (which is in case of -140/+120 would be 56.2/43.8) so you have a clear benchmark
to compare all your estimates with.
And every time your estimate is better than no vig IP you have to prove your case to yourself.



What would be the reason for that assumption?
Why would you ever assume that posted lines have any kind of +EV?

ok, so i should remove the vig on all posted lines...got it. now how should i go about handling line moves? would i work it as i stated in the above post?

[hutennis]

ok, so i should remove the vig on all posted lines...got it. now how should i go about handling line moves? would i work it as i stated in the above post?

Now I'm confused a bit.

What exactly have you stated?
All you do is assuming that ev should appear from somewhere for you.
I keep on asking where should it come from and why and you keep on avoiding these questions.

These questions are really important and unless you start answering or at least discussing them, I have no idea what else is there to say.

[theangryelf]

no i am not assuming ev should appear for me. im asking is what do i do about the line moves, where and how do i factor in push probs.

i am not trying to avoid your questions, i just dont think i a reading you clearly. That is why i started this thread is because i had questions regarding last weeks game. That's all, i was on the right side I would just like to further analyze it from a ev stand point.

I'm trying to better myself as a gambler.

[hutennis]

no i am not assuming ev should appear for me. im asking is what do i do about the line moves, where and how do i factor in push probs.

i am not trying to avoid your questions, i just dont think i a reading you clearly. That is why i started this thread is because i had questions regarding last weeks game. That's all, i was on the right side I would just like to further analyze it from a ev stand point.

I'm trying to better myself as a gambler.

I'm glad you were on a right side last week, but it really means nothing from a ev stand point.
There is no connection there at all, although there is a huge, deeply rooted in us temptation to establish one.

Conversation about EV should not be like

"I won last week (or month, or year) thus I must stumble on some +EV.
Please let me know what is the best way to expand on it"

That would be beyond naive.

Truth about +EV is that it can not be accidental.
You must have a very clear and correct understanding on where your edge is coming from or you don't have one.
If your understanding is clear and correct it will allow you to make predictions about your future results and when those predictions
will start coming true with statistical significance then you know you have +EV.

This is the reason why I keep on asking why you bring EV into a conversation.
What makes you think you have one?
After all, when you look at bookmakers lines, at any point, whether they stalled or moving, you look at something that not supposed to have any +EV in it. By definition.

[Optional]

Ok so I have a +ev question and I've read a bunch of threads and I'm just trying to grasp this concept. So going back to last weeks Den/NE game the line opened up at 7.5 Den -130/ NE +110. Now I know that the game can not push therefore there is no need to factor in push prob. So I know that I have a 50/50 chance of hitting this game so Den would be +100 and NE would be +100. So would it be positive EV if I were to bet NE on the opener or would I first have to remove the vig off the opening lines?

If I remove the vig I would then get Den -118.68 /NE +118.68. If that was the case, would NE still be +EV, I'm a little confused.

Thanks for the help,

Elf

I suspect the confusion here could be coming from the bolded bit above.

You need to calculate your own estimate of each teams probability of winning, not work it out by assuming the bookie odds are correct as the start point.

You cannot calculate EV on a bet without capping what the fair odds should be in your own opinion to start with.

[hutennis]

I suspect the confusion here could be coming from the bolded bit above.

You need to calculate your own estimate of each teams probability of winning, not work it out by assuming the bookie odds are correct as the start point.

Apparently he did, b/c he calls probability of winning/losing 50/50, not 54/46, thus assuming he has an edge.
And that's why I asked the question I asked: Why does he believe the probability is 50/50?