[statnerds]

I failed to realize until about midway through the 1st Half that my Chi +10.5/51.5 tease I had with my local meant he had Chi at +3.5.

At that point it seemed to me that I should have bet Chi +3.5 for a few hundred and GB 3 offshore for a few hundred. If the final lands on the favorite winning by 3 ~10% of the time with a line of 3, is it long term profitable for me to take advantage of his line errors? Second time he did this on a Monday Night Game.

Or would I better off selling that half point and taking the fave 3.5 +120 or whatever and Arbing the bets?

Did it on Sunday when he gave me TB +3.5, which I took, and then bet Pit at 3.5 +130 offshore.

Which strategy supplies me the best avenue to maximize profit?

[wrongturn]

the non-hedging version, because when you hedge you sacrifice some long term profit for stability. but personally i would also hedge because i want to sleep tight.

[statnerds]

I think I did the math right:

If I used the Arb version, and I got +125 or better, it would make the better choice long term. say 100 bets at $200/play and profits of $14.29/play (+125) and $19.05/play (+130), profit would be at least $1,429.

Assuming same $200/play, and a perfectly historic distribution over 100 plays, 45 favorites, 45 dogs and 10 pushes, profit would be $200.

Sound right?

[djiddish98]

Not sure I quite follow.

If you bet Bears +3.5 at -110 only, then A) you won't push and B) you won't have a 50/50 split between winning and losing, since it's an off number. It'll skew more towards the winning side.

[Shonner]

I failed to realize until about midway through the 1st Half that my Chi +10.5/51.5 tease I had with my local meant he had Chi at +3.5.

At that point it seemed to me that I should have bet Chi +3.5 for a few hundred and GB 3 offshore for a few hundred. If the final lands on the favorite winning by 3 ~10% of the time with a line of 3, is it long term profitable for me to take advantage of his line errors? Second time he did this on a Monday Night Game.

Or would I better off selling that half point and taking the fave 3.5 +120 or whatever and Arbing the bets?

Did it on Sunday when he gave me TB +3.5, which I took, and then bet Pit at 3.5 +130 offshore.

Which strategy supplies me the best avenue to maximize profit?

The SBR 1/2 point calculator or Arbitrage calculation handles these types of situatoins

[sharpcat]

I think I did the math right:

If I used the Arb version, and I got +125 or better, it would make the better choice long term. say 100 bets at $200/play and profits of $14.29/play (+125) and $19.05/play (+130), profit would be at least $1,429.

Assuming same $200/play, and a perfectly historic distribution over 100 plays, 45 favorites, 45 dogs and 10 pushes, profit would be $200.

Sound right?

Half middle has an +EV of $1

+3.5 has a +EV of $5.50

Long term +3.5 is far more valuable.

[Shonner]

I failed to realize until about midway through the 1st Half that my Chi +10.5/51.5 tease I had with my local meant he had Chi at +3.5.

At that point it seemed to me that I should have bet Chi +3.5 for a few hundred and GB 3 offshore for a few hundred. If the final lands on the favorite winning by 3 ~10% of the time with a line of 3, is it long term profitable for me to take advantage of his line errors? Second time he did this on a Monday Night Game.

Or would I better off selling that half point and taking the fave 3.5 +120 or whatever and Arbing the bets?

Did it on Sunday when he gave me TB +3.5, which I took, and then bet Pit at 3.5 +130 offshore.

Which strategy supplies me the best avenue to maximize profit?

What book allows you to sell a half point (to go from -3 to -3.5)???

If the true market value was GB -3 your Chi play would have an EV of +4.8%

If you got GB at -3.5 +120 the EV would be -.77% (Again assuming -3, -110 was the true efficient market value)

At the end of the day, from an EV standpoint, you were correct in not betting the Packers. Even in cases where you lock in profit they typically have less EV than if you took on the risk. Risk isn't bad, it's about EV.

Guys correct me if I am wrong here.

[donjuan]

Shonner,

Expected growth should be the focus over expected value (and perhaps expected utility should be the ultimate focus). Ganchrow has an excellent post about EG vs. EV.

[DeluxeLiner]

I would just pound his bad line...that half a point is huge in pro foots. The arbing situation is much more complicated and unless you are betting a ton and really know what you are doing I wouldn't get fancy (especially when dealing with a local)

[u21c3f6]

Shonner,

Expected growth should be the focus over expected value (and perhaps expected utility should be the ultimate focus). Ganchrow has an excellent post about EG vs. EV.

+1

Other than running into limits and other considerations like getting booted, the hedge is (almost) always going to be better for your long-term bankroll (handled properly of course). And this is not to suggest that you just put on random hedges, you must also be selective and have a valid reason for the hedges you set-up.

This is one of those mantras that I see over and over in postings that one should only bet the +EV side which then gets repeated over and over again as if it is an absolute truth. It is not.

Do not just accept anything that is written on a message board (not even what I write). Do the work and test it but also think outside the box. There are many different ways to set-up hedges. Most think of the direct arb way of setting-up hedges but there are many more variations available that you can experiment with to see if you can find an edge.

Let me add the fact that I am more concerned on the comparison of the odds in the different markets than I am of who or what is going to win! The other fact is, because I know I am going to hedge going in, I can put a much larger % of my bankroll to work so that even if my overall EV is diminished by the hedge, it will still be significantly higher than the EV of the stand alone wager which would only allow a much smaller % of bankroll to be at risk. Do the math and try it for yourself.

Joe.

[wrongturn]

Joe, of course, if he goes all-in or half all-in whatever, then definitely hedge. that is no brainier. If he bets his normal 1 unit, I wound think non-hedge is better long term-wise.

[u21c3f6]

Joe, of course, if he goes all-in or half all-in whatever, then definitely hedge. that is no brainier. If he bets his normal 1 unit, I wound think non-hedge is better long term-wise.

Agreed.

But with the situation described above, the hedge/arb was the superior choice to a stand-alone wager which I will describe in my next post.

Joe.

[u21c3f6]

What book allows you to sell a half point (to go from -3 to -3.5)???

If the true market value was GB -3 your Chi play would have an EV of +4.8%

If you got GB at -3.5 +120 the EV would be -.77% (Again assuming -3, -110 was the true efficient market value)

At the end of the day, from an EV standpoint, you were correct in not betting the Packers. Even in cases where you lock in profit they typically have less EV than if you took on the risk. Risk isn't bad, it's about EV.

Guys correct me if I am wrong here.

Be careful using EV to make decisions this way because it can blind you to other wagering possibilities.

Let's assume:

$1,000 bankroll
Chi +3.5 -110
GB -3.5 +120 (though +125 was possible as I actually averaged -127 on Chi +3.5 before the game (-EV ))

Let's further assume Chi +3.5 has a 55% win rate resulting in a 5% +EV (a little more generous than your +4.8%)

Now, full-Kelly for -110 with a 55% win rate is 5.5% of bankroll or a $55 wager. $55 * 5% advantage means that this wager has a +EV of: $2.75.

If we arb (I try to use the term arb for those situations where you wager both sides simultaneously for a guaranteed profit as opposed to the term hedge which can and usually carries risk), what % of bankroll can we use? Since it is a guaranteed profit, the answer is 100%!

For example you can wager $535 to win $486.36 on -110 and $464.26 to win $557.11 on +120 for a guaranteed profit of $22.10/22.11 regardless of which side wins. This is far in excess of the $2.75 EV you could win even wagering full-Kelly (and no one should ever wager more than full-Kelly IMO if you are serious about trying to make consistent profits).

If you managed to get +125 on GB -3.5 the wagers would have been approx:

$540 to win 490.91 on -110 and 458.18 to win 572.73 on +125 for a guaranteed profit of $32.73, and again, much higher than the EV of the stand-alone advantage side.

This one was easy to see because of the guaranteed profit. It is trickier when there is not a guaranteed profit (more of what I describe as a hedge) and it is hidden in the %'s of the currently available and/or future wagers.

Joe.

[Shonner]

+1

Other than running into limits and other considerations like getting booted, the hedge is (almost) always going to be better for your long-term bankroll (handled properly of course). And this is not to suggest that you just put on random hedges, you must also be selective and have a valid reason for the hedges you set-up.

This is one of those mantras that I see over and over in postings that one should only bet the +EV side which then gets repeated over and over again as if it is an absolute truth. It is not.

Do not just accept anything that is written on a message board (not even what I write). Do the work and test it but also think outside the box. There are many different ways to set-up hedges. Most think of the direct arb way of setting-up hedges but there are many more variations available that you can experiment with to see if you can find an edge.

Let me add the fact that I am more concerned on the comparison of the odds in the different markets than I am of who or what is going to win! The other fact is, because I know I am going to hedge going in, I can put a much larger % of my bankroll to work so that even if my overall EV is diminished by the hedge, it will still be significantly higher than the EV of the stand alone wager which would only allow a much smaller % of bankroll to be at risk. Do the math and try it for yourself.

Joe.

You can anaylze it forever bottom line is that if you have a +EV bet and you add in -EV bets to hedge you will be less profitable in the long term. Its math.

[Shonner]

Joe I see your point on the bankroll and if you are betting small u r right but books don't typically take 3k prop wagers

[statnerds]

thanks for all the insight gentlemen. going to read through this thread again slowly.

for now, sorry I forgot to mention it was 5Dimes. I called him on Sunday, and he rattles off the lines and I guess he gets lots of homer action on the Steelers cause he had at it 3.5. 5Dimes for the Steelers to be 3.5 was +130.

and think it was Sharpcat, with a sharp post, explaining I should just take his +3.5 bad line every time as it will turn that ~10% of pushes into wins. Now that I sit here thinking off it, how much do books charge to move off 3, 25 cents?

if you guys feel like giving even more input of how to crush my local, I just found out about a week ago he doesn't shade his Totals in MLB. I nearly shit a brick when my buddy told me that. so again,

1. Just take the shaded side by Pinny closer

or

2. Take the shaded side with him and Arb the other side offshore?

EX: the Sox/Sox Total is 9 Un 25. Bet under with local at -110 and bet Over offshore at +115. chump change cause I would keep it at $50/play (5Dimes limits my reduced) but 3 or 4 a night over the course of 6 months would add up.

[Shonner]

thanks for all the insight gentlemen. going to read through this thread again slowly.

for now, sorry I forgot to mention it was 5Dimes. I called him on Sunday, and he rattles off the lines and I guess he gets lots of homer action on the Steelers cause he had at it 3.5. 5Dimes for the Steelers to be 3.5 was +130.

and think it was Sharpcat, with a sharp post, explaining I should just take his +3.5 bad line every time as it will turn that ~10% of pushes into wins. Now that I sit here thinking off it, how much do books charge to move off 3, 25 cents?

if you guys feel like giving even more input of how to crush my local, I just found out about a week ago he doesn't shade his Totals in MLB. I nearly shit a brick when my buddy told me that. so again,

1. Just take the shaded side by Pinny closer

or

2. Take the shaded side with him and Arb the other side offshore?

EX: the Sox/Sox Total is 9 Un 25. Bet under with local at -110 and bet Over offshore at +115. chump change cause I would keep it at $50/play (5Dimes limits my reduced) but 3 or 4 a night over the course of 6 months would add up.

Hey bud, can you help me out? What book allows you to sell a half point (to go from -3 to -3.5)???

[statnerds]

Hey bud, can you help me out? What book allows you to sell a half point (to go from -3 to -3.5)???

5Dimes.

[donjuan]

What are your local's max bets and what is your bankroll?

[NY Playa]

never tease....

[NY Playa]

no tease, no tease...cant say enough.

[donjuan]

no tease, no tease...cant say enough.

Nobody is talking about teasing. But, of course, you are completely wrong.

[sharpcat]

Be careful using EV to make decisions this way because it can blind you to other wagering possibilities.

Let's assume:

$1,000 bankroll
Chi +3.5 -110
GB -3.5 +120 (though +125 was possible as I actually averaged -127 on Chi +3.5 before the game (-EV ))

Let's further assume Chi +3.5 has a 55% win rate resulting in a 5% +EV (a little more generous than your +4.8%)

Now, full-Kelly for -110 with a 55% win rate is 5.5% of bankroll or a $55 wager. $55 * 5% advantage means that this wager has a +EV of: $2.75.

If we arb (I try to use the term arb for those situations where you wager both sides simultaneously for a guaranteed profit as opposed to the term hedge which can and usually carries risk), what % of bankroll can we use? Since it is a guaranteed profit, the answer is 100%!

For example you can wager $535 to win $486.36 on -110 and $464.26 to win $557.11 on +120 for a guaranteed profit of $22.10/22.11 regardless of which side wins. This is far in excess of the $2.75 EV you could win even wagering full-Kelly (and no one should ever wager more than full-Kelly IMO if you are serious about trying to make consistent profits).

If you managed to get +125 on GB -3.5 the wagers would have been approx:

$540 to win 490.91 on -110 and 458.18 to win 572.73 on +125 for a guaranteed profit of $32.73, and again, much higher than the EV of the stand-alone advantage side.

This one was easy to see because of the guaranteed profit. It is trickier when there is not a guaranteed profit (more of what I describe as a hedge) and it is hidden in the %'s of the currently available and/or future wagers.

Joe.

Although I do not disagree that there are many times where you will find more value in an arb play I have 2 major problems with this scenario.

A) since we are assuming that the player only has a $1,000 bankroll on a 15 game NFL card the player would be tying up his entire bankroll on 1 play whereas he would only be tying up 5% of his bankroll by taking the weak number therefore allowing him to exploit numerous +EV plays with his bankroll likely ultimately exceeding the value he would gain from the scalp. If the winning scalp play does not clear before the next round of games he likely would miss out on 14 opportunities.

B) again assuming that the players bankroll is $1,000 the player would be required to have enough funds in each book in order to fully capitalize on the scalp.

[statnerds]

What are your local's max bets and what is your bankroll?

guess that answers it. thank you.

He has taken a $1,000 before. bet gets too big for him, he calls it off to a guy higher on the food chain.

I would want to avoid getting shut-off though. If I hit him for $500/play for a few months, he will either shut me off or figure out he should be shading his Totals. or if my timing is bad and I happen to start and get bit by some variance, my BR would be gone.

I would much rather win at $50 or $100/play over the course of years. I am assuming that just betting the shaded side with him would prove the most profitable route. and by your response, I also assume it will be a long term winner.

so basically a -120 has implied prob of 54.55%, making my expected long term return over 2%?

[u21c3f6]

Although I do not disagree that there are many times where you will find more value in an arb play I have 2 major problems with this scenario.

A) since we are assuming that the player only has a $1,000 bankroll on a 15 game NFL card the player would be tying up his entire bankroll on 1 play whereas he would only be tying up 5% of his bankroll by taking the weak number therefore allowing him to exploit numerous +EV plays with his bankroll likely ultimately exceeding the value he would gain from the scalp. If the winning scalp play does not clear before the next round of games he likely would miss out on 14 opportunities.

B) again assuming that the players bankroll is $1,000 the player would be required to have enough funds in each book in order to fully capitalize on the scalp.

Unfortunately, trying to discuss every possibility on a message board is not realistic when a full discussion of most topics asked on this forum would take at least a small book.

As to point A), this was a Monday Night football game, so in my case, this was the only game I had action on and therefore I could use my entire bankroll if I had the above opportunity available to me. As to point B), IMO, you really only need your local and an exchange or any other venue where you can get “better’ pricing.

What I was trying to convey was a concept and not necessarily that it had to be done this one and only way. I keep reading on this forum that you should never bet the –EV side and/or not arb/hedge etc and I was trying to show that one would be missing opportunities to increase their profits if they ignored other possibilities.

Let me try another example that may be more palatable (again, this is an easy one to find because there is an arb opportunity which one can clearly see).

Same assumptions:

$1,000 bankroll
Chi +3.5 -110
GB -3.5 +120

Let's further assume Chi +3.5 has a 55% win rate resulting in a 5% +EV
Full-Kelly is $55 and that is what you want to risk. Now how much of your bankroll is available to put on your arb/hedge is of course determined by whether or not you have or plan to have some of your bankroll tied up with other wagers. I personally try to concentrate more on the better opportunities than to “spread” it around but to each their own.

First, let’s assume that you will use your entire bankroll:

You could wager $570 at -110 to win $518.18 and $429.17 at +120 to win $515. The net result of this hedge is that you still have $55 at risk but instead of only winning $50 ($55 at -110) if you hit, you win $89.01! You have essentially converted a -110 wager into a +162 wager! I am sure that everyone can see that if you got +162 on all of your -110 wagers that you would have no choice but to be profitable long-term.

Now let’s look at using less than full bankroll:

½ bankroll:

Wager $300 at -110 to win $272.73 and $204.17 at +120 to win $245. Same $55 at risk but now you would win $68.56 instead of $50 for odds of +125.

¼ bankroll:

Wager $160 at -110 to win $145.45 and $87.50 at +120 to win $105. Same $55 at risk but now you would win $57.95 instead of $50 for odds of +105.

Bottom line is that by creating the hedge, you are actually increasing the odds in your favor. IMO, it is more advantageous to concentrate on those opportunities that afford you the best return than to spread out your wagers. Sometimes to get a better return however, you have to wager on the "–EV" side.

There really is so much more that can go into this discussion but I will stop here. Hopefully there will be those that can use this info to at least be more aware of the possibilities than to just accept that the answer to any topic is always no or don't.

Joe.

[wrongturn]

Betting large sum with locals and from US present many problems that others don't have. The cost of moving money around and the potential to get stiffed by locals is significant. These factors can also affect on what strategy to use, not just pure math.

[olddirtyfighter]

Opened my eyes u21c3f6 - thnx

[That Foreign Guy]

You can anaylze it forever bottom line is that if you have a +EV bet and you add in -EV bets to hedge you will be less profitable in the long term. Its math.

Less % profit but more $ profit. I know which one I like more.

[statnerds]

I tracked every shaded MLB Total in Sept, according to closers either at Pinny, or what DB had the Pinny closer at.

shaded totals went 105-81. too small of a sample but it is encouraging that even at just $50/game, looking at a $800 profit. By no means making me rich, but would probably keep me from getting shutoff over the course of 6 months.

[u21c3f6]

Bump.

Joe.