I'm testing a new hockey system and I want to see how much I make/lose by playing Moneyline bets instead of 1X2 odds. I only have the historical 1X2 odds (the highest offered for each choice at the time) and I thought that I possibly could make an fair assumption regarding the offered ML odds for the same game.
I was thinking something along these lines:
Game :Toronto - Pittsburgh
Bookie offered odds: 1: 2.29, X: 3.97, 2: 2.45
Convert the bookie odds into probablities:
1: (1/2.29) = 43.67 %
X: (1/3.97) = 25.19 %
2: (1/2.45) = 40.82 %
Since the odds are from different places, this doesn't add upp to 100 % probablity.
Still, based on the bookies that offered the 1 and 2 choices, converted to moneyline probalities that would be:
Toronto win = 0.4366 / (0.4366 + 0.4082) = 0.5169 = 51.68 %
Pittsburgh win = 1 - 0.5169 = 48.32 %
Convered to moneyline odds:
Toronto win = 1 / 0.5169 = 1,93
Pittsburtgh win = 1 / 0.4832 = 2,07
But, taking to account that the odds doesn't reflect the true probablity by the bookies and to reflect that I won't always will get the best odds possible, I'm thinking about putting a discount on the odds offered.
So, when calculating what odds I get offered I'm thinking about playing the odds calculated as follows:
1.93 * 0.9 = 1.74
2.07 * 0.9 = 1.86
What do you guys think? Am I on the right track? Would you be comfortable with using that kind of odds input when backtesting your systems?
Thanks for your input!
/JayDee