Explain this to me re: series bets

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • No coincidences
    SBR Aristocracy
    • 01-18-10
    • 76300

    #1
    Explain this to me re: series bets
    I've seen quite a few posters tie their money up on a World Series bet at basically even odds.

    The odds for Game 1 were virtually the same.

    So if you wanted to place a SF series bet, why didn't you just take the Giants in Game 1 on the ML instead? That way, you either cash if they win and be done with it or double up at a much better price on the series "live" after the first game is over if they lose.

    I see these types of wagers posted here all the time and I've never understood it. Doesn't make sense to make a series bet to me and tie your cash up when you have a much quicker alternative.
  • The Giant
    SBR Posting Legend
    • 01-21-12
    • 21480

    #2
    What if I liked the Royals?

    How would I be at an advantageous point right now?
    Comment
    • t-wizzle
      BARRELED IN @ SBR!
      • 12-18-09
      • 38099

      #3
      If you liked Giants to win the Series, they were a decent bet because they were the dog. How many games are you going to get them at the price you could get them for the series pre-Game 1??
      Comment
      • No coincidences
        SBR Aristocracy
        • 01-18-10
        • 76300

        #4
        Originally posted by t-wizzle
        If you liked Giants to win the Series, they were a decent bet because they were the dog. How many games are you going to get them at the price you could get them for the series pre-Game 1??
        Weren't the Game 1 and series odds virtually the same?
        Comment
        • No coincidences
          SBR Aristocracy
          • 01-18-10
          • 76300

          #5
          Originally posted by The Giant
          What if I liked the Royals?

          How would I be at an advantageous point right now?
          If you liked the Royals to win the series? Because now you can get them at + odds.

          I was under the impression that the series odds and Game 1 odds were nearly identical -- at least going by the posts I saw yesterday.
          Comment
          • t-wizzle
            BARRELED IN @ SBR!
            • 12-18-09
            • 38099

            #6
            Originally posted by No coincidences
            Weren't the Game 1 and series odds virtually the same?
            Not quite sure. Giants were a slight fave in Game 1. I thought they were like +115 for the Series but correct me if I'm wrong.
            Comment
            • Big Bear
              SBR Aristocracy
              • 11-01-11
              • 43253

              #7
              Originally posted by No coincidences
              I've seen quite a few posters tie their money up on a World Series bet at basically even odds.

              The odds for Game 1 were virtually the same.

              So if you wanted to place a SF series bet, why didn't you just take the Giants in Game 1 on the ML instead? That way, you either cash if they win and be done with it or double up at a much better price on the series "live" after the first game is over if they lose.

              I see these types of wagers posted here all the time and I've never understood it. Doesn't make sense to make a series bet to me and tie your cash up when you have a much quicker alternative.
              Only way I see betting on the series being justified is if you are betting a large amount of money and you just don't want to lose your money b/c of bad pitching performance or one costly error.

              But yeah I am not sure why you wouldn't just wait and bet the series after Bumgarner shoves it up your ass if you liked Kansas City. Royals have good numbers against Peavy and the Royals up until last night had avoided facing ace pitchers except for Jon Lester who also shoved it up the Royals ass only to watch his bullpen crumble.

              Good point though bc if there is any weakness on the Giants it is lack of quality depth In the pitching rotation it really drops off the table after bum fukk
              Comment
              • The Giant
                SBR Posting Legend
                • 01-21-12
                • 21480

                #8
                Got it. I thought he was implying either way, since it was basically a pick'em game.

                I thought the Giants even closed a favorite.
                Comment
                • Seto
                  SBR Posting Legend
                  • 12-16-11
                  • 12906

                  #9
                  Because in some cases you're not sure whether a team will win a particular game or not but think they'll prevail over time.

                  It's like saying that you'd rather take a tennis player to win the first set, this way if he wins the first set you're done with it and if not you can get the guy at much better odds down a set.

                  One game can always be decided by dumb things, especially in certain sports (bad call by a ref, a closer blowing the game, a player choking up 5-1 in a set...), but giving yourself the option for the player/team to come back is a good thing in some cases.
                  Comment
                  • Big Bear
                    SBR Aristocracy
                    • 11-01-11
                    • 43253

                    #10
                    Another reason I see Giants series bet justified is probably nobody would be surprised is Kansas City gets lucky and wins 1 baseball game In this World Series but it seems impossible or unimaginable to hear
                    kansas city royals and World Series champion in same sentence.
                    Comment
                    • The Giant
                      SBR Posting Legend
                      • 01-21-12
                      • 21480

                      #11
                      It seems like no matter when you make a series bet, you're not getting the true odds that you should.

                      That's on either side, at any point.
                      Comment
                      • Big Bear
                        SBR Aristocracy
                        • 11-01-11
                        • 43253

                        #12
                        Originally posted by The Giant
                        It seems like no matter when you make a series bet, you're not getting the true odds that you should.

                        That's on either side, at any point.
                        Aint that the truth.

                        If they are going to make one -200 the other team should +200 in my opinion.

                        Sucks when u see one team is -200 and the dog is only +145
                        Comment
                        • No coincidences
                          SBR Aristocracy
                          • 01-18-10
                          • 76300

                          #13
                          Originally posted by Seto
                          Because in some cases you're not sure whether a team will win a particular game or not but think they'll prevail over time.

                          It's like saying that you'd rather take a tennis player to win the first set, this way if he wins the first set you're done with it and if not you can get the guy at much better odds down a set.

                          One game can always be decided by dumb things, especially in certain sports (bad call by a ref, a closer blowing the game, a player choking up 5-1 in a set...), but giving yourself the option for the player/team to come back is a good thing in some cases.
                          Let's say you liked the Royals. You pass on the series bet and go with them in Game 1 instead for a unit (again, the key here is both Game 1 and series prices were virtually identical). They lose. Shouldn't you just double up at the current series price now that they're +175?
                          Comment
                          • Seto
                            SBR Posting Legend
                            • 12-16-11
                            • 12906

                            #14
                            Originally posted by The Giant
                            It seems like no matter when you make a series bet, you're not getting the true odds that you should.

                            That's on either side, at any point.
                            Well you obviously are since before the series, there's a certain % chance each team will win, and if you think that % if better than the odds the side has value... Now obviously you don't always bet everything you think has "value" otherwise you're there making 50 bets a day, but a series bet is no different than any other bet.

                            One type of bet where in my mind you're typically not getting the odds you should is futures. Often times you actually end up getting better odds betting a team/player in each round and stacking the bets up than betting a future. A series bet is much more complex as you can lose a game without losing the series. Also a series bet is typically like -105/-105 whereas futures with tons of options typically have a higher "implied vig" if you get what I mean.
                            Comment
                            • No coincidences
                              SBR Aristocracy
                              • 01-18-10
                              • 76300

                              #15
                              Originally posted by The Giant
                              It seems like no matter when you make a series bet, you're not getting the true odds that you should.

                              That's on either side, at any point.
                              That's kind of what I'm saying. Why not either just make the Game 1 bet and either A) win and move on, or B) lose and double up at what you would consider a much more "vulnerable" series price at that point? I've just never understood betting a series beforehand if the odds make it a virtual toss-up.
                              Comment
                              • The Giant
                                SBR Posting Legend
                                • 01-21-12
                                • 21480

                                #16
                                Originally posted by No coincidences
                                Let's say you liked the Royals. You pass on the series bet and go with them in Game 1 instead for a unit (again, the key here is both Game 1 and series prices were virtually identical). They lose. Shouldn't you just double up at the current series price now that they're +175?
                                If it was +200, sure, but at +175 you're still getting shortchanged.
                                Comment
                                • MickeyMan
                                  SBR Hall of Famer
                                  • 10-20-09
                                  • 5091

                                  #17
                                  Originally posted by No coincidences
                                  That's kind of what I'm saying. Why not either just make the Game 1 bet and either A) win and move on, or B) lose and double up at what you would consider a much more "vulnerable" series price at that point? I've just never understood betting a series beforehand if the odds make it a virtual toss-up.
                                  The one thing with doing this is you may either wind up being in for more than initially planned or not winning as much as you wanted.

                                  Say if you like a team to win a series at +100 and want to win one unit that's your bet. If you bet them at say the same odds (+100) for game one for a unit and they lose, then you are all of a sudden invested at least two units just to break even on the second game.

                                  On the other side, if you only go .5 units on game 1 to reduce risk and it wins you are only up .5 units. If you would have put just the initial one unit bet on the series price you know exactly what you are risking/chance to win.
                                  Comment
                                  • The Giant
                                    SBR Posting Legend
                                    • 01-21-12
                                    • 21480

                                    #18
                                    Originally posted by No coincidences
                                    That's kind of what I'm saying. Why not either just make the Game 1 bet and either A) win and move on, or B) lose and double up at what you would consider a much more "vulnerable" series price at that point? I've just never understood betting a series beforehand if the odds make it a virtual toss-up.
                                    I get what you're saying, about wanting to get it over with as soon as possible, but...

                                    If I put a unit on the Royals for game one, they lose, I'm at -1.

                                    And then, I'm having to expose more of my bankroll moving forward on the series price. Suddenly I'm risking a second unit, and I'm not really getting fair market value at +175.

                                    Of course, if the Royals would've won game one and then lost the series, I get screwed in reverse if I only bet the series.
                                    Comment
                                    • No coincidences
                                      SBR Aristocracy
                                      • 01-18-10
                                      • 76300

                                      #19
                                      Originally posted by The Giant
                                      I get what you're saying, about wanting to get it over with as soon as possible, but...

                                      If I put a unit on the Royals for game one, they lose, I'm at -1.

                                      And then, I'm having to expose more of my bankroll moving forward on the series price. Suddenly I'm risking a second unit, and I'm not really getting fair market value at +175.

                                      Of course, if the Royals would've won game one and then lost the series, I get screwed in reverse if I only bet the series.
                                      You don't think +175 is fair market value at this point?

                                      I'm actually surprised it's that high. Typically, series lines don't move much more than 50 cents after Game 1. I think the current series line is a blow to those who think the Royals will come back and win this series. Would definitely make me hesitate to back the Royals if I liked them before the series started.
                                      Comment
                                      • Seto
                                        SBR Posting Legend
                                        • 12-16-11
                                        • 12906

                                        #20
                                        Originally posted by No coincidences
                                        Let's say you liked the Royals. You pass on the series bet and go with them in Game 1 instead for a unit (again, the key here is both Game 1 and series prices were virtually identical). They lose. Shouldn't you just double up at the current series price now that they're +175?
                                        Well for one after game 1 the situation has changed. You could have changed your mind on the series and not want to make that bet anymore. Also you can risk losing 2 stakes instead of 1. Both are really entirely separate bets (your game 1 bet and your "chase" series bet). Betting the series before or after game 1 is a completely different thing.


                                        Anyone not wanting to waste their time should not read the middle part of my post. lol. just move on to the last sentence.



                                        But focusing on the "math" of it all, ie supposing that the books are completely right and that their odds represent each team's chance of winning:
                                        Game 1: Giants -109/Royals -101 (pinny closer)
                                        Series before game 1: Royals -114/Giants +103 (i seem to remember that was it, at least at one point, at pinny)
                                        Series now: Giants -190/Royals +171 (pinny)
                                        SUPPOSED series odds if the Royals had won game 1: Royals -200/Giants +180 (hope you guys find this fair enough considering Royals were a slight fave before the series, they would be slightly more favoured than the Giants being up a game, especially it being a game they were very slight underdogs for)

                                        GAMBLER 1: guy bets Royals series 1.14/1

                                        GAMBLER 2: guy bets Royals game 1 1.01/1. If it loses, bets Royals series 1/1.71



                                        SCENARIO 1 (49.1% chance of happening): Royals win game 1.

                                        GAMBLER 1: Has Royals series 1.14/1. Has a 65.1% chance of winning according to the odds.

                                        GAMBLER 2: Has won 1 unit. (ie, 100% chance of winning)


                                        SCENARIO 2 (50.9% chance of happening): Giants win game 1.

                                        GAMBLER 1: Has Royals series 1.14/1. Has a 36% chance of winning according to the odds.

                                        GAMBLER 2: Has lost 1.01 unit (ie 100% chance of losing that unit). Now risks 1 unit to win 1.71 units on Royals +171 and has a 36% chance of winning. So in total, the bet equates to risking 2.01 units to win 0.7 units in the case where the Royals lose game 1.



                                        So all in all:
                                        GAMBLER 1: 49.1%*65.1%+50.9%*36% = 50.3% chance of winning his 1 unit. (ie 49.7% chance of losing 1.14 units.)

                                        GAMBLER 2: 50.9%*100% = 50.9% chance of winning 1 unit.
                                        49.1%*36% = 17.7% chance of winning 0.7 units
                                        (ie 31.4% chance of losing 2.01 units)







                                        So all in all, it gives you a better chance to win but you're risking losing more. But that's just if you do your 2 bets robotically. The reality of it is that both bets are separate and one should always reevaluate their position after game 1 before "chasing" on the series in my mind.
                                        Comment
                                        • No coincidences
                                          SBR Aristocracy
                                          • 01-18-10
                                          • 76300

                                          #21
                                          Originally posted by Seto
                                          So all in all, it gives you a better chance to win but you're risking losing more. But that's just if you do your 2 bets robotically. The reality of it is that both bets are separate and one should always reevaluate their position after game 1 before "chasing" on the series in my mind.
                                          Even more of a reason to avoid series bets beforehand altogether if it's a "toss up" line.

                                          Either take the team you like in Game 1 or reassess and take your series position before Game 2 depending on what you saw in the opener. At least that's the way I look at it.

                                          Good stuff, Seto.
                                          Comment
                                          • Seto
                                            SBR Posting Legend
                                            • 12-16-11
                                            • 12906

                                            #22
                                            Originally posted by No coincidences
                                            Even more of a reason to avoid series bets beforehand altogether if it's a "toss up" line.

                                            Either take the team you like in Game 1 or reassess and take your series position before Game 2 depending on what you saw in the opener. At least that's the way I look at it.

                                            Good stuff, Seto.
                                            By laying off completely you risk the line becoming basically unbettable if the team wins game 1.
                                            By taking them in game 1 then "chasing" you risk putting yourself in a position where you have less to win and more to lose than the guy who just has a series bet pending from before the series (despite getting it at a better price, because make no mistake it's better to have a team -114 than have them +171 AND have already lost a bet, which in this case basically equates to having Royals series -287 rather than +171.)


                                            It just really boils down to:

                                            1) Whether you think game 1 is a pivotal game in the series
                                            2) Whether you will feel comfortable with your team in the lead in the series
                                            3) Whether you think they can come back from a deficit

                                            Both are really different things to me. I remember for instance in the 2012 Finals I was supremely confident Miami would win but wasn't sure which game in OKC they were taking. I was just sure they would never lose 4 of 7 to that Thunder team.

                                            However when you're dealing with a shithead team like the Atlanta Hawks, you're probably better off just taking them for game 1. lol.
                                            Comment
                                            • Pauulzcappin
                                              SBR Posting Legend
                                              • 04-23-10
                                              • 20295

                                              #23
                                              Originally posted by Seto

                                              However when you're dealing with a shithead team like the Atlanta Hawks, you're probably better off just taking them for game 1. lol.
                                              I read the whole thread but this comment really caught my eyes. i fukking hate the hawks.
                                              Comment
                                              • Seto
                                                SBR Posting Legend
                                                • 12-16-11
                                                • 12906

                                                #24
                                                Originally posted by Pauulzcappin
                                                I read the whole thread but this comment really caught my eyes. i fukking hate the hawks.
                                                Me too. But at least with them I know they're shitheads and never risk anything big on them even when I like them a lot.

                                                The Wizards somehow convinced me they had dropped the schizo tag after that series win over the Bulls. Can't believe I risked that much money on them v the Pacers. I mean they lost a couple close games but there's a reason why and regardless it's probably the worst bet I've ever made and it completely fukked up my playoffs.
                                                Comment
                                                • Pauulzcappin
                                                  SBR Posting Legend
                                                  • 04-23-10
                                                  • 20295

                                                  #25
                                                  Originally posted by Seto
                                                  Me too. But at least with them I know they're shitheads and never risk anything big on them even when I like them a lot.

                                                  The Wizards somehow convinced me they had dropped the schizo tag after that series win over the Bulls. Can't believe I risked that much money on them v the Pacers. I mean they lost a couple close games but there's a reason why and regardless it's probably the worst bet I've ever made and it completely fukked up my playoffs.
                                                  holy shit that wizards series. please.................................. .........................

                                                  anyway we are less than a week way

                                                  fukking pumped
                                                  Comment
                                                  Search
                                                  Collapse
                                                  SBR Contests
                                                  Collapse
                                                  Top-Rated US Sportsbooks
                                                  Collapse
                                                  Working...