In Defense of Sportsbook.com

ShamsWoof10 · 10-17-07, 12:54 AM

Originally posted by Wheell

I've been thinking about this for a while. There are a lot of different kinds of books and each have their own codes of honor and their own advantages and disadvantages.

A books:

Pinnacle: Low vig, high limits. Very useful for arbers. The main disadvantage of playing at pinnacle is you are probably going to lose unless you either play in the shallow pools ($50 dollar limit soccer), or are very good. It has been said that pinnacle isa sportsbetting operation masquerading as a sportsbook. That is half right. They are a sportsbetting operation but also a Walmart clone. Pinnacle tries to be as honorable as possible. If you take a shot at pinnacle they might offer you a choice: Keep the bet or keep your account (if you choose the bet, after it finishes your account gets transfered out to the location of your choice). I chose to keep the account when it was my turn after I had taken a line put up in error. Pinnacle won't kick out steam players or arbers as they don't harm pinnacles business model. Part of that is because pinnacle IS the market in most sports, so any steam hits pinnacle first, ergo the arbers who pick off other books are simply helping pinnacle get out from under a bad position. If you play with Pinnacle you should know what to expect: Safety, low vigs, sharp lines.

TheGreek: Chase steam here and you get booted. The Greek would really prefer to take all bets via phone but that isn't feasible and they know it. The Greek has also been known to cancel bad lines somewhat aggressively, but do so before the game in question comes to pass. They can offer opinionated lines and do offer high limits when you call in, so they have their place in the world. Also, they too are safe.

CRIS and company: Similar to the Greek. They too are aggressive about canceling lines put up in error, but they have a code of honor that you can generally respect. They nickel and dime you to death if you are a small player, but that is their way of saying that you aren't worth their time.

WSEX: If you are sharp expect to get limit capped and sent to Matchbook. Such is life. Your money is safe. Oh, they too hate steam chasers.

Matchbook: They won't be the wave of the future until either they or one of their clients starts putting up sharp lines with decent limits well in advace of the games. Sometimes you want a dime on Penn @ Yale on Tuesday when the game is Friday. Again, your money is safe.

These books all deal with shot takers in their own way, and we can agree they are reasonably fair. They are A books and you can have a safe and happy life just playing at them. However, if you are in this business for money, and you are in this business for money, aren't you? If you are in this business for money you probably do not want to limit yourself to just these A books. Why should you play at a place where your money isn't 100% safe?

Value. Advantage players seek out value. Bonuses? Promotions? GREAT! Soft lines? Slow moving lines? Books that have misvalued props for 4 figure limits? And that allow you to parlay them? WONDERFUL!

Books that allow you to Parlay -27.5 and over 41? And then allow to parlay +27.5 and under 41? SIGN ME UP!

There are correlated parlays and then there are correlated parlays. If you were playing multiples of these you knew what you were doing. It is one thing to bet the home team and the under in a baseball game. There is covariance that can turn two good lines into one positive ev bet. It is another thing to lay under 41 and +27.5. Let's not put our head in the sand and pretend that Sportsbook.com is going to retroactively cancel -1 parlayed with over 60. We may never find out the entire story and sportsbook.com is almost certainly deserving of a D- rating, but I'm betting a bunch of shot takers just got kicked in the balls.

If I am conflating shot takers with advantage players, well, the line is thin and it is a matter of personal honor. Did anyone really cry for the guy in the movie Casino who got the hammer to his right hand? I mean, it isn't like sportsbook.com could give these players the choice.

D- books have their place in the world. They offer 10% deposit bonuses and +7.5 when the rest of the world is at 7. They do not offer you a gunslingers mentality and a sense of fairness. Deal with it. The players that got nailed lost the one real bet they made: That they would get away with it.

They didn't get away with it. Now they have one Hell of a bad beat story. So be it. We all have bad beat stories. Move on.

P.S. I know that I am taking the role of Rush Limbaugh at the Democratic Convention. I also know that SBR is the ACLU for players (an evenhanded ACLU, but I digress). Flame on, but if we are in this for money (and we are in this for money), then sportsbook.com has their place in the world. Different strokes to move the world.

I don't know how long it took you to write that but I enjoyed reading it.. GOOD POST and well thought out..

Wheell · 10-17-07, 12:59 AM

Shams: Thank you, now get prepared for an avalanche of righteous indignation against the above post.

ShamsWoof10 · 10-17-07, 01:08 AM

Originally posted by Wheell

Shams: Thank you, now get prepared for an avalanche of righteous indignation against the above post.

Oh I know... I agree about the shot takers part but do you know anything about the below in bold..? I can't get an answer from anyone.. I admit I don't read through all the T & A and when I do I will likely forget important details.. Not many in this world will admit their faults and try and bullsh*t their way around it like a college kid missing an exam because he f*cked around the night before and over slept... By the way anytime the come back is "yeah but they took it"... knows they are wrong that's why they lean on that statement... They take bad lines too but that's ok...

This is all their rules said as late as 9/15/07:

Parlay or Multiple Betting
No parlay wagers can be accepted where individual wagers are 'connected' , 'dependant' or 'correlated'. For example, one wager in your parlay is for Sampras to beat Agassi in the 4th round of Wimbledon and the second or additional part of the parlay is for Sampras to win the overall Wimbledon title. The match forms part of the overall tournament and is therefore 'correlated'. In the same way, you cannot parlay the total of the first half of a football game with the total of the game line itself, as the two are 'dependent'.

Dark Horse · 10-17-07, 01:15 AM

If I may summarize. Would this kind of cover the load? "You're in it for the money and you know it! So why sweat the games if you can sweat the payouts?"

Wheell · 10-17-07, 01:18 AM

Shams: (Taken from my response to you in another thread)

Shams: Sampras to win in the 4th is necessary but not sufficient for him to win the tournament. It is not necessary for the over in the 1st half to come in for the over in the game to come in, but one predicts the other. Similarly, these correlated parlays are predictive, but not in the same way as in the case of over 1st h - over for the game all points are useful for you whereas if you have the favorite and over it really doesn't help you if the dog explodes for 6 touchdowns. Let me define this simply:

Texas -30 Rice, ou of 44.

If you were to bet on Texas with the over as well as Rice with the under you are saying that Texas will have more variance in respect to their score then Rice will. If Texas scores 37 points you will lose both bets unless Rice scores exactly 7. Similarly if Rice scores exactly 7 you cannot lose both bets and at worst will tie both. The average variance of a team with an expected value of 37 points is simply much higher than the variance of a team with an expected value of 37. If both teams score between 115 to 120 percent of their expected value, you win! That is the form of correlation with these bets.

Dark Horse: No. Sweat the games AND sweat the payouts because the EV is worth it. US T Bills don't pay as much as pretty much any other security out there, but the average rate of return should be similar when risk and reward are both taken into account.

Dark Horse · 10-17-07, 01:34 AM

I like it. "Sweat the games AND the payouts!" Has a ring to it.

I hear you, though. But if it all evens out in the end (rate of return versus risk and reward), I'd rather not have the headache of being robbed, cheated, and lied to.

Wheell · 10-17-07, 01:36 AM

Dark Horse: It does, doesn't it?

Maledetto · 10-17-07, 02:57 AM

Originally posted by Wheell

They didn't get away with it. Now they have one Hell of a bad beat story. So be it. We all have bad beat stories. Move on.

Move on? Hell no, I mean one way or another they will pay.

mngmnt took a gamble with their decision, let them get what they should get

ladron que roba a ladron tiene cien años de perdon

jjgold · 10-17-07, 06:10 AM

Why would you play at a book that owes players more than $280,000?

HedgeHog · 10-17-07, 06:39 AM

Originally posted by jjgold

Why would you play at a book that owes players more than $280,000?

Because SB was so easy to beat and they paid. Now, however, the risk/reward has changed tremendously. Given what's happened recently, SB is no longer a viable out.

curious · 10-17-07, 06:44 AM

Originally posted by Wheell

I've been thinking about this for a while. There are a lot of different kinds of books and each have their own codes of honor and their own advantages and disadvantages.

A books:

Pinnacle: Low vig, high limits. Very useful for arbers. The main disadvantage of playing at pinnacle is you are probably going to lose unless you either play in the shallow pools ($50 dollar limit soccer), or are very good. It has been said that pinnacle isa sportsbetting operation masquerading as a sportsbook. That is half right. They are a sportsbetting operation but also a Walmart clone. Pinnacle tries to be as honorable as possible. If you take a shot at pinnacle they might offer you a choice: Keep the bet or keep your account (if you choose the bet, after it finishes your account gets transfered out to the location of your choice). I chose to keep the account when it was my turn after I had taken a line put up in error. Pinnacle won't kick out steam players or arbers as they don't harm pinnacles business model. Part of that is because pinnacle IS the market in most sports, so any steam hits pinnacle first, ergo the arbers who pick off other books are simply helping pinnacle get out from under a bad position. If you play with Pinnacle you should know what to expect: Safety, low vigs, sharp lines.

TheGreek: Chase steam here and you get booted. The Greek would really prefer to take all bets via phone but that isn't feasible and they know it. The Greek has also been known to cancel bad lines somewhat aggressively, but do so before the game in question comes to pass. They can offer opinionated lines and do offer high limits when you call in, so they have their place in the world. Also, they too are safe.

CRIS and company: Similar to the Greek. They too are aggressive about canceling lines put up in error, but they have a code of honor that you can generally respect. They nickel and dime you to death if you are a small player, but that is their way of saying that you aren't worth their time.

WSEX: If you are sharp expect to get limit capped and sent to Matchbook. Such is life. Your money is safe. Oh, they too hate steam chasers.

Matchbook: They won't be the wave of the future until either they or one of their clients starts putting up sharp lines with decent limits well in advace of the games. Sometimes you want a dime on Penn @ Yale on Tuesday when the game is Friday. Again, your money is safe.

These books all deal with shot takers in their own way, and we can agree they are reasonably fair. They are A books and you can have a safe and happy life just playing at them. However, if you are in this business for money, and you are in this business for money, aren't you? If you are in this business for money you probably do not want to limit yourself to just these A books. Why should you play at a place where your money isn't 100% safe?

Value. Advantage players seek out value. Bonuses? Promotions? GREAT! Soft lines? Slow moving lines? Books that have misvalued props for 4 figure limits? And that allow you to parlay them? WONDERFUL!

Books that allow you to Parlay -27.5 and over 41? And then allow to parlay +27.5 and under 41? SIGN ME UP!

There are correlated parlays and then there are correlated parlays. If you were playing multiples of these you knew what you were doing. It is one thing to bet the home team and the under in a baseball game. There is covariance that can turn two good lines into one positive ev bet. It is another thing to lay under 41 and +27.5. Let's not put our head in the sand and pretend that Sportsbook.com is going to retroactively cancel -1 parlayed with over 60. We may never find out the entire story and sportsbook.com is almost certainly deserving of a D- rating, but I'm betting a bunch of shot takers just got kicked in the balls.

If I am conflating shot takers with advantage players, well, the line is thin and it is a matter of personal honor. Did anyone really cry for the guy in the movie Casino who got the hammer to his right hand? I mean, it isn't like sportsbook.com could give these players the choice.

D- books have their place in the world. They offer 10% deposit bonuses and +7.5 when the rest of the world is at 7. They do not offer you a gunslingers mentality and a sense of fairness. Deal with it. The players that got nailed lost the one real bet they made: That they would get away with it.

They didn't get away with it. Now they have one Hell of a bad beat story. So be it. We all have bad beat stories. Move on.

P.S. I know that I am taking the role of Rush Limbaugh at the Democratic Convention. I also know that SBR is the ACLU for players (an evenhanded ACLU, but I digress). Flame on, but if we are in this for money (and we are in this for money), then sportsbook.com has their place in the world. Different strokes to move the world.

Please explain what a "shot taker" is and the difference between a "shot taker" and an advantage player. I understand advantage player.

HedgeHog · 10-17-07, 07:28 AM

Curious:

A shot taker is someone who makes a bet that he knows shouldn't be accepted (i.e. betting a winning horse on a race you know is over, but the book's software mistakenly takes it). With regard to correlated pars, there is a fine line between advantage player and shot taker. That's why it is the book's responsibility to filter out the pars it feels are undesirable.

I respect Wheel's insight into this matter, but there is no way you can excuse SB for going back 6 weeks and voiding winners while letting losers stand. I think he's playing devil's advocate here, because there is no just defense for SB in this case.

Wheell · 10-17-07, 11:28 AM

Hedgehog & Curious: I am not simply playing Devil's advocate. You can still play with Sportsbook.com and expect an excellent rate of return on your money by doing nothing more than taking very soft main lines on NCAA and NFL football. You don't even need to chase steam. They are a d- book on many levels and line management can be considered one of them.

Now, definitions time:

All shot takers are advantage players. Not all advantage players are shot takers. The difference lies in the lines put up in error or the bets that a reasonable book would not allow. If you take a line that no person would EVER offer, ie +7 when it should be -7, or the above listed covariance parlays, you are a shot taker. An advantage player to be sure, but a shot taker as well. Most advantage players will take as many shots as they feel they can get away with, which kind of makes sense.

DrunkenLullaby · 10-17-07, 11:35 AM

Wheell, whether or not the players in this situation are/were shot-takers we can debate 'til the cows come home and probably get nowhere. Question for you though...

Are we in agreement that, beyond a shadow of a doubt, Sportsbook.com management is a bunch of shot-takers for their selective cancellation (not refunding net losers), and arbitrarily picking a retaroactive timeframe to enforce their "rules" (particularly when their "rule" did not even appear on their site prior to 9/15 and they've stolen winnings back to 9/1)?

HedgeHog · 10-17-07, 11:45 AM

Originally posted by Wheell

Hedgehog & Curious: I am not simply playing Devil's advocate. You can still play with Sportsbook.com and expect an excellent rate of return on your money by doing nothing more than taking very soft main lines on NCAA and NFL football. You don't even need to chase steam. They are a d- book on many levels and line management can be considered one of them.

Now, definitions time:

All shot takers are advantage players. Not all advantage players are shot takers. The difference lies in the lines put up in error or the bets that a reasonable book would not allow. If you take a line that no person would EVER offer, ie +7 when it should be -7, or the above listed covariance parlays, you are a shot taker. An advantage player to be sure, but a shot taker as well. Most advantage players will take as many shots as they feel they can get away with, which kind of makes sense.

I thought my version of shot taker said basically the same thing. My point is that the threshhold is blurred. Say the line is -2, but they have +2 instead. I place the bet, so have I crossed the line into Shot Taker? Different people will disagree. Some books will allow the bet, while others will delete it--hopefully before it starts. Having said this, wouldn't you call what SB did Shot Taking? And now we are waiting to see if they get away it.

DL, I just saw that you beat me to the punch!

Wheell · 10-17-07, 11:48 AM

Drunken: Yes. Sportsbook.com is DEFINITELY taking a shot. However, remember context in everything. They are a d- book. Here is a story to put this entirely into context:

Henry Ford used to scour junkyards to examine his Model T Fords. When he discovered there were certain parts of the car that NEVER malfunctioned are were always in fine working order when the car itself was junk he went back to the factory and replaced said parts with cheaper models. It simply is inefficient to have a bunch of parts that will last 100,000 miles when the car will be junk in 50,000 miles. Similarly sportsbook.com got a d+ rating due to pure incompetence. Dropping from D+ to D- by taking an unjustifieble retroactive shot at players who they felt were doing nothing more than finding holes in their system is a positive EV play for management on the grand scale. The drop from D+ to D_ isn;t worthless but is worth far less than the half-mill to mill I've been hearing. Furthermore, there is an additional advantage in that future shot takers who are familiar with this case will listen to JJ's advice and steer clear of sportsbook.com. As for the squares, yes they will lose the occasional square, but most simply log on and play with the first one they find, which is either sportsbook.com, or sometimes bodog.com due to advertising.

In summary, yes what they are doing is taking a shot at shot takers.

Wheell · 10-17-07, 11:52 AM

There is a poker story that fits here. In the olden days in texas there was a local gangster who lost a lot of money over a long period of time to a local pro. Eventually the gangster got tired of it and pulled a gun on the pro and demanded everything of value the pro had on him. The pro gave him all his chips, and all his cash, and then signed over 100 travellers checks he had on him. When he was done signing the last check over the pro turned to the gambler and uttered these famous words "Hey, I hope you don't let this little incident break up our regular game."

I am not going to let this incident move me away from Sportsbook.com.

DrunkenLullaby · 10-17-07, 11:55 AM

Then sir, as I have wished for Shams, I also wish for you that they don't get so tired of losing to you someday that they find an equally unjustified reason to steal your money.

HedgeHog · 10-17-07, 11:55 AM

Wheel:

Sure now we know they're a D- Book, maybe F, but they were rated higher before all this. Okay, just a D+ here at SBR, but RX had them rated much much higher. Ratings are somewhat subjective.

Wheell · 10-17-07, 12:17 PM

The RX is meaningless to me. I consider SBR as a starting point in my evaluation for books. As for Shams wishing that they don't steal from me, well, I've been SEVERELY limit capped there for everything but main line College and NFL bets so I know the risks... and rewards.

JC · 10-17-07, 12:28 PM

I don't understand your argument.

How is being a good place to find value a defense of what they have done? What does one thing have to do with the other?

HedgeHog · 10-17-07, 12:29 PM

Originally posted by Wheell

The RX is meaningless to me. I consider SBR as a starting point in my evaluation for books. As for Shams wishing that they don't steal from me, well, I've been SEVERELY limit capped there for everything but main line College and NFL bets so I know the risks... and rewards.

So what's next for you, a thread defending Cascade (once A rated here)? Perhaps BetonSports?

Wheell · 10-17-07, 12:51 PM

JC: The defense isn't of the action. It is of the value of the book itself.

"Sweat the game. Sweat the payout."

The lines are simply so juicy, the promotions so sweet, the bonuses so nice, that the issues of them being a d- book are canceled out. Risk vs. reward. Yes what they did was wrong, but I understand it and i am not losing sleep over it.

Hedgehog: I am actually not that familiar with the BOS situation. As for Cascade Lenny ran a sportsbetting operation that lost over 7 figures and now can't pay. It really is that simple. He tried to play against Pinnacle and got destroyed. What kind of defense does one mount? If he wanted to keep a modicum of respect he would not have taken new depoisits and would have paid out whatever he could have. he didn't and at this point I wouldn't mind hearing about truly bad things happening to him.

HedgeHog · 10-17-07, 01:17 PM

Once SB drops to an F, which is a full out scam, how will that factor into your risk/reward ratio? Good luck cashing out at that point! But don't lose any sleep over it; I'm sure it won't happen to you.

ShamsWoof10 · 10-17-07, 01:30 PM

Originally posted by DrunkenLullaby

Wheell, whether or not the players in this situation are/were shot-takers we can debate 'til the cows come home and probably get nowhere. Question for you though...

Are we in agreement that, beyond a shadow of a doubt, Sportsbook.com management is a bunch of shot-takers for their selective cancellation (not refunding net losers), and arbitrarily picking a retaroactive timeframe to enforce their "rules" (particularly when their "rule" did not even appear on their site prior to 9/15 and they've stolen winnings back to 9/1)?

From what I see the bold is the only thing I have left that I am still not happy about with Sportsbook.com because it is taking a shot at SHOT TAKERS!!! I know other books who think you are taking a shot at them would not be so nice... Not to mention names but 5DIMES.. SIA... They will show you the door and maybe even take all of your money... Even still they should be consistant here and treat all these wagers the same..refund them all...

The reason why we can debate shot takers "til the cows come home" is because we can't see the betting tickets.. I would think if we could that would make a difference... Reviewing all bets made is how a sportsbook evaluates you isn't it..? Well we can't see the tickets.... Even if you lose they know what kind of bettor you are by looking at your tickets..

Art Vandeleigh · 10-17-07, 01:37 PM

I come in peace but I don't understand your example wheell. If a line were ever to be Rice +30 o/u 44 it would be because Rice has been shut out, or scored 3 points, a bunch of times so why would there be expectation that such a punchless offense could score more than 7?

To me a coorelated play is if I have good info that Sabathia has several blisters on his pitching hand so the probabilty is he will have a crappy outing which makes a parlay of Boston and the over correlated to his blisters.

Any line a book puts up is the way it is for a reason (says naive me) so unless they say no parlays in advance I don't see any mathematical mumbo jumbo that can excuse such action, it's it and that's that, IMHO.

DrunkenLullaby · 10-17-07, 01:41 PM

Originally posted by ShamsWoof10

The reason why we can debate shot takers "til the cows come home" is because we can't see the betting tickets..

Actually, no. We could have clear view of all the tickets and still, with 99% confidence I can say we will disagree on this issue.

out.

Wheell · 10-17-07, 01:59 PM

Hedge: If they turn into a deposit only sportsbook then it will happen to me. They have the single best piece of online real estate with the name sportsbook.com which is the single most lilely destination for a first time player. There is a long way from D- to F and we both know that.

Art: First off away team + over in baseball has some natural correlation due to the game either ending after 8.5 if the home team leads. Second, lets look at the Rice-Texas example:

Rice: EV of 7. Average number of points teams with an EV of 7 score: 7.92.

Texas: EV of 37. Average number of points teams with an ev of 37 score: 36.92.

Now, how much variance do you expect that a team with an average number of points at 7.92 can have? Compare that with the variance that a team with an average number of points of 36.92?

If Texas scores 22% more than average then the over is in. If Texas scores 26% of its average then Rice covers automatically and the only way the over comes in is if Rice scores more than two touchdowns. Now if Rice scores scores 26% more than their average a correlated parlay on Rice and the under wins if Texas scores 34 or fewer (if they score exactly 34 it is win-tie), and a correlated parlay on Texas and the over wins if they score 40 or more (40 is win tie).

In terms of percentage you might expect more variance in scoring from Rice than Texas, but in terms of actual points scored Texas is more likely to be variant from their EV than Rice is. That is simply a mathematical fact that will bear out over the coarse of a season. Thus, the parlays are indeed correlated.

ShamsWoof10 · 10-17-07, 02:10 PM

Originally posted by DrunkenLullaby

Actually, no. We could have clear view of all the tickets and still, with 99% confidence I can say we will disagree on this issue.

out.

90%...? Where did you get that number. just grabbed it out of thin air aa a guess..??

In conclusion Sportsbook.com should no doubt refund all wagers winning and losing but it probably balances out anyway... same type of guess as the 90% and the players should be required to lean how to read T&A's...

I called them last night to place an IF bet (Correlated) on the Clev. and under the total and they said it was ok so I logged on to try it... How hard is it to do that..? and No I don't get the MLB Promo because as it says in their T&A for the promo ...it only applies to straight bets... Just because people didn't read the T&A does not mean it wasn't there...

1) BET ID=2xxxxxxx6
If Win (Maximum 7 Teams) 10/16/07 20:06 ET
bet xx.92 to win xxx.07 (paid xx.92) Result: Net Even

Event #1
RedSox(Boston) Wakefield 3
Indians(Cleveland) Byrd 7 10/16/07(20:25 ET)
Under 10 (-105)

Event #2
RedSox(Boston) Wakefield 3
Indians(Cleveland) Byrd 7 10/16/07(20:25 ET)
Indians(Cleveland) -104

DrunkenLullaby · 10-17-07, 02:16 PM

Originally posted by ShamsWoof10

90%...? Where did you get that number. just grabbed it out of thin air aa a guess..??

In conclusion Sportsbook.com should no doubt refund all wagers winning and losing but it probably balances out anyway... same type of guess as the 90% and the players should be required to lean how to read T&A's...

I called them last night to place an IF bet (Correlated) on the Clev. and under the total and they said it was ok so I logged on to try it... How hard is it to do that..? and No I don't get the MLB Promo because as it says in their T&A for the promo ...it only applies to straight bets... Just because people didn't read the T&A does not mean it wasn't there...

1) BET ID=2xxxxxxx6
If Win (Maximum 7 Teams) 10/16/07 20:06 ET
bet xx.92 to win xxx.07 (paid xx.92) Result: Net Even

Event #1
RedSox(Boston) Wakefield 3
Indians(Cleveland) Byrd 7 10/16/07(20:25 ET)
Under 10 (-105)

Event #2
RedSox(Boston) Wakefield 3
Indians(Cleveland) Byrd 7 10/16/07(20:25 ET)
Indians(Cleveland) -104

Two things:

1) Since this "rule" was posted on 9/15, please justify the cancellation of wagers from the period 9/1 through 9/15.

2) If you think that the if-bet you posted there is correlated in any way shape or form, then....well....quite honestly I dunno what to tell ya. I guess I'd start by reading Wheell's post right above yours. He seems to have a good grip on it.

ShamsWoof10 · 10-17-07, 02:28 PM

Originally posted by DrunkenLullaby

Two things:

1) Since this "rule" was posted on 9/15, please justify the cancellation of wagers from the period 9/1 through 9/15.

2) If you think that the if-bet you posted there is correlated in any way shape or form, then....well....quite honestly I dunno what to tell ya. I guess I'd start by reading Wheell's post right above yours. He seems to have a good grip on it.

1) Now wait a minute step back for a minute.. Did I or it say 9/15 was THE FIRST DAY IT WAS UP?? I do NOT KNOW and I have heard 9/1 was the actual date it was first up although I HAVE NOT YET VARIFIED THAT!!! I DO NOT KNOW TO BE HONEST NOR at this time can I justify the period from 9/1 to 9/15 without knowing more... If indeed 9/15 was the first day it was up then there is no justification and all wagers before should be graded as if it was never up...

Even still I will admit that taking shots back even though other books do it is no excuse to step down to that level...

2) Forgive me I just noticed that I didn't take the Cleveland RL... When I called I said Under and Cleveland RL but as you can see by the time it was SECONDS before the first pitch an I must have clicked the wrong box without looking closer... crist... Disregard the example...

SPECULATOR 13 · 10-17-07, 02:43 PM

Originally posted by ShamsWoof10

I don't know how long it took you to write that but I enjoyed reading it.. GOOD POST and well thought out..

SHAMMY AS express my sentiments exactly....i would also ad :

your book review is highly informative and accurate

Art Vandeleigh · 10-17-07, 02:43 PM

Originally posted by Wheell

lets look at the Rice-Texas example:

Rice: EV of 7. Average number of points teams with an EV of 7 score: 7.92.

Texas: EV of 37. Average number of points teams with an ev of 37 score: 36.92.

Now, how much variance do you expect that a team with an average number of points at 7.92 can have? Compare that with the variance that a team with an average number of points of 36.92?

If Texas scores 22% more than average then the over is in. If Texas scores 26% of its average then Rice covers automatically and the only way the over comes in is if Rice scores more than two touchdowns. Now if Rice scores scores 26% more than their average a correlated parlay on Rice and the under wins if Texas scores 34 or fewer (if they score exactly 34 it is win-tie), and a correlated parlay on Texas and the over wins if they score 40 or more (40 is win tie).

In terms of percentage you might expect more variance in scoring from Rice than Texas, but in terms of actual points scored Texas is more likely to be variant from their EV than Rice is. That is simply a mathematical fact that will bear out over the coarse of a season. Thus, the parlays are indeed correlated.

Wheell, thanks for the explanation I'm beginning to see the reasoning from a pure mathematical standpoint.

Any chance I could get concrete numbers? For instance, say two football games each have an o/u 50, in one game the 2 teams are pick while in the other game there is a 14 point favorite. Any rule of thumb number as to how much more an advantage, theoretically, the dog/under, fav/over parlays of the 14 point spread game is compared to the pick 'em game?

Wheell · 10-17-07, 02:54 PM

Hmm, I'll see if I can whip up a simplified rule of thumb that can be used here. i might simply use every two touchdown favorite or more and post those numbers.

OK, did some database questioning. I checked all games with spreads larger than 13.5 (ie 14 or more).

The covariance was 55.15365%. In other words the favorite and the over or the dog and the under come in over 55% of the time. Now, the average spread in these games is 20.3 and average ou is 54. This means the EV for the dogs is about 16.85. The lower the dog's ev in points goes, the higher the covariance, so you can see why this might piss off the books.