[Johnnythunder]

Back when they played the padres. They were obviously favored but what was the line? where would i find that info?

[lakerboy]

https://www.sportsoddshistory.com/ml...s/#WorldSeries

Not what you want but Detroit was +800 to win the pennant pre season

[stevenash]

^
I remember that team vividly.
I was a teen playing scholastic ball.

One of the best up the middle defenses of my (or any) era.
Parish, Whitaker, Trammell, and Chet Lemon.
All won gold except for Lemon who got ripped off (IMO)

Rock solid rotation (Jack Morris, Dan Petry, Milt Wilcox) supported by a rock solid bullpen.
Opened the season 35-5
Bookies were getting hammered.

Having said all that, MYSQL I use only goes back 25 years, but I'm pretty sure, the series line was Det -240/ SD +160

[ChuckyTheGoat]

Good question. Hard to find #s from games that long ago.

Had to be at least -200 Favorites vs Padres.

[MinnesotaFats]

-160, +140

SportsOddsHistory.com

[ChuckyTheGoat]

-160, +140

SportsOddsHistory.com

Fats, my compliments to you. Nice link.

https://www.sportsoddshistory.com/ml...ies/?y=all&o=s

Hard to believe the Tigers weren't priced higher. That said, it was 4/3 Home advantage to Padres.

[ChuckyTheGoat]

Wonder how much the line moved on the 1919 World Series. Was best of 9 back then.

[stevenash]

Wonder how much the line moved on the 1919 World Series. Was best of 9 back then.

It was mentioned a few times in "Eight Men Out"
I forgot, but it was substantial if the movie is accurate.

[Johnnythunder]

Great replies

[ChuckyTheGoat]

Fats, the Presidential odds are interesting. I wonder how far out the posted Odds are. The -550/+375 odds on Hillary/Trump match my memory to the night b4 election. I thought Trump was +400 24 hours b4 Election Day...so Hillary may have been -500.

Hillary was supposed to win comfortably. Anyone that says otherwise is dealing in alternate reality. Nate Silver kept listing Hillary at 70%, which means that Silver was one of the few people who thought Hillary was being over-priced.

Some newspapers called Trump's 2016 win the last Presidential upset since Truman/Dewey. We can discount Carter's 1976 win as a short dog, close to pick-em.

In 1948 the famous "DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN" headline resulted from seeing the early results. He wanted the result to go to print for the morning's early edition headline. He made the decision to go with that headline. When he went to bed, he thought the result was safely going to get there. You'll never see a wider grin than Harry holding up that paper with the incorrect headline.

[ChuckyTheGoat]

https://www.sportsoddshistory.com/other/potus-odds/

[ChuckyTheGoat]

One more thing about the Presidential results. Notice how it's Favorite-heavy from 1900 to now.

I'd argue that's because the computers can capture the polling expectations more accurately now. Look at the string of five straight Dogs coming home before 1900. I think that's a function of not yet being in the computer age.

I'm still fascinated by the 2016 result. It's as if the (liberal) news-media just didn't think Trump could win. If you go back in history and look at the last few weeks b4 the election:
*Hillary was picking out furniture for her office.
*Trump was campaigning his ass off. He was making 3 or 4 stops per day trying to pick up votes. Presumably, he hit the right areas to swing the battleground states.

[ChuckyTheGoat]

-160, +140

SportsOddsHistory.com

Goldy, this post alone should put Minny Fatty top5 for POM.

[MinnesotaFats]

I think it's favorite heavy because the economy changed after reconstruction.

We are now a European style mercantile economy vs a free market economy, w a nationalized banking system and A LOT of Federal peoframs, ergo the effects on the States is much more easy to calculate...whereas in past elections they the late 19th century, the Federal government was much smaller and deferred to the States

[ChuckyTheGoat]

It was mentioned a few times in "Eight Men Out"
I forgot, but it was substantial if the movie is accurate.

Jake, very good post. WIKI corroborates your statement:

Although rumors were swirling among the gamblers (according to Tom Meany in his chapter on the 1919 Reds in "Baseball's Greatest Teams," "Cincinnati money was pouring in" even though the White Sox were regarded as the overwhelming favorite) and some of the press, most fans and observers were taking the Series at face value.

So, not sure of the size of the move...but people knew something was going down. "8 Men Out" was a great film. John Cusack, in particular was awesome. Just wonder how much liberty the writers took. And there still was a possibility the White Sox might have won if only a few guys were in on the scam.

[RockBottom]

Fats, my compliments to you. Nice link.

https://www.sportsoddshistory.com/ml...ies/?y=all&o=s

Hard to believe the Tigers weren't priced higher. That said, it was 4/3 Home advantage to Padres.

There wasn’t a lot of -200 and higher baseball favorites back then.