I wasn't paying attention when the rules were made but I can't understand why favorites were limited to a max of -140.
I don't see why favorites should be limited. If someone wants to bet 1 unit on a -500 favorite (1 unit to win .2 units), why not? It's their play, they should have control over it without arbitrary restrictions. I think the base for all plays should be set at 1 unit and you should be able to bet anything on the board. This way, a -140 favorite would pay off .71 units (1 unit @ -140 wins .71 units). This way, there's an equal level playing field where everyone is betting exactly 1 unit on every play.
Limiting the underdog plays has been discussed and I don't think it makes sense. No one can really say when an underdog has no shot and the odds certainly don't tell you always. Look at the dog I took on my last play, the Fever. They were +315 but they dominated the game and won by about 30. It's not fair to say, "You can't take that dog because the number is too big", it would have unnecessarily and arbitrarily changed the result of my competition and I wouldn't be advancing to the next round.
On the other hand, limiting picking favorites to -140 creates an unnatural, unrealistic situation, imho. I think everyone should be able to bet the board just like they would with real money.
If anyone's concerned about calculations, you can use this parlay calculator to quickly and easily calculate any payout for any moneyline:
If someone takes a -325 favorite, you can see their payout would be .31 units (all picks would be based on 1 unit, no matter what odds were involved).
I don't see any reason why dogs or favorites should be limited on either side. If everyone is staking one unit on every play, everybody's on an equal playing field the whole time and arbitrary limitations will not get in the way. That's one way to make the contest as realistic as possible and making it realistic is the only way to decide who the most skilled person really is, imho.
I don't see why favorites should be limited. If someone wants to bet 1 unit on a -500 favorite (1 unit to win .2 units), why not? It's their play, they should have control over it without arbitrary restrictions. I think the base for all plays should be set at 1 unit and you should be able to bet anything on the board. This way, a -140 favorite would pay off .71 units (1 unit @ -140 wins .71 units). This way, there's an equal level playing field where everyone is betting exactly 1 unit on every play.
Limiting the underdog plays has been discussed and I don't think it makes sense. No one can really say when an underdog has no shot and the odds certainly don't tell you always. Look at the dog I took on my last play, the Fever. They were +315 but they dominated the game and won by about 30. It's not fair to say, "You can't take that dog because the number is too big", it would have unnecessarily and arbitrarily changed the result of my competition and I wouldn't be advancing to the next round.
On the other hand, limiting picking favorites to -140 creates an unnatural, unrealistic situation, imho. I think everyone should be able to bet the board just like they would with real money.
If anyone's concerned about calculations, you can use this parlay calculator to quickly and easily calculate any payout for any moneyline:
If someone takes a -325 favorite, you can see their payout would be .31 units (all picks would be based on 1 unit, no matter what odds were involved).
I don't see any reason why dogs or favorites should be limited on either side. If everyone is staking one unit on every play, everybody's on an equal playing field the whole time and arbitrary limitations will not get in the way. That's one way to make the contest as realistic as possible and making it realistic is the only way to decide who the most skilled person really is, imho.
