Everyone loves to talk about value and odds and when and why they are better or worse.
Perfect example are the Lakers odds right now to win the series. Currently +1950, which in a vacuum are 'great' odds. As the necessary results are known. Lakers have to win the next 3 games to win. They opened +385 in the game tonight, so one can assume they would also be +385 at least on the open to win a game seven (we assume it gets to a game 7). There for we take 3.85 X3.85 and we get 14.82. So we then take 1950 and divide that by 1482, that gives us 131.5 which is what the Lakers would have to pay at home to make simply parlaying them on the ML in every game the same as the 1950 they are now, that is around a +2.5 dog. Which is maybe possible but not likely, they were +2 at home in Game 4 off a back to back, and they only got to +125, but hovered mostly around +115 or so. You also have to look that currently Lakers are "Only" +310 on the ML so they have taken a lot of money there thats for sure.
So realistically if you were late and looking to parlay your lakers money, and you were on them at +310 now, and figured at best +125 (more than likely they'd be favored and probably -115) that would mean they would have to be +503 to 'cover' the +1950 they are now.
So in the grand scheme +1950 is a very good price. But is it 'value'. Some would say yes. The purely math guys anyway. But people who have watched the series and seen the ups and downs and collapses and intangibles know that the Lakers beating OKC 3 in a row (2 on the road) is a nearly impossible task.
So this is a perfect example where good odds dont come anywhere near being a good 'value', even when you have a lot of information to go on.
Perfect example are the Lakers odds right now to win the series. Currently +1950, which in a vacuum are 'great' odds. As the necessary results are known. Lakers have to win the next 3 games to win. They opened +385 in the game tonight, so one can assume they would also be +385 at least on the open to win a game seven (we assume it gets to a game 7). There for we take 3.85 X3.85 and we get 14.82. So we then take 1950 and divide that by 1482, that gives us 131.5 which is what the Lakers would have to pay at home to make simply parlaying them on the ML in every game the same as the 1950 they are now, that is around a +2.5 dog. Which is maybe possible but not likely, they were +2 at home in Game 4 off a back to back, and they only got to +125, but hovered mostly around +115 or so. You also have to look that currently Lakers are "Only" +310 on the ML so they have taken a lot of money there thats for sure.
So realistically if you were late and looking to parlay your lakers money, and you were on them at +310 now, and figured at best +125 (more than likely they'd be favored and probably -115) that would mean they would have to be +503 to 'cover' the +1950 they are now.
So in the grand scheme +1950 is a very good price. But is it 'value'. Some would say yes. The purely math guys anyway. But people who have watched the series and seen the ups and downs and collapses and intangibles know that the Lakers beating OKC 3 in a row (2 on the road) is a nearly impossible task.
So this is a perfect example where good odds dont come anywhere near being a good 'value', even when you have a lot of information to go on.
