How can legends have Fed at -215 while 5D has fed at -195, that's insane
-
-
Fed -192 PinnacleComment -
Wow I'm at legends and feel robbed by that line I can see a difference of between -5 and -10 but difference of -20 for 5d and -23 at pinny. WowComment -
Stop thinking in cents and you'll get over this.
The difference -110 to -120 (10 cents) is 2.2%
The difference -215 to -195 (20 cents) is 2.2%
Getting -215 when other site has -195 is the same as getting -120 when other site has -110.
if the odds were -475 and you added 2.2% it would move to -558. Thinking in cents makes no sense.
This first, second not a lot of reasons to use legends if you're odd shopping. Is better prices elsewhere almost all the time.Comment -
1950 to win 1000
2150 to win 1000
$200.00. I prefer the $200 less, sir.Comment -
Gotta have one more than one outComment -
No problem. This might be obvious but you don't seem like the type who will give a duhh response so in case not, will explain a bit more.
Cents / moneyline odds format are like a low level encryption that catches novice bettors and just gets them thinking wrong. In other ares where decimal odds are used you think a little a different naturally along the way. But kind of off topic.
It's all implied probability (which is how often you need to win to break even). This is risk/return=implied probability. Where return is how much a win pays stake + win.
So -110 is risk $110 to win $100 (the return is $110 stake + $100 win = $210). Implied probability is: $110 risk / 210 return = 52.38%.
From here just use the odds converter. If you add say 3% (55.38% entered under implied probability) this moves it to -124.
Now take some huge favorites -450, this is $450 to win $100 so return is $550. 450/550=81.82% implied probability. Add 3% to this (84.83) and it's -559.
See the difference 14 cent move versus a 109 cent move. Therefore cents are meaningless as a way of thinking.
Side topic is how a bookmaker adds vig / juice / bookmaker advantage (whatever you want to call it). If he's building in a 5% advantage on -550. He doesn't just give side A 2.5% and Side B 2.5%. In order to maintain an equal vig he needs to give a team who is going to win 85% of the time, 85% of that and the team going to win 15% of the time, 15% of that. And that's equal (meaning same vig on both sides).
So back to OP. A ten cent move on one example, and a twenty cent move on the other you're being shorted about the same amount. A common mistake people make is saying there's more juice on big favorites or big underdogs. Yes in some cases (baseball due to novelty pricing) this can be the case.. but more of the time people are just saying that because they're confused how cents work, and the juice is pretty much, if not exactly, the same. If you're going to win 85% of the time adding some mark up is going to be a lot of cents. If your going to win 50% of the time it's not as much.
Also I had assumed the difference in pricing was due to higher juice, but also as another posted pointed out with the looking at the wrong side, this might be part of it too. maybe they have a little higher juice, and also slightly favor the other fighter as the two sites compared. Either way you obviously should make the bet at 5Dimes not Legends when those are the lines.Comment -
Therefore cents are meaningless as a way of thinking.
post some playsComment -
I realize this isn't exactly what you are implying/trying to explain but I would be careful when making the assumption that a bookmaker is going to try and keep the the vig equal on both sides. The first issue is each individual bookmaker have different motivations and restraints on themselves (for example their own bankroll, risk aversion, betting habits of their players) so the objectives (if they are rational... another big assumption) of each should be different which is one reason why (or, at least, should be why...) you going to see price variation between books. Secondly a bookmaker can make money in other ways than just "figuring the odds" and charging equal vig. One example is by taking unbalanced action with the belief that the large majority of their clients are going to be on the wrong side.
IMO the biggest theoretically problem with the idea is that if the true price is anywhere between the prices being offered any bets the bookmaker takes are going to be +EV and, in the long run, they will make money regardless if their action is balanced or not. Since those with knowledge of a more correct price are left without any incentive to make a bet as long as the true price is maintained in this range bookmakers are free to adjust their line based on their other considerations (such as risk or maximizing profits) while being guaranteed a long term profit.
As a real world example once the true odds starting getting further away from the -100 price point (as is very common in tennis money lines) if you calculate the the no vig price strictly based on the prices being offered, with the assumption that the vig is equal on both sides, the no vig price rapidly "approaches" the price of the favorite. In reality, since the real price can be anywhere between the range being offered (or even outside the range given other factors) I think you will very often find that even at those books that are most actively trying to sharpen their lines that the true price should often be perceived as lying somewhere else than very near the price of the favorite...Comment -
PROP, I just dropped you two cents man appreciate that explanation. I honestly didn't see it that way thanks man!!! Just trying to learn how to be a well rounded playerComment -
William Hill has -188, must have a lot of British action. lolComment -
at the guy who thinks -195 and -215 does not make a difference.
Comment -
-215 to -195 is a HUGE difference, that's a $200 difference if you're placing a bet to win a $1k. Over the course of a month, if you're making about 20-30 bets, it makes a VAST difference in how much you win. Can mean the difference in over $1K-$2K of more winnings over the course of a month.
Your type of thinking is square as can be and a book's dream client.Comment -
Lol what? you guys read that post way out of context. Obviously it makes a huge difference. The point was it makes the same difference -215 when can get -195 as -120 when can get -110. He was on about the difference in cents, the post suggested stop thinking in cents; that was all. Of course place the bet at the best odds; that's common sense. I got a laugh out of the responses anyways, thanks.Comment -
Thx prop. Not for the post but for exposing those with 4th grade comprehension skills.Comment -
Prop makes an astute point to the original question, and the squares crawl out of the woodwork to berate him.
His point was that -215/-195 is a similar margin difference to -110/-120 and it isn't that shocking to see 2 books have those prices offered for the same event.
First rule of gambling/investment, always compare pricing with same risk amount, not same return amount. When someone compares 2150 to win 1000 vs 1950 to win 1000, you know he's a square, and a loser.
By comparing equally with risk, you have -195: 1000 to win 512.82 vs. -215 : 1000 to win 465.12. Then, figure the impact of that over 100 bets. How many of these bets will you win? Obviously not 100/100, but if you're good, you should be winning at least 70% laying prices like these. 100 bets at $1000 a bet = $100,000 risked. at -195 you get back 1512.82 for every win, at -215, you get back 1465.12 per win. If you win 70% of the 100 bets, you get back a total of $105,897 at -195 vs. $102,558 at -215 . In this example, a difference of 3.34% on your return.
Compare a plausible scenario with -110 vs. -120. -110 : 1000 to win 909.09 vs. -120: 1000 to win 833.33. Lets look at the impact over 100 bets as well. Obviously, you're not going to win anywhere near 70% of these, so lets say you do comparably well and win 56% of your bets. $100,000 bet, 56 bets won, $106,909 returned at -110, $102,667 returned at -120. In this case a 4.24% difference on your return.
Now, Prop never said there was no difference between -215 and -195, because EVERY price difference makes an impact on your bottom line. He was just comparing the spread margins being similar to more frequently seen margin differences at closer to 50% markets.
Take for example horse racing, Is there a big difference between a horse paying 3.80 vs. 3.60 to win? You better believe there is. That's -125 vs. -111, and that's a much bigger difference than -215/-195 when it comes to your bottom line.Comment -
lol at prop rubbing indio's dick
both pts are clear... but there is no way you -- indio -- can deny the pricing. that was their point. altho I know when a math guy jumps in with his tiny dick and the chip on his shoulder.... he's got to throw some shots.
but hey, can we please get indo or prop to jump into that Blackie contest where a "math genius who writes programs that even God couldn't design" ... got shit-blasted and couldn't even hit 51% over 100 wagers?
that was funny as hell. and the all the math guys were massaging his rooster while he was getting shit-blasted.Comment -
"no way you can deny the pricing, that was the point" Really? Your point was that 215 is larger than 195? Wow, thanks for the enlightenment. I guess some of us couldn't ascertain that without you and some of the other geniuses pointing that out.
So -195 is a better price than -215, thanks for sharing that insight. That has benefited the community immensely.Comment -
Good points here
sharpComment
