is this a bad line?

[SBR Lou]

The book concedes an error was made. They intended to mirror Bet365's price on the "Yes", but did not. When that was recognized, apparently the "Yes" was re-priced, while the "No" was erroneously not. Although Bubba logged in to see the wager cancelled and chose not to re-bet it, he's being credited with both a $500 freeplay and $2,000 cash in his account (equivalent to a $250 wager at the intended +800 that he never had action on).

It's beyond a good faith gesture for what was ultimately a poorly handled market. Mistakes happen. We've confirmed that bubba was the only player affected.

[bubba]

i have reached an agreement that i find to be very fair to the player and the book. i am being paid out at the price of +800 (what book says there line was intended to be) on my wager. funds in my account already. i think this is fair for me, especially because in reality my funds were never at risk. i have no more complaint, i think somewhat valid arguments could be made for player to get anywhere from 0 all the way to the full 4688. often in this case the player is screwed but management came through and did what i think is the right thing.

i thank sbr for assistance provided in the matter.

[bubba]

You obviously don't understand math or the wagering business. Not only was this a bad line, it was OBVIOUSLY a bad line. Offering +1875 on a game going into overtime is a HUGE EDGE FOR THE PLAYER. That would be like me offering you 6-1 odds on rolling a 7 with a standard set of dice. Let's look at all the reasons why your arguments are ridiculous.

1.Since the NFL went to 11 playoff games a year since 1990, there have been 225 playoff games, 20 have gone into OT. That is 7.6% and a ratio of around 12-1. If we look since 2003, there have been 92 playoff games, 10 of those have gone into OT, which is a ratio of 8.2-1 in recent trending. Still think +1875 is "fair"?

2. Do you have any clue what the house edge is on a -3500/+1875 line? It's a paltry 2.23%. That is slightly less hold than offering -105/-105. Do you really think they would offer margins that low on a prop bet that would be all 1 sided action?

3. The -3500 on NO is basically offering only the YES bet on overtime to players. But offering -3500/+800 is still less vig than offering -120/-120. Would you be crying foul if a low volume prop was offered at -120/-120? Why not, there is more house edge in that than -3500/+800

4. The fact that they cancelled BEFORE THE EVENT STARTED, and then offered the fair price of +800 before the contest means this place did NOTHING WRONG.

And by the way, don't get too caught up in the 8 point favorite angle, thats just to balance action on the game, means very little in relation to chances of OT. In fact, the more important number was the total of 34, which predicted a tight, low scoring game which is more condusive to an OT.

The fact that so many nimrods are screaming for sanctions and crying foul is further proof of how dumb the general betting public is in regards to gambling.

#1- playoff games i assume are on avergae supposed to be closer then regular season games (teams more evenly matched). however, how many playoff games had a spread over 7? what % of those went to overtime?? your playoff numbers not only are meaningless but are misleading.

#2-i dont know house edge, nor do i figure this stuff out before placing a wager. i just know if a line is obviously bad or not

#3- is -3500 a bad line then? according to you i think it is!

#4- so books can cancel any "borderline" prop they dont like and re offer odds? as long as its before the game?

i cant imagine someone looking at the facts posted in this thread and come to the conclusion so authoritatively that the book was 100% in the right and player 100% wrong.

i would think you worked for the book if they didnt go out of their way to settle this in a fair matter for me. i have no idea your agenda.

[indio]

#1- playoff games i assume are on avergae supposed to be closer then regular season games (teams more evenly matched). however, how many playoff games had a spread over 7? what % of those went to overtime?? your playoff numbers not only are meaningless but are misleading.

#2-i dont know house edge, nor do i figure this stuff out before placing a wager. i just know if a line is obviously bad or not

#3- is -3500 a bad line then? according to you i think it is!

#4- so books can cancel any "borderline" prop they dont like and re offer odds? as long as its before the game?

i cant imagine someone looking at the facts posted in this thread and come to the conclusion so authoritatively that the book was 100% in the right and player 100% wrong.

i would think you worked for the book if they didnt go out of their way to settle this in a fair matter for me. i have no idea your agenda.

1. 20+ years of data is not meaningless. Any 3rd rate math guy will tell you that. And the numbers are what they are, so there's nothing misleading about them. But just to satisfy your curiosity, i looked back to 1998, and out of 13 OT playoff games since '98, EIGHT had lines of 7 or more.

2. You admit you know nothing about house edge, but yet you know a bad line when you see it?

3. You don't understand so I won't waste my time trying to answer this one.

4. This was not a borderline prop, this was AN OBVIOUS ERROR. Giving +1875 on something that NEVER has a lower than 7% chance of occuring, not to mention an industry standard market value of +800 to +1000 is a recipe to go broke. If I was in the gasoline business, and I had a pump set at 1.89 a gallon when its supposed to be 2.89 a gallon, how long am i supposed to let people pump gas at 1.89 just because thats what the pump says?


And no, I have no affiliation with any offshore books, but I've been around markets, gambling, and business for the last 30 years, and I guess I just get tired of people knocking a company for bad reasons. There are SO MANY legitimate beefs with some bookmakers, why waste time on what that isn't?

The fact that they canceled this BEFORE it started, and you had a chance to play this prop at a fair market price means you have no legitimate beef, plain and simple. I know you're pissed off, and I don't blame you, but they did nothing wrong.

[bubba]

1. 20+ years of data is not meaningless. Any 3rd rate math guy will tell you that. And the numbers are what they are, so there's nothing misleading about them. But just to satisfy your curiosity, i looked back to 1998, and out of 13 OT playoff games since '98, EIGHT had lines of 7 or more.

2. You admit you know nothing about house edge, but yet you know a bad line when you see it?

3. You don't understand so I won't waste my time trying to answer this one.

4. This was not a borderline prop, this was AN OBVIOUS ERROR. Giving +1875 on something that NEVER has a lower than 7% chance of occuring, not to mention an industry standard market value of +800 to +1000 is a recipe to go broke. If I was in the gasoline business, and I had a pump set at 1.89 a gallon when its supposed to be 2.89 a gallon, how long am i supposed to let people pump gas at 1.89 just because thats what the pump says?


A.

#1- i said spreads over 7, not 7 or more. feel free to post your data but even i know that playoff games with spreads over 7 are too small of a sample size to even judge. how often does a game go into OT with a spread under 7? how often does a game with a spread 7.5 or more go into OT? these numbers must be vastly different.

#2 i know an OBVIOUS bad line when i see it. big difference

#4- you must be some super genious and whats obvious to you is not obvious to us typical folks. so while its obvious to you, it wasnt to anyone. however, comparing the prop bet i made to your price of gasoline being off by that much is off in so many ways i dont know where to begin. for starers the price of gasoline is pretty well known and easily accessable. this is an obscure prop we are dealing with. it seems like in some ways you are too sharp for this, in others not nearly enough commons sense.

[Optional]

The book concedes an error was made. They intended to mirror Bet365's price on the "Yes", but did not. When that was recognized, apparently the "Yes" was re-priced, while the "No" was erroneously not. Although Bubba logged in to see the wager cancelled and chose not to re-bet it, he's being credited with both a $500 freeplay and $2,000 cash in his account (equivalent to a $250 wager at the intended +800 that he never had action on).

It's beyond a good faith gesture for what was ultimately a poorly handled market. Mistakes happen. We've confirmed that bubba was the only player affected.

Awesome job SBR.

That's exactly the fair way to do it in my mind. Surprised the book went that far though. Good for them.

[indio]

#1- i said spreads over 7, not 7 or more. feel free to post your data but even i know that playoff games with spreads over 7 are too small of a sample size to even judge. how often does a game go into OT with a spread under 7? how often does a game with a spread 7.5 or more go into OT? these numbers must be vastly different.

#2 i know an OBVIOUS bad line when i see it. big difference

#4- you must be some super genious and whats obvious to you is not obvious to us typical folks. so while its obvious to you, it wasnt to anyone. however, comparing the prop bet i made to your price of gasoline being off by that much is off in so many ways i dont know where to begin. for starers the price of gasoline is pretty well known and easily accessable. this is an obscure prop we are dealing with. it seems like in some ways you are too sharp for this, in others not nearly enough commons sense.

Sounds like you got a really good deal from this book ( whoever they are) so congratulations. Giving you 2k when you risked nothing is more than generous.

My last response on this so I'll answer your question/statements.

1. Differentiating between games of 7 or more and more than 7 is completely irrelevant in this topic of conversation, trust me. Not to mention, any lined game has shops offering + or - .5 point off of any spread except 3 anyway. Also, the spreads impact of the probability of an NFL game going to overtime is minimal if not totally non-existent. Not that it matters, but like I said, I looked back since '98 and the majority of the OT games had spreads of 7 or higher. (I did have to relive the agony of the Seattle/Chicago overtime game from '07 when I had Seattle, the 9 point underdog, in a 4 team ML parlay that would have paid 50k when NE beat SD later that afternoon as another ML dog).

2. I'll concede the point that a novice wouldn't necessarily know that +1875 for this prop is ridiculous.

4. Trust me, I'm no super genius, although I can spell the word genius properly. And my only main point of the whole thing was that a business should not be forced to do something that will lose them money simply due to an honest mistake. The fact that this was cancelled before the game and re-offered at a fair price determined that this was not a malicious act. So if I were you, i would be grateful to them, as they gave you a very generous gift in the name of customer relations.

Hey, I'm glad you got 2k, Good for you, i hope you win some more. Good luck.

[KEdge2k]

The book concedes an error was made. They intended to mirror Bet365's price on the "Yes", but did not. When that was recognized, apparently the "Yes" was re-priced, while the "No" was erroneously not. Although Bubba logged in to see the wager cancelled and chose not to re-bet it, he's being credited with both a $500 freeplay and $2,000 cash in his account (equivalent to a $250 wager at the intended +800 that he never had action on).

It's beyond a good faith gesture for what was ultimately a poorly handled market. Mistakes happen. We've confirmed that bubba was the only player affected.

Excellent outcome for the poster here, thumbs up for SBR getting this resolution. The book made a mistake and sounds like it is owning up to it. Can you tell us what book took this good faith gesture now?

[Pareto]

1. Differentiating between games of 7 or more and more than 7 is completely irrelevant in this topic of conversation, trust me. Not to mention, any lined game has shops offering + or - .5 point off of any spread except 3 anyway. Also, the spreads impact of the probability of an NFL game going to overtime is minimal if not totally non-existent. Not that it matters, but like I said, I looked back since '98 and the majority of the OT games had spreads of 7 or higher. (I did have to relive the agony of the Seattle/Chicago overtime game from '07 when I had Seattle, the 9 point underdog, in a 4 team ML parlay that would have paid 50k when NE beat SD later that afternoon as another ML dog).

So when the patriots met the colts earlier this season and the colts were a +2000 dog, you still thought that the chance of OT was about 10%. Of course the spread matters....it matters a lot.

Besides we dont need to look at old stats or imaginary super bowl odds. We already had the market line at Betfair.

But good job by SBR getting Bubba a compensation which is more than fair to him, as his money was never at risk.

[egistoras]

Wow great job by SBR and by this sportsbook

[indio]

So when the patriots met the colts earlier this season and the colts were a +2000 dog, you still thought that the chance of OT was about 10%. Of course the spread matters....it matters a lot.

Besides we dont need to look at old stats or imaginary super bowl odds. We already had the market line at Betfair.

But good job by SBR getting Bubba a compensation which is more than fair to him, as his money was never at risk.

We've been talking about NFL playoff games, and he insinuated that lines of 4.5 and under were MUCH different as far as chances of going to OT than lines of more than 7. The effect of that is minimal, which the data supports. But leave it to a moron like you to chime in with the dumb example of the ultra-rare 17+ lines. How many playoff games have had lines of 17+?.

+1875 for this prop was an obvious bad line, which is a simple fact.

[Pareto]

We've been talking about NFL playoff games, and he insinuated that lines of 4.5 and under were MUCH different as far as chances of going to OT than lines of more than 7. The effect of that is minimal, which the data supports. But leave it to a moron like you to chime in with the dumb example of the ultra-rare 17+ lines. How many playoff games have had lines of 17+?.

+1875 for this prop was an obvious bad line, which is a simple fact.

Thank you for your kind reply.

You stated spread had minimal if any effect on the probability of an OT, which is not true. Your so-called data consists of so few games that it is useless.

Whether or not the line was bad is up for discussion. It was about 10-15% above the market line.

It would be nice to have a set of rules that determine when a line is bad.

[d2bets]

You obviously don't understand math or the wagering business. Not only was this a bad line, it was OBVIOUSLY a bad line. Offering +1875 on a game going into overtime is a HUGE EDGE FOR THE PLAYER. That would be like me offering you 6-1 odds on rolling a 7 with a standard set of dice. Let's look at all the reasons why your arguments are ridiculous.

1.Since the NFL went to 11 playoff games a year since 1990, there have been 225 playoff games, 20 have gone into OT. That is 7.6% and a ratio of around 12-1. If we look since 2003, there have been 92 playoff games, 10 of those have gone into OT, which is a ratio of 8.2-1 in recent trending. Still think +1875 is "fair"?

2. Do you have any clue what the house edge is on a -3500/+1875 line? It's a paltry 2.23%. That is slightly less hold than offering -105/-105. Do you really think they would offer margins that low on a prop bet that would be all 1 sided action?

3. The -3500 on NO is basically offering only the YES bet on overtime to players. But offering -3500/+800 is still less vig than offering -120/-120. Would you be crying foul if a low volume prop was offered at -120/-120? Why not, there is more house edge in that than -3500/+800

4. The fact that they cancelled BEFORE THE EVENT STARTED, and then offered the fair price of +800 before the contest means this place did NOTHING WRONG.

And by the way, don't get too caught up in the 8 point favorite angle, thats just to balance action on the game, means very little in relation to chances of OT. In fact, the more important number was the total of 34, which predicted a tight, low scoring game which is more condusive to an OT.

The fact that so many nimrods are screaming for sanctions and crying foul is further proof of how dumb the general betting public is in regards to gambling.

That's all well and good, but at least to my way of thinking, not the proper line of inquiry. The proper consideration is whether the line was an obvious error to a reasonable/average customer/bettor. The average bettor does not and should not be expected to know all those percentages. Most don't. The inquiry is not whether the bettor in fact has some edge, but again, it's whether the bettor should reasonably be expected to recognize a line as a bad line.

[relaaxx]

i have reached an agreement that i find to be very fair to the player and the book. i am being paid out at the price of +800 (what book says there line was intended to be) on my wager. funds in my account already. i think this is fair for me, especially because in reality my funds were never at risk. i have no more complaint, i think somewhat valid arguments could be made for player to get anywhere from 0 all the way to the full 4688. often in this case the player is screwed but management came through and did what i think is the right thing.

i thank sbr for assistance provided in the matter.

great. love happy endings. congradulations bubba. glad you ended up with,what you thought was fair.

[dj_destroyer]

The player is happy, I assume the book is happy; it's a positive step in an industry where problems like these often go unnoticed and unfixed. Kudos!

[andywend]

You obviously don't understand math or the wagering business. Not only was this a bad line, it was OBVIOUSLY a bad line. Offering +1875 on a game going into overtime is a HUGE EDGE FOR THE PLAYER. That would be like me offering you 6-1 odds on rolling a 7 with a standard set of dice. Let's look at all the reasons why your arguments are ridiculous. 1.Since the NFL went to 11 playoff games a year since 1990, there have been 225 playoff games, 20 have gone into OT. That is 7.6% and a ratio of around 12-1. If we look since 2003, there have been 92 playoff games, 10 of those have gone into OT, which is a ratio of 8.2-1 in recent trending. Still think +1875 is "fair"? 2. Do you have any clue what the house edge is on a -3500/+1875 line? It's a paltry 2.23%. That is slightly less hold than offering -105/-105. Do you really think they would offer margins that low on a prop bet that would be all 1 sided action? 3. The -3500 on NO is basically offering only the YES bet on overtime to players. But offering -3500/+800 is still less vig than offering -120/-120. Would you be crying foul if a low volume prop was offered at -120/-120? Why not, there is more house edge in that than -3500/+800 4. The fact that they cancelled BEFORE THE EVENT STARTED, and then offered the fair price of +800 before the contest means this place did NOTHING WRONG. And by the way, don't get too caught up in the 8 point favorite angle, thats just to balance action on the game, means very little in relation to chances of OT. In fact, the more important number was the total of 34, which predicted a tight, low scoring game which is more condusive to an OT. The fact that so many nimrods are screaming for sanctions and crying foul is further proof of how dumb the general betting public is in regards to gambling.

Someone who clearly knows the ins and outs when it comes to oddsmaking and gambling.

Either Indio is a winning gambler or he manages a sportsbook somewhere.

Quality post.

[d2bets]

You obviously don't understand math or the wagering business. Not only was this a bad line, it was OBVIOUSLY a bad line. Offering +1875 on a game going into overtime is a HUGE EDGE FOR THE PLAYER. That would be like me offering you 6-1 odds on rolling a 7 with a standard set of dice. Let's look at all the reasons why your arguments are ridiculous.

1.Since the NFL went to 11 playoff games a year since 1990, there have been 225 playoff games, 20 have gone into OT. That is 7.6% and a ratio of around 12-1. If we look since 2003, there have been 92 playoff games, 10 of those have gone into OT, which is a ratio of 8.2-1 in recent trending. Still think +1875 is "fair"?

2. Do you have any clue what the house edge is on a -3500/+1875 line? It's a paltry 2.23%. That is slightly less hold than offering -105/-105. Do you really think they would offer margins that low on a prop bet that would be all 1 sided action?

3. The -3500 on NO is basically offering only the YES bet on overtime to players. But offering -3500/+800 is still less vig than offering -120/-120. Would you be crying foul if a low volume prop was offered at -120/-120? Why not, there is more house edge in that than -3500/+800

4. The fact that they cancelled BEFORE THE EVENT STARTED, and then offered the fair price of +800 before the contest means this place did NOTHING WRONG.

And by the way, don't get too caught up in the 8 point favorite angle, thats just to balance action on the game, means very little in relation to chances of OT. In fact, the more important number was the total of 34, which predicted a tight, low scoring game which is more condusive to an OT.

The fact that so many nimrods are screaming for sanctions and crying foul is further proof of how dumb the general betting public is in regards to gambling.

What are the odds and house edge on a single number on a roulette wheel (35-1 payout with 38 numbers)?

[indio]

That's all well and good, but at least to my way of thinking, not the proper line of inquiry. The proper consideration is whether the line was an obvious error to a reasonable/average customer/bettor. The average bettor does not and should not be expected to know all those percentages. Most don't. The inquiry is not whether the bettor in fact has some edge, but again, it's whether the bettor should reasonably be expected to recognize a line as a bad line.

You make a valid reasoning, but if a book is offering literally thousands of wagering options each and every day, it's just not plausible that these will all be error free. With that in mind, what is the barometer for how many -ev wagers (-ev for the book) you would have them honor because the "average" bettor doesn't know he bet a player edge prop?

Let's say for example Martin Kaymer is entered in the XYZ open (an average type field) and there are 120 entrants. Kaymer is offered at around 25-1 at most shops to win the event. Now let's say a fictional sportsbook offers TO FINISH TOP 10 odds and mistakenly offers Kaymer at +800 to finish top 10, when it was supposed to be +300. Math wise, its an 11-1 prop, and the "average" bettor might think that +800 is reasonable, whereas a regular golf bettor knows this is way off in the players favor.Most other shops are offering between +275 and +400. So the book gets a few thousand bet on Kaymer at +800 before they realize their error. Do you think they should eat the bets every time something like this happens? And we've already established that due to the number of bets offered every day, this type of mistake will happen regularly throughout the year.

Let's take that one step further. Lets say the book took bets in the above scenario from 8 players. A few of those are novices who almost never bet golf, and a few of those have been betting golf every week for years. Do you let some players keep their +800, and make the others have +300 because some should have known better, and some claim they didn't? And then what can of worms does that open if that ever gets out? So you really have to either honor for everyone, or not honor for everyone, which leads back to the original question, how many times do they have to eat player edge bets?

And using your final qualifier, you say the question is whether the bettor should reasonably be expected to recognize a line as a bad line. So let's say I'm a little on the sleazy side, and I bet the overtime prop at +1875 knowing it was a mistake. Then let's say my bet was cancelled (which I kind of expected), and I read this thread seeing someone got their original bet honored who didn't know better, do I now have a right to get my cancelled bet awarded too?

I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I'm glad this guy got some money. But I'd make a safe guess that in this instance,this was only bet by this player(or very few others), and they see a long term profitable relationship for them, so they are making an investment to keep him playing there. Which is all good for everyone I suppose.

[indio]

What are the odds and house edge on a single number on a roulette wheel (35-1 payout with 38 numbers)?

That's an American roulette wheel with 38 numbers (who the heck would ever play American roulette when European roulette is almost always available too?). odds are 37-1 and the house edge is 5.26%

European roulette is 36-1 with a house edge of 2.7%

Thing to remember about casino holds is that it is completely random luck, so a 2.7% hold in a casino game is a huge house edge. As long as they get consistent and mostly balanced play, they can't lose if they are properly funded. Sports betting can be beaten because it has an element of skill, which is why most books charging -110/-110 (a 4.55% hold) on high volume games is considered fair. Sports Prop bets, that are exploitable and usually much lower volume, require a higher hold and lower limits to minimize risk. Therefore, a 2.7% hold on a game like roulette is a large house edge, whereas a 2.7 % hold on a bet on how many yards will Joe Shmo run for in the first half is a very low house edge.

Truth be known, all though everything I've said in this thread is my true feelings and thoughts, I happened to notice a cool looking Pinnacle Sports hat I'd like, and I'm trying to get points for it without making completely useless posts.

[andywend]

Indio, if you consider your posts useless, then what must you think about the quality of other people's postings?

[bachngocduong]

You obviously don't understand math or the wagering business. Not only was this a bad line, it was OBVIOUSLY a bad line. Offering +1875 on a game going into overtime is a HUGE EDGE FOR THE PLAYER. That would be like me offering you 6-1 odds on rolling a 7 with a standard set of dice. Let's look at all the reasons why your arguments are ridiculous.

1.Since the NFL went to 11 playoff games a year since 1990, there have been 225 playoff games, 20 have gone into OT. That is 7.6% and a ratio of around 12-1. If we look since 2003, there have been 92 playoff games, 10 of those have gone into OT, which is a ratio of 8.2-1 in recent trending. Still think +1875 is "fair"?

2. Do you have any clue what the house edge is on a -3500/+1875 line? It's a paltry 2.23%. That is slightly less hold than offering -105/-105. Do you really think they would offer margins that low on a prop bet that would be all 1 sided action?

3. The -3500 on NO is basically offering only the YES bet on overtime to players. But offering -3500/+800 is still less vig than offering -120/-120. Would you be crying foul if a low volume prop was offered at -120/-120? Why not, there is more house edge in that than -3500/+800

4. The fact that they cancelled BEFORE THE EVENT STARTED, and then offered the fair price of +800 before the contest means this place did NOTHING WRONG.

And by the way, don't get too caught up in the 8 point favorite angle, thats just to balance action on the game, means very little in relation to chances of OT. In fact, the more important number was the total of 34, which predicted a tight, low scoring game which is more condusive to an OT.

The fact that so many nimrods are screaming for sanctions and crying foul is further proof of how dumb the general betting public is in regards to gambling.

you such the F off
your # 1 BULLLLSHITT
your #2 # 3
see here
Sat 1/14 1109 Any punt returns for TD +850
4:25PM 1110 No punt returns for TD -1300

Sat 1/14 1267 Tied at Half & SF FT +2200
4:25PM 1268 Any other result -3400

[d2bets]

5Dimes has:

Sat 1/14 1331
1st half a tie & SF wins game +1950 4:25PM
1332 Any other result -2950 Sat 1/14 17113
New York Giants win Superbowl +1700 4:30PM
17114 Field wins Superbowl -2700

So why is -3500/+1875 something that we can't believe a book would offer? Are the above lines also bad lines? Do these really have less hold than a -105/-105. I know how you calculated your percentage, but I don't think it's correct way to analyze it.

[Scooter]

---------

[Winner_13]

what book?

[durito]

Someone who clearly knows the ins and outs when it comes to oddsmaking and gambling.

Either Indio is a winning gambler or he manages a sportsbook somewhere.

Quality post.

lol

[RickySteve]

lol

+1

Cliff and I are coming to see you. Is there room at your place for a bouncy castle?