Another interactive example from the SL/TB game

[Machiavelli]

On the surface, it is appears very similar to the first one but I think it is much different.

Situation:
Market is SL -2.5
TB 13, SL 7
12:22 left in 4th quarter
SL 1st and 10 on their own 20
SL was pregame -2.5 -125 but Faulk is out for the game

Rather than try to estimate the current price, try to estimate the price in the following two potential situations:

(a) SL scores a FG with 8:00 to go
(b) SL scores a TD with 8:00 to go

I will return with my thoughts after I take the remainder of TheDevil's money on the golf course tomorrow. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

[Oakley]

Hi Mach,

I'm always trying to look at the game as a coach might look at it. In a situation like yours above, if I laid the -2.5 on Stl, I want the Rams to kick a fg on this drive much more than I want them to score a td. A Stl fg has them down 3 and kicking off with 8 minutes left in the game (I'll use that # since thats what you have in your question). With TB up, the likelihood of a TB score decreases dramatically as they become more conservative with play calling and try to keep the clock rolling. Assuming Stl gets the ball back down 3 pts, you have 2 shots at covering. A Stl fg to send it to ot or a Stl td. Either way they are in 4 down mode in their last drive.

If Stl scores a td with 8 minutes left and go up 1, I think you've got big problems. TB becomes more aggressive with the ball knowing that they need a score. If Stl manages to stop their drive, then they become the passive offense as they try and burn clock (although with a lunatic like Martz you never know).

I think without Faulk their is no doubt that TB is favored or at worst a Pick em pre-game.

So, In answer to your question I think I would tend to lean more towards TB with them down 1 and 8 minutes to go than I would with them up 3. Both scenarios they are the favorite:

With TB Up 3 after the Stl Fg, I'd have them around 75
With TB Down 1 after the Stl TD, I'd have them a couple pts higher than that (I believe this # would be in the low 80's with a team with a more conservative coach and a better running game than the Rams had last night)

[Picksix]

Oakley, I agree with almost everything you said. The one thing I'm not sure about is Stl. scoring the touchdown and being up by 1.

If they scored with 4 minutes left instead of 8, I would agree with you 100%. With 8 minutes left, it seems like too much time. T.B. would be more aggresive than normal which could put the ball back in the Rams hands with 5 or 6 minutes to go. I don't know if the Rams would be able to go into clock killing mode with that much time left.



(I deleted (edited) some of my reasoning because I was using the wrong score.) (Thanks Oakley)



Again, I'll agree with Oakley on the 75 for T.B. up 3.

On the T.B. down 1, I would go a little lower rather than a little higher, maybe 68 or 70. Now if T.B. throws 2 incomplete passes right off the bat, and have a 3rd and 10 from their own 18 with 7:37 left, then I would make T.B. 55.

Question: Do the market makers set the odds strictly on the sitution in the game, or are they always trying to keep balanced action? (factoring in which side has more action)

I would think it's a little of both and also depends on who is setting the Markets. (A vet. or a rookie) or (Gambler or non- Gambler)

I have a couple other comments about the recent interactives but I'm not sure I should say them publicly. I'll wait for the PM's to come back.

[Oakley]

Picksix,

I think you mean TB down 1 instead of up 1 (Score would be Stl14 TB 13 if the Rams scored a TD).

If TB is down 1 and punts the ball back to Stl with 5 min to go I think its gonna be tough for the Rams to put 3 more pts on the board (once again it would be easier for Stl than it would most teams due to Martz aggressive nature). Reason being that on 1st and 2nd down, a lot of teams will run the ball or make short safe passes that will keep the clock rolling. A couple of 3rd down conversions and there goes a lot of that 5 mins.

Also, coachs that have any sense are not gonna attempt a long FG with little time left on the clock. Too much chance of a blocked kick, or a miss that would turn the ball over with great field position. As a result, for the Rams to cover they would need to really move the ball a good distance down the field which is gonna eat up a lot of time (unless of course there is a big play)

As far as your MM question, I think the MM should always try and set a line that draws balanced action. Im sure they are wary of their position on the game, but the goal I think would remain to get balance at every new price. Would love to hear wsexsteve's take on that question.

[Holy Bull]

I'll give it a try and put it together (I really don't know what I'm doing so please tell me where I've gone wrong):

X = chance of rams FG on this drive
Y = chance of rams TD on this drive
Z = chance of rams Catastrophic possesion (grouping of everything resulting in either a score or likely score for TB...basically an immediate TO or a late TO + runback)
1-(X+Y+Z) chance of punt


If X, I'd put the number at around 27 (slightly higher than oak and p6), either way this is a pretty vanilla scenario.
If Y, I think the number would be about 25 (Oak pointed out that TB would be less conservative, this inflates the number because it preserves time and increases a TO,either straight or on downs.)
If Z, you start approaching low enough to 0 that I clumped this together. With TB up 9, they'd be going for a TD + FG (1 pt win). With a TB td, you are down either 12 or 14 depending on the 2 pt result. This is better off than a TB FG as we almost saw last night if the rams could have completed that last drive + 2 pt conversion, but still pretty disasterous. Only place there is value is a TB catastrophic possession (missed FG/TO). Will put this bunch together at 8.
If 1-(X+Y+Z), assuming 8 minuts again, I'll put this # at 16. This may be a little high?

So we have 27x+25y+8z+17(1-(X+Y+Z) = 10x+8y-9z+16. Looking at a total of maybe 19?

Looks like the real key here is accurately pricing the scenerio after a punt since the chance of a TD is really only giving you 2-3 points on the total as is a FG.

[KingOfTheSquares]

For what it's worth, the sim has TB+2.5, up by 6, 12:22 left in game, SL on 20 with an 86% chance of winning the game ATS, therefore SL has a 14% chance of an ATS win.

If SL kicks FG at minute 8.00 then SL win chance goes to 13% (4:36 minutes dif has an impact!)

If SL makes TD (seven pts) at minute 8.00 then SL win chance is: 39%

[Machiavelli]

Good work everyone. I agree closely with Oakley's assessment, that a FG is better than a TD for a SL cover at the 8:00 mark. As I was trading this game throughout the 3rd quarter (the score was 13-7 at the half and throughout the 3Q), I kept thinking to myself, boy, a SL TD is all that much better than a SL FG. Towards the end of the 3rd Q I was thinking, I am indifferent between the two. And then it got to the point where in my eyes, the FG was more dangerous for the cover.

OK, here's my breakdown (all prices in terms of SL -2.5):

<u>(a) SL FG at 8:00</u>

Here is one way to "bound" this problem: What is the probability if SL was tied at 8:00? In that case it would be pretty close to $50 (with TB getting the ball and Faulk hurt). The 3 point difference hurts some, but not too badly because the potential overtime scenario is preserved. So right away I am thinking somewhere in the 30's, probably low 30's.

After the SL FG at 8:00, if TB scores at all, they would almost certainly cover. If they don't, SL still has to be priced a little less than their potential price after they get another FG. That is to say, a (sane) SL coach would "take" a sure thing FG if you offered it to him at the start of his drive, but it is a decently close call. So I am thinking around $42 is the right price on the SL drive start. A TB score has to be more likely than not, so my final estimate (which confirms the estimate in the other paragraph) is:

SL FG at 8:00 = $30

<u>(b) SL TD at 8:00</u>

PickSix makes the point in support of SL that if there were 5 or 6 minutes remaining instead of 8, that SL would be in a much weaker position. I think that he has the right idea, that this is a situation that is ultra-sensitive to time, but I think that we already have elapsed a couple of very crucial minutes (the time from 11:00 to 8:00) and that a SL FG is doubtful without a TB turnover (See also Oakley's good rebuttal).

Most of your SL covers in this scenario are going to occur off of either TB turnovers or broken plays on offense, particularly if TB runs even one in-bounds play to take a little time off of the clock. So, since most of the covers are going to be "off the wall"-type plays, I don't want to analyze this price by thinking "OK, what will SL be if they get the ball back with 5:30 to go on their own 30" because that will not be the primary method of covering IMO.

I just thought of another scenario under which SL can cover 2.5. A TB TD + 2pt conversion would give them a 7 pt lead and reintroduce the chance of OT. A TB TD + missed 2pt conversion would allow SL to score a TD and then go for two. So I think SL covers can come from one of three avenues:

TB turnover (in their own end)
TB punt and SL scores despite waning time
TB scores TD, and revitalizes SL inititive

Those are arranged in order of most likely to least likely, although the contribution to SL's value is roughly equal amongst each of them. Also, don't forget, in all three scenarios a SL score does not end the game unless they do it with almost no time left. TB will have one last drive to cover. So, here we have another bound, that SL is most likely not going to be more than 75 even if they get their score.

Despite being highly mathematically inclined, I firmly believe that at some point you have to drop the math and the sims and just go by feel, because there is just too many subtle things going on. This is that point IMO. Having identifed the three avenues of covering, I am going to estimate a 32% chance of one of them happening and resulting in SL taking the lead ATS, with 75% of those holding on against TB re-covering. All together, I am making the price:

(b) SL TD at 8:00 = $24

This is a little higher than I initially thought I was going to make it, since I didn't realize the TB touchdown avenue. So, yes, I agree with Oakley that the FG is more dangerous, although my values for SL are a little stronger than his (a) SL = $25 and (b) SL &lt; $25.