ONLINE SPORTSBOOKS

Go Back   MajorWager Forums > MW - Online Sportsbooks > Handicapping "Think Tank"
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Handicapping "Think Tank" technical handicapping and statistics

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 10-19-2002, 03:58 AM
The Actuary The Actuary is offline
Five Star General
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 20,122
Default

P6,

This sort of situation arises a great deal in racing.

Often one animal will be grossly overbet causing overlays virtually across the board.

Most will tell you from records that splitting the equity gained from this between two animals is optimal, three dilutes the overall return as does just one.

I hate conceding the difference and undoubtedly cost myself money, generally going with just one. But in this situation both are clearly pos expectations, in the coin flip clearly tails -105 is not.

TA
__________________
In 1998 the Department of Justice brought charges under the Wire Act against 22 American citizens involved in managing foreign-based sites. "You canít hide online," Janet Reno, the attorney-general, warned Internet betting operators, "and you canít hide offshore."
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 10-19-2002, 04:18 AM
Picksix Picksix is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,334
Default

TA,

I understand your point and I agree with you. In horse racing I would have no problem taking a stand and selecting which horse offers the best value. Also, I feel I've watched as much golf as anyone and would maybe make a stand there too, but take some thing like nascar, If I have Gordon at -125 and Stewart at +130, I would have no clue which line is off and therefor I wouldn't risk a dime, but I would bet them both and lock in some money to give me a FREE shot at the last race Exacta at Santa Anita.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 10-19-2002, 04:32 AM
buckeye buckeye is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,612
Default

picksix,
The problem is that two tails and you're bust! The risk of ruin at 50% of bankroll is enormous and why I keep saying money management can't be swept under the carpet. If betting on a 50-50 prop at +110 you still will have swings and binomial distribution patterns/streaks that will kill you if undisciplined. With a no risk bet or converting the same "small" risk to greater odds ( reward ) you don't risk ruin or throw $ management out the door.

You also have to compare apples and apples. My scenario only risks 20,000 in 100 tries ( 200 a pop ) to get to that 13,500 profit. TA's or yours(5000 at risk each attempt) risks 500,000 to get the 26,000. The risk to reward is MUCH BETTER in my scenario. And I've effectively put my whole bankroll into risk twice and have virtually ZERO CHANCE of busting ( unless heads hits the first 50 times straight and I obviously would not have 5000 to put on each if I ran into that kind of streak but it would be over in 2 tries for the other ) whereas any small run of tails will likely bust the other case. The first two or 3/4 for instance.

Please look at it more closely guys, it really is cool and works! Philo described just putting two units on one side and one on the other in basic training, and even that will help over a straight 1 unit on the soft side! It might seem counter-intuitive to bet anything on the -105 line but you are also betting more on the +110 too. If they were +100 and +105 instead it would be the same principle. Being less than even money doesn't matter if their is a scalp inherent/available. My last big ones of these was Monty -150 vs +170 ( I forget the opponent ) and the -150 side was at OLY so it wasn't exactly a shaky out. Really, mull it over and you'll see!

GL
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 10-19-2002, 05:09 AM
Picksix Picksix is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,334
Default

Buckeye,

Again, I think you're both right. I normally do exactly what you're suggesting. Using your bankroll scenario you are correct. How about this way. You and TA both have $10,000 you will put into a coin flip fund. The max you can bet on this prop is 500 (which is fairly common for props like this). You wager 525 to win 500 and also 500 to win 550, 100 times. you would break even 50 times and you would make 25 bucks 50 times for a +1250. Now TA will bet 500 to win 550 100 times. He will lose 500 50 times -25,000 and he will win 550 50 times +2750 which makes him +2500 compared to +1250 for you. TA would not run out of money unless he got down by more than 20 losses vs wins which is unlikely. I think this is the point TA is trying to make.

One other pain in the butt about scalping, especially if you're using a large part of your BR, is keeping your funds balanced in all your accounts.

I think the X factor is the bets we play aren't as predictable as a coin flip. Which makes me a lot more willing to play it safe even if I'm giving a little money back in the long run.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 10-19-2002, 05:40 AM
buckeye buckeye is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,612
Default

p6,
Obviously it only works if your normal bet is something less than the max at either book. But this will work for any $line sport and not just props. I find LARGER scalps on golf, and others do on Neckcar, but a 5 cent bases scalp isn't that uncommon if you shop and Pinn is often involved to boot.

I don't think that many players bet max bets as their normal unit such that there is no room for using this technique. If so, then it is not applicable. But TA is inferring that the -105 can never be a smart bet. I disagree as you must think of it in terms of leveraging it for your benefit and as a combination and not look at each side separately. I am proposing that you could look at the same example with -110/+100 and +105/-115 and it may be easier to "see it". But any scalp and ANY under max bet will be helped by this technique.

Now I'll go a little off and say that I have never read this technique detailed ANYWHERE ELSE other than posts I've made over the years. Philo actually paraphrased my explanation of it for our piece as I droned on about it and parlays and other things and he had to do me the favor of editing down my drivel. I may not be the only one that's done it over the years, but no one else has ever said so or published on it, to my knowledge, before our piece. So my coining it "partial scalping" is my own creation/term. So remember that if you do use it we are owed a royalty, LOL!

Other factors like balancing accounts is why I said free w/ds is important and having the bankroll to do this in say Neteller is another. Before Neteller I was much more constrained and less able to do this to the degree I can now.

JMHO
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 10-19-2002, 12:19 PM
The Actuary The Actuary is offline
Five Star General
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 20,122
Default

Buckeye,

I have nothing else to add, other then if you scalp you ultimately end up paying the same guy routinely, it's what separates good linesmen from bad as graphically illustrated in our example.

Please do not try to make it any simpler, I understand the concept, it has nothing to do with the particular number posted if it was heads +110, tails +105, I'd still advocate betting as much as possible on heads and half as much on tails, I think a pure scalper would advocate more on tails the worse of the two numbers to even out the return.

I am grateful the thread stayed basic, I really didn't want to include the thousands of vagaries that separate sports betting from coin tosses.

And if you remember next chat, I have some golf info. from this past week that will really make you laugh that I'd rather not post.

GL
TA

__________________
In 1998 the Department of Justice brought charges under the Wire Act against 22 American citizens involved in managing foreign-based sites. "You canít hide online," Janet Reno, the attorney-general, warned Internet betting operators, "and you canít hide offshore."
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 10-19-2002, 03:01 PM
buckeye buckeye is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,612
Default

[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-cool.gif[/img] TA, I look forward to it.

I guess I must have misunderstood your stance because your "as much as possible on heads and half as much on tails" is exactly the technique being advocated just using 50% of the max as the "bet size" instead of my example's 2% of bankroll. Its the same principle, but just money management considerations on what the "bet portion" of the partial scalp will/should be. I used 2% because my idea is you find these while line shopping to make your 2% play on the one side to begin with, and then when you see that a simultaneous scalp exists then you use this technique and leave the "bet" your were going to make anyway on the side you like. So we both seem to agree on the technique now, its just how to use it that is for each player to decide!

What you are now advocating is that since you can convert a +110 play that you liked for X units into a +122 ( or whatever it is to do 5K/2.5K ) play it is worth it to up your bet to 25X. As I've said that seems a little radical $ MGMT to me but I do agree that putting more than your original X bet on the play is now called for by its BETTER +EV and strength. I was just saying you maximize the odds by leaving the original play size your normal one. I agree with you the sharper angle would be to raise it some ( for me that works because I use a stratified bet size system of $MGMT but many use a flat system for which they don't bet more on some bets than others ). So your point is a good one but for others even doing the 2/1 ratio helps and works!

I hope others are helped by this "civil" debate! I really think this technique is a very STRONG BETTING ANGLE to maximize profits.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 10-19-2002, 03:27 PM
The Actuary The Actuary is offline
Five Star General
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 20,122
Default

Mach how often are you on both sides of anything?[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]
__________________
In 1998 the Department of Justice brought charges under the Wire Act against 22 American citizens involved in managing foreign-based sites. "You canít hide online," Janet Reno, the attorney-general, warned Internet betting operators, "and you canít hide offshore."
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 10-19-2002, 04:25 PM
Picksix Picksix is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,334
Default

TA, I also have a question for you:

I'm not sure if you know what American Idol is. It was a contest to see who would win a recording contract in the music industry. It ended about 1 month ago. Towards the end of that contest some books started taking action on who would win. Eventually it got down to two people remaining, 1 guy and 1 girl. Suppose you found the guy at +220 at one place and you found the girl at -200 at another. What would you with this situation?
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 10-19-2002, 07:49 PM
buckeye buckeye is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,612
Default

I know, I know. The proper response is "shoot yourself" for even thinking about creating a situation where you may CARE WHO WINS that crap! LOL What's the power rating on the gay guy? I know, which ONE? Of course its kind of hard to scalp a prop with a $55 max.

GL
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 10-19-2002, 08:15 PM
Picksix Picksix is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,334
Default

Buckeye, money is money!!!

I've seen scalps on Academy Awards and on weekend box office results.

I just wanted to see what TA would do in a situation where it is hard to know what book is offering the value, but there is the potential to lock in some money risk free?
Reply With Quote
  #31 (permalink)  
Old 10-19-2002, 09:09 PM
buckeye buckeye is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,612
Default

I agree p6, just trying to lighten it up a bit as this stuff can be pretty stiff when we drone on about it! On the AA, always vote for the actress with the smallest hooters, unless its Jennifer Connolly or Julia Roberts. And if an actor played someone with a disability, they're a good bet. LOL
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old 10-20-2002, 02:45 PM
The Actuary The Actuary is offline
Five Star General
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 20,122
Default

Thats a very ironic question P6,

as a couple comrades here can attest,

the American Idol interactive was over $100 to sell all with 5 folks left.

under normal circumstances I would've tried to ID the error and just exploit that.

however something rather amazing occured, I sold them all I think 50 times, got a free $100,

but one entrant they had posted at 0-2, who I thought was eliminated was actually still in the competition,

so not only was it over $100, but I go back into my account a couple days later, and WOW, all of a sudden,

the one that was 0-2, is now 6-9 as one was eliminated, the opportunity now to sell this one for an additional 50 x $6=another $300.

So, I in essence did what I normally would by selling all but the mistake, unwittingly.[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

TA
__________________
In 1998 the Department of Justice brought charges under the Wire Act against 22 American citizens involved in managing foreign-based sites. "You canít hide online," Janet Reno, the attorney-general, warned Internet betting operators, "and you canít hide offshore."
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old 10-20-2002, 03:16 PM
turkoman1963 turkoman1963 is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,919
Default

Buckeye raises a point of scalping award shows and other events as well.

I think there might be a way to get out of a bad book on the breeders cup simply by taking overinflated odds on uk books and then betting with the "bad book" to cover your positions.

But I'm not advocating that.

What I AM advocating is taking calculated risks where you see very close lines between the bad book and the good book and then hedging the wagers that are going the "wrong" way at halftime (if you are playing foots). I've seen many players do this to bring their balances down to a manageable level at a book they feel is going to take a long time to pay, if at all.

Remember -- you can't put a price on piece of mind as well.

I realize my advice is full of pitfalls. But if you document your plays, know where you are most successful, then find "those successful" plays that can also be "middled" where you are on the "right side with the good book" then I think it is worth the risk.

For me.

And that was what I was trying to convey to Randyrohm...
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old 10-20-2002, 04:49 PM
Picksix Picksix is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,334
Default

TA,

I was on that too!!!

When there were were 5 people left, I thought the favorite was way off. For the record, I don't have one ounce of racism in me, but I knew the votes were being called in by the american public. The favorite was a black girl that was unbelievable, but sadly, I knew many people in this country would not vote for her. I'm not saying I knew she would lose, but I thought -200 was way off.

I was just curiuous what you would do in an event that you had no knowledge of, but had a chance to make some free money. I guess you answered my question by saying you shorted all available contestants. Lucky for you the girl that wasn't available to short ended up getting back in the hunt.

I'm now looking for a scalp on who will be the next Pope. LOL
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:44 PM.

Please be advised that if you are wagering over the internet, this is illegal in many jurisdictions. A wagering site may be operating legally at their location but it may still be illegal for you to wager from your location. We suggest you check on the legal situation from any jurisdiction in which you may wager.
 

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC6