Jeff Haney on why most props aren't so super for bettors

[clevfan]

February 02, 2007

Jeff Haney on why most props aren't so super for bettors

LAS VEGAS SUN


Welcome to the dark side of those "fun" and "wild" and "wacky" Super Bowl betting propositions we hear so much about.

Around this time every year, casinos release special parlay cards devoted solely to the Super Bowl.

Some of the options for bettors playing the parlay cards seem benign enough: Will the Colts' score in the big game be an odd or an even number?

Others look suspiciously similar to the ever-popular "props" that play such a prominent role on Super Bowl Sunday in Las Vegas: over/unders on the number of field goals, interceptions, fumbles, sacks.

Yet gamblers should approach Super Bowl parlay cards with extreme caution.

From a bettor's perspective, these cards offer some of the very worst gambling opportunities of the year in Las Vegas.

The primary reason is that ties lose on the Super Bowl cards.

For example, they offer a point spread of 7 in Sunday's game, but both sides lose if the Colts beat the Bears by exactly 7 points. Essentially, the cards offer bettors a choice of taking the Bears plus 6 1/2 or the Colts minus 7 1/2.

The payout prices, not surprisingly, don't come close to making up for ties losing.

The specifics of the cards vary by casino company, but the cards almost always offer a payout of 5-1 odds for going 3-for-3.

(Casino marketers opt to refer to the 3-for-3 payout as "6 for 1," a misleading phrase that here in the real world means 5-1 - that is, a bettor risks $1 to net $5.)

That's not going to cut it when the options on the card include props with massive house advantages such as over/under 2 on the number of fumbles. Because a result of exactly 2 loses, this is equivalent to making bettors choose between under 1 1/2 or over 2 1/2.

I have never begrudged a sports book its cut of the action, but this comes dangerously close to crossing the line and entering fleece-the-suckers territory.

It gets worse.

At some properties, bettors can choose whether the first score of the game will be a touchdown pass, a touchdown run, a field goal or "any other score." The same option is available for the game's last score or the first score of the second half, depending on the property.

Because bettors can choose only one of those options, a glaring weakness emerges: Obviously, "any other" (a special teams or defensive touchdown, or a safety) is by far the biggest underdog of the four. The true chance of the first (or last) score Sunday being of the "any other" variety is certainly no more than 10 percent, or 9-1 against.

Another prop on some cards is total sacks, over/under 5 (that is, over 5 1/2 or under 4 1/2). Given the true expected mean of sacks in this game is about 3.4 or 3.5 according to the sports betting market, a bettor playing over 5 1/2 would have only about a 13 percent chance of winning, or 7-1 against.

So it's conceivable that a visitor looking to have some fun on Super Bowl weekend could pick up one of these parlay cards, make those three selections (first score "any other," last score "any other," and sacks over 5 1/2) and stand to get paid off at odds of 5-1 on a 799-1 event.

The house's theoretical edge on this wager is about 99.4 percent.

The fact that a tourist could make a single wager in a Las Vegas casino taking the worst of it to the tune of 99.4 percent tells me that these Super Bowl parlay cards in their present form should be illegal - as in, prohibited by state law.