Discussion in 'The Sports Book' started by Rush, Mar 30, 2013.
Good luck, man!
I think you should have put the whole 4gs on Tiger to win the Masters!
Got better odds on these other bets!
Without bothering to look, I bet you can't even get 3-1 on Tiger to win the Masters
Tiger will be a joke as odds go, but would you bet against him? I won't. I will be out there the week of the Masters, and I will put $500 on him, because it will be a sound wager. He's playing as well as he has.
UKF, you watered your odds down on the NL champ bet by making two of them. Only one can win, so in essence, you "halved" the worth of each bet.
Tiger makes as much sense based on that, IMO.
I still hope you cash, and you have a whole season to root!
Actually, I still got better odds with these bets. The only time I checked Masters wagers, the odds on Tiger were two and a half to one.
Golf is definitely not my area of expertise, but I believe there are approximately eighty entrants in the masters (a lot more than there are NL teams vying for the penant). But let's use a little handicapping knowledge to study this question. Again, I am not a golf expert. I understand Tiger is the favorite to win. But its a one weekend event. if it were a seven match series, laying the favorite can be a good bet. But that is not the case. This is a futures bet (where the house already has a pretty good edge). Even if Tiger is the favorite, how manhy other golfers can reaosnably be expected to win the Masters? Three? Four? I'm not sure, but I assumed at least three other golfers stand a reasonable shot of winning that tournament.
Apply the same logic to the National League. In my esitmation, there are four teams that have a reasonable shot at winning the pennant (Atl, SF, LA, and Cincy). I can see an argument where someone else might include St. Louis in that group, but I would not. Of the four teams I think have a shot, the best payoffs are on the two I bet.
And I haven't "halved" the value of each bet. By placing two wagers, I am essentially betting $2000 at four and a half to one. I think what you mean to say, actually, is that I have hedged my wager somewhat, which is correct. But I'm more comfortable with that hedge than I am betting on Tiger for one weekend with worse odds. Sometimes, I do think the heavy favorite is a good bet (I think I even posted a pic of winning ticket betting on Serena to in the US Open last August, even though she was -140). But in this case, I greatly prefer betting on two teams I feel pretty confident about (epecially Cincy, I think they are on the verge of a breakthrough) on a sport I understand much better than golf.
All that being said, if someone held a gun to my head and forced me to bet, heck yeah I'm betting on Tiger to win! Fortunately, there was no gun to my head last weekend, but just enough vodka and rebull to convince me that leaving a few grand behind might make for a fun summer :evillaugh
I like most of what you wrote. It's pretty sound. The "odds" are still way off, though.
You say you are catching $2000 at 4.5 to one. If that were true, you would be getting back $11,000 on your winning wager. As your tickets state, you are getting either 5 or 6k back. Thus, we are back to "halving your bets".
Take that 4.5 and cut it in half. Now, Multiply your $2000 by the new 2.25 overall odds you have, and you get 4.5 to one, or $4,500.
I sincerely hope you hit all three that you can, and have your next trip paid for!
This is a pretty interesting idea that I've thought up before but never had the balls to actually implement.
The only flaw I see is that I think in the NL both the Cards and Nats have a chance of winning, surely making it a 6 horse race instead of the 4 which effectively makes the bet somewhat profitable?
I hear ya. Obviously, opinion factors into it and I should have included DC in the list of potential NL winners. I personally do not have much faith in them, but like the Cardinals, I understand why someone would include them.
I'm doing this from memory, but I think the NL odds last weekend were LAD 3 to 1, SF 4 to 1, Cincy 4 to 1, DC 4 to 1, Atl 5 to 1, and St. Louis 6 to 1
You're right. I was using betting odds interchangably with the liklihood of winning the bet. No futures bet involves true odds. But since gamblers may handicap a sports bet differently than the house (which we cannot do on other casino games), the math for the gambler may be a bit different than the math for the house. In this case, since I am only handicapping four teams as having a chance at winning the pennant, and I have half of those teams at odds better than two to one, I am happy to make this bet (not to mention, ther is always the possibility of a true hedge where I cannot lose if either Cincy, or especially Atl, make the NLCS). As I wrote, I don't know enough about golf, but I don't personally handicap Tiger winning the Masters as likely as you do. Simply a difference of opinion (or my lack of knowledge!)
I think the sportsbooks have it about right. I honestly think it will be between LAD and SF, with Cincy and DC being the other division winners.
Not that there's any point me putting futures bets on being based in the UK!
Separate names with a comma.