Week 12 Other Games Thread

Donate To GopherHole
100 folks bet $110 on +110 = $1100 in
100 folks bet $100 on -110 = $1000 in

Favorite wins -> book has to give the $1100 back + the $1000 from the underdog bettors.
Underdog wins -> book has to give the $1000 back + $1000 from the favorite bettors, and gets to keep the $100 of so-called "vig". + the $1100 from the favorite bettors.

So basically, the books want the people betting on the favorites to lose? So basically, the book doesn't make money in this scenario, either way.

Do I do this correctly? I'm sure I'm missing a lot in the factors.


EDIT: no I didn't do it correctly, fixed above
 
Last edited:

MplsGopher said:
100 folks bet $110 on +110 = $1100 in
100 folks bet $100 on -110 = $1000 in

Favorite wins -> book has to give the $1100 back + the $1000 from the underdog bettors.
Underdog wins -> book has to give the $1000 back + $1000 from the favorite bettors, and gets to keep the $100 of so-called "vig".

So basically, the books want the people betting on the favorites to lose?

Do I do this correctly? I'm sure I'm missing a lot in the factors.
Click to expand...
those aren't the way the odds usually work. If one team is -110, the other is at most +100/even (typically it is also at -110). They keep approximately -10 (aka 10-20%) money as the vig to ensure they are winning if the bets balance perfectly even. that's why their goal is to always have money split 50/50 because then they make 10-20%.

Typically when betting on +110, people bet 100 (bet 100 to make 110) and on -110, people bet 110 (bet 110 to make 100). This changes up your math a little but really the takeaway is that they keep that buffer in the middle so they win every time the money is split
 

MplsGopher said:
100 folks bet $110 on +110 = $1100 in
100 folks bet $100 on -110 = $1000 in

Favorite wins -> book has to give the $1100 back + the $1000 from the underdog bettors.
Underdog wins -> book has to give the $1000 back + $1000 from the favorite bettors, and gets to keep the $100 of so-called "vig".

So basically, the books want the people betting on the favorites to lose?

Do I do this correctly? I'm sure I'm missing a lot in the factors.
Click to expand...
The betting sites want volume and the bets to be placed evenly for both teams.
The "fee" on each bet placed is high enough to guarantee a profit no matter how the games end.
I grew up in a somewhat lawless area of KY where illegal gambling was common.
If a bookie say in NJ had more money bet on a contest or race than he could afford to pay off the winner he would "lay off" those bets to a more well financed operation in Vegas or my home area.
In the saloons where I played poker the saloon paid the dealer who took a chip from every pile to pay his wages.
The same principal is used by race tracks.
You bet against the other betters and not the track which partially finances its operation by taking a cut of every bet.
 

Thanks.

I screwed it up anyway, because I incorrectly had the 100 people laying $100 each on -110 only getting $1000 back, when they actually should've got $1100 back. So it balanced evenly regardless.


Currently the Vegas Insiders "consensus" for Minn/Wisc spread shows -110 on both sides. I don't see how the book can make any money that way. Unless, I guess, the bets come in lopsided bigly for the team that ends up losing (the spread).

xkLWIvx.png
 

MplsGopher said:
Thanks.

I screwed it up anyway, because I incorrectly had the 100 people laying $100 each on -110 only getting $1000 back, when they actually should've got $1100 back. So it balanced evenly regardless.


Currently the Vegas Insiders "consensus" for Minn/Wisc spread shows -110 on both sides. I don't see how the book can make any money that way. Unless, I guess, the bets come in lopsided bigly for the team that ends up losing (the spread).

xkLWIvx.png
Click to expand...
This was explained pretty well in a post above, but basically when betting the spread there's no "favorite". Both teams are treated as favorites because of the points given/taken, so you need to bet $110 (or whatever) to win just $100. The little difference is the "vig", and it's why the house wins in pretty much any scenario they keep the bets on either team fairly close.

For example, say 10 people bet $110 on MN and 10 bet $110 on Wisc. The house takes in a total of $2200 in bets. If MN covers the 6.5 (i.e., loses by 6 or less), the MN bettors get back their original bets ($1100) plus their winnings of $100 each (10 x 100 = $1000). The Wisconsin bettors get nothing. So the house takes in $2200 in bets and pays out only $2100. That $100 is the vig, and it would be the same if Wisconsin covers.

You can see if fewer people bet on one team or another the vig potentially gets smaller (or BIGGER depending what happens), which is why casinos are constantly adjusting both the spread AND the odds (-105, 110, 115, etc) to ensure they've got the best possible chance of walking away a winner regardless of the game's outcome.
 



MGGopher said:
This was explained pretty well in a post above, but basically when betting the spread there's no "favorite". Both teams are treated as favorites because of the points given/taken, so you need to bet $110 (or whatever) to win just $100. The little difference is the "vig", and it's why the house wins in pretty much any scenario they keep the bets on either team fairly close.

For example, say 10 people bet $110 on MN and 10 bet $110 on Wisc. The house takes in a total of $2200 in bets. If MN covers the 6.5 (i.e., loses by 6 or less), the MN bettors get back their original bets ($1100) plus their winnings of $100 each (10 x 100 = $1000). The Wisconsin bettors get nothing. So the house takes in $2200 in bets and pays out only $2100. That $100 is the vig, and it would be the same if Wisconsin covers.

You can see if fewer people bet on one team or another the vig potentially gets smaller (or BIGGER depending what happens), which is why casinos are constantly adjusting both the spread AND the odds (-105, 110, 115, etc) to ensure they've got the best possible chance of walking away a winner regardless of the game's outcome.
Click to expand...
I screwed up again, thinking - was the oppose of vig (whatever that's called, negative vig?).

Right, OK, both sides of the bet have a vig.
 

upnorthkid said:
and won them. they're going to end in the 4 slot and get piped by Georgia, the same as whoever ends up in that 4 slot will. not many great teams this year
Click to expand...
Georgia/Ohio State is the game everyone wants to see.
 

upnorthkid said:
that's why their goal is to always have money split 50/50 because then they make 10-20%.
Click to expand...
Heard a pro gambler on the radio say that is actually a fallacy. Vegas wants to pick correctly most of all, because if they don't the sharks will bet big right before the game and sink the book.

That 10-20% just gives them margin for error.
 



Wally said:
Heard a pro gambler on the radio say that is actually a fallacy. Vegas wants to pick correctly most of all, because if they don't the sharks will bet big right before the game and sink the book.

That 10-20% just gives them margin for error.
Click to expand...
Well yes that’s why the opening line matters. It’s never going to come out perfectly that way and they can get drilled by later bets or futures. That’s why the successful gambler (like I’d assume the pro gambler heard) targets lines they like as you mention. I’m not meaning they move the live actively to make it always 50/50, but based on their end prediction of how they think the money will end up as the game kicks

they may try unbalance the lines if they feel good and where the money has come in, but that’s going to leave them exposed when they’re wrong which is how bookies get fired or lose their ass if they’re a small operation
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom