Last night I took the Steelers. Had the option of +3 +105, or +3.5 -115. So, risk 100 for 105 first way, and risk 100 for 87 the 2nd way. I opted for the +3 +105, and of course I pushed.
My belief is that in the long run taking the +105 will be more profitable. To make up for the lost 87, I'd need to win 5 times with the same scenario(5x18=90, which makes up for the lost 87). So, 1/6 of the time(16.666%) a push instead of win would still be profitable for me in the long run, as the 5 wins would give me an extra $3.
Does anyone have historical data for the outcomes on games where the closing line was between 2.5-3.5? How many of these games ended with the exact difference of 3?
Even if it's 25%(which seems high), taking the +105 would seem correct, as probability dictates that the team I wagered on would win half of the time, thus rendering only 12.5% of the time I would push instead of win.
If I was making a major, one time wager, then I'd definitely buy the extra half off the 3, But, grinding with a normal play, I think the +105 is the correct move.
Any help, backed by facts would be greatly appreciated.
Last night I took the Steelers. Had the option of +3 +105, or +3.5 -115. So, risk 100 for 105 first way, and risk 100 for 87 the 2nd way. I opted for the +3 +105, and of course I pushed.
My belief is that in the long run taking the +105 will be more profitable. To make up for the lost 87, I'd need to win 5 times with the same scenario(5x18=90, which makes up for the lost 87). So, 1/6 of the time(16.666%) a push instead of win would still be profitable for me in the long run, as the 5 wins would give me an extra $3.
Does anyone have historical data for the outcomes on games where the closing line was between 2.5-3.5? How many of these games ended with the exact difference of 3?
Even if it's 25%(which seems high), taking the +105 would seem correct, as probability dictates that the team I wagered on would win half of the time, thus rendering only 12.5% of the time I would push instead of win.
If I was making a major, one time wager, then I'd definitely buy the extra half off the 3, But, grinding with a normal play, I think the +105 is the correct move.
Any help, backed by facts would be greatly appreciated.
Good point. Last night's game definitely had a greater chance of landing on 3 with the low total and history of those teams playing 3 point games.
I'd like to know, in general though, how many games end with a 3 point difference. I know it is much higher in NFL than NCAA, but no idea what the % is.
Good point. Last night's game definitely had a greater chance of landing on 3 with the low total and history of those teams playing 3 point games.
I'd like to know, in general though, how many games end with a 3 point difference. I know it is much higher in NFL than NCAA, but no idea what the % is.
I have an NFL handicapping book that gives all the percentages on margin of victory as well as totals.
This percentage was from 1986-1993. The author does state that when the 2 point conversion was added in 1994, that this was not enough to have any significant affect on scoring margins.
The book was copyrighted in 1997, so you can safely count on 1986-1997 that the 14.5% is correct. You could go back and research it from 1997 to 2012 to see what percentage is for that period.
I have an NFL handicapping book that gives all the percentages on margin of victory as well as totals.
This percentage was from 1986-1993. The author does state that when the 2 point conversion was added in 1994, that this was not enough to have any significant affect on scoring margins.
The book was copyrighted in 1997, so you can safely count on 1986-1997 that the 14.5% is correct. You could go back and research it from 1997 to 2012 to see what percentage is for that period.
I always find this topic interesting and based on experience and assuming your following some type of BR mgmt. its definitely best to stand at 3 and take + $...obviously 3.5 is nice but over a large sample size paying upwards of 20-30cents on each wager to do it is not in your best interest. Funny thing when a lot of guys have a "game of the year" wager and 10 units on the line your mind always wants to buy the hook which becomes much pricier but you think of it as insurance when in most cases you should just stick with capping ability and gut instincts and play the line as it stands
I always find this topic interesting and based on experience and assuming your following some type of BR mgmt. its definitely best to stand at 3 and take + $...obviously 3.5 is nice but over a large sample size paying upwards of 20-30cents on each wager to do it is not in your best interest. Funny thing when a lot of guys have a "game of the year" wager and 10 units on the line your mind always wants to buy the hook which becomes much pricier but you think of it as insurance when in most cases you should just stick with capping ability and gut instincts and play the line as it stands
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.