Author: 
[NFL Betting] Topic: NFL FORUM  BUYING THE HOOK TO 3 AND 7 IN THE NFL  FULL 7 YEARS OF STATS AND PROBABILITIES INSIDE 
budwiser 
View Space  Friends  Playbook  
Captain
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7735
Location: 
#26 Posted: 2/15/2013 8:42:54 PM u can analyze the f/ck out of this but i'm telling you follow 2 rules: Buy the hook off the field goal Pick the right team
That's it. That's all you need to do.
If you pick a garbage/random game, the hook might matter, and that's where ur analysis definitely comes in handy.


quote 
TexasD 
View Space  Blog  Friends  Playbook  
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1607
Location: Wisconsin 
#27 Posted: 2/15/2013 9:30:13 PM We did it! We finally figured out what we were both doing wrong! I appreciate you catching me when I charged $120 to the 50/50 guy NOT buying points when it should have been $110 when he loses and we finally figured the riddle of 763  JUST original pushes and THEN divide by 2 for 50/50 wins/loses.
And we DO, both agree that buying the half point IS BENEFICIAL to "saving" money in football when buying TO or OFF of the key numbers of 3 and 7.
There are only a few more things I want to derive out of my data yet when I have time and energy...my job has been draining me of time and energy:
1. Splitting the buying TO and OFF 3 and 7 stats and showing that buying TO 3 or 7 is EVEN MORE BENEFICIAL than buying OFF or buying BOTH.
2. Buying points ANYWHERE OTHER THAN 3 or 7 conclusion 

Posted using a mobile device.quote 
TexasD 
View Space  Blog  Friends  Playbook  
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1607
Location: Wisconsin 
#28 Posted: 2/15/2013 9:50:45 PM #1...buying TO is more profitable than buying OFF. (I will show in future data soon)
#2...obviously picking the "right" team that wins is the whole idea...
#3...my research and analysis show that ANY SCHMUCK that gambles, regardless of how many "right" teams, will LOSE LESS $ by buying the 1/2 point near or on the key numbers of 3 or 7,...at least in NFL....as much as I love stats, research and numbers, Iam NOT sifting through thousands of games...the NFL data was NOT as easy as basketball data! 

Posted using a mobile device.quote 
TexasD 
View Space  Blog  Friends  Playbook  
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1607
Location: Wisconsin 
#29 Posted: 2/16/2013 10:44:48 PM QUOTE Originally Posted by TexasD:
NEW DATA HOT OFF THE PRESS:
I sifted through the 7 years of data again to find out what amount of the 763 games that were ON or 1/2 point OFF of 3 and 7 and broke them up, as some people have said that they ONLY BUY TO 3 and 7 FOR THE PUSH.
763 games that were on or near 3 or 7
421 games were originally ON 3 or 7 Of the 421 ON 3 or 7, 27 were originally pushes. 27 divided by 421 = 6.41%
342 games were originally 1/2 point OFF of 3 or 7 Of the 342 OFF of 3 or 7, 31 originally didn't cover by 1/2 point. 31 divided by 342 = 9.06%
Buying TO 3 or 7 not only proved to have a 2.65% more success rate, BUT let's not forget,..."saving" the amount risked on the games that changed from a loss to a push is HIGHER than the amount WON on pushes to wins.

Buying OFF 3 and 7 for a Win instead of Push calculations risking $120 on 120 odds:
Out of 100 bets buying OFF 3 or 7 for the win with 6.41% probability is 6.41 (rounded down to 6) extra wins x $100 = $600 "savings"
Out of 100 bets buying ONTO 3 or 7 for the push instead of loss with 9.06% probability is 9.06 (rounded down to 9) extra wins x $120 = $1,080 "savings"
$1,080 > $600 9.06% > 6.41% Buying TO 3 or 7 > Buying OFF 3 or 7
Conclusion: If you are going to buy around 3 or 7, it look like it was more beneficial to your bankroll buying TO 3 or 7 for the push as opposed to buying OFF 3 or 7 for the win.
#1. Noticed that when I spit up the Total data into buying ONTO 3 and 7 VS buying OFF 3 and 7, I made a mistake of when I rounded down for a quick calculation, but didn't use the rounded number...not a big difference, but not a fan of having wrong data out there.
I corrected in red above.
#2. While the quick comparison of the above quote gave an "idea" of what could be "saved", it's just that; a quick comparison. I don't know what the word is, but it's just a way of "relating the differences in probabilities".
To understand the actual amounts of money that a gambler would incur, a more indepth calculation would be needed.
I didn't have time until now to express whether or not they individually would have been beneficial or profitable to buy in those cases or to show what kind of actual "savings" each would produce. Here are the calculations:

421 games were originally ON 3 or 7 Of the 421 ON 3 or 7, 27 were originally pushes. 27 divided by 421 = 6.41%
50\50 gambler NOT BUYING the 1/2 point on situations that were ON 3 or 7 risking $110 on 110 for $100 in winnings and betting 1000 bets (1000 for less rounding and more accurate calculation): 1000 bets x probability of 6.41% where there was an original push ~= 64 pushes 1000  64 pushes = 936 936 bets divided by 2 to get 50/50 wins = 468 468 wins @ $100 = $46,800 468 loses @ $110 = $51,480 $51,480 in loses  $46,800 in winnings = $4,680 in losses
50\50 gambler BUYING the 1/2 point on situations that were
1/2 point OFF of 3 or 7 risking $120 on 120 for $100 in winnings and betting 1000
bets: 1000 bets x probability of 6.41% where there was an original push ~= 64 pushes 1000  64 pushes = 936 936 bets divided by 2 to get 50/50 wins = 468 468 wins PLUS 64 games that WON INSTEAD OF PUSH = 532 wins 532 wins @ $100 = $53,200 468 loses @ $120 = $56,160 ($56,160 in loses)  ($53,200 in winnings) = $2,960 in losses
$2,960 in losses BUYING the 1/2 point point IS BETTER THAN $4,680 in losses NOT buying the 1/2 point
CONCLUSION: Buying the 1/2 point WAS BENEFICIAL TO A BANKROLL

342 games were originally 1/2 point OFF of 3 or 7 Of the 342 OFF of 3 or 7, 31 originally didn't cover by 1/2 point. 31 divided by 342 = 9.06%
50\50 gambler NOT buying the 1/2 point ONTO 3 or 7 risking $110
on 110 for $100 in winnings per game and betting 1000 bets :
1000 bets with no pushes due to it NOT being a whole number on original spread = 1000 bets that won or lost 1000 bets divided by 2 to get 50/50 wins = 500 500 wins @ $100 = $50,000 500 loses @ $110 = $55,000 ($55,000 in losses)  ($50,00 in winnings) = $5000 in losses
50\50 gambler BUYING the 1/2 point ONTO 3 or 7 risking $120
on 120 for $100 in winnings per game and betting 1000 bets :
1000 bets with no pushes due to it NOT being a whole number on original spread = 1000 bets that won or lost 1000 bets divided by 2 to get 50/50 wins = 500 500 wins @ $100 = $50,000 1000 bets x probability of 9.06% where there was a bet that lost by 1/2 point ~= 90 loses that lost by 1/2 point 500 loses  90 games that ended up being PUSHES instead of LOSSES = 410 losses 410 loses @ $120 = $49,200 ($50,000 in winnings)  ($49,200 in loses) = $800 in WINNINGS
$800 in winnings by buying the 1/2 point is better than $5,000 in losses NOT buying the 1/2 point
CONCLUSION: Buying the 1/2 point to get more pushes WAS BENEFICIAL TO A BANKROLL

OVERALL CONCLUSION: Buying 1/2 point ONTO the key numbers of 3 or 7 for more PUSHES was MORE BENEFICIAL than buying 1/2 point OFF of the key numbers of 3 or 7 for more WINS.


quote 
TexasD 
View Space  Blog  Friends  Playbook  
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1607
Location: Wisconsin 
#30 Posted: 2/16/2013 10:51:28 PM QUOTE Originally Posted by TexasD:
NEW DATA HOT OFF THE PRESS:
I sifted through the 7 years of data again to find out what amount of the 763 games that were ON or 1/2 point OFF of 3 and 7 and broke them up, as some people have said that they ONLY BUY TO 3 and 7 FOR THE PUSH.
763 games that were on or near 3 or 7
421 games were originally ON 3 or 7 Of the 421 ON 3 or 7, 27 were originally pushes. 27 divided by 421 = 6.41%
342 games were originally 1/2 point OFF of 3 or 7 Of the 342 OFF of 3 or 7, 31 originally didn't cover by 1/2 point. 31 divided by 342 = 9.06%
Buying TO 3 or 7 not only proved to have a 2.65% more success rate, BUT let's not forget,..."saving" the amount risked on the games that changed from a loss to a push is HIGHER than the amount WON on pushes to wins.

Buying OFF 3 and 7 for a Win instead of Push calculations risking $120 on 120 odds:
Out of 100 bets buying OFF 3 or 7 for the win with 6.41% probability is 6.41 (rounded down to 6) extra wins x $100 = $600 "savings"
Out of 100 bets buying ONTO 3 or 7 for the push instead of loss with 9.06% probability is 9.06 (rounded down to 9) extra wins x $120 = $1,080 "savings"
$1,080 > $600 9.06% > 6.41% Buying TO 3 or 7 > Buying OFF 3 or 7
Conclusion: If you are going to buy around 3 or 7, it look like it was more beneficial to your bankroll buying TO 3 or 7 for the push as opposed to buying OFF 3 or 7 for the win.
#1. Noticed that when I spit up the Total data into buying ONTO 3 and 7 VS buying OFF 3 and 7, I made a mistake
of when I rounded down for a quick calculation, but didn't use the
rounded number...not a big difference, but not a fan of having wrong
data out there.
I corrected in red above.
#2.
While the quick comparison of the above quote gave an "idea" of what
could be "saved", it's just that; a quick comparison. I don't know what
the word is, but it's just a way of "relating the differences in
probabilities".
To understand the actual amounts of money that a gambler would incur, a more indepth calculation would be needed.
I
didn't have time until now to express whether or not they individually
would have been beneficial or profitable to buy in those cases or to
show what kind of actual "savings" each would produce. Here are the
calculations:

421 games were originally ON 3 or 7 Of the 421 ON 3 or 7, 27 were originally pushes. 27 divided by 421 = 6.41%
50\50 gambler NOT BUYING the 1/2 point on situations that were ON 3 or 7 risking $110 on 110 for $100 in winnings and betting 1000 bets (1000 for less rounding and more accurate calculation): 1000 bets x probability of 6.41% where there was an original push ~= 64 pushes 1000  64 pushes = 936 936 bets divided by 2 to get 50/50 wins = 468 468 wins @ $100 = $46,800 468 loses @ $110 = $51,480 $51,480 in loses  $46,800 in winnings = $4,680 in losses
50\50 gambler BUYING the 1/2 point on situations that were
1/2 point OFF of 3 or 7 risking $120 on 120 for $100 in winnings and betting 1000
bets: 1000 bets x probability of 6.41% where there was an original push ~= 64 pushes 1000  64 pushes = 936 936 bets divided by 2 to get 50/50 wins = 468 468 wins PLUS 64 games that WON INSTEAD OF PUSH = 532 wins 532 wins @ $100 = $53,200 468 loses @ $120 = $56,160 ($56,160 in loses)  ($53,200 in winnings) = $2,960 in losses
$2,960 in losses BUYING the 1/2 point point IS BETTER THAN $4,680 in losses NOT buying the 1/2 point
CONCLUSION: Buying the 1/2 point WAS BENEFICIAL TO A BANKROLL

342 games were originally 1/2 point OFF of 3 or 7 Of the 342 OFF of 3 or 7, 31 originally didn't cover by 1/2 point. 31 divided by 342 = 9.06%
50\50 gambler NOT buying the 1/2 point ONTO 3 or 7 risking $110
on 110 for $100 in winnings per game and betting 1000 bets :
1000 bets with no pushes due to it NOT being a whole number on original spread = 1000 bets that won or lost 1000 bets divided by 2 to get 50/50 wins = 500 500 wins @ $100 = $50,000 500 loses @ $110 = $55,000 ($55,000 in losses)  ($50,00 in winnings) = $5000 in losses
50\50 gambler BUYING the 1/2 point ONTO 3 or 7 risking $120
on 120 for $100 in winnings per game and betting 1000 bets :
1000 bets with no pushes due to it NOT being a whole number on original spread = 1000 bets that won or lost 1000 bets divided by 2 to get 50/50 wins = 500 500 wins @ $100 = $50,000 1000 bets x probability of 9.06% where there was a bet that lost by 1/2 point ~= 90 loses that lost by 1/2 point 500 loses  90 games that ended up being PUSHES instead of LOSSES = 410 losses 410 loses @ $120 = $49,200 ($50,000 in winnings)  ($49,200 in loses) = $800 in WINNINGS
$800 in winnings by buying the 1/2 point is better than $5,000 in losses NOT buying the 1/2 point
CONCLUSION: Buying the 1/2 point to get more pushes WAS BENEFICIAL TO A BANKROLL

OVERALL CONCLUSION: Buying 1/2 point ONTO the key numbers of 3 or 7 for more PUSHES was MORE BENEFICIAL than buying 1/2 point OFF of the key numbers of 3 or 7 for more WINS.


quote 

TexasD 
View Space  Blog  Friends  Playbook  
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1607
Location: Wisconsin 
#31 Posted: 2/16/2013 10:55:29 PM What the hell!! I just noticed that I've been double posting in the NFL FORUM!!! DISREGARD THE OTHER POST that starts with the heading "NCAA FORUM"....I thought that I was posting that in the NCAA basketball forum this whole time!!! I apologize, as I don't actually click on the "sports forums" to get to my posts, but click on the links in My Page to get to them and obviously I posted the "NCAA FORUM" one in the NFL forum instead of the NCAA BASKETBALL FORUM like I wanted.
Sorry guys, again, disregard the OTHER thread and let it die.


quote 
TexasD 
View Space  Blog  Friends  Playbook  
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1607
Location: Wisconsin 
#32 Posted: 2/17/2013 1:59:13 AM Wow...AND I doubleposted that last one! I didn't realize Alzheimer's starts to set in at 32!
Best of Luck 

Posted using a mobile device.quote 
theclaw 
RSI View Space  Blog  Friends  Playbook  
Veteran
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 4549
Location: 
#33 Posted: 2/18/2013 10:20:25 PM QUOTE Originally Posted by theclaw:
EXACTLY !!
76327 pushes = 736
736 GAMES winning 50% = 368 games won  368 games lost 27 pushes = a 50% W/L record.
Do the math......................................
$110 at 110  368 wins = $36,800
368 losses = $40,480
27 pushes = $0.
Player not buying points and winning 50% = lost $3680
Player buying points would have the same 368 + 27 pushes that become wins for 395, he turns 31 losses into pushes.................368 31 = 337 losses
his line 395 wins  337 losses  31 pushes
do the math..................................395 wins = $39500
337 losses at 120 = $40,440
he loses $940, much better to buy points.
You could also have both players bet equal amounts.....................
Player buying points, wins 395 games betting $110 at 120 = $32,915
337 losses at $110 each = $37,070
player betting same amount loses $4155.
Now the player not buying points comeout ahead, interesting...................
I quess the moral of the story is to lay the extra $ in juice, the player laying extra juice is also betting more so maybe that is why he comesout ahead.
Son of a gun, I thought something wasn't right about the this.......................
Player buying points and betting the same amount $110 actually wins $36,208, not $32,915 as I posted in the other post.
The $32,915 is from betting $100 a game.
Therefore, player buying points loses $862 and comesout ahead of player not buying points.


quote 
theclaw 
RSI View Space  Blog  Friends  Playbook  
Veteran
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 4549
Location: 
#34 Posted: 2/18/2013 10:31:17 PM Another way to look at it......................................
Risk VS Reward....................................
Buying points has a risk of losing a extra $10, the reward for winning instead of pushing is $100 or a 101 ratio.
So for every 10 losses you need 1 time to win instead of push to break even.. And if you win 50% of your games those 10 losses would come in 20 games.
That's 201 and since the 3 or 7 come in play every 13.15 games you are well ahead of that buying points.
Buying to 3 or 7 , pushing instead of losing creates a reward of $110 while having a risk of losing an extra $10 when losing. Or a 111 ratio.
If you win 50% of your games that would be 22 games and you need 1 time for the 3 or 7 to come into play. And since the 3 or 7 come into play once every 13.15 games your way ahead.
Buying to 3 or 7 creates a bigger reward of $110. 

quote 
TexasD 
View Space  Blog  Friends  Playbook  
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1607
Location: Wisconsin 
#35 Posted: 2/19/2013 1:46:44 AM Thank you for all your help. You definitely put in a different way of looking at it in your last post when you related everything through ratios.
I have one last thing I wanted to derive from this data, but wasn't quite sure how to do it, but I wanted to show the probability of buying 1/2 point in ANY OTHER spot other than buying to or off of 3 or 7 or other than the 763 games we have analyzed already.
My quick calculations came out really, really low and my overall opinion was that it was an ABSOLUTE WASTE OF MONEY BY FAR.
While I sifted through the 1,792 games played, I found 763 BETS (one team/situation) where we could have bought 1/2 point to go ONTO 3 or 7 or OFF of 3 or 7. The OTHER team of those 763 situations, people could have bought 1/2 point the OTHER WAY ON THE OTHER TEAM.
1,792  763 = 1,029 other games with 2 teams/spreads per game
Going back, overall there were a possible 3,584 possible bets out of the 1,792 games.
3,584  763 = 2,821 other situations
Out of those 2,821 situation NOT buying 1/2 point on or off 3 or 7, which is including even buying around 10 or 14, only 42 other spreads were originally loses by 1/2 point or a push on anything other than 3 or 7.
42 divided by 2,821 = a probability of only 1.49%!!!!
1.49% sounds really low and I doublechecked that number of 42 and it was only 42 out of all 1,792 games played in the last 7 regular seasons of the NFL.
Does that sound like I did it right?!?!?


quote 

TexasD 
View Space  Blog  Friends  Playbook  
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1607
Location: Wisconsin 
#36 Posted: 2/28/2013 9:22:37 PM BUMP....for CRASHDAVIS
All opinions, thoughts, info, analysis, corrections, etc. are welcome. 

Posted using a mobile device.quote 
TexasD 
View Space  Blog  Friends  Playbook  
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1607
Location: Wisconsin 
#37 Posted: 3/2/2013 3:03:15 PM A point was brought up that when sports books charge more than the normal 10 cent juice for the 1/2 point, that it is a waste of money. Well let's see:
50/50 gambler betting original spreads on the 763 games at 110 odds:
763 minus 27 original pushes = 736 games that were NOT pushes
736 divided by 2 = 368
368 wins x $100 in winnings per game won = $36,800
368 losses x $110 in losses per game lost = $40,480
$36,800  $40,480 = $3,680 in TOTAL LOSSES

50/50 gambler buying 1/2 point on the 763 games at 125 odds:
763 minus 27 original pushes = 736 games that were NOT pushes
736 divided by 2 = 368
(368 wins + 27 pushes to wins) x $100 in winnings per game = $39,500
(368 wins  31 losses to pushes) x $125 in losses per game = $42,125
$39,500  $42,125 = $2,625 in TOTAL LOSSES

$3,680 in losses NOT buying points is STILL A BIGGER LOSS than only losing $2,625 in losses buying 1/2 point Even at 15 cent juice for the extra 1/2 point, it would still save about $1,000, making buying the 1/2 point BENEFICIAL TO A BANKROLL.


quote 
budwiser 
View Space  Friends  Playbook  
Captain
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7735
Location: 
#38 Posted: 3/2/2013 6:39:36 PM i don't mean to burst your bubble dude but....it's about picking the right team, not buying the hook.
you're not the first one to analyze this. buy the hook off 3, or if you're scared off 7, and that's all you need to know.


quote 
TexasD 
View Space  Blog  Friends  Playbook  
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1607
Location: Wisconsin 
#39 Posted: 3/2/2013 6:52:03 PM It's easy to say "pick the right team", that's obvious...but what I've showed here through data, you can "pick the right teams" AND make a BIGGER PROFIT or LOSE LESS MONEY BY BUYING THE 1/2 POINT AROUND 3 AND 7.
Let's assume you are good at "picking the right team"...well, you get your higher than normal average of wins, but NOW YOU HAVE A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE MORE WINS DUE TO BUYING THE POINTS.
What I am saying in this thread, through analysis, is that you get MORE THAN WHAT YOU ARE PAYING FOR when buying 1/2 point around 3 or 7 IN FOOTBALL.
Where on the other hand, in basketball, buying any amount of points in any scenario, is a waste of money. I've researched that also and you can find that in the NBA and NCAA forums, or just go to My Space and click on my threads.
BUYING POINTS:
IN FOOTBALL AROUND 3 OR 7 IS GOOD
IN BASKETBALL IT IS A WASTE OF MONEY


quote 
budwiser 
View Space  Friends  Playbook  
Captain
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7735
Location: 
#40 Posted: 3/4/2013 2:28:26 PM Fair enough.
Agree w ya buy the hook.around 3 or 7 in football 

Posted using a mobile device.quote 
