Author: 
[NFL Betting] Topic: NCAA FORUM  BUYING THE HOOK TO 3 AND 7 IN THE NFL  FULL 7 YEARS OF STATS AND PROBABILITIES INSIDE 
TexasD 


Posted: 2/11/2013 7:14:52 PM I've proven that in basketball that buying points is an
absolute waste of your money....doesn't matter the few times you "saved
your *ss" with the points, but the juice that you pay on the 85% of the
time it DIDN'T MATTER in basketball, YOU WASTE MORE ON THE JUICE THAN
YOU "SAVE" BY BUYING THE POINTS. BUT that is in basketball and the
point values are linear at 1, 2 and 3.
CHECK OUT THE BASKETBALL STATS IN NBA AND NCAA FORUMS.

Here
it is, the FULL 7 NFL REGULAR SEASON STATS that Covers.com offers with
FULL STATS AND PROBABILITIES on BUYING 1/2 POINT TO 3 OR 7, FG or TD:
For your understanding, I took ALL THE GAMES THAT HAD ORIGINAL SPREADS "NEAR" OR ON 3 OR 7.
For games that were originally 3.5, it was bought down to 3 to make loss into push. For games that were +2.5, it was bought to +3 to make loss into push. For games that were 7.5, it was bought down to 7 to make loss into push. For games that were +6.5, it was bought to +7 to make loss into push.
For games that were ON
3 or 7, 1/2 point was bought on ONLY 1 of the 2 teams as you would NOT
buy 1/2 point on both sides. Either way, doesn't matter WHICH team you
picked, but that you bought the half point on the game that was ON the
number FOR THE WIN instead of a PUSH. 


TexasD 


Posted: 2/11/2013 7:18:02 PM NFL Regular Season 201213 Stats: Of the 256 games player, 121 games had spreads near or on 3 or 7 Of the 121 games, buying 1/2 point on 5 games would've resulted in a loss to a push. Of the 121 games, buying 1/2 point on 4 games would've resulted in a original push to a win. 1/2 point would have mattered in only 5 OTHER GAMES OTHER THAN BUYING TO 3 OR 7.
9 of 121 games that could've bought 1/2 point near or on 3 or 7 were affected for a probability of 7.44%.
60 of all 256 games ended in a 3 or 7 point margin of win for a 23.44% probability or just under 1 in 4 games were won by 3 or 7.
NFL Regular Season 201112 Stats: Of the 256 games player, 117 games had spreads near or on 3 or 7 Of the 117 games, buying 1/2 point on 6 games would've resulted in a loss to a push. Of the 117 games, buying 1/2 point on 5 games would've resulted in a original push to a win. 1/2 point would have mattered in only 7 OTHER GAMES OTHER THAN BUYING TO 3 OR 7.
11 of 117 games that could've bought 1/2 point near or on 3 or 7 were affected for a probability of 9.4%.
65 of all 256 games ended in a 3 or 7 point margin of win for a 25.4% probability or just over 1 in 4 games were won by 3 or 7.
NFL Regular Season 201011 Stats: Of the 256 games player, 115 games had spreads near or on 3 or 7 Of the 115 games, buying 1/2 point on 4 games would've resulted in a loss to a push. Of the 115 games, buying 1/2 point on 3 games would've resulted in a original push to a win. 1/2 point would have mattered in only 8 OTHER GAMES OTHER THAN BUYING TO 3 OR 7.
7 of 115 games that could've bought 1/2 point near or on 3 or 7 were affected for a probability of 6.09%.
63 of all 256 games ended in a 3 or 7 point margin of win for a 24.61% probability or just under 1 in 4 games were won by 3 or 7.
NFL Regular Season 200910 Stats: Of the 256 games player, 83 games had spreads near or on 3 or 7 Of the 83 games, buying 1/2 point on 2 games would've resulted in a loss to a push. Of the 83 games, buying 1/2 point on 3 games would've resulted in a original push to a win. 1/2 point would have mattered in only 9 OTHER GAMES OTHER THAN BUYING TO 3 OR 7.
5 of 83 games that could've bought 1/2 point near or on 3 or 7 were affected for a probability of 6.02%.
64 of all 256 games ended in a 3 or 7 point margin of win for a 25.0% probability or exactly 1 in 4 games were won by 3 or 7.
NFL Regular Season 200809 Stats: Of the 256 games player, 102 games had spreads near or on 3 or 7 Of the 102 games, buying 1/2 point on 4 games would've resulted in a loss to a push. Of the 83 games, buying 1/2 point on 3 games would've resulted in a original push to a win. 1/2 point would have mattered in only 3 OTHER GAMES OTHER THAN BUYING TO 3 OR 7.
7 of 102 games that could've bought 1/2 point near or on 3 or 7 were affected for a probability of 6.86%.
51 of all 256 games ended in a 3 or 7 point margin of win for a 19.92% probability or just under 1 in 5 games were won by 3 or 7.
NFL Regular Season 200708 Stats: Of the 256 games player, 116 games had spreads near or on 3 or 7 Of the 116 games, buying 1/2 point on 4 games would've resulted in a loss to a push. Of the 116 games, buying 1/2 point on 6 games would've resulted in a original push to a win. 1/2 point would have mattered in only 4 OTHER GAMES OTHER THAN BUYING TO 3 OR 7.
10 of 116 games that could've bought 1/2 point near or on 3 or 7 were affected for a probability of 8.62%.
67 of all 256 games ended in a 3 or 7 point margin of win for a 26.17% probability or just over 1 in 4 games were won by 3 or 7.
NFL Regular Season 200607 Stats: Of the 256 games player, 109 games had spreads near or on 3 or 7 Of the 109 games, buying 1/2 point on 5 games would've resulted in a loss to a push. Of the 83 games, buying 1/2 point on 3 games would've resulted in a original push to a win. 1/2 point would have mattered in only 6 OTHER GAMES OTHER THAN BUYING TO 3 OR 7.
8 of 109 games that could've bought 1/2 point near or on 3 or 7 were affected for a probability of 7.34%.
67 of all 256 games ended in a 3 or 7 point margin of win for a 26.17% probability or just over 1 in 4 games were won by 3 or 7. 


TexasD 


Posted: 2/11/2013 7:34:31 PM \/7 NFL Regular Seasons OVERALL Data\/
7 NFL Regular Seasons 200607 Through 201213 Stats: Of the 1,792 games played, 763 games had spreads Near or On 3 or 7 Of the 763 games, buying 1/2 point on 31 games would've resulted in a loss to a push. Of the 763 games, buying 1/2 point on 27 games would've resulted in a original push to a win. 1/2 point would have mattered in only 42 OTHER GAMES OTHER THAN BUYING TO 3 OR 7.
58 of 763 games that could've bought 1/2 point near or on 3 or 7 were affected for a probability of 7.6%.
437 of all 1,792 games ended in a 3 or 7 point margin of win for a 24.39% probability or just over 1 in 4 games were won by 3 or 7.
/\7 NFL Regular Seasons OVERALL Data/\ 


TexasD 


Posted: 2/11/2013 7:46:07 PM Sorry, been doing cutting and pasting to save time...post #3 correction:
437 of all 1,792 games ended in a 3 or 7 point margin of win for a 24.39% probability or just UNDER 1 in 4 games were won by 3 or 7. 


TexasD 


Posted: 2/11/2013 8:50:16 PM SO...WAS BUYING 1/2 POINT ON GAMES NEAR OR ON 3 OR 7 WORTH IT?!?!?
Using
the 7 NFL Regular Seasons worth of data and the sample size of 763
games that we could have bought 1/2 a point to or off of 3 or 7 points:
31 bets would have pushed instead of lost, for a savings of $120 per bet for a total of $3,720.
27 bets would have won instead of the original push for an extra winnings of $100 per bet for a total of $2,700.
By buying 1/2 a point on games near or on 3 or 7 would have had a total result of $6,420.
763
total games bet on minus the 58 games where the 1/2 point affected the
outcome of the game from a loss to a push or an original push to a win
equals 705 bets where THE 1/2 POINT DID NOT MATTER.
On
those 705 bets we would have Lost $10 more than just taking the
original 110 bet OR won approx. $10 less than had we put the $120 on
the original 110 spread.
705 bets X $10 = $7,050 lost on the 10% juice
$6,420 "savings" < $7,050 lost on juice.
CONCLUSION: BUYING
THE HOOK OF 1/2 A POINT ON SPREADS AROUND 3 OR 7 WOULD HAVE LOST A
LITTLE BIT OF MONEY AND WAS PRETTY MUCH JUST A WASTE OF TIME.
ALTHOUGH
IT MAY HAVE GOTTEN 7.6% MORE WINS, THE CALCULATIONS DON'T LIE....IT
REALLY DIDN'T HELP AT ALL, BUT RATHER WOULD HAVE LOST A SMALL $630 OVER
THE STRETCH OF BUYING 1/2 A POINT 763 TIMES.
ADVICE: JUST WORK ON HAVING OVER A 52.5% ON 110 ORIGINAL SPREADS TO MAKE MONEY. IF YOU FEEL YOU NEED TO BUY THE 1/2 POINT, OR ANY AMOUNT OF POINTS FOR THAT MATTER,....WHY ARE YOU EVEN BETTING ON THE GAME?!?!?
THERE ARE BETTER BETS ON THE BOARD!!!!!! 



TexasD 


Posted: 2/11/2013 8:50:43 PM WINNING OVER 52.5% OF BETS ON 110 ORIGINAL SPREAD ODDS CALCULATIONS:
Winning 52.5% of 1,000 bets is 525 wins x $100 = $52,500
Losing 47.5% of 1,000 bets is 475 losses x $110 = $52,250
$52,500 winnings  $52,250 in losses = $250 in PROFIT
Pick
bets that you are sure on. If you feel you need to buy the "hook" to
win, don't bet on that game. Don't bet just because it is on
TV,....then you are Paying for Entertainment.
THE REAL REASON ANY OF US GOT INTO GAMBLING:
TO MAKE MONEY AND PROFIT....NOT JUST FOR ENTERTAINMENT
...BUT TO EACH HIS OWN
BEST OF LUCK EVERYONE 


freebet123 


Posted: 2/11/2013 8:58:42 PM
To me, the most important thing in betting is money management. It's more important than picking a winner. 


TexasD 


Posted: 2/12/2013 4:26:11 PM Does this put the whole buying the 1/2 point to the "KEY" numbers of 3 and 7 to rest? Or are people who buy that 1/2 point Psychic where they can pick BETTER THAN the 7.6% of games where that 1/2 point will even matter, just to make a profit overall?
Do all the stats and numbers and logic look right? Did anybody see any mistakes in my analysis? Always open to hearing if I did something wrong or miscalculated or didn't explain something well enough.
Let me know guys, I think this is some great insight into the myth of buying points near 3 and 7 in football. I hope it was helpful and insightful.



TexasD 


Posted: 2/12/2013 7:08:53 PM I will also add that many sports books understand how people like to buy
to 3 and 7 in football. Many books understand that buying down on
favorite lines of 3.5 and 7.5 and buying up on dogs of +2.5 and +6.5
is of WAY HIGHER DEMAND than people buying 1/2 point on 2.5 or 6.5
down to 2 or 6 and buying 1/2 point on +7.5 and +3.5 up to +4 and
+8.....
sooo.....they raise the rate and jack up the juice. At
least at my sportsbooks, lines of 3.5, 7.5, +2.5 and +6.5 cost MORE
than the usual 10 cents for the 1/2 point as compared to buying the 1/2
point on 2.5, 6.5, +3.5 and +7.5.
Sportsbooks know the demand
and charge accordingly, so even if you hit the average of 7.6% of bets
being affected by the 1/2 point, you would also have to add in the
HIGHLY TAXED JUICE for those 1/2 points that EVERYBODY and their mothers
want to buy.
So in my example where I compared the money "SAVED"
on the bets that WERE affected against the money LOST on the ADDED
JUICE of the 92.4% of the bets where the 1/2 point did NOT
MATTER,....the disparities would have been even greater if you calculate
in paying MORE THAN 10 cents juice for the inhighdemand 1/2 point.
In
the example of 6.7% of all bets being affected, there was a $630 LOSS
of money. Understand that that loss would have been even greater had
the sports books charged MORE. 


TexasD 


Posted: 2/13/2013 1:51:39 PM I cancel post number #5 in light of THECLAW helping me look at my data in another forum:
After theclaw got me thinking.....let's assume a gambler IS a 50/50
gambler. Here is my example of a 50/50 gambler buying original lines at
110 vs buying 1/2 point at 120 using the 763 games where he could
have bought ONTO or OFF of 3 or 7:
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 $120 in losses per game lost = $44,160
$36,800  $44,160 = $7,360 in TOTAL LOSSES

50/50 gambler buying 1/2 point on the 763 games at 120 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 $120 in losses per game = $40,440
$39,500  $40,440 = $940 in TOTAL LOSSES
$7,360 in losses betting original spreads > $940 in losses buying the 1/2 point onto or off of 3 or 7
IN CONCLUSION:
When you compare a 50/50 bettor betting on original spreads at 110 as
opposed to buying 1/2 point on those SAME 763 games where you could buy
ONTO or OFF of 3 or 7, IT DID SAVE THE BETTOR $6,420 OVERALL.
POINT BUYING DID SAVE THE 50/50 GAMBLER MONEY, BUT STILL NOT ENOUGH TO MAKE A PROFIT.
MY VOTE IS: BUYING THE HOOK, OR 1/2 POINT ON GAMES NEAR OR ON 3 OR 7 IS BENEFICIAL TO YOUR BANKROLL.

I KNOW I HAVE BEEN ALL OVER THE BOARD WITH THE NFL DATA AND CONCLUSIONS! THIS HAS BEEN A WORK IN PROGRESS AND STILL IS A WORK IN PROGRESS.
THANK YOU TO THECLAW FOR MAKING ME THINK ABOUT MY DATA! IT'S PROVEN HELPFUL IN THE FULL ASSESSMENT OF BUYING THE HOOK IN NFL FOOTBALL.
PLEASE! IF YOU SEE ANYTHING IN MY THREADS ON POINT BUYING THAT IS QUESTIONABLE, PLEASE QUESTION IT! LIKE I SAID, IT IS A WORK IN PROGRESS! 



TexasD 


Posted: 2/13/2013 1:52:12 PM After everything I just said in post #10, I DO want to reiterate
that it DOES RELY on what your book is charging you for that 1/2 point
also. A guy in another thread said that his book charges at least 125
for that 1/2 point around 3 or 7...at least the CRUCIAL 1/2 point on
3.5, 7.5, +2.5 and +6.5 and NOT the 2.5, 6.5, +3.5 and +7.5.
Adding
the extra 5 cents or more into the equation/example could change
things....well obviously it DOES hurt the amount saved,...but possibly
not enough yet to say that buying points was NOT beneficial as opposes
to just betting the original lines with a 50/50 gambler.
Our
God Vegas and his many minions understand how gamblers work and
OBVIOUSLY buying the 1/2 point around 3 and 7 is in WAY higher demand
than anywhere else, and so they DO charge more for THOSE 1/2 points than
anywhere else.
Again,
please comment if you see any questionable data or thoughts...this
still is a work in progress. Mona Lisa wasn't finished until she had
her lips painted on.... 


RockPlay 


Posted: 2/13/2013 2:54:19 PM Mods, can you move this to the CFB or NFL forum? Also, can you ask that this data isnt continually posted under new threads? This is getting ridiculous. Its every day, to feed this guy's ego... I have read Natenberg enough for work, dont need someone jamming his understanding of statistics and probability down my throat on a gambling site that I visit for recreation.
Thank you



kvs23 


Posted: 2/13/2013 3:26:02 PM TexasD  thanks for the post, I really enjoyed it.
Let's look at it this way (and I am doing the calculations as I type this so not even sure what conclusion we will get at).
* There are 763 games with spreads near 3 or 7.
* I bet $100 on all the home teams. My twin brother bets $100 all the away teams. We both push 27 games. The other 736, either I lose $10 or he loses $10. So we lose $7,360 together.
* Now we both buy 1/2 point on all those 763 games. In 705 games, we lose $20 per play (either I lose at 120 or he loses at 120). So, that's a loss of $14,100. In 31 games, we go 101  so we win $3,100. In 27 games we go 101, so we win $2,700. So, we lose $8,300 together.
* So, do NOT buy the points.
* Is my math wrong? Funny you got to $7,360 for 1st part (but you got there incorrectly)  as you multiplied losses by 120 when it should be 110 (so it should be 1/2 amount)  but for me and my twin brother it is the $7,360.
* Your math for 2nd part is CLEARLY wrong. You have the dude playing 395 winners and 337 losers  which is 732 games. But, 768732 is 36  and there were not 36 original pushes.
* Trust me, just think and do math like you and your twin brother bet opposite sides and if you both the hook, are you better off in end.
* Hard to explain why but your 5050 assumption is flawed b/c that is 5050 without the 1/2 edge.
* Agree?



TexasD 


Posted: 2/13/2013 3:51:41 PM QUOTE Originally Posted by RockPlay:
Mods, can you move this to the CFB or NFL forum? Also, can you ask that this data isnt continually posted under new threads? This is getting ridiculous. Its every day, to feed this guy's ego... I have read Natenberg enough for work, dont need someone jamming his understanding of statistics and probability down my throat on a gambling site that I visit for recreation.
Thank you
I'm going to humor you once more by relying to your USELESS POSTS:
AS I HAVE STATED BEFORE, I POSTED IN IN THE NCAA AND NBA FORUMS BECAUSE FOOTBALL IS OBVIOUSLY (NOT SO OBVIOUS TO YOU) OVER AND NOBODY VISITS THE FOOTBALL FORUMS.
PLUS the NFL football data is a contrast to point buying in basketball and is interesting to contrast the two as MANY people buy to and off of 3 and 7 since they are KEY numbers. Basketball is linear as the point values are 1, 2 and 3.
SECONDLY, AS I HAVE STATED BEFORE, I'M NOT "JAMMING IT DOWN YOUR THROAT." YOU CONTINUALLY CONTINUE TO CLICK ON THEM AS THEY OBVIOUSLY ARE NOT FOR YOU.
There ARE, and have been countless people who have benefited from this, thanked me for this, or CONTRIBUTED SOMETHING OF WORTH,...AS OPPOSED TO YOUR RIDICULOUS CLAIMS.
And now I digress back to ignoring your WORTHLESS POSTS.
Ohhh,....as to your "Thank you"....YOU ARE WELCOME



TexasD 


Posted: 2/13/2013 4:15:20 PM Thank you KVS23!!!! THERE WAS AN ERROR IN MY CALCULATIONS!!!! I DID use the losses times $120 and not $110 as they should have been on a 50/50 guy betting 110 on original spreads.
Here is the CORRECT CALCULATIONS:
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

AS FOR THE SECOND PART BEING INCORRECT,...I keep going over it and I think I hit it correctly.
"Your math for 2nd part is CLEARLY wrong. You have the dude playing
395 winners and 337 losers  which is 732 games. But, 768732 is 36 
and there were not 36 original pushes."
That number should be 763, which is why you got 5 more. Plus there were ORIGINALLY 27 PUSHES ON THE ORIGINAL SPREADS, WHICH IN TURN, BUYING 1/2 POINT, CHANGE TO WINS.
The ORIGINAL 31 GAMES where a team lost by 1/2 point turn to PUSHES WHEN YOU ADD IN THE 1/2 POINT, therefore, when buying 1/2 point, there were 31 games that PUSHED INSTEAD OF LOST.

And as to your calculations (and don't get me wrong, I'm not scolding you or arguing with you, but helping to talk our stats through and discuss whether we got them right or not):
The one thing that you didn't add in is that you can't use the 763 games in my sample in the way that you did, because THOSE 763 games were "framed" as ONLY BETTING 1 TEAM OF THOSE GAMES, so there is no betting on HOME AND AWAY on those 763 games...there was only 1 bet on either home or away and there was no other side.
Hopefully I didn't lose you on that, but I derived the NFL data by ONLY taking the "SITUATIONS" where a game was 1/2 point off of 3 or 7 OR DIRECTLY ON 3 or 7....We would ONLY BUY the half point on 3.5, 7.5, +2.5 or +6.5 and NOT the OTHER TEAM (home or away depending on the GAME) which would have lines of +3.5, +7.5, 2.5 and 6.5.

Hopefully that clears some things up.
BUT YES, I clearly made a mistake in the FIRST PART as I multiplied the losses times $120 instead of the $110 we would put on a 110 line to win an even $100.
THANK YOU!!!! THAT'S WHAT I HAVE BEEN WANTING PEOPLE TO DO!!!! IF YOU SEE A QUESTIONABLE STAT, PROBABILITY, CONCLUSION, OPINION, ETC....PLEASE QUESTION IT FOR ME!!!!
Like I've said before, this is a work in progress and Mona Lisa wasn't quite herself until she had lips painted on!




RockPlay 


Posted: 2/13/2013 4:51:20 PM Go away. 


TexasD 


Posted: 2/13/2013 5:10:01 PM QUOTE Originally Posted by RockPlay:
Go away.
RockPlay, please keep my threads current for me while I am away doing things other than reading your useless posts that help NOBODY....wait, they do keep my threads current, so I guess I can't say they are totally useless. Thank you for your hard work kid!



kvs23 


Posted: 2/13/2013 5:28:46 PM 2nd part is incorrect.
Think of it this way.
* I flip a coins  head I take home team, tails I take away team. So I am a 5050 bettor.
* In 705 games, I am going to win 1/2 and lose 1/2  so I will lose 7,050 in those games (b/c line is 120 on my losses).
* Now, in the other 58 games, I am going to either TIE or WIN. So, 29 times I tie and 29 times I win  so I win 2,900.
* So I lose 4,050 in 2nd case vs losing 3,680
 so BUYING points is BAD.
* Your assumption of 5050% bettor is for all the non games where 1/2 point is diff  in those cases even a 5050 bettor becomes a 75% bettor.
* You DO NOT lose 940 buying points, you lose 4,050.
* AGREE? 


RoughEmUp 


Posted: 2/13/2013 6:10:03 PM QUOTE Originally Posted by RockPlay:
Mods, can you move this to the CFB or NFL forum? Also, can you ask that this data isnt continually posted under new threads? This is getting ridiculous. Its every day, to feed this guy's ego... I have read Natenberg enough for work, dont need someone jamming his understanding of statistics and probability down my throat on a gambling site that I visit for recreation.
Thank you
I will give you a hint bud you don't have to come into this thread ever. Texas very usefull stuff for those who take the time to understand.
Some lines are right on so the odd time it might be worth it but in the long run it is better to sell half/full pts to get plus money. Then if you are at 50% you are up
I know you don't let the clowns get to you just do what you do. 


TexasD 


Posted: 2/13/2013 6:21:26 PM QUOTE Originally Posted by kvs23: 2nd part is incorrect.
Think of it this way.
* I flip a coins  head I take home team, tails I take away team. So I am a 5050 bettor.
* In 705 games, I am going to win 1/2 and lose 1/2  so I will lose 7,050 in those games (b/c line is 120 on my losses).
* Now, in the other 58 games, I am going to either TIE or WIN. So, 29 times I tie and 29 times I win  so I win 2,900.
* So I lose 4,050 in 2nd case vs losing 3,680
 so BUYING points is BAD.
* Your assumption of 5050% bettor is for all the non games where 1/2 point is diff  in those cases even a 5050 bettor becomes a 75% bettor.
* You DO NOT lose 940 buying points, you lose 4,050.
* AGREE?
I'm not following you:
*Why are we adding home and away to a sample of 763 BETS (NOT GAMES)? They are predetermined when I found the BETS where we could have bought 1/2 point ONTO or OFF of 3 or 7. I don't understand the home and away thing. I brought up a 50/50 bettor AS IN he WINS 50 AND LOSES 50 games on average, not picks home or away in 763 situations where there isn't even a home AND away team for those 763 scenarios. It was EITHER a home or away team, there WAS NO OPPOSING SIDE TO THE 763.
*Where are you getting 705 from? You can't subtract the games that PUSHED AND the games that would have NORMALLY LOST by 1/2 point on the original spreads.
There were 763 total bets, minus the 27 original pushes would be 736 just like in scenario 1 with the straight 110 bettor. Then out of those 736, half would NORMALLY lose and half would win.
368 would've won before the 1/2 point 368 would've lost before the 1/2 point
The 1/2 point would have changed he ORIGINAL PUSHES ON THE ORIGINAL SPREADS TO A WIN, AS WHY I ADDED THE 27 ORIGINAL PUSHES TO THE WIN NUMBER OF 368 TO GET 395 WINS X $100 TO GET $39,500.
The 1/2 point would have affected 31 games that LOST BY 1/2 POINT, making them PUSHES, so we have to subtract the 31 from the 368 losses to get 337 total losses and then multiplied by $120 we bet on them to get $40,440. The 31 were pushes, so they didn't win or lose, but rather get OMITTED as nothing was lost or won.
*I think where you are going wrong is you are subtracting the games that could be affected (58) BEFORE you should have. A 50/50 bettor would have won 368 bets, lost 368 bets and pushed on the other 27 BEFORE HE BOUGHT THE 1/2 POINT....so you have to work from there. NOW add the 1/2 point to the equation to make the ORIGINAL PUSHES TO WINS and THE GAMES THAT WOULD HAVE ORIGINALLY LOST BY 1/2 POINT INTO PUSHES.
IMO I think you are doing your math at the wrong times.
*Agree? or understand where I am coming from?
*DOES ANYBODY ELSE FOLLOW WHAT I OR KVS23 ARE TRYING TO SAY???




TexasD 


Posted: 2/13/2013 6:31:21 PM Understand that sometimes people can ADD EMOTIONS to what people type. I've mistook many texts from friends as being negative in nature, but really they were just saying something without being mad or cocky or angry.
What I am trying to say is Everything typed above (maybe with the exception of my RockPlay replies...) is all DISCUSSION and is merely trying to talk things out in a manner that we can all get our opinions, thoughts, stats, analysis, etc....trough to each other WITHOUT THE CHILDISH ROCKPLAY, BELITTLING, RUDE REMARKS, AND IGNORANCE that can really fill these forums up too much, and actually get pretty tiring to read sometimes when perusing other people's threads.
I DO MAKE AN ATTEMPT TO KEEP MY THREADS GENTLEMANLIKE AND WORK WITH DISCUSSIONS RATHER THAN ARGUMENT.
I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S THOUGHTS, ANALYSIS, OPINIONS AS MUCH AS MY OWN AND AM NOT AFRAID TO ADMIT WHEN I'M WRONG. I ENJOY CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM AS IT ONLY MAKE YOU A BETTER PERSON IN LIFE. BUT BELITTLING, ARGUING, RANTING, ETC...IS UNWANTED HERE.
DISCUSS ON AND THANKS IN ADVANCE!



TexasD 


Posted: 2/13/2013 9:48:14 PM 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 = $640 "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 > $640 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. 


TexasD 


Posted: 2/16/2013 10:47:49 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.



TexasD 


Posted: 2/16/2013 10:58:13 PM SORRY GUYS! I JUST NOTICED THAT THIS THREAD IS NOT IN THE NCAA BASKETBALL FORUM WHERE I INTENDED IT TO BE....IT ONLY TOOK 5 DAYS FOR ME TO NOTICE IT!!!
PLEASE LET THIS THREAD DIE AND DO NOT REPLY!


