Basically, what my spreadsheet does is look for the largest anomalies between what the bookies are doing to go Dutch on their money, and what Holden's numbers of the probable outcome of the game show.
Dutch just means a bookie is making a line not by who he/she thinks is going to win; he makes the line to make money on both sides' juice. Period.
So, I calculate the 'win' percentage based on the William Hill odds, put that against Holden's numbers for win percentage, then I calculate actual and percent difference.
The colors are weighted based on the fibonacci series; this is totally arbitrary at this point. I just dig math and ,personally, like to see colors and numbers associated.
So. The percentages get greener going up from 3%, 5%, 8%, 13%, 21%, 34%, all have slightly more intense green than the last. This is based on the blind assumption that the difference ought to provide a higher value.
I weighted his values in a similar fashion, but in 5 increments. Again. Totally arbitrary. I just like numbers and colors.
The bottomline: The actual and percentage differences are showing you the theoretic "value" in the play. Actual shows more of a "will this team win" difference, Percent Difference shows you a better glimpse of the true, underlying value in the bet.
This is a work in progress, by the way, so comments and suggestions are invited.
Basically, what my spreadsheet does is look for the largest anomalies between what the bookies are doing to go Dutch on their money, and what Holden's numbers of the probable outcome of the game show.
Dutch just means a bookie is making a line not by who he/she thinks is going to win; he makes the line to make money on both sides' juice. Period.
So, I calculate the 'win' percentage based on the William Hill odds, put that against Holden's numbers for win percentage, then I calculate actual and percent difference.
The colors are weighted based on the fibonacci series; this is totally arbitrary at this point. I just dig math and ,personally, like to see colors and numbers associated.
So. The percentages get greener going up from 3%, 5%, 8%, 13%, 21%, 34%, all have slightly more intense green than the last. This is based on the blind assumption that the difference ought to provide a higher value.
I weighted his values in a similar fashion, but in 5 increments. Again. Totally arbitrary. I just like numbers and colors.
The bottomline: The actual and percentage differences are showing you the theoretic "value" in the play. Actual shows more of a "will this team win" difference, Percent Difference shows you a better glimpse of the true, underlying value in the bet.
This is a work in progress, by the way, so comments and suggestions are invited.
It's my opinion that the percent difference shows more of a real-world value because, in theory, Holden and the bookies are independently creating a numerical quantity for the same occurrence.
So, in actual difference, our point of reference is 100% = win, 0% - loss. The two percentages are in the grey area in between this reference frame of win-loss.
TOR RL for today for EX:
Billy Hill is woke up and phoned in a -150 RL. This, in raw numbers, means Bill thinks folks will pay -150; he's guessing the public thinks this is a 60% win chance.
Holden's numbers say this is 86% win percentage.
You can bet based straight on that.
But, 16 points between, say 86 and 60 isn't the same 16 that's between, say 34 and 50. 16 in the latter example is a boatload of value on a dog.
It's my opinion that the percent difference shows more of a real-world value because, in theory, Holden and the bookies are independently creating a numerical quantity for the same occurrence.
So, in actual difference, our point of reference is 100% = win, 0% - loss. The two percentages are in the grey area in between this reference frame of win-loss.
TOR RL for today for EX:
Billy Hill is woke up and phoned in a -150 RL. This, in raw numbers, means Bill thinks folks will pay -150; he's guessing the public thinks this is a 60% win chance.
Holden's numbers say this is 86% win percentage.
You can bet based straight on that.
But, 16 points between, say 86 and 60 isn't the same 16 that's between, say 34 and 50. 16 in the latter example is a boatload of value on a dog.
I think Lincecum is a bum. I think, when I used to live in Milwaukee, I used to see a lot of games with high scores, and both of those teams can get some runs.
I think there's a lot of value in Seattle.
I think there is a lot of value in Ohio, with Cubs bettors going big on Feldman. I'd wait this pick out today. I bet Cubs money goes big, and this pick becomes even more valuable. (the old this team isn't that bad, feldman's the best, etcetera)
I think there's value in Canada today.
If I wasn't a DNFW on the Dodgers, I would take them as a sharp home dog against a team that ain't great against lefties.
Thus far, what have I actually plopped cash on? CO ML, CO Over, CO x Over Parlay. The two team parlay turns a theoretic percentage of 35% win. about 10% better than a straight 50/50 win 2 team parlay, with a nice juicy underlying odds of 472, which in implied odds-land means I should only win this 17% of the time. :shifty:
Expected: PIT O, CIN ML, Some assortment of SEA action, HOU O, Some type of TOR action.
I like the value in the under on LAA/KC, but with all the hot bats coming out of the Angels dugout, who the hell knows? get in fast on the Angels ML if you'd like. There's a lot of value there.
In fact, both LA Teams are DNFW as of right now, for me, besides totals and when Blanton pitches. I have no emotional connection, just each time I touch them it's bad news for me.
I think Lincecum is a bum. I think, when I used to live in Milwaukee, I used to see a lot of games with high scores, and both of those teams can get some runs.
I think there's a lot of value in Seattle.
I think there is a lot of value in Ohio, with Cubs bettors going big on Feldman. I'd wait this pick out today. I bet Cubs money goes big, and this pick becomes even more valuable. (the old this team isn't that bad, feldman's the best, etcetera)
I think there's value in Canada today.
If I wasn't a DNFW on the Dodgers, I would take them as a sharp home dog against a team that ain't great against lefties.
Thus far, what have I actually plopped cash on? CO ML, CO Over, CO x Over Parlay. The two team parlay turns a theoretic percentage of 35% win. about 10% better than a straight 50/50 win 2 team parlay, with a nice juicy underlying odds of 472, which in implied odds-land means I should only win this 17% of the time. :shifty:
Expected: PIT O, CIN ML, Some assortment of SEA action, HOU O, Some type of TOR action.
I like the value in the under on LAA/KC, but with all the hot bats coming out of the Angels dugout, who the hell knows? get in fast on the Angels ML if you'd like. There's a lot of value there.
In fact, both LA Teams are DNFW as of right now, for me, besides totals and when Blanton pitches. I have no emotional connection, just each time I touch them it's bad news for me.
Holden no numbers for Philadelphia and Washington?? I just received some information about this game and I was curious to see your numbers.
Wht is the info? PM me. Good to see you Polar Bear. Yeah there is. i was holding on that one for a reason so I am actually curious to know now. Hit me up with a PM. Let me look.
Holden no numbers for Philadelphia and Washington?? I just received some information about this game and I was curious to see your numbers.
Wht is the info? PM me. Good to see you Polar Bear. Yeah there is. i was holding on that one for a reason so I am actually curious to know now. Hit me up with a PM. Let me look.
Wht is the info? PM me. Good to see you Polar Bear. Yeah there is. i was holding on that one for a reason so I am actually curious to know now. Hit me up with a PM. Let me look.
PEACE!
I pm'd you
The lion and the tiger may be more powerful, but the wolf doesn't perform in the circus.
Wht is the info? PM me. Good to see you Polar Bear. Yeah there is. i was holding on that one for a reason so I am actually curious to know now. Hit me up with a PM. Let me look.
I really don't like to answer that question whisperman, only because I don't want to be responsible for anyone losing money. I always say the numbers are there it's up to the individual who to dance with
I really don't like to answer that question whisperman, only because I don't want to be responsible for anyone losing money. I always say the numbers are there it's up to the individual who to dance with
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.