Week 11 lines/thoughts

The line has moved past -3 in the Hamilton/Edmonton game....I am contemplating an attempt at a middle.

For those that don't know what this is.....it's when a bettor tries to win both sides of a game....in my case I got Hamilton to win the game outright at +100 earlier in the week.

Now the line is at -3.5, so does this make mathematical sense to do so?  

If hypothetically I bet with a bookmaker that has -110 lines, betting on the game on Hamilton/Edmonton, say for a hundred dollars, risking 110 dollars to win a hundred and then on Edmonton 110 dollars to win a hundred.  I am risking 220 dollars and will lose 10 dollars if the game does not fall within 1, 2 or 3 points and will draw one side if the game ends in a tie and win the other side.

We take 10 (the amount I'd lose if it doesn't fall into the winning zone) and divide it into 220 (the total amount risked), which gives us .04545, or 4.5%.  Our calculated odds of Hamilton winning by 1, 2 or 3 points will have to be higher than 4.5% to have this be an +EV bet.

So, what does the data say?  Are the chances higher than 4.5% of Hamilton winning by 3 or less (or getting a draw to win one side only)?

I took all of the home non-divisional games in the database,.....46 out of 404 times the game landed on 1, 2, or 3, 11.3% of the time, four times out of 404 times it landed on zero (a draw), so about 12 percent of the time this was a winning play, so this is a positive expectancy play.

If I filtered out the higher than plus or minus 7, either underdogs or favorites, there were 279 games and 11% of them fell into the winning zone and 3 ended in draws, again about 12%.

On the other hand, what if I instead  took the moneyline on Edmonton....I would then have a risk-free bet on Calgary at +140 at my book.  Does that make mathematical sense?  Would it give me  more mathematical advantage than trying to middle in the example above?

Using the database again, I entered in non-divisional home games where the home team was favored by less than 7 points,....the home team won straight up 95 times (56.8%) , they lost straight up 70 times (41,9%) and there was two draws.

I would win 140 dollars 41.9% of the time in this scenario, I'll multiply those numbers out to get 58.66 dollars returned, which equates to a 5.866% return, higher than 4.54% that I'd need to make this a positive EV, but not as high as the percentage ROI in trying to middle the game.

"I would then have a risk-free bet on Calgary"

Should read "Edmonton"

Play:

7)  Edmonton +3'

to go along with 

1)  Hamilton +100

The calculated EV was slightly off in the post two posts ago, because I have Hamilton +100, rather than -110 that I calculated, so the expense is 3.75% rather than 4.54%.  My calculated chances of landing on Hamilton drawing or winning by 1, 2, or 3 is 12%, so it is a sound idea to attempt a middle.

1)  Hamilton +100 winner

7)  Edmonton +3' winner

Niiiiiiice!

NFL week 1 games I've played.

1)  Broncos -2'

2)  Colts -3

3)  Cowboys +3

4)  Jets +6'

5)  Redskins +1

May play:

6)  49ers +

7)  Bills +

Thanks DB, middles are rare and nice.

Here's a query used to give me Saturday's plays.

tA(YPPA-o:YPPA)-oA(YPPA-o:YPPA)>0 and playoffs=0  and game number>7 and HF and DIV

47-71-1 ATS, versus Sasquatches, Stampeders

Once again we are fading the yards/pass attempt superior team as a home favorite.

16-10 Alouettes, wonders never cease, Montreal actually has the lead.  Pipkin still impressive and the Alouettes' receivers are about the worst receivers ever.  Does not bode well for an over.  Still Toronto did basically nothing against the worst defense in the league, they'll have to throw down the field in the second half.

We might need a special teams or defensive turnover touchdown to get the cash in this one.

I was willing to give Mike Sherman the benefit of the doubt......but he is a bonehead.  You kick field goals when you have the chance....you have the worst defense in the CFL and you are passing up a chance at 3 points in order to a)  have your kicker pin the other team deep b)  with the expectancy that your defense is gonna hold the other team.

That is a negative probability on both counts.....bad coaching, plus your team is very undisciplined....the Alouettes just can't seem to get it right.

Numerous points left on the field...poor coaching decisions, bad kicking, etc, etc, etc.  

22-22 with 7 minutes left, they could score another 28 or they might score nothing, this is the CFL after all.

1st and goal at the 9 for Sherman and the Als and runs twice into the line....to kick a field goal and leave a minute on the clock.

He gets in "F".

Normally we'd pray for at least overtime, but with these teams, maybe neither would score in OT.

3)  Als/Argos OVER loser

Bombers up 15-12 at half....we're ok with field goals.  The back up for Winnipeg, Streveler is a stud,....at some stage in the next couple of years, he will be the quarterback as he can throw it and he can run it.

I like Nichols, but someone like Saskatchewan or Toronto could throw a ton of players/draft picks at winnipeg in the next year or two and if I'm the Blue Bombers I strongly considering it, as Streveler could be an MOP player for them.

15-25 Winnipeg with 5 minutes left....crazy time in the CFL....we'll see if the Peggers can slip in the back door.

Bombers hold on 3rd and 1, 2:51 left at about midfield.....we need 3 points for a cover and the Bombers need two scores.

They get the field goal, 18-25 with 2 minutes left.  

I've seen guys break off touchdown runs trying to run out the clock.

Amazingly terrible.

70 yard touchdown pass to blow the Bomber cover.

Interception to blow the UNDER.

Full credit to Calgary, they make plays when it counts, and the other teams in the CFL, don't.