Arbitrage Opportunity in NFL Futures

Quote Originally Posted by Jokeheads:

The Bets:
GB -3 (-135)
Chicago to win Super Bowl (+600)

The only risk to this bet is GB not covering. You can immediately hedge out on the opposing ML if CHI beats GB.

If CHI wins this week, you're risking 210 to win 600 (+285). Does anyone think the Super Bowl ML for the opponent of CHI would be higher than that?

Thoughts?

Quote Originally Posted by gallotron:

You both are calculating this wrong anyways.  When you lose the first bet on GB it is not like you are wagering 235 to win 600 because you won't get the 135 back you lost on GB like you would with a normal bet.  To make this scenario exactly break-even would look something like this:

Risk:          Win:
100            600             Bears win SB
135            100             GB covers
465            235             ML on team playing bears in SB

You can see from this scenario that if GB covers first game you break even with the 100.  If the bears win the SB you will win 600 but will have lost 135 on GB bet and another 465 on opponent's ML breaking even.  If the opponent wins you win 235 which is exactly how much you would lose on your SB and GB bet.  465 to win 235 is -198 so to make this arbitrage profitable at all you would need a better than -198 line.  This doesn't even take into account the possibility of GB winning but not covering.  Vanzack's scenario of taking the GB ML at -200 would result in needing a -133 ML just to break-even which ain't gonna happen.

Quote Originally Posted by gallotron:

You both are calculating this wrong anyways.  When you lose the first bet on GB it is not like you are wagering 235 to win 600 because you won't get the 135 back you lost on GB like you would with a normal bet.  To make this scenario exactly break-even would look something like this:

Risk:          Win:
100            600             Bears win SB
135            100             GB covers
465            235             ML on team playing bears in SB

You can see from this scenario that if GB covers first game you break even with the 100.  If the bears win the SB you will win 600 but will have lost 135 on GB bet and another 465 on opponent's ML breaking even.  If the opponent wins you win 235 which is exactly how much you would lose on your SB and GB bet.  465 to win 235 is -198 so to make this arbitrage profitable at all you would need a better than -198 line.  This doesn't even take into account the possibility of GB winning but not covering.  Vanzack's scenario of taking the GB ML at -200 would result in needing a -133 ML just to break-even which ain't gonna happen.