You are exactly right, sorry for that Van Zack, I never meant to provide information that wasn't accurate, as I do pride myself on that too. I have found my error, and I realize what your saying now. I don't know how I missed that. It's never smart to hedge, I knew that from the get go, and let my mistake overtake me there.
But I do have a question for you because I seen something that I found interesting in what you were saying..
0
You are exactly right, sorry for that Van Zack, I never meant to provide information that wasn't accurate, as I do pride myself on that too. I have found my error, and I realize what your saying now. I don't know how I missed that. It's never smart to hedge, I knew that from the get go, and let my mistake overtake me there.
But I do have a question for you because I seen something that I found interesting in what you were saying..
You are exactly right, sorry for that Van Zack, I never meant to provide information that wasn't accurate, as I do pride myself on that too. I have found my error, and I realize what your saying now. I don't know how I missed that. It's never smart to hedge, I knew that from the get go, and let my mistake overtake me there.
But I do have a question for you because I seen something that I found interesting in what you were saying..
No problems dude - none at all.
I actually shake your hand for putting together something that is math based - I can only congratulate you for being smarter than most around here.
Everyone makes mistakes - I was ready to say I did there for the first 10 times I read your post....
But I kept going back to the fact that if you pay vig on both sides, it is just impossible to bend that equation in to a positive. Just like craps systems - if every bet on the table has a negative EV - you cant combine them in any combination to make that a + EV - no matter what the salesman of the system is telling you!
Good conversation...
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Quote Originally Posted by FreakyFresh:
You are exactly right, sorry for that Van Zack, I never meant to provide information that wasn't accurate, as I do pride myself on that too. I have found my error, and I realize what your saying now. I don't know how I missed that. It's never smart to hedge, I knew that from the get go, and let my mistake overtake me there.
But I do have a question for you because I seen something that I found interesting in what you were saying..
No problems dude - none at all.
I actually shake your hand for putting together something that is math based - I can only congratulate you for being smarter than most around here.
Everyone makes mistakes - I was ready to say I did there for the first 10 times I read your post....
But I kept going back to the fact that if you pay vig on both sides, it is just impossible to bend that equation in to a positive. Just like craps systems - if every bet on the table has a negative EV - you cant combine them in any combination to make that a + EV - no matter what the salesman of the system is telling you!
Middling assumes that you have an opportunity to take advantage of a change in the line. I do this ALL THE TIME. I sell bets, I middle where I calculate it to be the best move - all the time....
But this whole hedging thread and discussion is based on the question that is asked every sunday and monday night - should I hedge a parlay where the odds have not changed, information has not changed..... And the answer is mathematically NO!!!
And the reason is that you are being paid less than your current position is worth because of the juice you paid on the parlay, and the juice you have to pay on the hedge bet. You cant get around it.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69:
Van....Do you believe in middling?
Sure....
Middling assumes that you have an opportunity to take advantage of a change in the line. I do this ALL THE TIME. I sell bets, I middle where I calculate it to be the best move - all the time....
But this whole hedging thread and discussion is based on the question that is asked every sunday and monday night - should I hedge a parlay where the odds have not changed, information has not changed..... And the answer is mathematically NO!!!
And the reason is that you are being paid less than your current position is worth because of the juice you paid on the parlay, and the juice you have to pay on the hedge bet. You cant get around it.
do actually believe that the true odds are the midpoint between the two lines?
For example you said earlier if the dog was +550 and the favorite was -600 the true odds are then +/- 575?
To me, that doesn't make much sense here is how I find what I think is the true line..
I take the odds for both the fav and the dog calculate them into winning percentages like I did earlier. Because of the vig, this is going to be over 100%, usually like 103 or 104%. From there I take the calculated expected win percentage from the odds and divide that by the total with the vig included. Do this with both the favorite and the dog and you get new balanced true odds.
What this does is take account for the vig whether its 3% or 4% or whatever in proportion to the odds already. That might be tough to understand, but here is an example:
Dog: +450 Favorite: -600 Midpoint ( +/- 525)
+450 equates to 18.18% (rounded at 2 decimals) -600 equates to 85.71% (rounded at 2) so the total % is 103.90% (rounded at 2)
revert those percentages back to odds: +450: 17.50% --- is now +471 -600: 82.50% --- is now -471
so instead of using the midpoint of +/- 525, it would be +/- 471?
Your thoughts?
0
VanZack here is my question...
Since we are both math guys-....
do actually believe that the true odds are the midpoint between the two lines?
For example you said earlier if the dog was +550 and the favorite was -600 the true odds are then +/- 575?
To me, that doesn't make much sense here is how I find what I think is the true line..
I take the odds for both the fav and the dog calculate them into winning percentages like I did earlier. Because of the vig, this is going to be over 100%, usually like 103 or 104%. From there I take the calculated expected win percentage from the odds and divide that by the total with the vig included. Do this with both the favorite and the dog and you get new balanced true odds.
What this does is take account for the vig whether its 3% or 4% or whatever in proportion to the odds already. That might be tough to understand, but here is an example:
Dog: +450 Favorite: -600 Midpoint ( +/- 525)
+450 equates to 18.18% (rounded at 2 decimals) -600 equates to 85.71% (rounded at 2) so the total % is 103.90% (rounded at 2)
do actually believe that the true odds are the midpoint between the two lines?
For example you said earlier if the dog was +550 and the favorite was -600 the true odds are then +/- 575?
To me, that doesn't make much sense here is how I find what I think is the true line..
I take the odds for both the fav and the dog calculate them into winning percentages like I did earlier. Because of the vig, this is going to be over 100%, usually like 103 or 104%. From there I take the calculated expected win percentage from the odds and divide that by the total with the vig included. Do this with both the favorite and the dog and you get new balanced true odds.
What this does is take account for the vig whether its 3% or 4% or whatever in proportion to the odds already. That might be tough to understand, but here is an example:
Dog: +450 Favorite: -600 Midpoint ( +/- 525)
+450 equates to 18.18% (rounded at 2 decimals) -600 equates to 85.71% (rounded at 2) so the total % is 103.90% (rounded at 2)
revert those percentages back to odds: +450: 17.50% --- is now +471 -600: 82.50% --- is now -471
so instead of using the midpoint of +/- 525, it would be +/- 471?
Your thoughts?
You are 100% correct.
As the line moves farther away from zero, this becomes more and more of a factor.....
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
0
Quote Originally Posted by FreakyFresh:
VanZack here is my question...
Since we are both math guys-....
do actually believe that the true odds are the midpoint between the two lines?
For example you said earlier if the dog was +550 and the favorite was -600 the true odds are then +/- 575?
To me, that doesn't make much sense here is how I find what I think is the true line..
I take the odds for both the fav and the dog calculate them into winning percentages like I did earlier. Because of the vig, this is going to be over 100%, usually like 103 or 104%. From there I take the calculated expected win percentage from the odds and divide that by the total with the vig included. Do this with both the favorite and the dog and you get new balanced true odds.
What this does is take account for the vig whether its 3% or 4% or whatever in proportion to the odds already. That might be tough to understand, but here is an example:
Dog: +450 Favorite: -600 Midpoint ( +/- 525)
+450 equates to 18.18% (rounded at 2 decimals) -600 equates to 85.71% (rounded at 2) so the total % is 103.90% (rounded at 2)
And sometimes when a bettor sobers up on Monday and sees they have a huge parlay still alive, they can and do hedge in order to guarantee a win. That also makes sense.
Sigh...
0
Quote Originally Posted by sharper45:
And sometimes when a bettor sobers up on Monday and sees they have a huge parlay still alive, they can and do hedge in order to guarantee a win. That also makes sense.
But this whole hedging thread and discussion is based on the question that is asked every sunday and monday night - should I hedge a parlay where the odds have not changed, information has not changed..... And the answer is mathematically NO!!!
And the reason is that you are being paid less than your current position is worth because of the juice you paid on the parlay, and the juice you have to pay on the hedge bet. You cant get around it.
___________
One thing people need to understand is that these principles apply as you take your sample size to infinity. If you have a -500 ML favorite to win a parlay where you bet $100 and could win $2,500, the mathematical play is to let it go. You have a -500 fav and are risking $100 to win $2,500....that is a no brainer.
But it could still lose. And they do sometimes. That's where the person who didn't hedge says, "I told you so." But the mathematical right choice is to let it ride.
I know many of us play poker. We've all had pair over pair and lost. But if you fold those excellent opportunities OVER TIME, you will get killed.
Best thread I've ever seen on covers to be honest. Just my opinion.
0
But this whole hedging thread and discussion is based on the question that is asked every sunday and monday night - should I hedge a parlay where the odds have not changed, information has not changed..... And the answer is mathematically NO!!!
And the reason is that you are being paid less than your current position is worth because of the juice you paid on the parlay, and the juice you have to pay on the hedge bet. You cant get around it.
___________
One thing people need to understand is that these principles apply as you take your sample size to infinity. If you have a -500 ML favorite to win a parlay where you bet $100 and could win $2,500, the mathematical play is to let it go. You have a -500 fav and are risking $100 to win $2,500....that is a no brainer.
But it could still lose. And they do sometimes. That's where the person who didn't hedge says, "I told you so." But the mathematical right choice is to let it ride.
I know many of us play poker. We've all had pair over pair and lost. But if you fold those excellent opportunities OVER TIME, you will get killed.
Best thread I've ever seen on covers to be honest. Just my opinion.
I made a username today just so I could post on your thread van. Best thread ever bro!!! Few comments I couldn't hold back:
First, I would like to thank you for finally coming up with the equation I had in my mind all along about why hedging is bad. I'm going to explain your way to get my point across to thick headed friends who think with their heart and not their brain.
Second, that moron KOAJ at the start of the thread was trying to explain that just betting the first 3 games(your good idea) is bad because 'what if you loose them?' Heres my insight:
When betting, the two things that matter are the odds and the payout ratio's I am getting. Another point that makes hedging stupid is, ALTHOUGH YOUR GETTING GAURANTEED MONEY, YOUR PAYOUT ISN'T WORTH THE RISK OF THE EARLIER GAMES THAT EVEN GOT YOU TO THAT POINT!!! Basically he accidently backed your point with his foolishness. If you have the 3-game parley and you loose, well then you loose. If you have the 4-game parley, YOU CAN STILL LOOSE 1 OF THE FIRST 3 GAMES AND THEN YOU WONT EVEN GET TO HEDGE AND THEN WHEN YOU DO WIN YOU WIN LESS!!!!
He didn't understand the point you made of 'winning less' and 'other ways of betting instead of hedging' (Only they don't feel like gauranteed money, but are essentially same thing)
Hedging parley's is basically the same as, you either loose, or you win less. Not to mention paying extra juice over time.
Also, maybe this point was repeated somewhere else in the thread, but here I go.
Say you bet 100 bucks on 3 games and you get paid 6-1. Thats $600, You bet 4 games, getting (Lets say even if it was 12-1(exagerated payout just to prove a point) $1200, you hedge yourself on the last game, so you only win slightly under half because of the juice. IT STILL IS <600
HOW CAN YOU ARGUE ITS BETTER TO WIN LESS!!! I SWEAR THESE PEOPLE GET A BUZZ OFF WATCHING A GAME AND THINKING, IM A GENIOUS BECAUSE NO MATTER WHAT, I GET PAID!!! But really their stupid, because they are getting ripped off and not getting paid everything for the risk they took with the games BEFORE THE HEDGED-GAME!!! SO WHY BET IT IN THE FIRST PLACE IF YOUR JUST GONNA GIVE AWAY EXTRA JUICE?!?!?!?!
Also why bet against yourself in the first place? I make a bet because I feel I am right. As long as im right 60%(My goal) in the betting world I should prosper if played smart. Why bother with extra juice's?!?!?!? Its like playing poker with a higher rake, instead of 45% of players beeing prosperous only 40% would prosper over the LONG TERM.
Cheers Van! Great minds think alike!!! In a way we should thank stupid people like this (90% like to hedge as you said lmao!!!) because they keep lots of bookies around for us smart people to make money!
0
I made a username today just so I could post on your thread van. Best thread ever bro!!! Few comments I couldn't hold back:
First, I would like to thank you for finally coming up with the equation I had in my mind all along about why hedging is bad. I'm going to explain your way to get my point across to thick headed friends who think with their heart and not their brain.
Second, that moron KOAJ at the start of the thread was trying to explain that just betting the first 3 games(your good idea) is bad because 'what if you loose them?' Heres my insight:
When betting, the two things that matter are the odds and the payout ratio's I am getting. Another point that makes hedging stupid is, ALTHOUGH YOUR GETTING GAURANTEED MONEY, YOUR PAYOUT ISN'T WORTH THE RISK OF THE EARLIER GAMES THAT EVEN GOT YOU TO THAT POINT!!! Basically he accidently backed your point with his foolishness. If you have the 3-game parley and you loose, well then you loose. If you have the 4-game parley, YOU CAN STILL LOOSE 1 OF THE FIRST 3 GAMES AND THEN YOU WONT EVEN GET TO HEDGE AND THEN WHEN YOU DO WIN YOU WIN LESS!!!!
He didn't understand the point you made of 'winning less' and 'other ways of betting instead of hedging' (Only they don't feel like gauranteed money, but are essentially same thing)
Hedging parley's is basically the same as, you either loose, or you win less. Not to mention paying extra juice over time.
Also, maybe this point was repeated somewhere else in the thread, but here I go.
Say you bet 100 bucks on 3 games and you get paid 6-1. Thats $600, You bet 4 games, getting (Lets say even if it was 12-1(exagerated payout just to prove a point) $1200, you hedge yourself on the last game, so you only win slightly under half because of the juice. IT STILL IS <600
HOW CAN YOU ARGUE ITS BETTER TO WIN LESS!!! I SWEAR THESE PEOPLE GET A BUZZ OFF WATCHING A GAME AND THINKING, IM A GENIOUS BECAUSE NO MATTER WHAT, I GET PAID!!! But really their stupid, because they are getting ripped off and not getting paid everything for the risk they took with the games BEFORE THE HEDGED-GAME!!! SO WHY BET IT IN THE FIRST PLACE IF YOUR JUST GONNA GIVE AWAY EXTRA JUICE?!?!?!?!
Also why bet against yourself in the first place? I make a bet because I feel I am right. As long as im right 60%(My goal) in the betting world I should prosper if played smart. Why bother with extra juice's?!?!?!? Its like playing poker with a higher rake, instead of 45% of players beeing prosperous only 40% would prosper over the LONG TERM.
Cheers Van! Great minds think alike!!! In a way we should thank stupid people like this (90% like to hedge as you said lmao!!!) because they keep lots of bookies around for us smart people to make money!
i just signed up to covers after reading your thread, wanting make a comment.
vanjack makes sense in math point of view, KOAJ makes sense in money management point of view.
At this type of situation, I never hedge the last game, But, I sell part of my bets to my sports buddies with no charge of juice. We cheer for the same team, buddies save the juice if they lose, and more importantly I am insured for part of money.
In another word, using your example, $100 would pay me a $1,000 if i hit the forth one, Instead, find a buddy who's same side as you, save him money from the risk of juice. This way you are saving yourself from the paying juice when you hedge.
I hope no one would say who cares $5, $10 juice?
0
very interesting, vanjack and KOAJ.
i just signed up to covers after reading your thread, wanting make a comment.
vanjack makes sense in math point of view, KOAJ makes sense in money management point of view.
At this type of situation, I never hedge the last game, But, I sell part of my bets to my sports buddies with no charge of juice. We cheer for the same team, buddies save the juice if they lose, and more importantly I am insured for part of money.
In another word, using your example, $100 would pay me a $1,000 if i hit the forth one, Instead, find a buddy who's same side as you, save him money from the risk of juice. This way you are saving yourself from the paying juice when you hedge.
Van, you are truly a better mathematician than I am. I freely admit that and respect you for it.
Just to further understand the concept of EV, I read this wiki. Ironically enough, at the bottom of that page, while looking for more information, I found this wiki. Let me know your thoughts, please.
0
Van, you are truly a better mathematician than I am. I freely admit that and respect you for it.
Just to further understand the concept of EV, I read this wiki. Ironically enough, at the bottom of that page, while looking for more information, I found this wiki. Let me know your thoughts, please.
Also, is there any reading out there on the web that you'd suggest for someone wanting to improve their understanding of gambling mathematics? Admittedly, I am very uneducated when it comes to statistics, probability, etc.
As for the above post, no reply needed. I just got a little excited when I saw that a famous mathematician had come up with those ideas regarding religion. Upon further reading I see that it has been thoroughly debated already. We'd surely just be re-hashing ideas that have already been documented.
0
Also, is there any reading out there on the web that you'd suggest for someone wanting to improve their understanding of gambling mathematics? Admittedly, I am very uneducated when it comes to statistics, probability, etc.
As for the above post, no reply needed. I just got a little excited when I saw that a famous mathematician had come up with those ideas regarding religion. Upon further reading I see that it has been thoroughly debated already. We'd surely just be re-hashing ideas that have already been documented.
One caveat with what van said is that nothing has changed with regards to the odds or possible outcome. But you should never do that anyways, because you should only parlay games that are happening at the same time (see van's first situation).
If you are betting the last one of your game at a time late enough that you can "hedge" - for example, parlaying 3 morning games and an evening games. Yes, if you find out some last minute weather changes for the evening game that could affect the outcome of the last game, there may be statistically sound reason to hedge.
However, in that case, you should have just parlay the first three and bet the winning straight on the evening game instead.
Some people are talking about how hedging give you guaranteed money. While it makes some sense in a emotional stand point, it is not a smart play. Same reason why taking the insurance on blackjack is always a losing play. If you are short stacked or just had a tremendously losing night that you need this guarantee money, it really just means that you are not playing according to your bankroll... or, you are just straight up gambling (as supposed to beating the house or book)
0
One caveat with what van said is that nothing has changed with regards to the odds or possible outcome. But you should never do that anyways, because you should only parlay games that are happening at the same time (see van's first situation).
If you are betting the last one of your game at a time late enough that you can "hedge" - for example, parlaying 3 morning games and an evening games. Yes, if you find out some last minute weather changes for the evening game that could affect the outcome of the last game, there may be statistically sound reason to hedge.
However, in that case, you should have just parlay the first three and bet the winning straight on the evening game instead.
Some people are talking about how hedging give you guaranteed money. While it makes some sense in a emotional stand point, it is not a smart play. Same reason why taking the insurance on blackjack is always a losing play. If you are short stacked or just had a tremendously losing night that you need this guarantee money, it really just means that you are not playing according to your bankroll... or, you are just straight up gambling (as supposed to beating the house or book)
If you hit the you are all good take out the money from your account and enjoy the party.
Don't take out more money from you bankroll unless you are %99 sure that the last team on the parlay is gonna lose. That is against the most basic rule of betting: money management.
Don't learn from the hard way, listen to the people who knows betting like vanzack
0
If you hit the you are all good take out the money from your account and enjoy the party.
Don't take out more money from you bankroll unless you are %99 sure that the last team on the parlay is gonna lose. That is against the most basic rule of betting: money management.
Don't learn from the hard way, listen to the people who knows betting like vanzack
All I have to say is Thanks to Van and that I cannot believe this post has gone on for over 2 years. It almost took me that long to read it and was so hard with all of the stupidity. The point that I am surprised was not made sooner in the post was.
You WIN the first 3 games to be able to hedge the 4th
You make the SAME parlay without the 4th team you have ALREADY WON the 3 teamer.
This is where they were so confused and hung up. They could not wrap their stupid heads around having already won in you only make it 3 teams instead of 4 lol....
0
All I have to say is Thanks to Van and that I cannot believe this post has gone on for over 2 years. It almost took me that long to read it and was so hard with all of the stupidity. The point that I am surprised was not made sooner in the post was.
You WIN the first 3 games to be able to hedge the 4th
You make the SAME parlay without the 4th team you have ALREADY WON the 3 teamer.
This is where they were so confused and hung up. They could not wrap their stupid heads around having already won in you only make it 3 teams instead of 4 lol....
I agree with Van , I usually do hedge bcuz I bet many parlays but i do not hedge to make an even amount If I have a 3 teamer to win 600 I will hedge the other side for 100 so either I win 500 or lose the vig.
0
I agree with Van , I usually do hedge bcuz I bet many parlays but i do not hedge to make an even amount If I have a 3 teamer to win 600 I will hedge the other side for 100 so either I win 500 or lose the vig.
Generally agree with OP about what he said. Anyone that says IT CAN'T BE WRONG TO GUARANTEE MONEY is lol to me and didn't understand the thread at all.
There's no doubt that hedging is negative -EV. And I completely agree that if your betting a four team parlay in the first place you shouldn't do so planning to hedge the last game.
But I would say that if someone does make such a bet (misguided or not) and wins the first 3 and the 4th one is later, there is some merit, some of the time, to hedging. Hedging, although clearly negative -EV, undoubtedly cuts down on variance.
If your betting parlays all the time you can deal with the variance of "riding it out". However, if your an occasional bettor, and you bet a 4 team parlay with a late game, you may be better off to hedge. You lose money in the long run, but for you there is no long run. The potential bad side of variance in the short term can be worse than the EV lost with the extra vig imho.
For instance, if someone said I could have a million dollars or flip a coin and if I pick the right side have like 2.2 million, I would take the million in a second even though I know in the long run that's negative EV. Obviously people shouldn't be making bets out of their bankroll and parlays in general if they're inclined to hedge, BUT such bets are made some of the time. In those instances hedging might be ok.
Like I said OP is completely right about how everyone always says HEDGE HEDGE HEDGE all the time, and there is something fundamentally wrong with that. If your going to hedge don't make the bet in the first place...
0
Generally agree with OP about what he said. Anyone that says IT CAN'T BE WRONG TO GUARANTEE MONEY is lol to me and didn't understand the thread at all.
There's no doubt that hedging is negative -EV. And I completely agree that if your betting a four team parlay in the first place you shouldn't do so planning to hedge the last game.
But I would say that if someone does make such a bet (misguided or not) and wins the first 3 and the 4th one is later, there is some merit, some of the time, to hedging. Hedging, although clearly negative -EV, undoubtedly cuts down on variance.
If your betting parlays all the time you can deal with the variance of "riding it out". However, if your an occasional bettor, and you bet a 4 team parlay with a late game, you may be better off to hedge. You lose money in the long run, but for you there is no long run. The potential bad side of variance in the short term can be worse than the EV lost with the extra vig imho.
For instance, if someone said I could have a million dollars or flip a coin and if I pick the right side have like 2.2 million, I would take the million in a second even though I know in the long run that's negative EV. Obviously people shouldn't be making bets out of their bankroll and parlays in general if they're inclined to hedge, BUT such bets are made some of the time. In those instances hedging might be ok.
Like I said OP is completely right about how everyone always says HEDGE HEDGE HEDGE all the time, and there is something fundamentally wrong with that. If your going to hedge don't make the bet in the first place...
I just dont do it bc I dont believe in ! Its either Im in with my pick or Im out with my pick that plane and simple...This hedging is Nonsense to betting....every now and then but def not Consistant!!!
GET EM!!!
0
I just dont do it bc I dont believe in ! Its either Im in with my pick or Im out with my pick that plane and simple...This hedging is Nonsense to betting....every now and then but def not Consistant!!!
Hot Forum Topics
