Weighing the Odds

End of Blog

2009-02-09T09:02:00.002-05:00

I have not posted in this blog in a long time. Unfortunately, I just lost interest. I will restart writing articles for the Two Plus Two Internet Magazine. I have agreed to write sports betting articles for the April issue through the October issue. I have no plans to post in this blog again. It is possible that may change, but right now, I don't see it happening. Thank you everyone.

NBA Opening games: Play the Under?

2008-10-28T10:24:00.005-04:00

When both teams are playing in their first game of the year, my data shows:

1993 to 2003, average betting total 195.4, average actual total 192.0.
Overs against the total: 49-87, 36%

That's a pretty darn good rate for the Under, right?
But...

2004 to 2007, average betting total 192.6, average actual total 194.3.
Overs against the total: 28-20 58.3%

The actual totals are about the same in the two time periods (192 vs 194.3), but the average betting total is drastically different (195.4 versus 192.6).

Digging further to look at the average totals for all games:
1993-2003: average betting total 193.0, average actual total 193.4. Overs ATS went 50.2%
2004-2007: average betting total: 195.9, average actual total: 196.4 Overs ATS went 50.3%

From 1993-2003, the average betting total for the first games of the year were 2.4 points higher than the average betting total for the year. But the average actual total was 2 points lower.

From 2004-2007, the average betting total for the first games of the year were more than 3 points lower than the average betting total for the year...and the average actual total was also 3 points lower.

From this data, it seems to me books mispriced the total too high previously, but have since gotten smart and adjusted the opening totals lower. The opportunity is gone. Anyone betting on the angle blindly with ATS numbers from the previous 14 years or even 10 years are making a fundamental mistake of not realizing the possibility the market has corrected and lines are now more efficient than they were in the past. The conclusion is that the angle is no longer a positive EV play.

If you aren't convinced yet to pass on the Unders based on this angle, here's another look at the three games tonight compared with totals from the last year when they last played (excluding playoff games)

CLE vs BOS. Tonight's total is 180. Looks like they last played on 2/27/2008. The total was 191.5
LAL vs POR. Tonight's total is 196. Looks like they last played on 2/26/2008. The total was 202.
MIL vs CHI. Tonight's total is 195. Looks like they last played on 3/29/2008. The total was 207.5

Personnel changes on teams, coaches change, so I'm not saying these are the same teams. But there is probably not that big of a difference in the team rosters (Garnett and Pierce still on the Celtics, Kobe still with the Lakers, Lebron still with Cavs, etc. etc.).

So, the conclusion is that if you hear/read anyone make a pick on the Under in any of the opening games based on this angle, you know they are making a fundemental mistake. Don't make the same mistake.

2-0 and 0-2 preseason teams

2008-08-19T18:28:00.004-04:00

There is often discussion by thinking football bettors that it is good to bet against 2-0 teams in the preseason and bet on 0-2 teams in the preseason. The idea is that 2-0 teams don't need a win to feel good, so they have no incentive to win whatsoever. They probably played well in the first two games and they can afford to give their backups more work. Or something to that effect. The reverse is that 0-2 teams need to work harder and want a win.

Has this theory held up? yes and no.

2-0 teams in their 3rd game since 1996 have gone 49-37-4 against the spread.
0-2 teams in their 3rd game since 1996 have gone 46-36-1 against the spread.

These are small sample sizes. While it may be decent news for betting on 0-2 teams, it doesn't look good for betting against 2-0 teams.

Teams this week that are 0-2: CHI, ATL, NE, DAL, GB, CLE
Teams this week that are 2-0: TB, WAS (3-0), DET

What to make of this? I'm not sure, I wouldn't recommend betting any of these teams blindly.

Interesting article on Robert Walker of MGM Mirage

2008-06-24T23:31:00.002-04:00

Here is a good article on Robert Walker of MGM Mirage. He is retiring from his position as the MGM Mirage sports book director. It surprised me a bit that the article talks more about sportsbooks and Walker specifically dealing with pro bettors more than anything else.

Good plan doesn't pan out

2008-06-14T14:13:00.004-04:00

Yesterday I took the Houston Astros in the 2nd Half at +130. I made this bet before the game started. The 2nd Half in baseball is the 6th inning and beyond. I liked the bet but it lost. I thought it was well thought out given the Yankees situation and had positive EV. Historically, in games with the road team around -155 favorites, the home team has been worth about +130 in the 2nd Half. If the NYY/HOU game was a normal game with a line of -155 for the Yankees, then I would have thought I had a zero-EV bet. But I knew that Mariano Rivera was unlikely to pitch, and even if he did, he would not be at 100% strength. Rivera had pitched in 4 straight games from June 7th to 10th, then took the 11th off, but then pitched again on the 12th. That's 5 out of 6 days! Incredible for a closer these days.

With Rivera out and Joba Chamberlain now in the starting rotation, the Yankee bullpen for last night's game was very suspect.

To top it off, Chamberlain was going into his 3rd start and was still probably on a pitch count. Although it would be higher than his previous start, I would have been shocked if he threw more than 100 pitches. So I didn't think he was likely to pitch much in the 2nd half of the game. If it was another pitcher, like Andy Pettitte, then there would have been the possibility of the starter going deeper into the game and pitching the 7th and 8th too. But with Chamberlain, there is a much lower chance of that. And that meant the bullpen would be pitching most or all the innings in the 2nd half. It turned out that Chamberlain threw 89 pitches over 6 quality innings.

But it didn't work out. Veras and Farnsworth pitched three scoreless innings and the Yankees scored one run in the 8th inning on a Derek Jeter solo HR. I still like the thought process and the rationale for the bet. At worst, I had a zero-EV bet. But likely, I had a positive EV bet given the reasonings shown above.

comments on the Donaghy issue

2008-06-12T23:33:00.004-04:00

I don't think it is a good idea to accept Donaghy's accusations as the truth. But I also don't think it is a good idea to assume he is lying. NBA commissioner David Stern is pleading with everyone to believe the latter.

I'll make a couple of comments from one of the ESPN.com articles: http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3439554

Here are the comments made by the Maloofs, owners of the Sacramento Kings, on the 2002 Game 6 game against the Lakers.

We believe we have the best fans in the NBA and are so grateful for their continued passion and support," the Maloofs said in a statement. "We certainly didn't like all the calls in that Game 6 and were extremely disappointed with the outcome. However, we have been associated with the NBA for many years and feel in no way that the league was conspiring for the Kings to lose."

This is exactly what any sane person would say. The Maloofs are part of the league. No matter what they truly believed, it does not help to stab the NBA and David Stern now. It can only hurt them, and hurt them immensely. This is the case with everyone that has any connection to the NBA. Owners, players, coaches, broadcasters. Everybody. Even some reporters are probably too close to the NBA to make disparaging remarks on this issue. Imagine a reporter saying he believes Donaghy and that something fishy happened in the 2002 game. What do you think Stern, Phil Jackson, Kobe, Shaq or many others will respond to him the next time he calls them for an interview.

Next comment is on David Stern's comments:

At his news conference Thursday, Stern made his strongest statements ever regarding the 2002 Kings-Lakers game, saying: "You can watch it, you can look at it again, and you could see what we call the correct, incorrect and non-call incorrect. ... My guess is it won't be pretty, but it won't be dishonest and it won't be illegal. Of that I assure you."

It should be tough for anyone to be assured by David Stern. He now says there were many bad calls (or at least he implies it). Did he say that back then. I don't think so. Just think about Stern's motives, and you know he has to say what he says. The other thing is that he cannot prove a negative. Before the Donaghy issue, he would have claimed all his referees were clean, and he would have been wrong.

From a gambling standpoint, I would think twice about betting the home team in the playoffs when they are down 0-2 in the series. Is it possible that one of the reasons they have such a great record in that spot is the referees helping them out in some way, however slight? Possibly. And that might be enough to think about laying off those bets in the future.

Interview with a NBA bettor regarding Donaghy and betting in general

2008-06-11T23:54:00.001-04:00

This article on a sports bettor's view on Donaghy is interesting. I saw it linked by "MadLib" on LVA Sports.

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-32-308/A-Professional-Gambler-s-Take-on-the-Tim-Donaghy-Scandal.html

new review of Weighing the Odds in Sports Betting

2008-06-07T11:46:00.001-04:00

Here is a nice Review of Weighing the Odds in Sports Betting by Allen Moody at About.com

NBA Finals Home/Away is different than other playoff series

2008-06-04T13:43:00.002-04:00

The Home-Away schedule is different in the NBA Finals than it is for other playoff series. In all other playoff series, the schedule is:

1. A
2. A
3. B
4. B
5. A
6. B
7. A

But in the NBA finals, the schedule is like a baseball playoff series:

1. A
2. A
3. B
4. B
5. B
6. A
7. A

I have no idea why they change. They shouldn't. It really isn't a big deal traveling from coast to coast these days, and if it was, all they have to do is build in an extra day or two of rest between games 4-5 and 5-6.

This scheduling change probably makes a small difference in the series pricing, but it makes a huge difference in series props. Such as: Lakers to win in 5 games or Celtics to win in 6 games. The Lakers are the home team in game 5, the Celtics are the home team in game 6. If the linemaker did not adjust for the scheduling change, there may be value in those series props. Hint hint. That's all I'll say on that topic.

Official scoring in baseball

2008-05-28T15:13:00.003-04:00

Statistics can sometimes be arbitrary as it is up to the official scorer to make a decision on certain things. For example, sometimes it is difficult to tell if a batted ball should be counted as a hit or an error by the fielder. Here is a story of the Chicago White Sox shortsop calling up official scorers to complain.

Story of White Sox Cabrera calling the official scorer

From a sports betting perspective, it makes me wonder about the accuracy of the data that sports bettors rely on. Not only is there some randomness in the official scorer's judgments, but there is also randomness in umpire calls (balls and strikes and on the basepaths as well), managerial decisions and other randomness. To me, a story like this is a reminder not to count on past statistics as if they are completely written in stone. They may have become that way with a little push from randomness. And there may be enough pushes in the same direction to make past statistics possibly misleading. The tough part is how to figure out when they can be misleading, and when you can count on them.

Some prop bets have horrible lines

2008-05-25T06:58:00.002-04:00

I love prop bets as they are interesting to think about and sometimes offer value. But sometimes the lines are just so ridiculous. Here is an example:

LA Lakers to win game 3 and WIN series +175

In order for this prop to win, the Lakers have to win Game 3 and then also win the series. Given that they have won Game 3, they are huge favorites to win the series, but the problem here is that the money line for Game 3 alone is Lakers +210! Any bettor that bets +175 on this prop should seriously consider burning their money instead, it would probably be more fun.

Updates to tables/charts and other random thoughts

2008-05-13T07:06:00.002-04:00

Over the last few months, I've received a few emails asking if I had or if I was going to update some of the tables and charts in Weighing the Odds in Sports Betting. I have not updated any tables so far. If I do, I will post it on this blog.

Random thoughts
It is only May, but it is already time to start working on NFL projections!

I don't know why the media is so willing to quickly dismiss the Walsh-Goodell meeting. They seem to think that it's a useless meeting and think what Goodell will say afterwards is already predetermined. I think that is just jumping to conclusions for the sake of having to fill airtime.

The NBA playoffs has been interesting. Lebron James makes Kevin Garnett look like an ordinary player. The Spurs looked old just a few weeks ago, now they look refreshed and experienced. Why are the Jazz a bigger underdog by 2 points in Game 5 than they were in Game 2, especially given that Kobe has some back issues? If I didn't already have Utah in series bets, I'd seriously consider betting them in the pointspread in Game 5. I bet very few NBA games outright, and honestly have no documented winning record (or any real documented record to speak of on straight point spread plays), so take that for what it is worth.

Scoring has been lower in baseball. Is there a true reason behind it or is it just some randomness. I see people looking at these numbers which is fine...but some are breaking down the data too fine. The more you break down the data, the more randomness can play a part, so be careful with looking only at Petco Park data in 2008 for example.

Home Court Advantage in the NBA Playoffs

2008-05-10T12:48:00.002-04:00

The Home Court Advantage in the NBA playoffs seem to be stronger this year with all home teams winning every game so far in the 2nd round. I wouldn't put too much weight on that though. In my opinion, it is just randomness. Remember, the home teams were all favoritess in their games in Round 2, so 11-0 isn't as incredible as it sounds. Although I admit it is a nice 10-1 run against-the-spread. Still, I think this is just due to randomness as opposed to a change in the funadamental nature of home court advantage in the playoffs. Betting on the home teams based on this small sample size is using randomness over a short term to dictate a change in the fundamentals, and that is a mistake.

Historical stats on ESPN

2008-05-06T08:14:00.002-04:00

I was watching SportsCenter on ESPN last night. After showing the Hornets and Pistons go up 2 games to 0 in their respective series, they showed the number of times the home team that were up 2-0 won the series in 4, 5, 6 and 7 games...as well as the number of times the home team lost the series.

How meaningful are these numbers when it comes to the Hornets and Pistorns? Without any other information about the teams or other valuation numbers, I think they are pretty good. But we do have more information.

The Detroit Pistons were 6.5- and 6-point favorites in their games against the Orlando Magic.
The Hornets were 3-point favorites in each of their games against the San Antonio Spurs.

Assuming a 4-point home court advantage in the playoffs, and a zigzag effect of one point for game 3 when down 2-0 going back home, that would make the lines for game 3 about:

Orlando -2.5 Detroit
San Antonio -6 New Orleans

These quick estimates may be off a little bit, but they should be pretty close. San Antonio will be a bigger favorite than Orlando in game 3 and probably in game 4 as well. And if there is a game 5 or other future games, San Antonio will probably have a higher chance to win each of their games than Orlando. So San Antonio has a higher chance of winning their series than Orlando.

There wasn't any need to use point spreads to make that judgement. This is probably obvious to any NBA fan. But this should also be obvious even if you don't know a single player on either team. And that makes the historical stats that ESPN shows not very meaningful.

NBA playoff series odds

2008-04-28T15:05:00.002-04:00

With the playoffs well underway in the NBA, I wanted to remind readers of the Excel spreadsheet that is available for free at SharpSportsBetting.com. On the left margin, under "Links", click on Prop Tools. You will be able to save a file titled SSB_Prop_Analysis which includes other work that Stanford Wong has done. In the last tab on the right is the spreadsheet I made up to value NBA Playoff odds given certain inputs. The user has to put in the value of a point as well as the expected point spread for each game. It is a static spreadsheet, meaning that the point spreads is assumed to stay constant regardless of previous results in the series. In reality, NBA lines often follow a zig-zag pattern where the team that lost the previous game usually gets a half-point or full-point in their favor for the next game. So, keep that in mind. The spreadsheet, just like any formula with user inputs, is only as good as the inputs. As they say, garbage-in makes garbage-out.

Paying too much attention to the games

2008-04-22T22:07:00.002-04:00

I've been paying too much attention to the baseball games. That sounds odd, but I think that is the case. I've been watching too many games, spending too much time marking my bets as wins and losses as they occur, and sitting on the couch just watching baseball all day long. I should be using that time into analysing teams, players and working on collecting data. It is really easy to watch and keep score as the games are played. Watching games can be useful, but I think it is only useful to a certain extent. So I'm kicking myself in the pants to get to work instead of sitting back and watching games.

nice article on the NBA MVP

2008-04-17T10:51:00.002-04:00

In past posts, I've gotten on Bill Simmons - and more specifically ESPN.com - about all the Boston-centric stuff written in his ESPN.com pieces. So I've got to give him and ESPN.com credit for his recent columns over the past few months. I doubt if my input had anything to do with it, but I appreciate it nonetheless.

Simmons' column today is on his vote for the NBA MVP. It is a nice read - a long read. Not that it matters much, but I agree with his pick for the most deserving - Kevin Garnett of the Boston Celtics.

Harrah's sportsbook: the worst in Nevada

2008-04-14T17:18:00.003-04:00

A real-life story about Harrah's unfair treatment of gamblers that aren't completely clueless.

Jeff Haney just can’t seem to get a fair shake at Harrah’s sports book

NFL schedule

2008-04-14T15:56:00.004-04:00

Apparently the NFL will release their schedule tomorrow at 2PM, and ESPN is doing a special on it. The teams that each team plays has been known since the end of the regular season since the NFL has a formula.

Basically each team plays the other three teams in their division twice (that's 6 games), each of the teams that finished in the same place as them in the other three divisions in the same conference (that's 3 games), one particular division in the other conference on a rotatin basis (4 games) and one particular division in their conference not counting the team that they already play that finished in the same place as them (3 games).

The schedule that the NFL will release simply shows the day, time and TV schedule for each game. So what's the big deal? Does it really matter? Maybe it matters it a little bit. MIA, TB and JAX may have a small edge playing September home games in humid Florida, GB, CHI and PIT may have a small edge playing December home games in the cold. But those edges are pretty small in my opinion, and often the home/away schedule is spread out fairly evenly. For example, it would be surprising to see any team play at home or away for three straight games.

The schedule that comes out tomorrow should not be a big deal. However, it may prompt some sportsbooks to release regular season wins, lines for the first week and "games of the year". Now that would be a big deal to me!

Woa, you can drive a truck through the MLS lines

2008-04-11T23:57:00.003-04:00

I was checking out some lines for Major League Soccer and I was shocked. Even books with great reputations are dealing 40 cent lines! 40 CENT LINES! It is embarrassing. Why even bother offering the league if these books are going to embarrass themselves with those lines? They would be better off not listing them at all.

April article

2008-04-10T10:07:00.000-04:00

Here is my article for the April Two Plus Two Internet Magazine

Taking advantage of Static Lines and Oddsin Dynamic Situations

Using the randomness of sports to your advantage

2008-04-09T16:27:00.003-04:00

Over the weekend, I was talking to a non-gambling friend about sports betting. He asked me an interesting question. "Sports is so random, doesn't that screw up a lot of your bets?"

I thought for a bit and responded, "Yes, it does screw up a lot of bets. Turning some probable winning bets into losing bets but also vice versa. But also, good sports bettors can take advantage of randomness."

Over the next few blog posts, I will try to go into further detail on how good sports bettors can take advantage of randomness.

"Super Crunchers"

2008-04-03T00:36:00.003-04:00

I just finished Super Cruncers by Ian Ayres. Interesting book. He describes how statisticians with large databases are changing the world in many different fields. There probably isn't anything in the book that will make anyone a better handicapper or bettor, but I think it is useful to read about what other people in other fields are doing. It opens up a few pathways of thought. I recommend the book.

Note: one thing I didn't like about the book was how Ayres presented Justin Wolfer's work on college basketball. I won't get into that today and I may never get to it, but just wanted to note that in case someone read the book based on this recommendation.

some random thoughts

2008-04-01T15:25:00.002-04:00

There's been lots of complaining by so-called sharp players that things aren't going there way. Lots of soul-searching about what to do differently and why they aren't winning. I say "so-called" because probably not all the guys complaining are as sharp as they think they are. I do agree that this is a topic that should be explored in-depth. Are line makers sharper than they were in the past? I think so. Is the public sharper than they were in the past - or at least less square? I think so too. Are there more sharps now than before? Probably. Those all add up to make a tougher, more efficient marketplace.

Yesterday was 30 degrees where I live. Today it is 55. Although there was a little rain, the wind was that familiar spring wind that is so inviting in the Northeast - as opposed to the biting, ship winter wind. And baseball is back! My favorite sport from a fan's perspective, but not from a betting perspective.

I'm surprised there are no day baseball games today. They usually have some early in the year. I haven't checked the schedule, but I hope more teams have games during the day.

test post

2008-03-31T10:30:00.000-04:00

I just got a new phone. This is just a test to see if I can post entries into the blog.