Favorite Wagering Activities

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by hockey2315

1. Horses
2. Football
3. Jai Alai
4. Poker
5. Blackjack

There is a good Jai Alai book that I wish I'd written. It contains an idea I had but sat on for too long, and this author did a good job of working out the odds.

The idea is to figure out exactly how much bias there is in certain quinella and perfecta combos coming up, simply as a result of the game structure. That is, you assume initially that each player (or team) has an equal chance to win a point, and then you see how often 1,2 wins compared to 1,8 or 4,5, etc. The structure creates big differences. (for those who've never seen Jai Alai, 8 players compete. First #1 plays #2; the winner stays on and plays #3, and so on. There's more to it than that, though.)

I think many jai alai bettors understand this intuitively, but I doubt more than a handful have good info on how to apply it. Most bettors I knew growing up in Florida just played their "favorite" numbers. I didn't get too excited about the concept myself because of how small the pools are and worries about cheating. But I did think it would make a good article or book.

--Dunbar

[Ghostzapperfan]

For me, it is

1) Horses
2) Poker (very seldom)
3) A tiny bit of NCAA Football

ALostTexan

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Cardus

I've watched jai alai in Connecticut, and boy, those fellas seem to drop the pelota at awfully unusual times. I've heard that if a player is short on rent money, then, well, he has a good day at the fronton.

What is the name of the book?

The book is "Jai Alai Wagering To Win" by Don Lostritto. The copyright is 1985, and the publisher was:

Fair Haven Press
Box 2152
Meridan, CT 06450

--Dunbar

[skippy3481]

Dunbar,
You are also assuming several things
1. You can find a blackjack table that pays 3-2 and does not hit on soft 17(Too many casinos are pushing this now)
Also, again you are assuming people are intelligent. People as a rule... are stupid.
Thats why craps is so easy. You have to make two whole bets and its the same one every time. Doesn't what table you walk up to, or the craps odds. Your right if your intelligent, there are better bets in the casino, but for the someone who just wants some action its a great bet.

Video poker strategy is completely up to what you want to do. I'm not comfortable trying to grind out a profit. I'm much more comportable playing double bonus or playing jacks or better with a tendency towards higher paying hands.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by skippy3481

Dunbar,
You are also assuming several things
1. You can find a blackjack table that pays 3-2 and does not hit on soft 17(Too many casinos are pushing this now)

skippy, I was taking issue with your blanket statement that craps is the best bet. It is simply not true.

As far as blackjack paying 3-2 and dealers standing on soft 17, that's why I specified 6-deck game. The majority of 6-deck games at the big strip casinos have those rules.

But even a game where the dealer hits soft 17 will usually have less than 0.6% against you. For example, the LV Hilton has dealer hits soft 17, but it's game has 0.54% against you. Luxor's game (with dealer hits soft 17) is 0.46% against you.

The casinos I mentioned first (Wynn, Bellagio, MGM) all have the additional rules of "late surrender", double-after-split, and resplit aces, too. Those rules get you down to 0.26% against you when dealer stands on soft-17.

Originally Posted by skippy3481

Also, again you are assuming people are intelligent. People as a rule... are stupid.
Thats why craps is so easy. You have to make two whole bets and its the same one every time. Doesn't what table you walk up to, or the craps odds. Your right if your intelligent, there are better bets in the casino, but for the someone who just wants some action its a great bet.

I agree with you that craps is the easiest way to get action with just a small house edge against you. I was only taking issue with your blanket statement. I also don't think it takes a heck of a lot of intelligence to learn blackjack basic strategy. Anyone who can read a racing form can learn blackjack basic strategy in a couple of hours.

Originally Posted by skippy3481

Video poker strategy is completely up to what you want to do. I'm not comfortable trying to grind out a profit. I'm much more comportable playing double bonus or playing jacks or better with a tendency towards higher paying hands.

Not sure I understand what you are saying there, unless it is that you don't care about your overall edge in a game.

--Dunbar

[Dunbar]

btw, Cardus, you also mentioned "Presidential Election". I've been tempted to make a bet at Pinnacle on the election. Here are two lines of interest:

2008 US Presidential Election: Democratic Party Presidential Nominee
11 Hillary Clinton (all bets have action) -101 Risk To Win
12 Anybody else (all bets have action) -109 Risk To Win

2008 US Presidential Election: Party to win the Presidency
Party to win. ALL BETS HAVE ACTION.
1 Republican Party -102 Risk To Win
2 Democratic Party -108 Risk To Win

("-108" means you put up $108 to win $100)

I see 2 good ways to bet this. First, I think the odds on someone besides Hillary getting the nomination are much better than -109. It should be more like -300. So you could simply bet the "Anybody else" at -109 and have a big edge, IMO.

The 2nd way is to realize that there is only a small chance the Dems would win with Hillary as the nominee. With that in mind, you could bet both the "Anybody else" and the "Republican Party". If you lose the "Anybody else" bet, then there's very little chance you'd also lose the Repub bet. However, you could easily win both bets. (ie, someone besides Hillary gets the nomination, and the Repubs win anyway.) If you assigne reasonable probabilities to all 4 possible outcomes, I think you come up with a significant edge.

The significant downside is that you tie up your money for 2 years, and there is some risk that even a sportsbook like Pinnacle will not be around for the payoff!

--Dunbar

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

btw, Cardus, you also mentioned "Presidential Election". I've been tempted to make a bet at Pinnacle on the election. Here are two lines of interest:

2008 US Presidential Election: Democratic Party Presidential Nominee
11 Hillary Clinton (all bets have action) -101 Risk To Win
12 Anybody else (all bets have action) -109 Risk To Win

2008 US Presidential Election: Party to win the Presidency
Party to win. ALL BETS HAVE ACTION.
1 Republican Party -102 Risk To Win
2 Democratic Party -108 Risk To Win

("-108" means you put up $108 to win $100)

I see 2 good ways to bet this. First, I think the odds on someone besides Hillary getting the nomination are much better than -109. It should be more like -300. So you could simply bet the "Anybody else" at -109 and have a big edge, IMO.

The 2nd way is to realize that there is only a small chance the Dems would win with Hillary as the nominee. With that in mind, you could bet both the "Anybody else" and the "Republican Party". If you lose the "Anybody else" bet, then there's very little chance you'd also lose the Repub bet. However, you could easily win both bets. (ie, someone besides Hillary gets the nomination, and the Repubs win anyway.) If you assigne reasonable probabilities to all 4 possible outcomes, I think you come up with a significant edge.

The significant downside is that you tie up your money for 2 years, and there is some risk that even a sportsbook like Pinnacle will not be around for the payoff!

--Dunbar

You state, " ... The 2nd way is to realize that there is only a small chance the Dems would win with Hillary as the nominee,..." as if that is fact. I don't think that's necessarily true. If you think that way, maybe the way to go is to sit out the bet until the candidates are nominated then, if the Dems did nom Hillary, bet against her. If she got the nom, I'd bet the opening ine would put her at +120 at most. I agree it's bad to tie up $$ for two years on this.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

You state, " ... The 2nd way is to realize that there is only a small chance the Dems would win with Hillary as the nominee,..." as if that is fact. I don't think that's necessarily true. If you think that way, maybe the way to go is to sit out the bet until the candidates are nominated then, if the Dems did nom Hillary, bet against her. If she got the nom, I'd bet the opening ine would put her at +120 at most. I agree it's bad to tie up $$ for two years on this.

You're right that I should have made it clearer that it was an opinion. And it's certainly possible that Bush could become so unpopular in the next 2 years that any Democrat, even Hillary, would have an advantage. Still, it appears to me that Hillary has too many things going against her to win the Presidency.

I would gladly bet you that the line, if Hillary gets the nom, is greater than +120. Having said that, I think the biggest edge is probably simply betting that she does not get the nom.

btw, I don't want this to slip into personal politics, but I have nothing at all against either Clinton.

--Dunbar

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

You're right that I should have made it clearer that it was an opinion. And it's certainly possible that Bush could become so unpopular in the next 2 years that any Democrat, even Hillary, would have an advantage. Still, it appears to me that Hillary has too many things going against her to win the Presidency.

I would gladly bet you that the line, if Hillary gets the nom, is greater than +120. Having said that, I think the biggest edge is probably simply betting that she does not get the nom.

btw, I don't want this to slip into personal politics, but I have nothing at all against either Clinton.

--Dunbar

you're on for a beer!

Nothng like a future wager on a future wager!!!

On the Jai Alai, exotic pool arbitrage thing, I live in So Florida and go once a year or so to Dania when someone visits and they want to see it. I do not think they handle more than $3,000-4,000 total per game -- about $60,000 a night. I've looked at the Ex/Quin pools and it's very miniscule. Not saying someone can't do ok with it, but I don't see how.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

you're on for a beer!

Nothng like a future wager on a future wager!!!

heh heh, hadn't looked at it that way! I'm actually at a distinct disadvantage on the bet, because the chance I'd remember having made it 2 years from now is about nil. But if you win and remind me, I'll remember it!

Originally Posted by SentToStud

On the Jai Alai, exotic pool arbitrage thing, I live in So Florida and go once a year or so to Dania when someone visits and they want to see it. I do not think they handle more than $3,000-4,000 total per game -- about $60,000 a night. I've looked at the Ex/Quin pools and it's very miniscule. Not saying someone can't do ok with it, but I don't see how.

Just to be clear, it's not an arbitrage (although I'm very partial to arbitrage!). It's merely a matter of factoring in the game structure into the outcome. I can give you an example since I went and got the book off the shelf for the answer to Cardus. If all the players are equally skilled, players 1 & 2 each have a 16.31% chance to win the game. Player 7 has just an 8.88% chance to win. Player 8 has an 11.78% chance to win. These aren't stats from real play. These are from a model that simply assumes each player has a 50% chance to win each point he plays. So, Player 2 has almost twice the chance of winning the game as Player 7, even if they are equally skilled. (The reason Player 8 sees a slight increase over Player 7 has to do with the fact that at some point the points have double value.) I think it's fairly amazing that "post position" has such a big impact on the outcome, and I doubt that this is well understood by the bettors.

I agree that the pool size makes it hard to imagine making much money at Jai Alai.

Note to self. Remember beer bet.

--Dunbar