Favorite Wagering Activities

SentToStud · #1 12-21-2006, 02:57 PM

Quote:

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 · #2 12-21-2006, 03:08 PM

Quote:

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 · #3 12-21-2006, 03:38 PM

Quote:

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 · #4 12-21-2006, 05:27 PM

Quote:

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!

Quote:

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

hockey2315 · #5 12-21-2006, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dunbar

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!

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.

--Dunbar

I've spent a significant amount of time trying to devise a jai alai system and I've come to the conclusion that while post position is obviously important, what's really important is each player's average win pay-off. I'm in the process of testing my strategy now. . .