I Need Help With Two Bets I Made!

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

Okay I'm high and before the game I took Washington -14 for $5, then Later I took live Stanford for +20.5 for $10.  So  if I win both bets I could win close to $30 ?, If Standford wins on the 20.5 but Washington doesn't cover there spread then I win  around $20. Worse that happens I lose 5 bucks but have a chance to win $20 or $30 ?  So I have a 2 in 3 chance of winning ?

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

If this is true then why aren't more people betting like this ? Reminds me of the Monty Hall thing.

[KSB2424 3,082]

5 minutes ago, BeenHereBefore said:

Okay I'm high and before the game I took Washington -14 for $5, then Later I took live Stanford for +20.5 for $10.  So  if I win both bets I could win close to $30 ?, If Standford wins on the 20.5 but Washington doesn't cover there spread then I win  around $20. Worse that happens I lose 5 bucks but have a chance to win $20 or $30 ?  So I have a 2 in 3 chance of winning ?

What was the score when you took Stanford +20.5 live betting?

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

1 minute ago, KSB2424 said:

What was the score when you took Stanford +20.5 live betting?

Washington 7-0 somewhat early.

[easilyscan 553]

Maybe you missed your calling. Maybe you were destined to be a hedge fund manager

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

1 minute ago, easilyscan said:

Maybe you missed your calling. Maybe you were destined to be a hedge fund manager

Lol Thanks.

[KSB2424 3,082]

Okay first of all, whilst gambling if you bet 5 bucks on a spread (not money-line) you win/lose 5 bucks.  You only have $15 in play and are talking about winning 30 bucks. 

This whole thread is focked up.  

[kutulu 1,542]

Double down then let it ride, hth

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

1 minute ago, KSB2424 said:

Okay first of all, whilst gambling if you bet 5 bucks on a spread (not money-line) you win/lose 5 bucks.  You only have $15 in play and are talking about winning 30 bucks. 

This whole thread is focked up.  

I have a chance to be -5 or up 5 or up 15 if both bets hit right.  2 out of 3 chance of winning is what I'm thinking.

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

That work out good Wash 40 - 22 and I'm a head almost 15 winning both bets. Wash -14 and Stan + 20.5. Think I'm on to something and will try this on the Buffalo game tomorrow. God Bless smoke helping me to think of this.

[nobody 2,031]

What you're describing is "middling" but the way you're thinking about this is so screwed up, it's difficult to even know where to begin.

You likely paid 5.50 on the original bet Washington -14 bet to win $5.

Then, because it'sive betting you probably bet $12 to win 10 on Stanford +20.5

The 4 scenarios then are:

1. Washington wins by more than that 20 and you win $5, but lose the $12.  So you're down $7
2. Washington doesn't cover -14, and you win $10, but lose the $5.50 for a profit of $4.50.
3. Washington wins by exactly 14 and you get the $5.50 back and win $10 for a profit of $10.
4. Washington wins somewhere between 15 and 20 and you win both bets for a profit of $15.

The chances of you winning are usually going to be dominated by scenarios 1 and 2, but your chances of winning are determined by the chances of each scenario happening, so let's assign some values.

1. Scenario 1.  Washington blows out Stanford by greater than 20... 47%
2. Scenario 2. Washington doesn't cover 14... 47%
3. Scenario 3. Washington wins by exactly 14... 2%
4. Scenario 4. Washington wins by 15-20... 6%

Usually you think of bets in expected value.

EV = .47*(-$7) + .47*($4.50) + .02*($10)  + .06*($15) = -$0.075 

So you'd expect to lose 7.5¢ every time you make this bet with my made up assigned percentages.  I may have been generous saying 6% for the middle.  If that comes down appreciably, the EV of the bet goes way down as well since you'll note that the value of the bet is dominated by the first two terms and that is slanted toward a loss.  For instance even if you take 2% off scenario 4 and spread it over scenarios 1 and 2, EV is -40¢ every time you make this bet.

The chances of you making money would just be the sum of the chances any of your profitable scenarios hit which in our case would be 47%+2%+6% = 53%.  The mistake on your idea of 66.6% is assuming every scenario has an equal chance of hitting.  The chance of hitting a 6 point middle is obviously much less than one team or the other pulling things one way or the other.  At least I think that's what you were saying. That post wasn't clear to me.

Note that your expected value on an attempt to middle is more profitable (or maybe less negative) if the middle is larger and goes through valuable numbers like 3 and 7.  In our case it was a 6 point middle if we count the win by 14 push and you had good 2 good point values in there with 17 and 20 along with a piece of 14.

Typically you'll see larger middles when you bet a big favorite and they jump out to an early lead or you bet an underdog and they pull out to a lead, but you won't have a chance to middle if the game goes to script or the team you bet against starts out well.

You're also messing up how you think of the winning amount.  A $5 bet doesn't win you $10.  It wins you $5 and you get your $5.50 bet back.  That's important when you think about EV.  Otherwise every bet would be massively profitable.

 

[MLCKAA 395]

Ball State did not cover against Georgia Southern 

[Alias Detective 1,179]

How much did you win/lose?  Just cut to the chase @BeenHereBefore

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

2 hours ago, Alias Detective said:

How much did you win/lose?  Just cut to the chase @BeenHereBefore

I'm up double my money 15 with only risking 5 last night.

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

4 hours ago, nobody said:

What you're describing is "middling" but the way you're thinking about this is so screwed up, it's difficult to even know where to begin.

You likely paid 5.50 on the original bet Washington -14 bet to win $5.

Then, because it'sive betting you probably bet $12 to win 10 on Stanford +20.5

The 4 scenarios then are:

1. Washington wins by more than that 20 and you win $5, but lose the $12.  So you're down $7
2. Washington doesn't cover -14, and you win $10, but lose the $5.50 for a profit of $4.50.
3. Washington wins by exactly 14 and you get the $5.50 back and win $10 for a profit of $10.
4. Washington wins somewhere between 15 and 20 and you win both bets for a profit of $15.

The chances of you winning are usually going to be dominated by scenarios 1 and 2, but your chances of winning are determined by the chances of each scenario happening, so let's assign some values.

1. Scenario 1.  Washington blows out Stanford by greater than 20... 47%
2. Scenario 2. Washington doesn't cover 14... 47%
3. Scenario 3. Washington wins by exactly 14... 2%
4. Scenario 4. Washington wins by 15-20... 6%

Usually you think of bets in expected value.

EV = .47*(-$7) + .47*($4.50) + .02*($10)  + .06*($15) = -$0.075 

So you'd expect to lose 7.5¢ every time you make this bet with my made up assigned percentages.  I may have been generous saying 6% for the middle.  If that comes down appreciably, the EV of the bet goes way down as well since you'll note that the value of the bet is dominated by the first two terms and that is slanted toward a loss.  For instance even if you take 2% off scenario 4 and spread it over scenarios 1 and 2, EV is -40¢ every time you make this bet.

The chances of you making money would just be the sum of the chances any of your profitable scenarios hit which in our case would be 47%+2%+6% = 53%.  The mistake on your idea of 66.6% is assuming every scenario has an equal chance of hitting.  The chance of hitting a 6 point middle is obviously much less than one team or the other pulling things one way or the other.  At least I think that's what you were saying. That post wasn't clear to me.

Note that your expected value on an attempt to middle is more profitable (or maybe less negative) if the middle is larger and goes through valuable numbers like 3 and 7.  In our case it was a 6 point middle if we count the win by 14 push and you had good 2 good point values in there with 17 and 20 along with a piece of 14.

Typically you'll see larger middles when you bet a big favorite and they jump out to an early lead or you bet an underdog and they pull out to a lead, but you won't have a chance to middle if the game goes to script or the team you bet against starts out well.

You're also messing up how you think of the winning amount.  A $5 bet doesn't win you $10.  It wins you $5 and you get your $5.50 bet back.  That's important when you think about EV.  Otherwise every bet would be massively profitable.

 

You nailed what I'm talking about and the best scenario work last night both bets hitting. I like the chance of hitting both bets with the low risk fee hedging the bet. You left out before you place the opposite higher bet you can always cash out if it's not going right or if it is going right don't place the opposite bet at all.  I think placing the opposite bet is a fun option to have with low risk. I'm going to try it on Buffalo game and already took them last night to win minus the the points. See how it works today.

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

Okay so can't try this on Buffalo now since it stays a tight game so far and not much spread moving. I did also bet Tenn last night +2.5 and they are up 21- 10 and that bet is looking good. For fun I took live Raiders + 6.5 and see how it goes. After writing this I see Tenn went up 24-10 and should have waited for more points.

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

1 hour ago, BeenHereBefore said:

Okay so can't try this on Buffalo now since it stays a tight game so far and not much spread moving. I did also bet Tenn last night +2.5 and they are up 21- 10 and that bet is looking good. For fun I took live Raiders + 6.5 and see how it goes. After writing this I see Tenn went up 24-10 and should have waited for more points.

That work out too and won both bets. Tenn 24 -22.

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

From both games I'm up 30 and only had risk 10. Think I'm on to something and imagine if the wagers get higher.

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

I took the Chargers -6.5 before the game and will see if the point spread shifts enough I can imply this theory to that game.

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

36 minutes ago, BeenHereBefore said:

I took the Chargers -6.5 before the game and will see if the point spread shifts enough I can imply this theory to that game.

Can't use this game cause I was on the wrong side of the bet from the start. I did double up on the Jags when they was up 6 to save my a$$ and got them +2.5. there is a chance I could lose both bets. Anyways hopefully tonight's game I will be able to use my strategy again.

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

I'm up another 5 from the live Jags bet and hopefully I can use my theory on the next game. Taking the 9ers from the start.

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

So I took the 9ers before the game -1.5 and now took Denver +3.5, if 9ers when by a field goal 3 points I win both games. My only regret is should have jump on Denver live when they was + 6.5 but they look like crap and was hoping for more points. Now they look decent figure I'll take the 3.5 and may not get better odds. So my strategy is in play in this game.

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

Dang I was close to winning both bets on that one too. 9ers tried 3 times to turn it over at the end and finally 3rd time was a charm. I'm still am ahead 5 on that game. So after doing my strategy up 15 each the first two games and up 5 on the last one. After 3 games up 35 now and  a pretty darn good strategy.

[Shooter McGavin 589]

It's not "your strategy", like Nobody said, you're middling.

https://www.actionnetwork.com/education/middle

I'll do this every once in a while, in fact I did it last night as a way to hedge my parlay.  It's not a bad strategy but you need to be good.  I like live middling, when I can watch the game and get a feel for what's going on.  If a team is winning off luck and you can spot this, sometimes it pays to bet the other team, of course that's assuming the luck won't continue.  I had the Raiders yesterday and they should have won the game, then I live bet them knowing this but they still continued to fock up their red zone trips, so that was an L.

I'll never forget making a killing in Baker Mayfield's first game live betting.  Tyrod looked like sh!t and my gut told me Baker was gonna come in and win the game, so I got greats odds on Browns ML, hammered it, and then cashed.

[BeenHereBefore 1,329]

6 hours ago, Shooter McGavin said:

It's not "your strategy", like Nobody said, you're middling.

https://www.actionnetwork.com/education/middle

I'll do this every once in a while, in fact I did it last night as a way to hedge my parlay.  It's not a bad strategy but you need to be good.  I like live middling, when I can watch the game and get a feel for what's going on.  If a team is winning off luck and you can spot this, sometimes it pays to bet the other team, of course that's assuming the luck won't continue.  I had the Raiders yesterday and they should have won the game, then I live bet them knowing this but they still continued to fock up their red zone trips, so that was an L.

I'll never forget making a killing in Baker Mayfield's first game live betting.  Tyrod looked like sh!t and my gut told me Baker was gonna come in and win the game, so I got greats odds on Browns ML, hammered it, and then cashed.

Thanks for you're response and I didn't think I was the first to have this strategy but surprised not many are using it. Out of the 3 games I tried it on it worked rather well and the hedge part is nice, Maybe it is more time consuming is why it's not used by many. To me live betting seems to be where it is at if you want to make a profit and not to eat a loss. I came dang close to hitting the max on all 3 games I used the strategy on and thought for sure the 9ers last night was going to get a field goal and win in the end. Didn't expect them to fumble 3 different times.

Going to try it again tonight since the games is on ABC and I can watch it. Think I will take Dallas before the game and then jump on the Giants later depending how the game is playing out. Again thanks for your response and appreciate it. Seems like you just need to figure out with this strategy is how to stretch out the spread just enough.