I don't understand why everyone is putting the LeBrons in the finals already but if they make it, are the Spurs a -500 favorite?
| Poster's Sportsbook Poll: 2011View Poll Results | ||
| # 1 5Dimes | 450 total points | 5Dimes Review |
| # 2 Pinnacle | 408 total points | Pinnacle Review |
| # 3 Heritage | 227 total points | Heritage Review |
| # 4 Bookmaker | 138 total points | Bookmaker Review |
| # 5 BetIslands | 129 total points | BetIslands Review |
| SBR Top-Rated SportsbooksRecommended List | ||
| Pinnacle Sports | SBR Rating A+ | Pinnacle Sports Review |
| 5Dimes | SBR Rating A+ | 5Dimes Review |
| BookMaker | SBR Rating A+ | BookMaker Review |
| Legends | SBR Rating A+ | Legends Review |
| Bodog | SBR Rating A | Bodog Review |
I don't understand why everyone is putting the LeBrons in the finals already but if they make it, are the Spurs a -500 favorite?
SBR Founder Join Date: 7/12/2005
Ok Pinnacle has ...
87 Western Conference -390
88 Eastern Conference +370
390 looks good against this Cavs team.![]()
SBR Founder Join Date: 7/12/2005
Spurs -450
SBR Founder Join Date: 8/25/2005
Right?? If you like the Spurs to take Detroit anyway, why not buy in at -390 now?
Who knows, maybe LeBron starts shooting from half court to get his shot off and people will actually perceive the Cavs have a shot.
SBR Founder Join Date: 7/12/2005
Spurs -340 over Detroit
Spurs -680 of Cleve
SBR Founder Join Date: 7/20/2005
Currently:
East +370 at Pinnacle
Spurs -320 at 5Dimes
2.599% scalp
SBR Founder Join Date: 8/28/2005
SBR Founder Join Date: 7/12/2005
Ganch finds some free money! especially if 5Dimes is allowing rebets after small moves.
If the line isn't moving they would have no one to blame but themselves. I know 5Dimes has gotten less tolerant of market bettors but this just looks like some bargain shopping.5dimes has already asked many of the players who do such things to leave. This might last a while.
SBR Founder Join Date: 7/12/2005
bodog has -350
SBR POKER TOURNEY10th Place 5/24/2012
SBR POKER TOP 100
12th Place 11/1/2011
SBR POKER TOURNEY5th Place 5/23/2012
SBR POKER TOURNEY12th Place 5/25/2012
SBR Founder Join Date: 9/20/2005
Heres what Pinnacle has it at currently:
Anyone got the balls to take the Cavs, because I sure don't.Cleveland Cavaliers +395
San Antonio Spurs -425
SBR Founder Join Date: 8/10/2005
Hmmm...
Cleveland played San Antonio twice in the regular season and won both games. San Antonio obviously should be favored to win the series but +395 is great value for the Cavs.
Looking at the matchups, Cleveland defense sets up well against SA with the notable exception of Tony Parker. Larry Hughes has a chance to earn his salary if he can get healthy enough to keep himself in front of TP. If he can not, then the Cavs will have some real problems.
SBR Founder Join Date: 12/16/2005
2.5% is chump change, no way to win
Square play is Cavs
SBR Founder Join Date: 7/20/2005
I'd take Spurs here......hard to imagine how the Spurs could lose this series.
SBR Founder Join Date: 8/10/2005
SBR Founder Join Date: 8/28/2005
It really depends on what your objective is. For a recreational bettor looking to enjoy himself by placing a few bets you're probably correct. For an advantage bettor hoping to grow his bankroll as quickly possible, however, then unless that player bets at a very large edge on big favorites, and/or makes a very large number of bets, it would almost certainly be rational to place a large portion of his bankroll on the risk-free scalp (also dependent of course on the likelihood of other risk-free opportunities presenting themselves).
Just to give an example, if a bettor typically places 10 bets at -110 and 5% edge each day, betting singles and constituent parlays (a state of affairs equivalent, btw, to a risk-free return of about 1.387%) then he's going to betting a bit less than 42% of his bankroll per day. If he bet the remainder (~ 58%) on the scalp he'd only be losing out on days where more than 10 5% edge opportunities presented themselves. On a day when 11 bets existed, for example, the bettor's opportunity cost (the expected bankroll growth lost from having insufficient funds) would only be 0.089%.
The point is that ignoring capacity constraints on the scalp (and a 5Dimes/Pinnacle scalp does have abnormally high capacity), an advantage bettor properly structuring hsi bets to provide maximal expected growth needs to consider what percentage of his bankroll he tends to put to use on a given day, the return he expects on those bets, as well as the distribution of that return. With a scalp of 2.599%, most of the time it will probably work out to place a very portion of one's bankroll on that scalp.
When you consider real world capacity constraints, however, most professional bettors with reasonable bankroll should in general probably bet as much as they can on every scalp that exceeds their respective hurdle rates (it's not worth the effort if the amount to be gained is sufficiently small).
SBR Founder Join Date: 8/28/2005
Its a nice setup for Cavs backers - very large price, nothing to lose attitude for the cavs and a over confident Spur team.
Problem is this is the Finals. If the Cavs go up say 2-1 the pressure shifts to them and the Spurs wake up. Hard to imagine the Cavs winning 4 out of 7 against this veteran Spur team.
SBR POKER TOURNEY1st Place 3/31/2012
CHARITY DONOR
12/01/2011
$475 donation
SBR Founder Join Date: 7/12/2005
SBR POKER TOURNEY1st Place 5/12/2012
Ostensibly, a player with access to Netller is not living a post-Neteller existence, although in general your point is of course quite relevant. I'd only note that for bettors with appreciable bankrolls most scalps will generally represent relatively small capital outlays.
Good point again.This was why I was implicitly placing so much importance on this particular scalp -- a 5Dimes / Pinnacle scalp is certainly at the blue chip end of the spectrum.
I'd point one that if one really wanted to weigh books based on payout risk correctly it would turn out to be a little more difficult than assigning linear risk factors coefficients (as in one dollar at book A is worth x% of a dollar in hand) due to the quadratic nature of risk (which is subsumed by the logarithim of Kelly). Not that this make the problem overly intractable of course, just that it becomes nontrivial.
This is indeed a great way to with deal liquidity constraints.To solve the no action/double bet issue, why not place the bet IF WIN ONLY on one side of the scalp and IF WIN/PUSH/NO ACTION on the other?
![]()
SBR Founder Join Date: 8/28/2005