"I agree that Sportsbook did not really make any assumptions regarding seed. In fact, I think these odds are simple extensions of their odds to win the title...Simply, it looks like they are dividing the odds of winning the title by a factor between 4.5 and 5."This is very true. It is also an awful way to go about creating these Final Four odds. Let's take a look at the Final Four and National Championship odds of the 14 longshots that have F4 odds listed.
The first three columns should be self explanatory (all odds taken from Sportsbook). The final column is their implied odds of winning the title should they reach the Final Four. For example, Indiana is 8:1 (11.1%) to reach San Antonio, and 40:1 (2.4%) to win the title, so their final column is .024/.111, or 22.0%.
For these two sets of odds to be equal, each of these teams would have to have between a 22% and 23.5% chance of winning two F4 games. None of them are even close to that number. Take Purdue, for instance. Let's give them a 30% chance of winning either game in the F4 (this is being generous). That puts them at 9% to win both. If they are 22:1 to reach San Antonio, they should be at least 250:1 to win it all. They are 100:1. You would be insane to bet on their NC odds over their F4 odds.I could go through this exact same process with each of the other 13 teams listed above. For each, there is at least two times more value in the F4 odds than in the NC odds. This is precisely why Sportsbook's strategy does not work for handicapping F4 percentages; if they want to make these odds equal, they should be dividing the NC odds for these teams by a factor of 10, rather than 5.
Here is this same comparison with the favorites:
Sportsbook's strategy works a little more efficiently here, but it is still far from perfect. Take Texas, for example. I would absolutely not bet on either of those numbers, but if I had to take one, it would definitely be the +220. Even if we say they'd be a pick'em in an average F4 game (which is not true; they'd be underdogs against any of the six teams listed above them), their percentage should be 25%; Sportsbook's implied odds have it at 29.1%.The same can be said for each of the five teams listed below Texas. For each one, there is significantly more value in the F4 odds than the NC odds.
I think there is a more general lesson here as well- there is rarely much value in longshot futures odds this late in the year. If you think Purdue is going to make a run in the tournament, then you should bet on their money line in every game. If you do this, starting with $10, and they win it all, you will likely end up with something in the range of $2500. If you just bet on them at 100:1, you'll have $1010 if they win it all. I don't think I need to further elaborate on which of these is the superior option.
13 comments:
I have a quick question for you since I'm trying to pick this up. It's along these same lines...
I took Xavier to win the National Title about 4-6 weeks ago (I forget when exactly) at 100:1.
Relative to their odds now (which in your February 22 post, you said the best were 80:1), was that a better or worse bet than taking them at 13:2 to reach the F4 now?
Obviously I know that reaching the F4 is a much easier task, but based on the value of getting them at 100:1 and them being 80:1 or lower now, was that at least a decent bet?
I made the exact same wager, at about the same time.
First of all, you can't get Xavier at 80:1 anymore. They are 40:1 at Caribsports.com; that is the best I'm seeing.
Is 100:1 to win it all better than 6.5:1 to reach the F4? For them, I think it probably is. If they had a 27.25% chance of winning either F4 game, these odds would be of equal value*. I think it's higher than that (I'd say 30-32%, but that's really just a stab in the dark). So there is more value in the 100:1 odds; and I think there is some value in the +650 odds, so your (our) wager was certainly a good one.
*If you are interested, the math to find this is (6.5+1)/(100+1)=X^2.
Well, that makes three of us: 1/16/08, 100:1 at Sportsbook for 1 unit (as i look back, that's the day they lost to Temple). I follow the A-10 more than any other conference and couldn't believe Xavier was still that high.
Must have been the 3 of us pushing the odds down.
One last comment... while there are definitely teams I believe there is great value in for the Final Four (Memphis, Xavier, Wisconsin), it's playing with fire to bet more than one of these. Imagine I take Memphis and Wisconsin (considering my pending wager on Xavier), and they wind up #1 and #4 in the same region... all of a sudden, those odds on each aren't so good if I've booked both.
The Money Line roll over option is almost always better unless you are getting absurd value (Xavier at 100-1, Tenny at 50-1) or are planning on hedging down the road.
I think "Rob" pointed this out in my blog about the Tiger Woods Grand Slam bet, and it's been said numerous times before that.
If I really had wanted to back KU all tourney long, I absolutely would have been better off going this route.
"If I really had wanted to back KU all tourney long, I absolutely would have been better off going this route."
You're obviously right, but I'm gonna track this throughout the tournament. We'll be able to figure the "true" F4 odds for the Elite 8 teams. It's not perfect, since things obviously change if you play a 13 in the second round instead of a 4, but I think it'll be interesting.
BTW, The Greek has posted new futures odds. I'd like to meet the sucker that bets on Xavier at +1815. Or Purdue at +3050.
ML, you don't want to know what KU is there.
I'm a pretty big fan of compounding my own mistakes. If it is +825 after lunchtime today, I'll be surprised. *wink*
I keep looking at these numbers you have posted, and I want to say that Marquette at 16-1 is a decent bet, but can they really beat a UCLA, Memphis, or Kansas on a neutral floor?? Those Louisville games really make me wonder.
Either way it is the best one on that board.
I ended up passing on all of these (which is saying something). As Rob noted, I am just not comfortable with the variation in the draws. I think Marquette is a decent F4 sleeper, but not if they have to go through two of KU/UCLA/Memphis/Tenny/'Ville/UNC (Tenny is starting to fall out of that group for me, BTW) to get there. And there's a 50% chance that will be the case. At that point, +1600 is terrible. But if they are playing Butler in Rd 2, and then have Purdue and Texas as the 2/3 in their region, it's a great bet.
Man, looking at that Parrish bracket, Memphis would absolutely destroy the South. Texas/Purdue/ND? Are you kidding me?
I'm over the Vols. They are going down before the Elite 8. I'll be able to hedge in a very nice profit though. Enough to cover the money I plan on blowing on KU.
I'm on full futures tilt now. I just maxed out KU at +825 at the Greek. We'll see how much they adjust, if at all. They have no reason to respect my money. I am down for my career at their shop.
It is down to +755. How are people still sleeping on them? Compare that to Texas at +1215. Those should not be close.
I cannot play there, because I'm not 21 yet. It sucks.
The human polls and the equally pretty records of Tenny, UCLA, Memphis, and UNC are probably to blame.
In the 3 years that Pomeroy has been calculating his ratings in this manner, they have the highest expected winning percentage of any team in that time frame.
This probably won't change before tournament time. At worst they will head into the tourney with the 3rd most efficient offense AND the 3rd most efficient defense. They are really, really good.
I'm writing a post about them right now that will be up later tonight. I am actually pretty happy with the position I have taken on them.
Damn it, now you've got me all riled up. 5Dimes has them at +775, and Louisville at +1600. I can't pass either of those up. There's just no way.
Post a Comment