Dumb questions on sports betting

[pokler]

I joined FAN DUEL and have lots of questions ..


1) Spread : Cardinals + 3/ Rams -3... If I pick Rams they must lose by more than 3 points ?

2) Money : Cards +144/ Rams -175. What does this mean ,, going by this who is favored ? How do they arrive at the numbers?

3). O/U. Cards 48 , -112 / Rams 48 -108. ... What is this and why do both have negative numbers ?

General questions ... Many apps offer $5 bet to win a big amount like $150, 200 if you pick winning team .. Is there any reason I should not join all apps and put down just $5 and have potential to win those big amounts ? What is the downside ..


Fan Duel required I put up $100.. I now have $380. Can I cash out anytime ?
After I give them 100 and bet 5 to win 150 would they have let me cash out the whole thing or do they want you to wager all 100?

In the Bills game they were up like 21 points in 3rd quarter so an almost certainty to win. At that point I could have bet 100 and made 4 which is a 4% return.
A virtual guarantee 4% return . If I was rich an a pro gambler could I wager $1,000,000 and get a almost certain $40,000?


Which are best apps you guys like and why?

 

[medroogies]

I use FD and Draftkings. I've had a few others, but those are the "best" and offer the most incentives/no-brainers (basically 'free money').

So to answer your questions - 1) If you pick the Rams, they have to win by more than 3 (-3 means you are giving the Cardinals 3 points to start so the game begins 3 to nothing)
2) +144 means you are getting 1.44X in return. If you bet $1 you will get $2.44 back (your $1 and $1.44). If you take the -175, you are getting .57 for every dollar you bet (you have to bet $1.75 to get $1 back) The team that is negative is the favored team, the team that is positive is not favored. The oddsmakers review all the available information and determine what the likely outcomes are going to be. If one team is likely to win 3 out of 4 times, the odds will depict this (and actually not quite exactly, the oddsmakers add a "vigorish" which allows them to make something assuming equivalent amounts are bet on each team, so the payouts won't be exactly equal overall).

3)O/U is over/under. 48 means the game has to be either OVER 48 total points or under 48 total points. Ignore the teams. That doesn't factor into this. Assuming the likelihood is equal that the game could finish over 48 or under 48, the odds should be roughly equal (+100), but they can't be. One side of the total has a slightly higher likelihood than the other and you have to factor in the vigorish, so both sides come in under +100, but one is slightly lower than the other.

 

[medroogies]

Oh your other questions - no, no reason to not download every app and take advantage. It makes perfect sense, really. There is no downside UNLESS you don't read the terms and it requires a certain amount to be deposited (some have this requirement) and you can't withdraw the winnings until you've bet the requirement. VERY FEW have this - but review the terms thoroughly.

I am not sure about the specifics for Fanduel. It's been a while since I did it, but read the terms they are usually pretty easy to determine.

Bills game - yes, that's the way my wife bets (though not with the $1,000,000, but with $10 at a time). Of course, I did this a few times and it pays off a lot....until it doesn't. Had one where I had a sure thing just like the Bills game, and watched the other team come back and win on a last second field goal and saw $100 disappear. My buddy's favorite story was betting a big player in a Grand Slam match for $200 - it was a SURE THING to get that $10 return (better than a bank's interest rate, right?). Except he lost and it took him 2 years to make that $200 back. If it weren't for Fanduel's no-brainers and other things (hammer the spread is always good), it may have taken him longer.

 

[pokler]

Oh your other questions - no, no reason to not download every app and take advantage. It makes perfect sense, really. There is no downside UNLESS you don't read the terms and it requires a certain amount to be deposited (some have this requirement) and you can't withdraw the winnings until you've bet the requirement. VERY FEW have this - but review the terms thoroughly.

I am not sure about the specifics for Fanduel. It's been a while since I did it, but read the terms they are usually pretty easy to determine.

Bills game - yes, that's the way my wife bets (though not with the $1,000,000, but with $10 at a time). Of course, I did this a few times and it pays off a lot....until it doesn't. Had one where I had a sure thing just like the Bills game, and watched the other team come back and win on a last second field goal and saw $100 disappear. My buddy's favorite story was betting a big player in a Grand Slam match for $200 - it was a SURE THING to get that $10 return (better than a bank's interest rate, right?). Except he lost and it took him 2 years to make that $200 back. If it weren't for Fanduel's no-brainers and other things (hammer the spread is always good), it may have taken him longer.

Thank you !!!

on point 3 ) I win if total points are either over or under 48 . So the only way to lose if total is EXACTLY 48? This seems too easy to be true.
Very unlikely to hit exactly 48. What am I missing ?

 

[anonsh6]

Thank you !!!

on point 3 ) I win if total points are either over or under 48 . So the only way to lose if total is EXACTLY 48? This seems too easy to be true.
Very unlikely to hit exactly 48. What am I missing ?

I never came across a bet where the over/under is a whole number. It would be over/under 47.5. But, if the bet is a whole number, I figure it would be a push if it landed on the exact number and you would still be only able to bet over or under.

 

[cutter]

Easiest way to do the money line is if your bet is +144, you are putting down $100 to win $144. If it's -175, you're putting down $175 to win $100.

 

[The Exiled]

Thank you !!!

on point 3 ) I win if total points are either over or under 48 . So the only way to lose if total is EXACTLY 48? This seems too easy to be true.
Very unlikely to hit exactly 48. What am I missing ?

You are betting over OR under. Not both. For instance if the Giants were playing with their offense you would probably bet under. So if the combined score was under 48 you would win, if it was over 48 you would lose.

 

[medroogies]

Thank you !!!

on point 3 ) I win if total points are either over or under 48 . So the only way to lose if total is EXACTLY 48? This seems too easy to be true.
Very unlikely to hit exactly 48. What am I missing ?

No if you hit 48, then you have what is known as a "push" and you get your bet back. The only way to lose if you bet the over is if the two teams' scores only add up to 47 or less.

 

[pokler]

You are betting over OR under. Not both. For instance if the Giants were playing with their offense you would probably bet under. So if the combined score was under 48 you would win, if it was over 48 you would lose.

Daaahh .. not I get it . Good example thx

 

[billyS]

Anyone betting heavily on the Super Bowl today?
Over 1k?
Over 10k?

We have any high rollers here?

Or has anyone placed any interesting bets on things like the coin flip?

 

[NINE-LIVES]

I took Cincy on the money line for 500

 

[medroogies]

Anyone betting heavily on the Super Bowl today?
Over 1k?
Over 10k?

We have any high rollers here?

Or has anyone placed any interesting bets on things like the coin flip?

Coin flip, I consider a sucker's bet. I'd say it's 50/50 but really it's not and you have no idea which side the slight favor goes toward, unlike most coins.

That said, I have a few "good" bets.
1. I like Cincy to win outright, but honestly not putting too much on that because the Rams really are better. Stafford is the real deal, and I like him a lot. I just think his coach chokes too often. Tightens up in big games. Just my POV. Guy goes plain vanilla when he should be stretching the field. Overall, if you're all about the numbers, the right bet is LAR on the alternate spread of +8. I just don't trust the LAR coach's ability. Of course, wtf do I know? I'm not in the NFL.
2. Player props that look good - Burrow for .5+ INT and .5+ TD should be easy money. Joe Mixon 9+ yards receiving in a Same Game Parlay, but look for 15+ if you want straight up. Stafford 295+ passing seems reasonable UNLESS there's a massive early lead. Then again, it's probably still reasonable as he'll want to pump up his stats for the MVP.
3. Tee Higgins, if Cincy is to win, has to go balls to the wall for a big game, so looking for him to have one.
4. The over. The only real problem I have with the over is that in highly offensive games like this is expected to be, things tend to become defensive battles. Both these Ds are suspect, though. Rams overall are the better team. No comparison, really. But weird things happen in the SB. So I can see 49+ points easily.

Though, I'm not betting big. I have over a thousand on the game, but most of that is on boxes and not bets.

 

[genius]

Coin flip, I consider a sucker's bet. .....

IMHO (and also my professional opinion) unless there is a fix on the thing you are gambling on (and you are in on the fix) it's all a sucker's bet. No matter what your system is, the house always wins in the long run.

 

[medroogies]

IMHO (and also my professional opinion) unless there is a fix on the thing you are gambling on (and you are in on the fix) it's all a sucker's bet. No matter what your system is, the house always wins in the long run.

Gambling by its very nature is a sucker's bet. Only the house wins consistently.

That said, SOME forms of gambling offer the ability to control the odds a bit more than others.
Roulette, for example, you have NO control over.
Blackjack, if you can read deep enough into a shoe (I've gone 5 deep, and some luck with 7), helps you control your odds.
Poker has as much skill, based on bet signaling, as luck (you still need the cards in almost any situation).
Craps is less skill, but does have among the best odds compared to many other forms of gambling.
Sports betting? Nothing is written in stone. But if you know your teams, understand the game, and can read deep into the strategies (and now that is easier to do than ever) you an improve your odds tremendously.

My wife gambles a bit on Draftkings. She's up $600 since it was legalized (4? can't remember) years ago. She doesn't make huge bets, and takes advantage of the no-brainers and odds boosts that are sensible. While I'd say 1/2 of the $600 is from no-brainers, the other half is from reasonable bets that make a lot of sense. She made one crazy bet 4 years ago. Put $50 on a player to win a game, -700. He lost. She learned her lesson, and developed a betting strategy that works for her.

So yes, gambling is a sucker's bet 80% of the time. But I've won enough at poker, and I've won enough on DK, to say that if you know how to manage your betting properly, you can do very, very well.
FWIW, my POV is too many people go for the -120 to +200 bets far too often. I'll take -300 and lower more frequently. Sure the payouts are lower, but the odds of winning much, much higher. And it's better than interest at the bank (-300 being about 30% return).
If you don't go crazy, and you know how to control your betting impulses, you can do very well. These apps count on people overdoing it - and they often do.

 

[genius]

Gambling by its very nature is a sucker's bet. Only the house wins consistently.

That said, SOME forms of gambling offer the ability to control the odds a bit more than others.
Roulette, for example, you have NO control over.
Blackjack, if you can read deep enough into a shoe (I've gone 5 deep, and some luck with 7), helps you control your odds.
Poker has as much skill, based on bet signaling, as luck (you still need the cards in almost any situation).
Craps is less skill, but does have among the best odds compared to many other forms of gambling.
Sports betting? Nothing is written in stone. But if you know your teams, understand the game, and can read deep into the strategies (and now that is easier to do than ever) you an improve your odds tremendously.

Yup, you can improve your odds tremendously. Maybe if you are really good at it, IMHO, if you spend a lot of time and effort at it, you can minimize your loses over the long term.

My wife gambles a bit on Draftkings. She's up $600 since it was legalized (4? can't remember) years ago. She doesn't make huge bets, and takes advantage of the no-brainers and odds boosts that are sensible. While I'd say 1/2 of the $600 is from no-brainers, the other half is from reasonable bets that make a lot of sense. She made one crazy bet 4 years ago. Put $50 on a player to win a game, -700. He lost. She learned her lesson, and developed a betting strategy that works for her.

I'm not trying to be a smart ass but please be honest, if you have her total all her time and effort and compared it to — say working a part time job at McDonald's, how do you think it would net out?

Don't get me wrong, if you enjoy the excitement and are not stupid about it — hey why not.

Although the "gambling" I used to do (actually I advised others) professionally involved stakes much, much, higher than just losing a lot of money, literally life and death, I know a lot about probability and game theory. The principles are the same with the casinos.

So yes, gambling is a sucker's bet 80% of the time. But I've won enough at poker, and I've won enough on DK, to say that if you know how to manage your betting properly, you can do very, very well.
......

Yeah, I agree on that although i think your 80% is a bit optimistic. For example, when I was in high school, I used to caddie. Would get to the caddie sign in at 6 am so I could get at head of the sigh in list. While waiting for the 1st golfers to show up I would play poker in the caddie shack with the professional caddies. They had no idea of probability and if I just acted stupid, i.e "hey does a full house beat a straight?" I would leave before the 1st call for a caddie with more money than could make as a caddie.

The guys who run the gambling sites and the casinos are not stupid — they are experts (or hire experts) at probability and run their business to make a profit at your expense. Do you ever wonder why they are such nice guys to offer comp room, meals, shows to the high rollers?

 

[pokler]

Yup, you can improve your odds tremendously. Maybe if you are really good at it, IMHO, if you spend a lot of time and effort at it, you can minimize your loses over the long term.

I'm not trying to be a smart ass but please be honest, if you have her total all her time and effort and compared it to — say working a part time job at McDonald's, how do you think it would net out?

Don't get me wrong, if you enjoy the excitement and are not stupid about it — hey why not.

Although the "gambling" I used to do (actually I advised others) professionally involved stakes much, much, higher than just losing a lot of money, literally life and death, I know a lot about probability and game theory. The principles are the same with the casinos.


Yeah, I agree on that although i think your 80% is a bit optimistic. For example, when I was in high school, I used to caddie. Would get to the caddie sign in at 6 am so I could get at head of the sigh in list. While waiting for the 1st golfers to show up I would play poker in the caddie shack with the professional caddies. They had no idea of probability and if I just acted stupid, i.e "hey does a full house beat a straight?" I would leave before the 1st call for a caddie with more money than could make as a caddie.

The guys who run the gambling sites and the casinos are not stupid — they are experts (or hire experts) at probability and run their business to make a profit at your expense. Do you ever wonder why they are such nice guys to offer comp room, meals, shows to the high rollers?

All true but you ever wonder why players get banned from casinos ? ( other than cheaters )
Some pros know how to win consistently .

 

[medroogies]

Yup, you can improve your odds tremendously. Maybe if you are really good at it, IMHO, if you spend a lot of time and effort at it, you can minimize your loses over the long term.

I'm not trying to be a smart ass but please be honest, if you have her total all her time and effort and compared it to — say working a part time job at McDonald's, how do you think it would net out?

Don't get me wrong, if you enjoy the excitement and are not stupid about it — hey why not.

Although the "gambling" I used to do (actually I advised others) professionally involved stakes much, much, higher than just losing a lot of money, literally life and death, I know a lot about probability and game theory. The principles are the same with the casinos.


Yeah, I agree on that although i think your 80% is a bit optimistic. For example, when I was in high school, I used to caddie. Would get to the caddie sign in at 6 am so I could get at head of the sigh in list. While waiting for the 1st golfers to show up I would play poker in the caddie shack with the professional caddies. They had no idea of probability and if I just acted stupid, i.e "hey does a full house beat a straight?" I would leave before the 1st call for a caddie with more money than could make as a caddie.

The guys who run the gambling sites and the casinos are not stupid — they are experts (or hire experts) at probability and run their business to make a profit at your expense. Do you ever wonder why they are such nice guys to offer comp room, meals, shows to the high rollers?

Bad betters can minimize their losses.
Good ones know when not to bet, or how to bet effectively. Outside of what I term my "pure gambling" (horse racing, boxes or other general pools) I am ahead. I keep track. As for my wife, and her "time and effort" (which is, quite literally as close to zero as it can be simply because she does no research), she's netting out pretty well. Would McDonald's pay better? Sure - if it was a full time job she was doing. But when she bets, she finds something she likes, bets it, and forgets it. She's looking to earn a few bucks here and there on small bets with reasonable odds. So the answer is "totaling all her time and effort" is simple. She's way ahead. Because it's very little work.

As for me, tonight I made money. Tee Higgins did as I expected. On a $5 bet, I earned 65 because I parlayed him with OBJ and Kupp.
Sadly Mixon didn't catch for 9.5 yards, but Burrow getting sacked more than 5 times earned me more than that back. Bengals covered the spread, which worked for me, as there was no over. So that was a wash. I had Bengals moneyline parlayed with Kupp TD, so that lost, but I hit on Stafford being sacked 3 times parlayed with Higgins over 94 yards and Burrow over 235 yards. But those are all small bets.

In my "pure speculation" bets (boxes) I lost $700. But my wife had boxes too, and made $1500.

Generally speaking - I'll disagree with you. Because when I bet knowledgeably, I win. And I know when to lay a lot of money down. Tonight I didn't. Because the Rams were probably double digits better on paper. SB rarely goes according to paper, so I found props that made a lot of sense based on how the game should go...but kept those small.
Meanwhile, I bet heavily on Medvedev over Djokovic at the US Open and then on Rafa over Medvedev in Australia. Tennis is a pretty consistent way to make money if you know your players. Made a fortune on Rafa, because he is workmanlike.
Where I've lost, it's usually on boxes and just pure speculation. But those don't make up the majority of my bets, so overall I'm ahead.

If it were my job, I'd approach it all differently. But it's not. It's a hobby, and one I know how to make a little money at. I'm not trying to feed the family on it, so comparing it to a job is idiotic.

 

[medroogies]

All true but you ever wonder why players get banned from casinos ? ( other than cheaters )
Some pros know how to win consistently .

That's the truth.
"Bringing Down the House" is a great story of professionals who know how to win at blackjack. What they do isn't illegal or cheating. They are just good at what they do.
Why do the same players seem to make the final table consistently in poker? Because they are good at it. Sure, you gotta get the cards, but part of poker is knowing when to bet, when to fold and most importantly HOW to bet.

Poker is just a game of alpha. Anyone in the market understands that. Which is why it's not uncommon to see lots of Wall Streeters playing poker.

 

[Bricktop]

All true but you ever wonder why players get banned from casinos ? ( other than cheaters )
Some pros know how to win consistently .

Do you personally know someone that was banned from a casino?

 

[medroogies]

Do you personally know someone that was banned from a casino?

I do. Counting cards. It's not illegal. They just don't want you doing it because it hurts their profits.
I used to count cards at Binion's in single deck Blackjack. That was easy money.
If I find places that do single deck, I'll always play. It's slower, but it's so easy to count into a single deck.
The hillside towns in Colorado - old mining towns that adopted gambling to save themselves - they were big on single deck as a draw.
Haven't been there in 20 years, so don't know if they still have it. Haven't been to Vegas in 10 years, so not sure if anyplace there does it anymore.

Counted into a seven deck shoe for 3 days a long time ago, when I was much younger. Had a massive headache at the end. Didn't want to do that anymore. Paid for my dining room.