Duke vs. UNC point spread [Archive]

tbyers11

03-07-2008, 01:17 PM

I just went to Vegas.com (then ran multiple Google searches ;)) to find the spread on the game Saturday.

All I got was a listing reading, "Points spreads have yet to be listed."

Just looking for insight here from posters who are more in the know on Vegas, gambling and other activities (legal or illegal) than me, EarlJam.

When do they usually post point spreads? Has anyone heard such info for Saturday's game?

My guess is that UNC would be a 4-5 point favorite.

-EarlJam

Vegas point spreads frequently open within a point or two of the Sagarin Predictor ratings found here (http://www.kiva.net/~jsagarin/sports/cbsend.htm) with 4 points factored in for home court advantage.

Sagarin predictor has UNC at 94.16 and Duke at 93.92 for a difference of .24 points. Add in the 4.02 points for home court in favor of Duke and this method gives Duke a 3.78 point advantage.

My guess is Duke by 2 when the line comes out.

mr. synellinden

03-07-2008, 01:43 PM

Vegas point spreads frequently open within a point or two of the Sagarin Predictor ratings found here (http://www.kiva.net/~jsagarin/sports/cbsend.htm) with 4 points factored in for home court advantage.

Sagarin predictor has UNC at 94.16 and Duke at 93.92 for a difference of .24 points. Add in the 4.02 points for home court in favor of Duke and this method gives Duke a 3.78 point advantage.

My guess is Duke by 2 when the line comes out.

I agree with that guess. I was going to say something very close. I thought UNC by 4-5 was way off. I would guess Duke by anywhere from -1 to -2.5.

Troublemaker

03-07-2008, 02:50 PM

Yeah, Duke will be the favorite. And it'll be around 3.5.

stals

03-07-2008, 03:14 PM

Score 91-85

Jeffrey

03-07-2008, 04:04 PM

Hi,

I'd expect UNC to be a 2 pt. favorite.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

Uncle Drew

03-07-2008, 04:16 PM

I can guarantee that line will change the closer we get to game time. Most every writer and announcer I've heard from thinks UNC is the better team, has more to play for (where they get that I don't know, seems to me both teams are playing for almost the exact same thing.) and few are convinced with Duke's obvious match up problems with Hansbrough. Betters will place MUCH more money on UNC to win and / or beat the spread. By game day to even things out odds makers will have UNC a slight to 5 or 6 point favorite to get more people betting on Duke.

For what it's worth my dad used to say he aught to bet $50 on UNC every Duke vs. UNC game. If Duke won he didn't mind losing the money and if UNC won at least he got paid.

Clipsfan

03-07-2008, 04:25 PM

Score 91-85

I don't think that Pomeroy factors injuries into the equation, merely results. As such, his prediction may not be worth a ton.

hondoheel

03-07-2008, 04:29 PM

For what it's worth my dad used to say he aught to bet $50 on UNC every Duke vs. UNC game. If Duke won he didn't mind losing the money and if UNC won at least he got paid.

I used to do that (bet against UNC that is) for the very same reason.

Troublemaker

03-07-2008, 04:33 PM

EarlJam

03-07-2008, 04:39 PM

Methinks, unfortunately, I was going with my "fears" when I thought UNC to be a 5-6 point favorite.

I'm just scared, that's all.

-EarlJam

Bob Green

03-07-2008, 04:40 PM

Duke is a 2 point favorite and the over/under is 163:

http://www.vegasinsider.com/college-basketball/odds/las-vegas/

I could care less about covering the spread, a one point victory would be great!

Lotus000

03-07-2008, 04:42 PM

kexman

03-07-2008, 04:54 PM

I'm a little late, but as I was reading the thread I was thinking I would take whichever team they were going to give me points for. I think it is a toss-up...I'll take the points. I don't know anything about point spreads or gambling, but I would have assumed the #1 team in the nation would be the favorite in most people's minds. I'm surprised duke is a favorite by 2 points.

It was interesting that home court was worth 4 points in general. Curious what it is in other sports.

Classof06

03-07-2008, 04:54 PM

Most sites don't put spreads up until the day of the game. And given UNC's "abundance" of injuries, I wouldn't expect most sites to have them up until tomorrow.

As much as common knowledge would say Duke would be the favorite, Duke was a 4 point underdog in Chapel Hill without Lawson. Given that UNC is now #1 in the nation and has added Lawson back into the rotation, I wouldn't expect Duke to be the favorite. Especially when Chapel Hill is a 10-minute bus ride away.

My guess is UNC will be a 1.5 - 2.5 point favorite.

hurleyfor3

03-07-2008, 05:01 PM

Bloomberg is also reporting Duke -2 and over/under 163.

dukestheheat

03-07-2008, 05:02 PM

Methinks, unfortunately, I was going with my "fears" when I thought UNC to be a 5-6 point favorite.

I'm just scared, that's all.

-EarlJam

DUDE! This is the game, the one we are here for! It's time to pull up the straps and prepare to open the can of whoop... on the Holes! No time for fear or even for thinking about it, it's time to send those boys to HELL!

Let's go!

dth.

Uncle Drew

03-07-2008, 05:19 PM

UNC as 5 or 6 point favorites? No chance. UNC will neither start out as the favorite nor end as the favorite.

I don't mean to be too argumentative since playing guess-the-spread is obviously a petty issue, but I know of no gambler that would predict UNC to be a favorite in this game. And it has nothing to do with whether I personally think Duke will win or not (although I DO happen to think Duke will win), and when the oddsmakers release the line, it will also not reflect whether THEY think Duke will win or not. Oddsmakers are just trying to balance the money, and there is no chance that THAT much money will flow towards UNC such that they become favorites.

I foresee the line starting out Duke -3.5, ending around Duke -2, with almost 0% chance of UNC ending up as the favorite. Remember, Duke is an extremely public team (same with UNC), and people respect Cameron Indoor. Any line with UNC as the favorite will have too much money coming in on Duke.

I'm not saying UNC should be the favorite, I'm not saying they are the better team. But there are a ton of factors when it comes to making odds. Lawson's health was a HUGE factor in the last game and is a bit of a factor Saturday. The game being at Duke would normally be a boost on the side of Duke. But odds makers know Hansbrough plays VERY, VERY well AT Duke. (JJ and S. Williams loss on senior day when Hansbrough was a freshman was the most humiliating loss in Duke history IMO.) As sadistic / sick as it might be, the death of the UNC student body president will even be factored in by professional odds makers as something else for UNC to play for.

If as Bob Green said Duke is NOW a 2 point favorite there are a TON of people out there who think with Lawson, playing in memory of a fallen tarheel, on a court where Hansbrough has always played well, that UNC will win the game. Sure there would be even more if UNC was listed as a 6 to 10 point favorite. But you have to realize for Duke on their home court to ONLY be a two point favorite to ANYONE is basically calling them an underdog. Home court in gambling usually accounts for 4 to 6 points depending on your odds maker.

The last time I bet on Duke was the JJ and Shel senior day loss, so I never bet anymore, period. But if you think I'm wrong about the gambling side and who the so called experts think will win search the net for yourself. UNC is the exact type of team Duke should and has had problems with this season. My hope is they make UNC match up with them like they did in Chapel Hill and not the other way around.

captmojo

03-07-2008, 05:24 PM

I don't gamble. Heck, I don't even play the lottery. I just prefer coming into the game as the underdog.

Dukefan03

03-07-2008, 05:28 PM

I'm not saying UNC should be the favorite, I'm not saying they are the better team. But there are a ton of factors when it comes to making odds. Lawson's health was a HUGE factor in the last game and is a bit of a factor Saturday. The game being at Duke would normally be a boost on the side of Duke. But odds makers know Hansbrough plays VERY, VERY well AT Duke. (JJ and S. Williams loss on senior day when Hansbrough was a freshman was the most humiliating loss in Duke history IMO.) As sadistic / sick as it might be, the death of the UNC student body president will even be factored in by professional odds makers as something else for UNC to play for.

If as Bob Green said Duke is NOW a 2 point favorite there are a TON of people out there who think with Lawson, playing in memory of a fallen tarheel, on a court where Hansbrough has always played well, that UNC will win the game. Sure there would be even more if UNC was listed as a 6 to 10 point favorite. But you have to realize for Duke on their home court to ONLY be a two point favorite to ANYONE is basically calling them an underdog. Home court in gambling usually accounts for 4 to 6 points depending on your odds maker.

The last time I bet on Duke was the JJ and Shel senior day loss, so I never bet anymore, period. But if you think I'm wrong about the gambling side and who the so called experts think will win search the net for yourself. UNC is the exact type of team Duke should and has had problems with this season. My hope is they make UNC match up with them like they did in Chapel Hill and not the other way around.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Seriously, don't mean to be rude, but you have a neophyte's understanding of how the line is set and where Vegas stands on this game. Also, what ESPN/SI think about the game is complete irrelevant and Vegas will often play upon this public perception to make a bigger score.

Troublemaker

03-07-2008, 05:33 PM

I'm not saying UNC should be the favorite, I'm not saying they are the better team. But there are a ton of factors when it comes to making odds. Lawson's health was a HUGE factor in the last game and is a bit of a factor Saturday. The game being at Duke would normally be a boost on the side of Duke. But odds makers know Hansbrough plays VERY, VERY well AT Duke. (JJ and S. Williams loss on senior day when Hansbrough was a freshman was the most humiliating loss in Duke history IMO.) As sadistic / sick as it might be, the death of the UNC student body president will even be factored in by professional odds makers as something else for UNC to play for.

If as Bob Green said Duke is NOW a 2 point favorite there are a TON of people out there who think with Lawson, playing in memory of a fallen tarheel, on a court where Hansbrough has always played well, that UNC will win the game. Sure there would be even more if UNC was listed as a 6 to 10 point favorite. But you have to realize for Duke on their home court to ONLY be a two point favorite to ANYONE is basically calling them an underdog. Home court in gambling usually accounts for 4 to 6 points depending on your odds maker.

The last time I bet on Duke was the JJ and Shel senior day loss, so I never bet anymore, period. But if you think I'm wrong about the gambling side and who the so called experts think will win search the net for yourself. UNC is the exact type of team Duke should and has had problems with this season. My hope is they make UNC match up with them like they did in Chapel Hill and not the other way around.

Your post is full of inaccuracies about gambling and how oddsmakers think. If I had time, I'd actually explain. But basically, you're already wrong. LVSC has Duke as a 2-pt favorite, not a 5-6 pt underdog. And Duke will remain the favorite or, at worst, the game will be a pick'em by tip.

stals

03-07-2008, 05:41 PM

I don't think that Pomeroy factors injuries into the equation, merely results. As such, his prediction may not be worth a ton.

What injuries should be factored into this game?

sagegrouse

03-07-2008, 06:08 PM

While the thought of a sage grouse having a "mindset" may be confusing to the traditional human, recent research cited below (including a Duke quote) points out that birds are very intelligent but use the clusters in the lower cortex to great advantage instead of the oversized neocortex of the mammalian species (esp. h. sapiens). I, for one, would rather just nibble the seeds, shoots and blooms off the purple sage and eat a few crawling critters every now and then for protein. But truthfully, most of my mental energy this time of year is in developing strategy for the sage grouse leks (I mean, that's March Madness!).;) ;) ;)

But I digress....

To determine the result of a basketball match, the teams play the game. Why would anyone except a bettor want to waste a lot of time doping out the results. Why not just watch the game? :confused: As Reagan used to say, "I am hopeful, but I never predict elections."

One reason, of course, is that sports writers and announcers have columns to prepare and air time to fill in anticipation of a big game, and they, by gum, are going to give their opinion. Not useful. OTOH, I find really useful the pre-game analysis that everyone on TV does (including Bilas) that talks to the key points of the game and then reviews the results at halftime (and sometimes at the end). I don't know why there isn't more analysis like this in the papers and the on-line columns.

Kornheiser opines that much of what columnists/ commentators do is ridiculous, such as speculating -- in October!! -- whether the Patriots will go undefeated. He also admits he does stupid stuff like that all the time -- because that's what sports writers do.

I don't see why we have to copy the sports writers. Isn't it enough to say, "Go To Hell, Carolina?"

sagegrouse

"... in the journal Nature Neuroscience Reviews, an international group of avian experts is issuing what amounts to a manifesto. Nearly everything written in anatomy textbooks about the brains of birds is wrong, they say. The avian brain is as complex, flexible and inventive as any mammalian brain, they argue, and it is time to adopt a more accurate nomenclature that reflects a new understanding of the anatomies of bird and mammal brains.

"'Names have a powerful influence on the experiments we do and the way we think,' said Dr. Erich D. Jarvis, a neuroscientist at Duke University and a leader of the Avian Brain Nomenclature Consortium. 'Old terminology has hindered scientific progress.'"

sagegrouse

Uncle Drew

03-07-2008, 06:18 PM

To those who say I have no idea what I'm talking about I truly appreciate the constructive criticism. :rolleyes: That being said, Vegas odds makers take a TON of factors into consideration when placing odds. It's their job to look at every angle and factor it all in. They even have local bookies in this area feeding them here say on things. I'm not suggesting they are attempting to fix the game or anything like that. But say a friend of Lawson gets told the ankle is almost 100% and a local bookie finds that out it tends to be a check mark in the UNC column. However in a rivalry game like Duke vs. UNC it's VERY hard to predict what will happen just for the bad blood and emotion of the people involved. Someone even said in the Roy vs. K reporting injurries thread that Dean Smith used to make his teams boo boos public so there was no "insider information" possibilities popping up.

All I'm saying is when a ton of cash gets bet on one team, which IMO will be placed on UNC the odds makers change the odds to get more people to take a chance on Duke. I hope Duke wins by 40 points and a ton of UNC fans (and run of the mill betters) lose cash hand over fist. I have yet to look at the odds, I'm going by what Bob Green typed earlier. But if Duke is at this moment a two point favorite at home that IS calling them the underdog by the odds makers. If anyone thinks odds makers just sit around a table and guess who's to be favored in any game you're nuts. And as their goal is to "sucker" people into betting on the eventual losing team they factor in every possible eqation they can into setting odds.

Amen Sagegrouse.....Go To Hell Carolina Go To Hell!

Indoor66

03-07-2008, 06:41 PM

While the thought of a sage grouse having a "mindset" may be confusing to the traditional human, recent research cited below (including a Duke quote) points out that birds are very intelligent but use the clusters in the lower cortex to great advantage instead of the oversized neocortex of the mammalian species (esp. h. sapiens). I, for one, would rather just nibble the seeds, shoots and blooms off the purple sage and eat a few crawling critters every now and then for protein. But truthfully, most of my mental energy this time of year is in developing strategy for the sage grouse leks (I mean, that's March Madness!).

But I digress....

To determine the result of a basketball match, the teams play the game. Why would anyone except a bettor want to waste a lot of time doping out the results. Why not just watch the game? As Reagan used to say, "I am hopeful, but I never predict elections."

One reason, of course, is that sports writers and announcers have columns to prepare and air time to fill in anticipation of a big game, and they, by gum, are going to give their opinion. Not useful. OTOH, I find really useful the pre-game analysis that everyone on TV does (including Bilas) that talks to the key points of the game and then reviews the results at halftime (and sometimes at the end). I don't know why there isn't more analysis like this in the papers and the on-line columns.

Kornheiser opines that much of what columnists/ commentators do is ridiculous, such as speculating -- in October!! -- whether the Patriots will go undefeated. He also admits he does stupid stuff like that all the time -- because that's what sports writers do.

I don't see why we have to copy the sports writers. Isn't it enough to say, "Go To Hell, Carolina?"

sagegrouse

"... in the journal Nature Neuroscience Reviews, an international group of avian experts is issuing what amounts to a manifesto. Nearly everything written in anatomy textbooks about the brains of birds is wrong, they say. The avian brain is as complex, flexible and inventive as any mammalian brain, they argue, and it is time to adopt a more accurate nomenclature that reflects a new understanding of the anatomies of bird and mammal brains.
"'Names have a powerful influence on the experiments we do and the way we think,' said Dr. Erich D. Jarvis, a neuroscientist at Duke University and a leader of the Avian Brain Nomenclature Consortium. 'Old terminology has hindered scientific progress.'"sagegrouse

I completely agree. The mental masturbation that takes place prior to these games is insane. I want them to stop the verbal diarrhea! Let's just get on with it and play the game.

Sage, I have to tell you that I have hunted the notorious prairie chickens and they are the most stupid bird I have been around. Nothing meant to demean you - only point out the obvious about the Sage Grouse and all it's beauty. :D

sagegrouse

03-07-2008, 07:01 PM

Sage, I have to tell you that I have hunted the notorious prairie chickens and they are the most stupid bird I have been around. Nothing meant to demean you - only point out the obvious about the Sage Grouse and all it's beauty. :D

Indoor66 (BTW, hunting indoors is dangerous):

You are confusing the magnificent Greater Sage Grouse (http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/birds/sagegrouse/) with the much smaller Greater Prairie Chicken (mostly in the Dakotas) and the Sharp-Tailed Grouse, a meadow-breeding bird whose widespread range extends from the Great Plains into the mountains (we have a bunch here).

The male Greater Sage Grouse (6.3 lbs.) is at least three times the size of these other birds. It remains in small flocks year-around, not just during breeding season, so you tend to see either 20 or zero (mostly the latter). It inhabits sagebrush country, of which NW Colorado has an abundance.

The Dusky Grouse (formerly known as Blue Grouse-- but that's another story) is common here in the alpine forests in the mountains in the winter and in the adjacent lowlands during breeding season. One was particularly fond of the petunias on my back patio.

I don't think you were hunting Sage Grouse, but I won't take it personally if you were.

sagegrouse

77devil

03-07-2008, 07:10 PM

JJ and S. Williams loss on senior day when Hansbrough was a freshman was the most humiliating loss in Duke history IMO.

Not even close. You must be too young to have witnessed the squandered 8 point lead in 17 seconds in 1974-before the 3 point shot. No question it is the most humiliating loss in Duke history.

Uncle Drew

03-07-2008, 07:26 PM

Not even close. You must be too young to have witnessed the squandered 8 point lead in 17 seconds in 1974-before the 3 point shot. No question it is the most humiliating loss in Duke history.

Sorry, the first Duke basketball game I ever watched was the 1978 loss to UK in the national championship. The record 30 point loss to UNLV was pretty humiliating. But at least they made it that far and if Hurley hadn't been running (no pun intended) off the court to the john every 10 minutes it could have been much closer.

In my book losing to a freshman led UNC squad on senior day for two of the greatest Duke players ever was FAR more humiliating than that. Next to UNC winning the title in 2005 I don't think I've ever felt worse after a game. My dad used to tell me after Duke lost the 42 Rose Bowl it felt like someone had died. Of course Pearl Harbor and the fact he was enlisting might have had something to do with that.

SilkyJ

03-07-2008, 07:36 PM

Bob Green

03-07-2008, 07:45 PM

Not even close. You must be too young to have witnessed the squandered 8 point lead in 17 seconds in 1974-before the 3 point shot. No question it is the most humiliating loss in Duke history.

I agree 100 percent. 1974 is the nadir of Duke basketball. But we all digress as it is not 1974 and tommorrow we are going to open up a can of whoop butt and take it to the tar heels.

blueprofessor

03-07-2008, 07:51 PM

I completely agree. The mental masturbation that takes place prior to these games is insane. I want them to stop the verbal diarrhea! Let's just get on with it and play the game.

Sage, I have to tell you that I have hunted the notorious prairie chickens and they are the most stupid bird I have been around. Nothing meant to demean you - only point out the obvious about the Sage Grouse and all it's beauty. :D
************************************************** *********
...the fool hen ? My wife and I hunt sage grouse in Montana.They are well-disguised---you cannot see them 10' away.Must have pointing dogs. In rainy or windy days, they are as tough as Huns(not a racial slur,talking about the birds here!). They are big like honkers and can fly 50 mph.They are a lot like sharptails---and delicious if cooked properly.Late in the season, they bunch up and you cannot get close enough to get a clean shot.One near White Sulphur Springs,MT, was released with a transmitter---it did a loop of 25 miles.They do not like people.
Now, bluegrouse...that is a stupid bird. A pal in Montana caught one with his hands near Chico and then let it go.

I think the "sagegrouse" on DBR is no fool hen!
Agree about the UNC game--Let's play the game and whip their entitled butts.
GTH,C!
Best regards.:D

Uncle Drew

03-07-2008, 08:07 PM

well maybe if SOMEONE had cheered a little harder we wouldn't be having this discussion :p

Silk, that litterally made me laugh out loud until it brought tears to my eyes. It's bad enough to find myself yelling at the refs or players on the TV screen when a game is live. I've found myself wanting to throw a remote through the screen watching a game on ESPN classic. I mean I realize no matter how hard I cheer for Duke or pull against the evil empire it does nothing to determine the outcome, but I do it anyway.

I don't know if I believe in karma per say, I'm Presbyterian after all; we're big into predestination. But do you ever think a game like the 1974 loss where Duke blew an eight point lead in 17 seconds allowed karma to be on their side when they came back in the famous "Gone In 54 Seconds" game at Maryland in 2001. (Or the Final Four for that matter?) And Laettners shot in 1992 that sent UK packing we all cherish. did that put karma on UK's side in 1998 when they came back against Duke in Tampa? Personally I think Makhtar Ndiaye standing on the scoring table after UNC beat Duke in the ACC tourney in 1998 beating his chest and taunting Duke fans jinxed them for several wonderful years.

Go To Hell Carolina Go To Hell X Infinity!!

Rogue

03-07-2008, 08:15 PM

I liked The Daily Tarhole predictions last game :D
I haven't seen their break down of this game, any word ?

I'm sure they still have the coaching advantage .... D U K E ;)

socaldukie

03-07-2008, 08:24 PM

http://sports.espn.go.com/videogames/simulation/ncb?id=3280518

Uncle Drew

03-07-2008, 08:28 PM

http://sports.espn.go.com/videogames/simulation/ncb?id=3280518

SoCal, I LOOOOOOOOVE the outcome of the game. Is it possible to watch the game? Or is it just the still picture frame from the game?

dukelifer

03-07-2008, 08:31 PM

http://sports.espn.go.com/videogames/simulation/ncb?id=3280518

Carolina shoots almost 60% , 63% from 3, outrebounds Duke by 5, has fewer turnovers and more steals and loses??? What would Roy say about that? He didn't coach well again?

MChambers

03-07-2008, 08:36 PM

Are just trying to set the odds so that there are an equal number of bets on each side. If that happens, the oddsmakers make money.

Classof06

03-07-2008, 09:10 PM

Are just trying to set the odds so that there are an equal number of bets on each side. If that happens, the oddsmakers make money.

Bingo. The oddsmakers know that within reason, wherever they set the line, people are probably going to even each other out. That's exactly what they want. Duke being a 2-point favorite, while I don't agree with it, will make bookies tons o' cash...

DukeDevilDeb

03-07-2008, 09:23 PM

http://sports.espn.go.com/videogames/simulation/ncb?id=3280518

This may be the best thing I've ever seen on the ESPN website!

Go to HELL, Carolina
Go to HELL

Lotus000

03-07-2008, 09:27 PM

Bingo. The oddsmakers know that within reason, wherever they set the line, people are probably going to even each other out. That's exactly what they want. Duke being a 2-point favorite, while I don't agree with it, will make bookies tons o' cash...

This is sort of true, but not entirely true...

Sports books try to get the point-line and Over/Under to where 50% of the money is on each side, thus tending to ALSO represent a 50/50 chance that each side will pay out. Sports books don't make a lot of money on the point/score line, they just try not to lose money.

Where sportsbooks MAKE lots of money is with three areas: 1) parlays, 2) money lines, and 3) proposition bets.

Let's talk about money lines, which is most applicable to this game. Let's say that UNC is HEAVILY favored. Their money line might read something like -90, meaning that for every $100 bet, you get back $110 if UNC wins. The reciprocal money line for a hugely-underdog Duke would be +80, which means that for every $100 bet, you get back $180. That $10 difference |-90| - |80| = 10 is called the 'vig' which is short for 'vigorish.' So, sportsbooks make money (lots of it) off the money line when the underdog wins, because of the vig. Vegas made out LIKE A BANDIT on the SuperBowl because the Pats were such heavy favourites on the money line.

Sports books like the money line, they could usually not care tooo much about the point line, in comparison.

Now, can we please move on and talk about basketball instead of gambling?

mph

03-07-2008, 09:33 PM

Are just trying to set the odds so that there are an equal number of bets on each side. If that happens, the oddsmakers make money.

Yes. I've never before heard the theory that odds-makers set the line to "'sucker' people into betting...on the losing team." An odds-maker that sets lines resulting in unbalanced bets won't keep his/her job for long. Here's (http://www.oswego.edu/~srp/stats/odds.htm) a decent explanation of how odd-makers set lines and how Vegas makes money. An odds-maker isn't predicting the outcome of the game, s/he's predicting what those placing bets think about the outcome of the game.

Truth

03-07-2008, 09:41 PM

This is sort of true, but not entirely true...

Sports books try to get the point-line and Over/Under to where 50% of the money is on each side, thus tending to ALSO represent a 50/50 chance that each side will pay out. Sports books don't make a lot of money on the point/score line, they just try not to lose money.

Where sportsbooks MAKE lots of money is with three areas: 1) parlays, 2) money lines, and 3) proposition bets.

Let's talk about money lines, which is most applicable to this game. Let's say that UNC is HEAVILY favored. Their money line might read something like -90, meaning that for every $100 bet, you get back $110 if UNC wins. The reciprocal money line for a hugely-underdog Duke would be +80, which means that for every $100 bet, you get back $180. That $10 difference |-90| - |80| = 10 is called the 'vig' which is short for 'vigorish.' So, sportsbooks make money (lots of it) off the money line when the underdog wins, because of the vig. Vegas made out LIKE A BANDIT on the SuperBowl because the Pats were such heavy favourites on the money line.

Sports books like the money line, they could usually not care tooo much about the point line, in comparison.

Now, can we please move on and talk about basketball instead of gambling?

How do you explain the point spread and the ML being tied to one another? (In other words, as the point spread moves in a direction, the ML will also shift a corresponding amount.)

dukie8

03-07-2008, 10:38 PM

So, sportsbooks make money (lots of it) off the money line when the underdog wins, because of the vig. Vegas made out LIKE A BANDIT on the SuperBowl because the Pats were such heavy favourites on the money line.

i don't know where you are getting this from but it is 100% incorrect. vegas LOST money on the super bowl when the giants won because so much money was bet on the giants:

In Vegas, Super Bowl XLII will be referred to as Black Sunday. The city's casinos posted a $2.6 million loss on Sunday, only the second time they've lost money on the game since 1992. Some of the blame is placed on bettors who played the moneyline and bet the Giants to win outright. At more than 3.5-to-1, those bets paid off handsomely.

The point spread didn't help matters much either. Set at 14 initially, the line dipped closer to 12 before kickoff which indicates a lot of action for the Giants. That makes sense. Despite their gaudy record, the Patriots hadn't been kicking teams' heads in the way they were early in the season while the Giant defense was clearly operating at a very high level.

The upside for Vegas? The game ended around 7:30 which left plenty of time for soused, happy Giant bettors to give their winnings back on the tables.

http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2008/02/06/vegas-lost-big-because-giants-won/

ice-9

03-07-2008, 11:16 PM

In the first game at UNC, I couldn't believe Vegas had UNC at -4. Duke was ranked higher and playing well; UNC had struggled in ACC play and was missing Ty Lawson! For the first time in my life, I actually gambled on a sports game. Easiest bet I ever made.

Now it is the second game and I am surprised Vegas has Duke at -2. We have been playing OK but not consistently well and our defense has slipped significantly (see Wake, Miami, NC State). UNC gets Lawson, their second best player and a key cog in their offense, back, Thomas is much improved, and Hansblah is still playing like a demon possessed. I don't want to seem like a downer but if Duke even wins by 1 point I would be pleasantly surprised. If I was a UNC fan, I would put money on UNC for this game (can't believe I just wrote that...how about a few GTHC GTHC to exorcise the guilt).

In the Duke-UNC case, the homecourt advantage is overrated. 1) We are just 8 miles apart so players don't have to sleep in a strange hotel and eat strange food; 2) home players are under intense pressure not to disappoint their own fans, perhaps enough to make their shot a little tighter than usual; 3) champs usually want to play in an intense atmosphere anyway even when at the butting end of it and especially as an underdog.

Uncle Drew

03-08-2008, 06:37 AM

Yes. I've never before heard the theory that odds-makers set the line to "'sucker' people into betting...on the losing team." An odds-maker that sets lines resulting in unbalanced bets won't keep his/her job for long. Here's (http://www.oswego.edu/~srp/stats/odds.htm) a decent explanation of how odd-makers set lines and how Vegas makes money. An odds-maker isn't predicting the outcome of the game, s/he's predicting what those placing bets think about the outcome of the game.

I TRULY appreciate someone finding an article that explains the mindset of bookies and odds makers and linking it for everyone. At the same time odds makers ARE initially trying to make a logical guage as to who should win / be favored and list those odds. In doing this they DO look at all kinds of factors, things the average joe on the street wouldn't think of often times. If we suddenly found out in the morning God forbid that Zoubek hurt his foot again or Ellington got a DWI last night late betters might want to bet differently. But the article was 100% correct in saying they want almost equal amounts of cash being bet on both teams. It's the over / under and parlays they make most of their cash on.

Think back to when Mike Tyson was "Iron Mike" and killing guys in the first or second round of every fight. Not only were the promotion people getting killed for staging a short enevitable fight. But everyone was puting their money on Tyson. Nobody thought anyone was going to last three rounds with the guy and most of the time in his early days they were right. As the fights neared they tried their best to get people to bet on "the other guy". But really until Buster Douglas shocked the world hardly anyone wanted to take the chance. Vegas and bookies won't make money on people betting on UNC or Duke too much. It's when people try to pick five teams, by the spread or wager on the over and under mney is made. That being said the initial listed odds are usually what they think will happen. And given that home court advantage is were several points, their initial thought was UNC was a favorite. Those of us who don't have a dime on the game if Duke wins by one or 50. (Okay some of us would love to see Duke win by 50!) But a win, even a quote unquote upset win, even at home is what we are looking for. Go To Hell Carolina Go To Hell!!!!!!!!!!!

dukie8

03-08-2008, 08:51 AM

since this thread has evolved into a duke and betting discussion, i think that many of you will find it interesting that duhon's meaningless 3 at the buzzer against uconn in 2004 has been call the most expensive meaningless shot in vegas history. the reason is because the line was uconn by either 2 or 3 (i can't remember) and uconn was up by 4 when duhon had the ball in the backcourt and the clock was winding down. he threw up a halfcourt heave that went in that cut the score to 78-79. uconn still won but with duhon's shot, duke covered. i believe that a lot more money was on uconn that game so vegas wound up losing a lot on that "meaningless" shot. i was in vegas for the game and was with a guy who had $5K on uconn. he was not a happy camper.

throatybeard

03-08-2008, 11:21 AM

Just about every point spread thread we've ever have has devolved into a long argument about how point spreads work.

In other news, it's trickling back towards 1 point.

http://www.covers.com/sports/odds/lineHistory.aspx?eventId=759981&sport=ncb

Troublemaker

03-08-2008, 11:42 AM

I TRULY appreciate someone finding an article that explains the mindset of bookies and odds makers and linking it for everyone. At the same time odds makers ARE initially trying to make a logical guage as to who should win / be favored and list those odds. In doing this they DO look at all kinds of factors, things the average joe on the street wouldn't think of often times. If we suddenly found out in the morning God forbid that Zoubek hurt his foot again or Ellington got a DWI last night late betters might want to bet differently. But the article was 100% correct in saying they want almost equal amounts of cash being bet on both teams. It's the over / under and parlays they make most of their cash on.

Dude, the article didn't support that kind of thinking at all. It just said what I said in my first post (not that I'm a guru or that this is uncommon, privileged information), which is that bookies try to even out the money. All this other stuff is fluff.

Troublemaker

03-08-2008, 11:58 AM

i don't know where you are getting this from but it is 100% incorrect. vegas LOST money on the super bowl when the giants won because so much money was bet on the giants:

http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2008/02/06/vegas-lost-big-because-giants-won/

It's highly dubious that the books lost money on the Super Bowl because of the sheer amount of Patriots-win-the-Super Bowl future bets that must've been lost. I mean, at what point do you think the Patriots became the most popular team to bet on to win the Super Bowl last season? Probably during the summer after they traded for Moss, right? Certainly no later than Week 2 of the season after they crushed the the Jets and Chargers back to back. So we're talking about months and months of future bets flowing in on the Patriots.