NHL: most value in money line or spread?

[beetman]

In the NHL it's rare that I bet a favorite that's more than slightly favored, so my questions are mostly geared toward underdogs. I was wondering if there's typically more value in the money line or the spread, and also if anyone has analysis handy with regards to what the difference between the moneyline and spread normally "should" be.

For example, I think there's value in NAS tonight @ COL. The best lines I found are s/u +240, +.5 +170, and +1.5 -125. Assuming my analysis in NAS's value is correct, which line offers the best value?

When I bet an underdog in football, I usually bet a bit on the moneyline as well, figuring the m/l offers me the biggest application of my edge. But in football, the ratio of the spread and money line tends to be pretty constant, whereas in hockey the ratios vary more. At one point last night Canbet had PIT +155 and MIN +135, but both were +.5 +102. My best guess is that the "correct" ratio is somewhere between the two.

In the Nashville example, the +1.5 spread is available without laying too much. When 1.5 goal lines became more prevelant a couple years ago I did some cursory analysis that seemed to indicate that there's almost always value in the +1.5 line, but that was probably a fairly small sample size. That analysis also goes against my intuition since it offers a smaller application of the edge than the money line does.

I understand my questions may be a bit confusing or vague, but any comments or suggestions are appreciated.

[Teddy]

Can you describe your analysis on the +1.5 line? ie: How large was your sample? In what years did you look? What was the EV of betting these teams? % of teams winning outright? etc..

I'm just really curious more than anything...

I have also wondered why NHL moneylines and spreads seem to be "out of whack"..

WildBill, what value would you put to a half goal in the NHL?

[vegasone]

i find the value of the half goal really varies as to which two teams are playing. since there is no penalty for losing in overtime, if the teams aren't in the same division or fighting for the same playoff spot, the overtime is likely to be totally wide open. if it's a division game, the half goal could mean a lot. with the advent of the new ot system last year, there isn't a lot of history to go with.

also to consider: some teams do well 4 on 4 and have an edge in ot.(detroit) while others lack the skill to exploit the extra ice.

this year i have tended to take the moneyline bets with underdogs and give the half with favorites. i'll really only take the half goal in divisional rival games where i really think a team will be happy with a tie.

[Wildbill]

Good questions. Half goal is accepted to be worth anywhere from 30-50 cents, with about 35-40 cents being the norm. This really is the eternal question and my best answer to you is to pick one and stick with it. Part of this decision might rest on what type of best you find yourself making and what your bankroll size is in relation. If you find yourself betting a lot of favorites, then obviously you will be laying good sized prices if you focus all your action on ML. Can you handle that? Most bettors can't do it, but I do warn that the value in hockey GENERALLY favors the dogs so you probably are on the wrong path anyways. In any event, pick one thing to focus on whether it is ML or halves and then stick to it almost every bet. The only time you should deviate is when in your shopping you find that you can get more than 50 cents in value by going to the opposite, otherwise by sticking to one you avoid the very real and common problem of second guessing. Stick to one and you eliminate most second guess reasoning once you stick to the plan. The few times you deviate and you end up losing, you have a great argument in that you got clear value and had no choice but to deviate.

As for the 1.5 goal bet, its still not offered much except on big favorites so I wouldn't put too much stock into it. I know a few places like Canbet offer them on every game, but its not a great idea to get tied to it because you won't have much shopping value with it and big spreads like they have on those tend to give the house more vig than betting the halves or ML. Also with 1.5 bets, you really subject yourself to a host of factors you might not be valuing in your analysis. The obvious things are there, big favorites play the 2nd goalie and might limit some ice time if a big game is up next...but do you factor coaching decisions and fourth line play? Its hard to do, but when you are counting on a big win or a close game involving two teams with clear disparity in talent, these other features come into play and you must think of them. They are beyond an easy discussion and frankly beyond the scope of most handicappers abilities so I just warn against making those bets unless you feel you have a clear positive spot for a team. As for the OT discussion, my personal view is that the games become basically crapshoots most often. While you might have a point with the divisional look at the game, it still comes down most nights to a carryover of what happened in regulation and luck. Luck is a huge part of hockey and an even bigger factor in OT. Talent wins over time, but way too long a time frame to matter on betting with an eye to OT games.

Alright, I have spoken enough, hockey is a ridiculously complex game that takes years to master and therefore the knowledgeable kill the novices 9 times out of 10. To know the game isn't really worth much, you have to know how the dynamics of betting work. The first step though is to eliminate the second guessing and stick to a choice of one or the other, ML or halves and forget everything else. Don't be afraid to lay some juice on a bet, just don't become too enamored with favorites as they will let you down far too much. After that, just keep the bets small and realize that this is the one sport that can kill you if you get too tied into reading current form or getting too high on your recent betting results because luck makes a huge impact on the game.

[beetman]

It was several years ago and I don't remember the relevant details, but the sample only involved that current season so it was likely not very statistically significant.

I am planning on doing a more comprehensive similar study--covers.com has data going back to '95-'96, but they only include one line per game, so there's no way to determine whether it would have been a better value to bet these dogs on a half goal line or moneyline. But it will at least tell us the overall value of all the teams teams that were 1.5 goal dogs. When I get around to finishing it I'll report back here.