Phil Ivey prop bet

[arod4276]

www.pinnaclesports has phil ivey not winning the main event at -556. Conversly he is plus 407 to win it. These numbers seem way way out of whack. I would want all i could get on the no he wont win at -556.Any thoughts

[arod4276]

They also have the field at -181 vs ivey ,raymer, and the mouth.. Anyone love the field besides me? arod4276

[Synergistic Explosions]

[ QUOTE ]
www.pinnaclesports has phil ivey not winning the main event at -556. Conversly he is plus 407 to win it. These numbers seem way way out of whack. I would want all i could get on the no he wont win at -556.Any thoughts

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoever set those odds has no clue. They seem way way out of whack. You better hurry and lock it in.

[arod4276]

my thoughts exactly..

[gorgeous]

Just took: Ivey -557, Raymer -1057, Field against the "Big 3" at -181. all max bets

Just hoping Ivey gets knocked out soon.. he could make me a very poor man

[WackityWhiz]

[ QUOTE ]
Just took: Ivey -557, Raymer -1057, Field against the "Big 3" at -181. all max bets

Just hoping Ivey gets knocked out soon.. he could make me a very poor man

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm with ya man, I got Raymer to beat ivey at +174. I like Ivey and all but I couldn't pass these up. Oh and just so you know, I opened up an account at pinnacle just cuz of this post. So I hope this is a winner.

Good Luck

[Morpheus]

What do those numbers mean ? Thanks. Not familiar with sports betting.

[WackityWhiz]

[ QUOTE ]
What do those numbers mean ? Thanks. Not familiar with sports betting.

[/ QUOTE ]

+174 means that I bet 100 to win 174... If the number was a minus, then you have to risk that much to make 100. For example, Ivey is -189 to beat Raymer. So if you wanted to win 100, you would have to bet 189.

Your bet doesn't have to be 100, it could be 10. +174 on a 10 dollar bet would be a profit of 17.40. As a 18.90 bet would yield a 10 dollar profit.

Obviously Ivey is well favored to beat Raymer.

cheers

[Morpheus]

So with Big 3 getting +196 for this to be a +EV bet, you'd have to think that those 3 guys are better than 50 % to win the WSOP. If not, then you go with the field. Man, I really don't know.

Because you bet 100 to make 196 or basically betting $100 to make a $96 profit so even money. I kind of like the big 3. I actually like Matusow. I think it might be his year.

[gorgeous]

It's not even money.. +196 is $100 to win $196 (you get your bet back). If you like the Big 3/Matusow you should bet on them/him.

[mackthefork]

WTF does all that crap mean anyway, why can't they just say Evens 5/4 6/4 7/4 2/1 5/2 etc like a normal human being might. Blah yuck

Mack

[meow_meow]

[ QUOTE ]
WTF does all that crap mean anyway, why can't they just say Evens 5/4 6/4 7/4 2/1 5/2 etc like a normal human being might. Blah yuck

Mack

[/ QUOTE ]

There are many ways to quote odds.
Live with it.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
There are many ways to quote odds.
Live with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good reasoning, heres a good reason for having a universal system.

thin analogy drawn by mack (http://edition.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/)

Regards Mack

[allinbaby]

The pinnacle line has now shifted enough that those of you who took the field at -181 can bet on the Big Three to make a safe profit.

[meow_meow]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There are many ways to quote odds.
Live with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good reasoning, heres a good reason for having a universal system.

thin analogy drawn by mack (http://edition.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/)

Regards Mack

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah ha!
Maybe it's just the reverse though - having different convensions confuses the punters into making bad bets /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Morpheus]

I took the Big 3.

[allinbaby]

[ QUOTE ]
So with Big 3 getting +196 for this to be a +EV bet, you'd have to think that those 3 guys are better than 50 % to win the WSOP. If not, then you go with the field. Man, I really don't know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is it whether or not one of the Big 3 will win the event? I'd assumed it was the total prize money earned by the Big 3 vs the money won by the field.

Either way tho, I still see value at Field -210.

[Morpheus]

I didn't choose the field because you have to win that bet 66 % of the time for it to be +EV. I still don't know and I don't think either bet is really that good. I don't wager on sports very often and the last time I did, it was on horse racing. Anyway, since it is -210 for the field, you are getting 1 to 2 . You have to win 2 times for every loss to break even.

[BigBluffer]

Just thought I'd throw you guys a heads up in case you were thinking of opening an account and throwing a tenner on one of these props. Here's a copy and paste job from their web site:

Our clients receive one free payout per month for withdrawals of $1,000 or more for cheques or wire transfers, with a flat fee of $25, or equivalent, for any additional withdrawals. Clients also receive one free Neteller, Moneybookers, WebMoney or Instadebit withdrawal of $500 or more per calendar month. Neteller, Moneybookers, WebMoney or Instadebit withdrawals of less than $500, or more than one per calendar month, incur a fee of $15 or equivalent, per transaction.

So, consider how this affects your EV computation on a small bankroll. I was gonna put $20 on the Big 3 just to have some rooting interest until I read this. The $15 withdrawal fee put the brakes on that. I guess I could just deposit $600 and then withdraw for free Saturday. Yeah, that might work.

[Pokeraddict]

Nice catch there. Most of these sportsbooks have gotten out of hand with cashout fees. As if the advantage they have on the bets isnt enough.

[TheHammer24]

The big three do not like a bad bet to me. Ivey and Matusow are the two best tournament players left over. If you throw Phan in and make it the big 4, I think it's a super +EV bet.

[ctv1116]

Yea, I've got a lot of cash on Ivey not winning it. He's only got 8% of the chips but would need to win it more than 15% of the time for Ivey -520 to be a bad bet. Ivey's good, but not THAT good.

From Pinnacle:
WSOP 2005 Matchups Big 3 (Ivey, Matusow, and Raymer) vs. The Field

What exactly is the proposition here? Is it 1) who wins the main event or 2) which group wins more money?

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
www.pinnaclesports has phil ivey not winning the main event at -556. Conversly he is plus 407 to win it. These numbers seem way way out of whack. I would want all i could get on the no he wont win at -556.Any thoughts

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoever set those odds has no clue. They seem way way out of whack. You better hurry and lock it in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Setting odds in sports betting has absolutely nothing to do with what the real odds are, and everything to do with setting it up so you get an equal amount of money/proportion bet by people on both sides of the issue so that regardless of what actually happens the house wins its rake.

[ctv1116]

It was who wins the tournament. We were basically betting that neither Raymer nor Ivey nor Matusow would WIN the tournament (and Raymer is gone).

[Brain]

[ QUOTE ]
Just thought I'd throw you guys a heads up in case you were thinking of opening an account and throwing a tenner on one of these props. Here's a copy and paste job from their web site:

Our clients receive one free payout per month for withdrawals of $1,000 or more for cheques or wire transfers, with a flat fee of $25, or equivalent, for any additional withdrawals. Clients also receive one free Neteller, Moneybookers, WebMoney or Instadebit withdrawal of $500 or more per calendar month. Neteller, Moneybookers, WebMoney or Instadebit withdrawals of less than $500, or more than one per calendar month, incur a fee of $15 or equivalent, per transaction.

So, consider how this affects your EV computation on a small bankroll. I was gonna put $20 on the Big 3 just to have some rooting interest until I read this. The $15 withdrawal fee put the brakes on that. I guess I could just deposit $600 and then withdraw for free Saturday. Yeah, that might work.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I tried that a while ago and they weren't too fond of it.

Ivey is knocked out. He had JJ vs KK.

[ctv1116]

NICE. Had quite a bit at -550 on Ivey not winning. Now Matusow needs to go and I'll be raking in the dough.

[Homer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
www.pinnaclesports has phil ivey not winning the main event at -556. Conversly he is plus 407 to win it. These numbers seem way way out of whack. I would want all i could get on the no he wont win at -556.Any thoughts

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoever set those odds has no clue. They seem way way out of whack. You better hurry and lock it in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Setting odds in sports betting has absolutely nothing to do with what the real odds are, and everything to do with setting it up so you get an equal amount of money/proportion bet by people on both sides of the issue so that regardless of what actually happens the house wins its rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Common misconception.

[ctv1116]

Homer, what's your take on the prop bet? Obviously now that Ivey's out its a moot point, but do you think Ivey -550 was a good play given he only held 8% of the chips?

[Morpheus]

Well, I screwed up. I got $300 paying 1 to 1 and my odds are certainly worse than 1 to 1 that Big 3 takes it now. Probably more like 10 to 1 now that it's down to just Matusow.

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
www.pinnaclesports has phil ivey not winning the main event at -556. Conversly he is plus 407 to win it. These numbers seem way way out of whack. I would want all i could get on the no he wont win at -556.Any thoughts

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoever set those odds has no clue. They seem way way out of whack. You better hurry and lock it in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Setting odds in sports betting has absolutely nothing to do with what the real odds are, and everything to do with setting it up so you get an equal amount of money/proportion bet by people on both sides of the issue so that regardless of what actually happens the house wins its rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Common misconception.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying that what I said was a common misconception, or that I was describing a common misconception that people have of how sports betting works?

[craig r]

It is a common misconcetption that sportsbooks want even action on both sides of a bet. I am assuming that is what Homer is saying.

craig