NBA MVP

[20Five]

[ QUOTE ]
LBJ, you absolutely have those odds wrong. There is absolutely no chance in hell that Pinnacle would ever offer a bet like this. Betting on both Nash and O'Neal means that they lose money 99% of the time, because they're going to get very little longshot action on the rest of the field...certainly not enough to offset all the action they will get on the two favorites.

I just checked, and at this moment, O'Neal is MINUS-218...meaning you have to pay 218 to win 100 bucks...and Nash is only +146...put up 100, get back 146 if he wins. Seeing those lines, there is simply no chance that they opened the way you posted they did. I suspect Shaq has been odds-on (a minus number) since the open.

If it were this easy, we'd all be making fortunes on sports betting. If those odds were being offered, I would mortgage my house to put as much money as humanly possible on both of them...one of them will win. Pinnacle Sports is smart enough to stay in business, and if they ever offered those odds, they would be out of business. People like me would find ways to dump fortunes on odds like the ones you posted. Sorry, not the case.

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed.. file this one under too good to be true [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

gl tonight

[LBJ]

I'm absolutely positive I had this right. I checked it 6 or 7 different times last night to make sure it was true.

I get home today and the odds have changed soooo much.

Yesterday, Shaq was +214 and Nash was +276, while Iverson was +615, so only 6.15 to 1, which seemed amazing to me.

Unfortunatly, it seems everyone else jumped on these bets, and I was too late. I should've placed my bets right when I saw those unbelievable odds, but I paid the price for waiting.

[Vince Young]

They were +114 and +176.

[LBJ]

I use the decimal pricing. I like it better.

The odds for Shaq opened at 2.14 to 1 and Nash was 2.76 to 1. I didn't know about them until my friend (who also bets on he site) called me up and told me about them. He put some money on Shaq and then a couple bucks on some random players....Wade, Nowitski, since they were higher payouts.

The odds changed fast, but they were in fact +214 and +276.

[LBJ]

Ugh, can I get some help. I just recently starting on the site and only been betting for a month of so. I've been using decimal pricing and it works fine for me. I checked Shaq current odds and they are 1.45 and American pricing was -216 or something. Can someone explain this. I figured 1.45 to 1 was +145....apparently not.

[razor]

[ QUOTE ]
Ugh, can I get some help. I just recently starting on the site and only been betting for a month of so. I've been using decimal pricing and it works fine for me. I checked Shaq current odds and they are 1.45 and American pricing was -216 or something. Can someone explain this. I figured 1.45 to 1 was +145....apparently not.

[/ QUOTE ]

1.45 to 1 *IS* +145

the thing is DECIMAL pricing IS NOT the same as ODDS TO pricing

and decimal price of 1.45 is NOT 1.45 to 1 OR +145

[LBJ]

Thanks, guy....I get it now.

I hope you welcome a newbie such as myself to the forum, both this section and the poker sections have been a great help to me.

[MCS]

I believe 1.45 is 1.45 FOR 1, or in other words, betting 1 returns 1.45 including your original bet. So you make a profit of .45. Notice that this is indeed a little worse than -200 (1.50 would be -200).

[Derek132260]

Good to know what happened here. I didn't actually believe Pinnacle Sports had lost their collective minds. Reading the odds wrong can make for some exciting possibilities. Ultimately, though, stake 100 bucks on each of those bets and you lose EVEN IF one of them comes in (which, of course, one of them will).