It is another borderline one, and depends on what you think the 7 is worth. It is worth between 7-9 cents I would figure. So taking the 6.5 for -112 isn't bad if you think it is worth 9. But if you think it is worth the 7, then it is a coin flip.
If you want to use Pinnacle as a benchmark, they typically charge 9-12 cents to buy on and off the 7. So according to them the 6.5 -112 would be the "better" play. But then again they will adjust a penny or two depending on their action, so the margin for error there is also a penny or two.
But overall the 6.5 -112 is probably going to be the better money maker long term.
If you want to use Pinnacle as a benchmark, they typically charge 9-12 cents to buy on and off the 7. So according to them the 6.5 -112 would be the "better" play. But then again they will adjust a penny or two depending on their action, so the margin for error there is also a penny or two.
But overall the 6.5 -112 is probably going to be the better money maker long term.
the reason I changed my mind from 6.5-12 to -7-05 is because if the game falls 7 I dont lose the bet. the more I thought about it its not worth laying the extra 7 cents, simply because you cant lose if it falls 7. I never bet off of a even # if the wiseguys lay 4 on a game I will not lay 4.5. if they lay 3.5 I will lay 4.
Rainbow-
good point, and the argument I always make, and made the other day. That is why it is worth so little in terms of actual expectations. A push does not lose for you, so that in and of itself is generally worth about half of your expectations. At least in terms of BUYING off, that is not the question here. But one thing that has to be thought about.
And again, it inly has relavence when you are paying every game that it applies.
People laugh when I say that. But say there are 100 games where this is available. A guy who bets here and there lays the -6.5 @ -112 on say 20 of those games. BUT he miraculously bet the games where the pushes WERE a factor. So say 7 of those 20 games he bet landed on the 7. There is NO WAY IN HELL you coould convince him that laying that -6.5 wouldn't be worth -130, let alone -112. It is all in the eye of the beholder.
On the flip side a guy might bet here or there and bet 20 games, and NONE of the games he bet landed on the 7. So to him the extra 7 cents was for naught. It didn't matter if he bought down or not. He would have won anyways.
The bottomline is it is basically theortical. The only way you can put ANY KIND of expectations onit is if you look at every single game that it has occurred, and then get a probability. Sometimes we cannot even agree on the number/spread, let alone the results.
So even when it seems easy, it always isn't.
The final point to that which is after the fact and comparing apples to oranges would be to ask...In the AFC championship game is Pitt +10 a good bet? BEFORE the game I would say 99% of EVERYONE would have said yes. But AFTER the game it was not.It may have had 'value' but lost anyways.
Ultimately, ofr a line to have value it has to make a difference after the game is done. Whether it be winner or a non losing proposition.
good point, and the argument I always make, and made the other day. That is why it is worth so little in terms of actual expectations. A push does not lose for you, so that in and of itself is generally worth about half of your expectations. At least in terms of BUYING off, that is not the question here. But one thing that has to be thought about.
And again, it inly has relavence when you are paying every game that it applies.
People laugh when I say that. But say there are 100 games where this is available. A guy who bets here and there lays the -6.5 @ -112 on say 20 of those games. BUT he miraculously bet the games where the pushes WERE a factor. So say 7 of those 20 games he bet landed on the 7. There is NO WAY IN HELL you coould convince him that laying that -6.5 wouldn't be worth -130, let alone -112. It is all in the eye of the beholder.
On the flip side a guy might bet here or there and bet 20 games, and NONE of the games he bet landed on the 7. So to him the extra 7 cents was for naught. It didn't matter if he bought down or not. He would have won anyways.
The bottomline is it is basically theortical. The only way you can put ANY KIND of expectations onit is if you look at every single game that it has occurred, and then get a probability. Sometimes we cannot even agree on the number/spread, let alone the results.
So even when it seems easy, it always isn't.
The final point to that which is after the fact and comparing apples to oranges would be to ask...In the AFC championship game is Pitt +10 a good bet? BEFORE the game I would say 99% of EVERYONE would have said yes. But AFTER the game it was not.It may have had 'value' but lost anyways.
Ultimately, ofr a line to have value it has to make a difference after the game is done. Whether it be winner or a non losing proposition.
Fishhead said:
not enough information.
doesnt it depend on what line you personally set for the game and your historical record of your lines versus the actual line? If you have
the game ranked at -3 and you trust your numbers then none of these are a positive ROI bet and all should be avoided. which is the worst of the worst in that case? Id think - 6 1/2 -112 as that extra juice on a negative ROI would cost you more. If you have this at a -10 line then the - 7 1/2 +105 will make you more long term but it depends on what the distribution of final scores are on games that you rank as -10, not sure anyone really has that information.
you have to calculate your own betting line, check for a overlay and then estimate or calculate how much of the bankroll based on the ROI and probability of winning to use for the wager. compare all three and you get the best answer.
