Is -2.5 and -3.5 a profitable middle in the NBA?

[PanchoSanza]

I am just taking the difference between the home and road teams juice to make the line perfectly fair for a friendly wager between two guys. Assume that you pinny has a team at -500 and the dog at plus 300. If you and I were at the bar wanting to bet each other on that game we would have to make it a line of -400 to make it fair. Same thing I am doing on the juice for the bucks and bulls at both the 6 1/2 and 7 1/2 lines. That make sense?

-107/-103 is a ten cent line, woudn't it be -105?

Or are you saying they are both 2 cents off -105 so it would be -102/+102?

 

[PanchoSanza]

Just read the whole thread... I only want to mention that since I play a NBA system on this forum for halves/games, I do play with Pinny's drop-down menu to find which half point I feel I want to risk or give, etc.

So yes I do SEE 10 cents extra to lay extra half... in fact, I see one right away (lol, it was even the 1st game I looked at the drop-down menu, ha):

NY Knicks
Ind -6.5 +102

lay extra half -7 +112

is that what some posters are trying to mention?

* CalvinTy

Only example I see where it moves 10 cents, no surprise its off the 6.5 and onto the 7, biggest key # out there.

Probly worth about 10 cents so your not gaining an edge.

 

[royalfan]

There is some confusing in your method of calculating the everage juice. Everage -107 and -103 is -105. No?

No, look at it this way. Bucks are -107 and bulls are -103. As we get closer to the average we do this step by step to get closer to the middle. Bucks -106 and Bulls -102. Bucks -105 Bulls -101, Bucks -104 bulls 100, bucks -103 bulls plus 101 and it ends at bucks -102 being the average. That make sense. Maybe this is what was confusing everyone.

 

[wrongturn]

You are probably wrong. It should go like this, bucks -106 and bulls -104, ...

 

[royalfan]

You are probably wrong. It should go like this, bucks -106 and bulls -104, ...

Nope you will never get to common ground doing it that way. You will be doing that until the end of time and never get an average number. I know I am not wrong about this part.

 

[wrongturn]

Okay, I see. It is not average juice, it is "fair" price.

 

[PanchoSanza]

I understand that going off past charts is one way of doing this to determine profitability. I think that is a pretty good indicator, no question about it. I just think my method is a possible even better way of determining it. So I will try and do this even more clear and detailed this time with a fresh example with up to date lines.

Milwaukee at chicago tonight. Current line is 7 1/2 and at that number Milwaukee is is -107 and Chicago is -103. So if Iceman and I were at the bar enjoying some drinks and wanted to make a fair value wager on the game we would have to assume the fair line to be 7 1/2 with the bucks favored at -102 juice, correct? That seems pretty cut and dry.

So now we take the dropdown to make the line 6 1/2 points instead. At this particular line the Bucks would be +112 and the Bulls -124. So if Iceman and I decided to use the 6 1/2 line instead for our friendly wager the fair line would be -118 juice if we took the bookies out of it.

So here we have two lines that cross over a potential number of 7. This is the one point middle we are talking about the entire thread. I am thinking that since the average juice in the first example(aka the fair juice for me and Icemans friendly wager) is milwaukee at -102 and in the 2nd example it is the bulls -118 on the average juices, which equates to a difference of 20 cents, that this would be an exact break even middle according to pinnacle. Again, anyone, please explain what is flawed here.

Not neccessarily.

The flaw is that they are forcing players to overpay for point buying in most cases and are not compensating enough for point selling.

 

[royalfan]

Not neccessarily.

The flaw is that they are forcing players to overpay for point buying in most cases and are not compensating enough for point selling.

I agree, but the two factors should even themselves out at each particular line on the dropdown should they not?

 

[wrongturn]

I am actually thinking that pinny might be giving a good price for point selling, otherwise they should not price any half points 8c or better.

 

[wrongturn]

The reason that Pinny can do this is that they have -4c juice to begin with and have high volume to compensate.

 

[royalfan]

Not neccessarily.

The flaw is that they are forcing players to overpay for point buying in most cases and are not compensating enough for point selling.

So actually what you are saying is for my system to be accurate, I would have to adjust the pinny dropdowns to make the selling points and buying numbers equal to each other. for example NJ is -2 1/2 over toronto and both juices are -105. If you make NJ -3 it makes the Nets +103 and Toronto -115(pinny charging 10 cents for the half but only giving 8 cents on the sell in this instance) so under my method the average or fair value would be Toronto at -109 juice at the number of -3. You are possibly saying this is skewed because of the fact pinny is charging more juice than they are giving on the buy vs sell? This definately makes sense. So what if I did my own slight adjustment making them the same. So I would take the 2 1/2 -105/-105 to the plus three and adjust them both nice cents(average of what their buy and sell juice was if you recall they were only giving 8 on the seel and charging 10 on the buy so they must think the half is worth about 9 cents true value) which would make the nets +104 and the Raptors =114. Still ends up being the fair price of -109 juice at the dropped down line of -3. So I am not sure it makes any difference, although your argument that it is flawed because of that does make some sense.

 

[royalfan]

What I along with a friend are possibly deducing by all of this, is that due to the fact that my method of doing it is correct, yet charts not showing these situations to be profitable is the possibility that pinnacle is giving too much slightly for selling a half point.

 

[PanchoSanza]

I agree, but the two factors should even themselves out at each particular line on the dropdown should they not?

Not necessarily.

To me it seems they force point buyers to overpay more than they short point sellers, guess its because they know people prefer to buy points as opposed to selling them.

If you look at most of the half point sells, they are in the 8-9 cent range in terms of what they give you.

When you buy halfs, they force you to pay 10-11 cents.

 

[Fishhead]

What I along with a friend are possibly deducing by all of this, is that due to the fact that my method of doing it is correct, yet charts not showing these situations to be profitable is the possibility that pinnacle is giving too much slightly for selling a half point.

BINGO............and their NORMAL lines are not SET IN STONE THEIR "ACTUAL" lines.

 

[PanchoSanza]

What I along with a friend are possibly deducing by all of this, is that due to the fact that my method of doing it is correct, yet charts not showing these situations to be profitable is the possibility that pinnacle is giving too much slightly for selling a half point.

Correct, I wouldnt say they are giving too much, they are giving fair value or very close to it.

 

[wrongturn]

Probably they think most gamblers tend to buy points instead of sell, for whatever the reason.

 

[wilheim]

.........