question fezz

question fezz I have jets 20-1 to win superbowl....played before playoffs If one was to hedge....how much in your opinion thanx
I'll start off. The rule on hedging is you don't do it if you don't have a bankroll-liquidity concern. Same can go for utility, where, perhaps, you don't need the money, but you'd just feel so much better cashing something at this point (I don't like this, but it can be real). Think about it -- you may or may not have had an edge with your intitial bet when it was made, but you absolutely have one now, and being in positive EV situations is what you're trying to accomplish. From a strict mathematical perspective, taking any negative-expectation play, even with hedging in mind, is not optimal. However, if you find a play that's also positive and happens to hedge the future (say the experts on this board really like the Colts ML), then you're getting it all. This was one of the most valuable gambling concepts drummed into me at the start of my career. I'll leave it to the guys who might be able to find you that positive hedge to take it from here.
thanx anthony
Bet Colts 1q-200, to win your intial risk amount Re evaluate after the end of the 1Q. Jets slow start in SD might be duplicated here.....no 1ds until well into the 2nd quarter.

I see....looks like another low scoring matchup thanx fezz
Of course the best advice would be to not place crappy futures bets in the first place. You can get 10 to 1 on the Jets to win the SB right now. Think about it.
they were the best odds on the jets at the time a week before the playoffs. note the jets are 7-1 or about 8-1.... I do not think you can find 10-1 now
Well they are +950 at Matchbook and I didn't shop around. You got 21 for 1 and you can now get 10.5 for 1. 21/10.5 = 2. Do you think they had a 50% chance of getting by the Bengals and the Chargers?
Or, given the result, maybe betting the Jets was a decent play. Kind of like making the "bad" play in a poker game or tournament. You get yelled at, but it's "hey man, I'm gonna enjoy your money." I'm defending here because the merit of the original bet is not particularly relevant to the question at hand.
Given the result, he should have bet +140 vs. CIN and then taken all money risked and won on that game and bet it on +400 vs. SD. Bonus being that he wouldn't have to worry about hedging with possibly -EV stuff now. I think it's relevant because it shows how often times there are better ways to bet than via futures, especially on big dogs. PS I'm sure a lot of people will read this and just think I'm just an asshole, but I am trying to help.