question fezz

Yes, basic strategy AVOID futures, bet MLines 1 after another I think last year MSU was 40-1, lost in the finals. You would have gotten 130-1 with the 6 teamer........

question and what if the team would become a favorite later week ..like in baseball.. game one ML bet...game two ML bet... now game three...I am a favorite...do I do the ML here also?

[QUOTE=Rumpelstiltskin;15516]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.[/QUOTE] Is it possible to be an asshole and try to help? Just kidding! Very good stuff. Appreciate the advice.

[QUOTE=anthony;15511]I'm defending here because the merit of the original bet is not particularly relevant.[/QUOTE] I disagree. If you don't understand how to compare the cost of different alternatives then you can't appreciate the issues involved in hedging. Here is the type of calculation the OP needs to understand. Bet 91% moneyline on the Colts at -340 and bet the remaining 9% on a moneyline parlay of the Colts -340 with the Vikings -190. Then bet the Colts in their subsequent game. This strategy pays +111 if the Colts beat the Saints at -125 or beat the Vikings at -180.

Not arguing that there weren't better routes originally, but the discussion originated with a question about how to proceed from the current position. What you did to get here has no bearing on what you should do from this point.

[QUOTE=KimLee;15554]I disagree. If you don't understand how to compare the cost of different alternatives then you can't appreciate the issues involved in hedging. Here is the type of calculation the OP needs to understand. Bet 91% moneyline on the Colts at -340 and bet the remaining 9% on a moneyline parlay of the Colts -340 with the Vikings -190. Then bet the Colts in their subsequent game. This strategy pays +111 if the Colts beat the Saints at -125 or beat the Vikings at -180.[/QUOTE] Very interesting analysis. Excuse my ignorance, but what is OP? Thanks.

Original poster, i.e., the person who started the thread.

Thanks, Joel! [QUOTE=joelshitshow;15557]Original poster, i.e., the person who started the thread.[/QUOTE] I appreciate your quick response.

[QUOTE=anthony;15511]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.[/QUOTE] Huh? The worse the initial bet, the tougher it is to hedge. The more accurate poker analogy would be "2-5 NLHE, I limp with T9o UTG, everyone folds, button makes it 25 total, blinds fold, I call. Flop comes 933. Now what do I do?" The correct answer is "Don't limp and call raises with shitty hands in bad position." I always hear these questions called "I stuck my hand in a blender, what should I do?" "Don't stick your hand in the blender in the first place." It doesn't bode well for this board IMO when moderators are posting such results oriented advice.

But there is no debate whether the original bet was bad. This type of situation is addressed often in the Harrington books, in which the sample scenarios involve bad preflop play, but what do you do now that the flop has hit you? Rubbing his nose in it is only going to make you feel better and adds nothing to the thread. He knows what he did. The goal now is to take his limping horse to the finish line, or some other mixed metaphor.