Week 1 Best Bets Recap

One thing you gotta know about me is I love betting the underdogs. The bigger dog you are the more I love you. With that said, my bets on the big dogs – Utah State, UTEP and UMass went 1 Push (UTEP) and 2 losses. However, I did get the best numbers in 2 of the 3 games. So that’s a win on Closing Line Value. Anyway, if you are following these picks, you should be a little wary when I am taking a big number.

My middle was stupid. But I did it to bring up a particularly important subject. This is the subject of the implied efficiency of the betting markets.

You have probably heard that. If not, you will. The egghead mathematics handicappers all love talking about it. We are told the oddsmakers set efficient lines. Which suggests their opinion is efficient. That the efficiency of the betting markets, let’s say a betting line of -3.0 / +3.0 has no value for the bettor. In some cases, this is true. In most cases it is not. It is true if the final score ends with the favorite winning by exactly three points. It is false when the final score is not right on the number. It doesn’t matter if it is off by 1 point or 50 points. Efficient betting markets are a complete fallacy. After all, that is why we make bets. We evaluate the line and find value betting the favorite or the dog, or we don’t bet it at all.

I told you all that so I can tell you this – the efficiency of the betting market was not at all evident in the Georgia Bulldogs mauling of the Oregon Ducks. Final score 49-3. The closing line was around 17 points, depending on the oddsmaker. The ESBN supercomputers have crunched the numbers and found that the line was off by 46 points. Not 17. An efficient line would have been UGA -46.0.

See what I mean? I would be a hero if I hit that middle. But winning one side and losing the other allowed me to introduce this topic. There are two takeaways here, both particularly important:

1. Efficiency of the betting market is an absolute fallacy.
2. Middles are difficult to hit (so probably should not try to middle a game).

The rest of the results are mostly explained by looking at the Box Scores of the individual games. For instance, consider Georgia State Panthers and South Carolina Gamecocks, final score Cocks 35 Panthers 14. We bet Panthers +13.5. This number turned out to be the best number, so we get the participation ribbon on Closing Line Value. But we lost our bet.

The thesis was (still is) we were fading Cocks QB Spencer Rattler. So, why did we lose? Rattler threw 2 INTs and finished with a QBR of 28.6 (awful). But the Panthers gave up 2 TDs on punt returns. Special teams may be a problem for the Panthers going forward. That was the difference in this contest.

We did get lucky with our Penn State and Pittsburgh bets. Over time, we will lose as many as we win with these kinds of games.

Alright, go back to what you were doing…

Peace Out