 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Other Stuff » Sports Talk » (lets try this again) Football
Jughead
January 05, 2010 at 05:10PM View BBCode
If you can get better than 25:1, I'd bet on them to win it all. Hell, if anyone here wants to offer me 30:1, I'll take the Jets.
FuriousGiorge
January 05, 2010 at 05:11PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
What like real money? I'd give you 30:1 on the dogshit Jets. Let's make the stakes 1 million dollars. I will give you 30 million dollars if the Jets win the Super Bowl.
tworoosters
Super Bowl XLIV Futures Odds
(Money odds on a $100 bet)
Indianapolis Colts +$250
San Diego Chargers +$350
New Orleans Saints +$400
Minnesota Vikings +$600
Dallas Cowboys +$1,200
New England Patriots +$1,200
Philadelphia Eagles +$2,000
Green Bay Packers +$2,200
Arizona Cardinals +$2,500
Baltimore Ravens +$2,500
Cincinnati Bengals +$4,000
New York Jets +$5,000
[Edited on 1-5-2010 by tworoosters]
January 05, 2010 at 05:26PM View BBCode
Here are the current money lines for the Super Bowl:Super Bowl XLIV Futures Odds
(Money odds on a $100 bet)
Indianapolis Colts +$250
San Diego Chargers +$350
New Orleans Saints +$400
Minnesota Vikings +$600
Dallas Cowboys +$1,200
New England Patriots +$1,200
Philadelphia Eagles +$2,000
Green Bay Packers +$2,200
Arizona Cardinals +$2,500
Baltimore Ravens +$2,500
Cincinnati Bengals +$4,000
New York Jets +$5,000
[Edited on 1-5-2010 by tworoosters]
happy
I should go put money on the eagles. :P
January 05, 2010 at 05:28PM View BBCode
so...there you go Jughead. 50:1 odds.I should go put money on the eagles. :P
Jughead
OK FG, if you want, I will give you $5 when the Jets get eliminated from the 2010 postseason, and you can give me $150 when the Jets win the 2010 Super Bowl.
January 05, 2010 at 05:38PM View BBCode
Wow, I wish I could get those odds at a real book. They add up to 121.3% by my account.OK FG, if you want, I will give you $5 when the Jets get eliminated from the 2010 postseason, and you can give me $150 when the Jets win the 2010 Super Bowl.
FuriousGiorge
January 05, 2010 at 05:40PM View BBCode
This doesn't seem legal but yes, of course I'd take that bet.
happy
January 05, 2010 at 05:43PM View BBCode
that is a real book, and your odds calculation is wrong.
Jughead
January 05, 2010 at 05:57PM View BBCode
You do like the math. So show me what the house edge is, assuming the odds are proportionally accurate. (That is, a team that was 2:1 had a 1/3 chance of winning etc.)
happy
Or to explain it in a more straightforward way...
The max payout is 5,100, so that means that basically you need to be able to make under 5,100 dollars worth of bets and receive a payout of 5,100 dollars no matter who wins.
so for the jets you would only need to put in 100 dollars.
for the colts you would need to put in (5100/350 * 100) = $1457.14 +100 = 1557.14 (this number is just the running total amount of money you have bet)
chargers: (5100/450 *100)= 1133.33 +1557.14 = 2690.47
saints (5100/500 *100) = 1020 + 2690.47 = 3710.47
Vikings (5100/700 * 100) = 728.57 + 3710.47 = 4439.04
cowboys (5100/1300 *100) = 392.31 + 4439.04 = 4831.51
patriots (5100/1300 * 100) = 392.31 + 4831.51 = 5223.66
Eagles (5100/2100 * 100) = (ok, im done, cuz I already proved it. you bet 5223.66 and your maximum winnings is 5100, and if any of the 5 remaining teams win, you get nothing. but either way you lose and the house wins.)
Packers (5100/2300 * 100)=
Cardinals (5100/2600 * 100)=
Ravens (5100/2600 * 100)=
Bengals (5100/4100 * 100)=
January 05, 2010 at 06:43PM View BBCode
I assume you added the odds up (like 2:1 = 1/3rd etc). When 100% of the teams add up to 121%, that means that 100% of the teams would have to win 121% of the time in order for you to recover your money. which is impossible. which means that the house has a 21% advantage.Or to explain it in a more straightforward way...
The max payout is 5,100, so that means that basically you need to be able to make under 5,100 dollars worth of bets and receive a payout of 5,100 dollars no matter who wins.
so for the jets you would only need to put in 100 dollars.
for the colts you would need to put in (5100/350 * 100) = $1457.14 +100 = 1557.14 (this number is just the running total amount of money you have bet)
chargers: (5100/450 *100)= 1133.33 +1557.14 = 2690.47
saints (5100/500 *100) = 1020 + 2690.47 = 3710.47
Vikings (5100/700 * 100) = 728.57 + 3710.47 = 4439.04
cowboys (5100/1300 *100) = 392.31 + 4439.04 = 4831.51
patriots (5100/1300 * 100) = 392.31 + 4831.51 = 5223.66
Eagles (5100/2100 * 100) = (ok, im done, cuz I already proved it. you bet 5223.66 and your maximum winnings is 5100, and if any of the 5 remaining teams win, you get nothing. but either way you lose and the house wins.)
Packers (5100/2300 * 100)=
Cardinals (5100/2600 * 100)=
Ravens (5100/2600 * 100)=
Bengals (5100/4100 * 100)=
Jughead
January 05, 2010 at 06:54PM View BBCode
Yeah, I screwed something up. This is why I don't bet futures. I hesitate to ask what kind of classes that puts me in.
dirtdevil
[Edited on 1-5-2010 by dirtdevil]
January 05, 2010 at 09:57PM View BBCode
hey, if rain man and the guy from the hangover can count cards, why can't happy be able to calculate the odds?[Edited on 1-5-2010 by dirtdevil]
thatrogue
However, this guy is now available:
[Edited on 1-8-2010 by thatrogue]
January 08, 2010 at 06:50PM View BBCode
However, this guy is now available:
[Edited on 1-8-2010 by thatrogue]
dirtdevil
January 08, 2010 at 08:38PM View BBCode
too bad. if they'd done that a couple of days earlier, they could have had charlie weiss.
thatrogue
January 08, 2010 at 08:44PM View BBCode
Odd that they were considering these moves (firing the GM and Head Coach) and did not reach out to Holmgren when he was mulling over the Cleveland opportunity. Maybe Benne and Tyler have some insight as to why they didn't go in that direction.
dirtdevil
January 08, 2010 at 08:49PM View BBCode
you really think so? i'd have thought it incredibly odd if they'd asked him back.
Tyles
The fact is, Holmgren was contacted about the GM job (well, team president, actually), and [url=http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/seahawks/2010551327_holmgren20.html]declined our offer[/url]. I have some qualms about dismissing Mora, especially since his rumored successor is Pete fucking Carroll, but whatever. The Seahawks devolved into a complete abortion on Ruskell's watch, and Mora is the collateral damage.
(Zorn was a superb assistant in Seattle. I'd gladly take him back ... as quarterbacks coach.)
January 08, 2010 at 09:01PM View BBCode
Originally posted by thatrogue
Odd that they were considering these moves (firing the GM and Head Coach) and did not reach out to Holmgren when he was mulling over the Cleveland opportunity. Maybe Benne and Tyler have some insight as to why they didn't go in that direction.
The fact is, Holmgren was contacted about the GM job (well, team president, actually), and [url=http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/seahawks/2010551327_holmgren20.html]declined our offer[/url]. I have some qualms about dismissing Mora, especially since his rumored successor is Pete fucking Carroll, but whatever. The Seahawks devolved into a complete abortion on Ruskell's watch, and Mora is the collateral damage.
(Zorn was a superb assistant in Seattle. I'd gladly take him back ... as quarterbacks coach.)
tm4559
(also, they forced almost an entire coaching staff on him. and washington is a bad place for any coach, and especially a newly minted head coach.)
((holmgren is an awesome footballs guy, and doesn't have anymore to prove. true......story.))
January 08, 2010 at 09:07PM View BBCode
zorn had the bad luck, really, to get kind of forced into the washington job. wasn't the plan in the beginning that he was going to be the offensive coordinator?(also, they forced almost an entire coaching staff on him. and washington is a bad place for any coach, and especially a newly minted head coach.)
((holmgren is an awesome footballs guy, and doesn't have anymore to prove. true......story.))
tworoosters
He'll have to console himself with the $11 million he'll get over the next three years for not coaching the Seahawks.
As for Pete Carroll, well he didn't really suck in New England but he didn't really do much either.
January 08, 2010 at 09:13PM View BBCode
Tough to blame Mora considering all the injuries but the Hawks had high expectations coming into the year and they did look awful down the stretch.He'll have to console himself with the $11 million he'll get over the next three years for not coaching the Seahawks.
As for Pete Carroll, well he didn't really suck in New England but he didn't really do much either.
FuriousGiorge
January 08, 2010 at 09:19PM View BBCode
The Seahawks had high expectations, really? Even I jumped off their bandwagon this year.
Tyles
We added T.J. Houshmandzadeh to a 4-12 team. But we haven't drafted an offensive lineman since the Taft Administration. We're going to the Super Bowl!
January 08, 2010 at 09:30PM View BBCode
Presenting the "High Expectations Seahawks Story":We added T.J. Houshmandzadeh to a 4-12 team. But we haven't drafted an offensive lineman since the Taft Administration. We're going to the Super Bowl!
tm4559
January 08, 2010 at 09:34PM View BBCode
well, christ. i didn't even know TJ was on the team. give roosters a cookie, that thing couldn't miss.
albiez
January 08, 2010 at 10:09PM View BBCode
I find it pretty easy to blame Mora, given that he'd already established himself as a very bad coach. That he was brought in a couple years ago to be Holmgren's successor was straight up lolwalrus. And that he then re-hired Greg Knapp as his offensive coordinator. I'm kind of shocked that there was anyone who didn't see this turning into a flaming wreck, honestly. Let's import that great Falcons coaching braintrust that forced Mike Vick to run the West Coast offense, those guys know what's up.