Hedge or no?
So my question is say you bet an underdog in the NHL. And that on the dog is leading after two periods. You can then bet the team that was the favorite to win the game they would now be the underdog. So in essence you would head your bat and guarantee yourself a win. But I'm just wondering if this is profitable in the long run?
13 Replies
sounds like this is the way your strategy unfolds.
bet a dog.
they're losing.
you lose.
bet a dog.
they're winning.
you bet the other side.
you win a little bit.
seems not profitable.
You lose EV by doing this (unless something has changed and now betting the favourite is +EV). You are paying a premium to lock in the profit, but will profit more in EV by letting it ride.
Hedging depends on the bankroll fraction of your original bet, and the edge you figure on your hedge bet. It also depends on the efficiency of your hedge vs the original bet, e.g. perfect hedge, polish middle, or true middle.
A poster here and I showed using math how to approach this to max out expected growth.
Link to thread: https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/40/sp...
So my question is say you bet an underdog in the NHL. And that on the dog is leading after two periods. You can then bet the team that was the favorite to win the game they would now be the underdog. So in essence you would head your bat and guarantee yourself a win. But I'm just wondering if this i
If the hedge is +EV then yes definitely. Although thats really less of a hedge and more of just a good bet. If its breakeven then maybe, it depends on your bankroll and the size of the bet. If its -EV then youre losing money every time you do it.
There certainly are situations when -EV hedges improve EG.
Treat it as an individual bet. Don't hedge blindly. In most cases hedging is a bad move. The one time that it's a good move is if you have a nice paying future such as 20-1 that's looking good. Then hedging may be the right move.
A common mistake people make is treating a hedge as an individual bet.
Hedging is probably the easiest way to extract the most $ out of betting. The link above explains a straightforward exploit that earns multiples over basic individual betting.
Shopping for the best price and hedge (middles are frequently optimal) is still the best path.
Ive always thought this too and I do do plenty of -EV hedges that I pre-plan. But Ive never been totally clear on the EV/EG of it all. Can you explain?
The basic point of hedging is the opportunity to increase bet sizing while simultaenously reducing risk.
Use tonight's game as an example. Say you find an alt line DAL +3.5 +190 (fair +175), and HOU -7 -110 (fair -108).
If you bet both, you reduce your risk of losing to HOU winning by (4-7). Using a $10k bankroll, you can then bet $1,310 on DAL +3.5 +190, and $1,475 on HOU -7 -110. Your expected growth of the combined bets is 0.67%.
If you treated the bets individually, you would not bet HOU -7 -110 (because it is -EV), and only bet the DAL alt line. In that case you would bet $534, and your expected growth would be 0.27%, or about a third of the combined hedge bets.
The bets are either profitable or unprofitable and should be treated as individual bets. If an inplay bet is plus ev make it if it is minus ev don't make it.
If you want to bet on the underdog to be leading after one period or at half time in other sports or whatever you can just bet on that directly at a lot of books.
Expected growth is the single most important aspect of bankroll management, and ultimately making max $.
The above example should be simple enough for any non-novice sports bettor to conclude that hedging may improve expected growth, and treating bets individually solely on +EV/-EV is grossly inferior (in the above case over 60%) IRT expected growth.
The bets are either profitable or unprofitable and should be treated as individual bets. If an inplay bet is plus ev make it if it is minus ev don't make it.
If you want to bet on the underdog to be leading after one period or at half time in other sports or whatever you can just bet on that directly
Wrong.
Shocker that a known liar could spend over a decade on a sport betting forum fabricating records and still not know the most basic **** about the subject.
The basic point of hedging is the opportunity to increase bet sizing while simultaenously reducing risk.
Use tonight's game as an example. Say you find an alt line DAL +3.5 +190 (fair +175), and HOU -7 -110 (fair -108).
If you bet both, you reduce your risk of losing to HOU winning by (4-7). Using a $
OK this is what I thought and Ive been doing stuff like this since I started betting. The big thing is that the pre planned hedge lets you bet more on the +EV line than you otherwise would have. If your roll justifies a max bet on the +EV line then youd lose by hedging. But for most people, hedging/middling makes sense if it allows you to bet more on the good line. I always understood that but its good to see the percentages of the expected growth.
