Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Super Bowl Wrap Up
Ths Sports Economist ^ | Sunday, February 07, 2010 | Brad Humphreys

Posted on 02/09/2010 12:36:28 PM PST by 1rudeboy

The Saints beat the Colts 31-17 for their first Super Bowl victory. It was a thrilling win, with the outcome in doubt until Tracy Porters' 74 yard "pick six" with 3:12 left in the game and the Colts driving for the potential tying score.

The other big winner in this game was sports books. Evidence shows that bettors love two things: favorites in point spread betting and the over on total betting. According to sportsbook.com, as of about 4pm Eastern on Sunday the line was the Colts -5 and the over-under was 57. Based on action at off-shore sports books, 63% of the sides betting was on the Colts, and 66% of the totals betting was on the over. The Colts didn't cover, and the 48 point total was well under 57. Given the bet-110-to-win100 payoff structure on sides and totals, and the fact that the Super Bowl is the most popular sporting event to bet on all year, that translates to a big payday for sports books.


TOPICS: Science; Society; Sports
KEYWORDS: colts; nfl; saints
This is an interesting blog to read if you have the day off and there are blizzard conditions outside.
1 posted on 02/09/2010 12:36:28 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
Based on action at off-shore sports books, 63% of the sides betting was on the Colts, and 66% of the totals betting was on the over.

If so, the line and over/under were badly set. They should have been set so that 50% is taking each side. The Colts needed to be a bigger favorite and the over/under needed to be higher.

2 posted on 02/09/2010 12:41:21 PM PST by KarlInOhio (Special SOTU tagline: YOU LIE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot; Mase; expat_panama

Here’s some “stimulus” that worked. Although it’s probably more accurate to call it “anti-stimulus,” as the money appears to be flowing in the wrong direction.


3 posted on 02/09/2010 12:42:39 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy; All

Anybody know what the odds were on a straight-up bet by gametime? Just curious.


4 posted on 02/09/2010 12:43:26 PM PST by Tallguy ("The sh- t's chess, it ain't checkers!" -- Alonzo (Denzel Washington) in "Training Day")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio
If so, the line and over/under were badly set.

Yup.

5 posted on 02/09/2010 12:43:27 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio

But then, not “badly set” if you run a booking operation.


6 posted on 02/09/2010 12:44:13 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio

No one was taking the Colts at a higher spread and most bettors thought that under/over was low.


7 posted on 02/09/2010 12:44:42 PM PST by Ingtar (I closed my eyes, only for a moment, and the moment's gone...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy

Colts -4.5


8 posted on 02/09/2010 12:45:07 PM PST by traderrob6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy
That's an interesting question: I wonder if InTrade has a history-feature, and whether it took bets.

I'd also ask whether the spread in, say, Vegas, was the same as the spread offshore.

9 posted on 02/09/2010 12:46:05 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

The smart bookie just makes his money on the vig and doesn’t rely on his customers being wrong. I had a coworker who put his hometown bookie out of business because he bet big and the bookie wasn’t smart enough to make sure the other side of the bets were covered - he instead just floated everything himself. After a bad football season he decided to get out of the business.


10 posted on 02/09/2010 12:49:35 PM PST by KarlInOhio (Special SOTU tagline: YOU LIE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

Let me see if I understand this correctly.

The ‘gamblers’ won a little, lost a little. Those who ‘owned’ the gambling casinos won big, as they always do.

Is that a sufficient allegory?


11 posted on 02/09/2010 12:54:56 PM PST by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio
If so, the line and over/under were badly set. They should have been set so that 50% is taking each side.

If you can figure the proper over/under to get that 50% result every time, I have a business proposition for you.

12 posted on 02/09/2010 12:57:52 PM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Math is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

Well, The Who really sucked.


13 posted on 02/09/2010 1:02:32 PM PST by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ozzymandus
Well, The Who really sucked.

Considering the fact that it was a free musical performance, I guess people shouldn't complain too much.

14 posted on 02/09/2010 1:39:00 PM PST by Isabel C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy; KarlInOhio; UCANSEE2

.
Two dropped passes and one blown route.

That’s all it took.


15 posted on 02/09/2010 1:45:08 PM PST by Touch Not the Cat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Isabel C.

Yeah, dang that ol’ freedom of speech. People should never complain about anything. Obama said so.


16 posted on 02/09/2010 1:50:16 PM PST by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Touch Not the Cat

If I were a betting man, and prescient, I would have placed bets on the number of penalty calls.

Did anyone else notice that there were very, very few penalties during the game?


17 posted on 02/09/2010 1:53:06 PM PST by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

.
I think the quality of the teams had a lot to do with the low penalty count but then , as John Madden once said: “You have to remember — there are three teams on the field.”


18 posted on 02/09/2010 1:54:53 PM PST by Touch Not the Cat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Touch Not the Cat
I think the quality of the teams had a lot to do with the low penalty count

So do I.

“You have to remember — there are three teams on the field.”

FOUR TEAMS.

Two teams of football players, the referees, and the advertisers.

Since the number of commericials goes up each year, there is less time to spend on 'penalties'.

I actually saw a few penalties that weren't called, but it is just a game.

19 posted on 02/09/2010 2:06:43 PM PST by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ozzymandus
Yeah, dang that ol’ freedom of speech. People should never complain about anything.

If you didn't enjoy The Who's musical performance, then maybe you should ask for your money back. Oh wait....

20 posted on 02/09/2010 9:52:15 PM PST by Isabel C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Isabel C.

They sucked, OK? I never claimed I paid to watch them suck. But they sucked. It was free, but they sucked. Get it?


21 posted on 02/10/2010 1:16:41 PM PST by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson