Vegas' sudden change in Hawks chance to win series

[johnnyde]

For those of you who are familiar with sports betting, in most sport's playoffs you can get a bet that is called a "series price". Basically you pick which team will win that series.

In order to go on, I should explain a money line. It's all based on a bet of $100 and you just do simple math from there if you bet more or less that $100. If you see +(some number), that means that is how much you would win if you bet $100. If you see -(some number), then that is how much you would have to put up to win $100. It's the most basic way to explain it.

The Hawks started out as +700 to win the series with the Bulls. Which means, if you put down $100 then you would win $700. The Bulls were -1200 which means someone would have to put up $1200 just to make $100.

Now, even if you don't understand all that, the thing I just noticed tonight is that the money line for the Hawks shifted to +550. Which is VERY odd. Which now means if I put up $100, I would only make $550 if the Hawks win the series. A lot of things affect the money line and how much it moves. But to go from +700 to +550 means Vegas knows something(these boys do their homework) or there is just wayyyyyyyy too many people putting money on the Hawks(Vegas is all about evening out the odds/money) but I highly doubt that because it would have to be an absurd amount of people leaning heavily on the Hawks winning.

Normally, the line would have shifted from +700 to +550 AFTER game 1 if the Hawks would have won. Since the Hawks increase their chance of winning with each win obviously. But, this just makes no sense. Public perception also influences the money lines but if anything with the news of Hinrich being out the whole series should have shifted the perception even more to Bulls winning, so I would expect the Hawks to be like +800.

OK, maybe I'm looking into things too much and am just bored. But I have been betting on sportsbooks for 15 years and I have never seen a series price shift like this before the games are even played or there was a huge injury.

Thoughts from other "gamblers"?

P.S. Just as I was about to hit submit I checked another sportsbook website and they have competely taken the series price off(the bets aren't even available to bet)...hmmmm....

[Admin]

'm not a betting man and appreciate the lesson above and it is very interesting indeed!! I wonder if this has something to do with Hinrich's injury (doubtful) or maybe the injuries to Rose (ankle and walking boot I believe) and/or Boozer (turf toe and missed Sat practice)? I know some people wouldn't want their team to beat a hobbled team or a team missing it's star(s) but I'm not among them, I'd be happy to beat a Bulls team missing Rose and/or Boozer :good:

[Supporter]

Very interesting indeed, maybe it has to do with the Refs, like with certain refs, the Hawks have more of a chance of winning a game.

[ATLJA316]

Good post,

I'm curious as well...

[BusBoyIsBack]

They fear Teague is about to take over the League

[niremetal]

They had a -1200 on a second-round NBA series?? Dang. Maybe Chicago hired Woody as an assistant yesterday and we just haven't heard yet.

In all seriousness, I would have laid $10 (though not $100...damn government wage freeze) on the Hawks if I had the chance for a $70 payout. I don't think one needs to be homer to realize that the Bulls aren't THAT much of a lock. Upgraded roster or no, this is a team that had won only 1 playoff series in the past 13 years. These are not guys who have "been there" before. The Hawks haven't either, mind you (no, the last two years don't count), but I certainly would not be overconfident heading into this series if I were Thibodeaux. And I definitely wouldn't put down $1200 if I were a Bulls fan.

[johnnyde]

They had a -1200 on a second-round NBA series?? Dang. Maybe Chicago hired Woody as an assistant yesterday and we just haven't heard yet.

In all seriousness, I would have laid $10 (though not $100...damn government wage freeze) on the Hawks if I had the chance for a $70 payout. I don't think one needs to be homer to realize that the Bulls aren't THAT much of a lock. Upgraded roster or no, this is a team that had won only 1 playoff series in the past 13 years. These are not guys who have "been there" before. The Hawks haven't either, mind you (no, the last two years don't count), but I certainly would not be overconfident heading into this series if I were Thibodeaux. And I definitely wouldn't put down $1200 if I were a Bulls fan.

Yeah, I got the Hawks at +400 for the Magic series(put down $100). The way they owned the Magic in the regular series and those odds for that payout was just too good.

I was going to stay away from the +700 in the Bulls series with the Hinrich injury, but if he was not injured then those odds at that payout are just wayyyyyy to good for the same reason you mentioned about Da Bulls having not proven anything yet in the playoffs.

As an aside to my original post, it is normal for money lines to move in increments of 10 (i.e. +700 to +710 to +720, etc.) before games (or series) as Vegas balances out the money but to move an increment of 150 is straight crazy or like I said before, Vegas knows something.

[BrazilianHawk]

Very interesting overview of how Vegas works when it comes to sports betting. A really good reading, I always wanted to know some about that. :ok:

[ATLJA316]

Does anyone have any preferences for betting sites?

[johnnyde]

Wow, I was not expecting this. I went to bet on the spread for Game 2 and take the Hawks cause they were getting +8.5 points. After you make a bet the "Quick Tips" comes up showing you trends in betting on the game you are betting on so they can entice to you to make more bets.

Lo and behold, 86% of people are taking the Hawks to win STRAIGHT UP!???! Nevermind the point spread....STRAIGHT UP!!! Again, another one of these situations that is almost never heard of when an underdog of 8.5 points is overwhelmingly being chosen to win STRAIGHT UP!!

And it's not like it's from a small sample size. This line has been out for over 24 hours now.

Anyway, thought I'd share. Hawk's getting respect in Vegas.

[jhay610]

Wow, I was not expecting this. I went to bet on the spread for Game 2 and take the Hawks cause they were getting +8.5 points. After you make a bet the "Quick Tips" comes up showing you trends in betting on the game you are betting on so they can entice to you to make more bets.

Lo and behold, 86% of people are taking the Hawks to win STRAIGHT UP!???! Nevermind the point spread....STRAIGHT UP!!! Again, another one of these situations that is almost never heard of when an underdog of 8.5 points is overwhelmingly being chosen to win STRAIGHT UP!!

And it's not like it's from a small sample size. This line has been out for over 24 hours now.

Anyway, thought I'd share. Hawk's getting respect in Vegas.

Wow! I'm assuming Michael Wilbon is not among that 86% (or IS he?)

Thanks for sharing johnny.

[hawkshomer]

Yeah this stuff is very interesting. As the Vegas guys usually have this stuff figured out.

[foeteen14]

Does anyone have any preferences for betting sites?

betus.com

very good site

[Guest]

Wow, I was not expecting this. I went to bet on the spread for Game 2 and take the Hawks cause they were getting +8.5 points. After you make a bet the "Quick Tips" comes up showing you trends in betting on the game you are betting on so they can entice to you to make more bets.

Lo and behold, 86% of people are taking the Hawks to win STRAIGHT UP!???! Nevermind the point spread....STRAIGHT UP!!! Again, another one of these situations that is almost never heard of when an underdog of 8.5 points is overwhelmingly being chosen to win STRAIGHT UP!!

Eh, knowing the Hawks I think I would stay away from the spread no matter what. If you look at the average margin for games throughout the year (not of victory, think of it as absolute value) then I would assume the Hawks have the highest variance in that statistic out of all the teams. They are just so erratic it makes the points you get irrelevant when adjusting for money payout. I think this is just bettors doing their homework, its not usually the odds makers that are that smart it is that they are better at interpreting information about the betting patterns than most.

Anyway, great post! I wish I had seen this earlier, betting is not an activity of mine but I always enjoy that statistical side of betting. I guess I am just too risk-averse to go off betting on sports but nerdy enough to talk about it.