A Bettor World

Intrade has the following message on their homepage:

“We understand yesterday’s announcement was met with surprise and disappointment by our US customers, but this in no way signals the end of Intrade in the US. In the near future we’ll announce plans for a new exchange model that will allow legal participation from all jurisdictions – including the US.  We believe this new model will further enhance Intrade’s position as the leading prediction market platform for real time probabilities about future events.

For our non-US customers, we will continue to offer real-money prediction markets. In the coming weeks and months we plan to implement a number of improvements to the Intrade website. These include expanding our market categories, adding more convenient funding options and a new and improved trading interface. We’ll keep you posted on these initiatives as they develop.”

It will be interesting to see how their new exchange model is structured, especially if it enables legal participation from all jurisdictions.  It will also be interesting to see what new categories they create.

However, even if Intrade creates an innovation that truly provides legal participation from all jurisdiction’s, it will not surprise me if continuous efforts are made to limit their business operations in the U.S.  It would be nice if proactive efforts leading to legalizing and regulating all types of betting exchanges would take place in this country rather than continuing with the failed whack-a-mole strategy that continues with all types of internet wagering.  Unfortunately, the big money special interests have better access to D.C.than the common citizen.

In the “Land of the Free” we continue to move away from freedom and personal responsibility in order to protect big money special interests.

On Monday the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) sued offshore prediction market operator Intrade, prompting it to close its doors to U.S. customers. This will likely kill Intrade in its current form. Non-U.S. customers appear sufficient to support contracts only on major political events, at least based on the modest offerings at Betfair (an exchange that does not accept Americans) and offshore bookmakers. We will likely lose real-money prediction markets on the wider range of subjects that Intrade offered (“Will the U.S. go to war with Iraq?”; “Will we find WMD in Iraq?”; “Will the deficit decline if Obama is elected?”). We will also lose a good platform for the development of new, even more interesting contracts.

Why did Intrade not operate onshore? The CFTC would not let it, or anything like it. While Monday’s complaint referenced only Intrade’s contracts on commodity prices and economic numbers, in April the CFTC rejected an application by another, unrelated firm, the North American Derivatives Exchange (NADEX), to operate onshore markets related to the 2012 elections.

read more

Tennessee scored ten ppoints in the final four and a half minutes to turn a Pittsburgh cover into a straight up win for the Titans.

After Tennessee took an early 3-0 lead, Pittsburgh slowly started to take control until Tennessee blocked a point, setting up a touchdown and providing momentum allowing the Titans to score 13 straight points.

With Pittsburgh set to take the ball to start the second half, it provided the first opportunity to back Pittsburgh since their first drive of the game.  This position paid off as Pittsburgh countered the Titans swing by scoring their own 13 unanswered points.

In real time, it was not highly advisable to take a large position on the Titans scoring on the Steelers defense.  However, if one did have any risk on a Steelers position, it was advisable to take off that risk and let the remaining Steelers position ride.

Unfortunately, we had a repeat of Monday night with the riskless position on the favorite coming up empty.  However, like Monday, tis position still left one no worse off than they were before the game.

As a side note, I have to wonder who set the dates for tonight’s debate and the final presidential debate that will go head to head with the Lions-Bears game on Monday Night football?  Since I have multiple tvs in my football room, I was able to listen to the debate as I watched the games.  However, you have to wonder how many viewers were lost for this important discussion on America’s future because of a ridiculous debate schedule that also conflicted with a playoff baseball game.

Although on-line gambling was obviously not discussed during the debate, there was an exchange that indirectly focused on the underlying issue.  During a discussion on abortion, Congressman Ryan (who often preaches freedom and personal responsibility) advocated that he would support legislating his religious beliefs onto others.

Set your political leanings aside, if you support legalizing, regulating and taxing on-line gaming, you can not support Republicans on the issue of legislating your personal religious beliefs onto hundreds of millions of persons who do not share in their religious beliefs.

Go ahead and believe what you wish to believe, but spare me the speeches on freedom and personal responsibility while supporting the failing and naive position of prohibition.

The call at the end of the game that was ruled a reception by the Seahawks’ Golden Tate rather than a Packers interception resulted in an estimated money swing, according to one sports book, of as much as $200 million to $250 million worldwide, espn.com reported.

It will never cease to amaze me how many gamblers playing with real sums of money fail to utilize betting exchanges and/or other live betting options.

I tend to repeat myself on a few betting fundamentals for a good reason, it is difficult to win in the long run when you take one step forward and 1.1 steps backward.  If your wager is not in hand late in the game and you can be beaten by one play, hedge some of your risk.

If your wager falls behind early, first reduce your risk and then use longer odds to re-renter if you desire to stay with your original position.

By no means am I saying you should hedge every bet, you don’t want to give away money either.  But last night a Packer backer could have taken a third of their projected winnings and created a situation where they would win regardless of the outcome while retaining two-thirds of their Packers winnings.

Many will argue that hedging is simply donating wins.  But my math tells me if the Packers backers win 100% of their next game while a simple trader makes just 67% of their next game, the old-fashioned gambler will be 0.1 units behind while a trader will be 0.5 unit ahead.

Take it one more game forward and the gambler will wither be 0.9 units ahead or 1.2 behind.  The sports trader will have a good chance being more than 2 units ahead while being ahead of the game even with a (smaller) loss.

Gamblers live for the big wins and resent the bad beats.  Traders keep moving forward with smaller steps, but tend to greatly outpace gamblers by taking many more forward steps while the steps back are much smaller

I doubt the NFL will ever reverse the outcome of a game as it is called on the field.  However, if there ever was a case for a team to place a successful appeal, it would certainly apply to tonight’s game.

This is coming from a Bears fan: the Packers were seriously jobbed tonight.  It was clear on replay that Seattle wr Tate’s arms came in to the ball well after the pass was intercepted, much less be anything close to a simultaneous catch.

Trading-wise, with the Packers trailing most of the game, there was ample opportunity to take the Packers at long odds.  After the Packers took a five-point lead, there was ample opportunity to green up, making the outcome indifferent to traders, unless they were leaning their green toward the Packers.

I have not commented on the refs this season because it really is not the refs fault that they are out there.  They did not create this situation and I believe they are doing the best they can given the little prep time they had to jump so far up in class. (I have also been amused by announcers talking down the refs and then making their own mistakes interpreting the rules!)

Hopefully this game, last Monday’s fiasco (and most other NFL games this season) the certain outrage that is to come will motivate the NFL to give in a little and allow the regular refs to make their own bad calls.

cartoon by Jeff Larson

Fox’s addition of Mike Pereira as a special rules analyst for the past two seasons has been one of the greatest telecast innovations in recent years.

Mr. Pereira is highly knowledgable of both college and pro football rules.  He is also entertaining despite his straight forward analysis and has an ability to educate fans of the rules without being condescending.

I don’t recall him being incorrect three times in the past two seasons, thus it was both surprising and a bit amusing to see Mr. Pereira make three incorrect statements during one analysis!

With 30 seconds remaining in the first half of the Arkansas-Kansas State game, a Wildcat run by Collin Klein that was initially judged a first down went under review as it appeared to be short of the line to gain for a first down.  During the analysis, Mr. Pereira stated the ball should be spotted at the 3.5 yard line (it was spotted at the 3), he said it would be fourth down (it would be third down) and that Kansas State would have to hurry because the clock would start on the ref’s signal (Arkansas had called timeout.)

We should forgive Mr. Pereira because it was an unusual event and he adds color to the broadcasts.

The same can not be said for ESPN’s attempt to imitate Fox’s rules analyst, though.  ESPN’s rules analyst is knowledgeable, but he does not share much of his rules knowledge with viewers, adds very little to the analysis that fans do not already know, is incredibly monotone, and often is unable to beat the field refs in making the call!  ESPN, which usually outdoes everyone else (except for NBC’s Sunday Night Football) has certainly flopped with their rules analyst.  They should continue to do the analysis, but should bring in someone with more charisma, although it will be difficult to top Mike Pereira.

As for the game, it was nice to see two teams make tackles and play pretty solid defense.

Arkansas (-9.5) took a unuasual 10-0 lead in the second quarter without making a single first down as they made a field goal off of a fumble recovery on a sack and took a punt return to the house.

The Razorbacks then extended their lead to 19-0 before Kansas State returned a blocked extra point for two points.

At this point there were undoubtedly persons looking to back Arkansas as a likely cover despite the short odds of nearly 5 to 1. This was ill-advised, not only because Kansas State has shown an ability to fight back all season, but because they had an opportunity to bookend the halves.

Despite struggling to move the ball the entire first half, Kansas State did indeed manage to bookend the half with two touchdowns to cut the lead to 3 points.

After exchanging punts following Arkansas’ change of mind in attempting to convert a fourth down, Arkansas moved back over the spread with a touchdown.

Kansas State then made Arkansas backers who failed to reduce any risk to sweat out the final quarter as they twice entered Arkansas territory with a chance to cover.

Unfortunately for Wildcat backers, the Cats missed a 42 yard field goal attempt which would have put them back within the numbers on their first march.  The Wildcats then made another promising drive, following a Razorback field goal, but Arkansas put the game away with back to back sacks and an interception.

This game was yet another example of the dangers of backing teams at very short odds, especially early in the game.  It also demonstrated the quick profits that can be made by taking the long side of the odds when a single play can put the spread back into contention, especially when there is plenty of time remaining.  Remember, in trading you don’t need to win the final outcome to come out green.

Every year at this time, several pompous sports reporters will spout about there being too many bowl games.

If there are too many  bowl games, then why weren’t there any football games to watch tonight?  A rematch of Eastern Michigan and Ball State, who played an exciting 33 to 31 game that ended on a 44-yard field goal with 9 seconds remaining, would likely have drawn better ratings than many of the shows on tonight’s television lineup.

A real fan of the sport would never complain about having an opportunity to watch an additional game.  If you don’t want to watch the game, then don’t watch.  Go have an exciting night out at Applebee’s, watching a two-star movie at the local cineplex, or sipping hot cocoa while reminiscing about your favorite Christmas moment being the time you went caroling at the old-folks home, or whatever it is you choose to do with your time.  Just please don’t be so arrogant as to campaign for fewer bowl games just because you wish to rain down on someone else’s parade.

I rather enjoyed watching UL-Lafayette play San Diego State.  It likely will end up being one of the most exciting bowl finishes this season.  The Ohio- Utah State game will also likely go down as one of the most exciting finishes in the post-season.

Fortunately, I don’t believe true football fans have much to worry about. The tv executives understand people want more football, not less.

Can there be a more fitting ending to the baseball season than the Tampa Rays coming from behind to win after trailing 7-0 while the Boston Red Sox and Atlanta Braves blew ninth inning leads to find themselves home for October?

For those who do not follow baseball, Boston led Tampa by 9 games and Atlanta led St Louis by 8.5 games late in the season, only to be part of epic collapses.  Both wild card races came into the night tied, thus it was incredibly ironic for both Boston and Atlanta to blow big leads in the standings and then blow leads in their final game.

I actually had incredible timing in seeing the Rays win.  I took a break from evaluating this weekend’s football matchups and was checking the baseball box scores to check on my fantasy baseball players for the final time and saw the Rays were tied up in extra innings.  I turned on my tv moments before Longoria hit the game-winning home run.

Speaking of collapses, two weeks ago it was looking like I would win all my fantasy baseball leagues only to have one of my teams blow a big lead much like the Red Sox and finish in second place.

In the last four years I have been in 42 fantasy baseball leagues competing against very good fantasy players from across North America and I have finished first or second in 40 out of 42 leagues (28 championships, 12 seconds, 1 third, and one embarrassing fourth place finish.)   It is a fun hobby and pays for summer vacations with this year’s winnings going toward a trip to Germany.

In case you are wondering, I do NOT play fantasy football, even though football is my favorite sport.  The primary reason is it interferes with handicapping games, which is very time-consuming.  Secondly, fantasy football involves more luck than skill whereas fantasy baseball is much like poker, there is certainly an element of luck, but skill is a larger element in overall success. (You don’t finish 1st/2nd in 40 out of 42 competitive leagues through pure luck!)

One interesting thing about the ”land of the free” is they allow risking money to make money in fantasy sports because it is deemed to be a game of skill, yet most of the states are not permitted to offer sports betting or trading (Nevada, Delaware, Oregon, and Montana being the exceptions) even though trading on a betting exchange involves a much higher degree of skill than fantasy sports.  Of course this hypocritical position has not stopped sports betting as some people estimate hundred of billions of dollars are wagered on sports every year in Vegas, with local bookies, and through dozens of on-line operators.

Most ironic, is that it is largely conservatives who preach freedom, less government intrusion, and personal responsibility who have fought against legalizing on-line poker and sports betting.  While their reasons can vary from legislating their religious beliefs onto others to other legitimate concerns (that can be better addressed through legalization and regulation), it likely has more to do with protecting other gambling monopolies like state lotteries and horse racing.  As far as I am concerned, these politicians need to go hug a unicorn.

The next time you hear a gambling cynic boast in a condescending voice “The House Always Wins,” you might want to ask them how the house made out on Saturday’s USC-Utah match.

With the 8.5-point favorite USC Trojans leading 17 to 14 and Utah lining up for a last second, 41-yard field goal attempt, it was looking good for Utah backers who took the points.  If Utah made the kick, the winner in overtime likely would not win by more than 8 points while a missed field goal would still provide an ATS win.  Of course, the kick could be blocked and returned for a touchdown, but how often does that happen on the last play of the game?

Then it happened. USC blocked the kick and returns it for a 9 point, spread covering victory!

But wait! Several joyous players on USC’s sideline ran onto the field during the play prompting the refs to throw their yellow hankies and take away the Trojan’s six points along with the USC backers rent payments, grocery money, and some unfortunate child’s college savings fund  (we all know gamblers never wager with discretionary income!)

So was I too early in proclaiming Hawai’i's stunning ATS loss on a blocked extra point that was returned by Washington for a spread winning two-point defensive conversion as the ‘point spread play of the day’?

My call was probably a bit premature considering…… BOTH USC AND UTAH backers may have shared the most prodigious point spread victory of the CENTURY!

“How is that?” you ask.  Well, two hours after the game, the Pac 12 Conference office declared that the final USC touchdown would count, making the final score 23-14, giving USC backers the ATS victory!  (Meanwhile, many Utah backers who had collected their winnings were already on their way back to Salt Lake City so they could attend Sunday morning services.)

“It’s unfortunate for the bettors and it’s unfortunate for us,” said Jay Kornegay of the Las Vegas Hilton . “We’re the ones that are paying it out both sides.” (Source of quote: ESPN.com)

BREAKING NEWS: In an attempt to lure Oklahoma into the Twelve-Pac Conference, Larry Scott has overturned an obivous officiating mistake from 2006, giving the Sooners their rightful 33 to 27 victory over the Oregon Ducks!!

Sebastian Janikowski tied the NFL record for the longest field goal with his successful 63-yard kick aginst Denver tonight.

Known for his booming kicks, it was not a huge surprise that the native of Poland was able to tie the record. Janikowski has been booming kickoffs through the endzone in the thin Denver air all night and kicked a 70 yard field goal in pregame, so when the holder spotted the ball at their own 47 yard line, it was really only a question of whether he could hit the ball straight and true.

Janikowski joins Bronco Kicker Jason Elam (who also made his field goal in Denver in 1998) and Detroit Lion Tom Dempsey who made a game winning field goal on Thanksgiving Day in 1970.

Dempsey broke Bert Rechichar’s 1953 record of 56 yards. Prior to that, Glen Presnell held the record with his 54 yard kick in 1934.

Janikoswki did not have the longest field goal attempt of the NFL weekend, though. Rob Bironas of the Tennessee Titans attempted to demolish the NFL record with a 67 yard field goal attempt just before halftime.  His kick was not even close as it fell short and to the right.

It is somewhat surprising that Dempsey’s record has been able to stand for 41 years.  Kickers have unquestionably been more accurate and field goals beyond 50 yards are more common.  However, the loss of field position on a missed field goal has made coaches bypass opportunities for stong-legged kickers to break the record.  This is especially significant since 1994 when missed kicks were spotted from the kick rather than the line of scrimmage.

The opportunity to make a record field goal thus is pretty much limited to being the last play of the first half (like Janikowski and Elam) or at the end of the game (like Dempsey.)

It is also surprising how few times the longest field goal record has been broken.  Since Presnell kicked his record field goal in 1934, the record has only been broken twice.