An Interesting Option for Sportsbooks

[Hartley]

I was discussing this with someone else and we both concurred. In hockey this year it seems that with 4 on 4 most games are being decided in OT. Consequently, teams that usually would win with 1/2 goal are losing which really isn't fair since 60 minutes is played 5 on 5 and the public bets based on the 60 minutes of 5 on 5 hockey.

Pro-Line (the Canadian sports lottery) therefore is offering the game finish based on 60 minutes (OT not included) so a win in OT is still considered a tie.

My suggestion - Overtime insurance. For an extra (say) 20 cents on the line (the books will decide what is fair), you can bet an underdog at +1/2 and if it goes into OT you automatically win. Similarly, you can bet either team on the money line and guarantee a push regardless of the OT result.

So if a game is listed as say Toronto +1/2 even, you can bet it at +1/2 -120 which will save the worry of overtime.

I got the impression this would be popular. Any other opinions?

[ray]

This won't work!

First of all, 20 cents won't cut it.

Then, carrying another set of lines will create much more troubles to the books than the benefit they can get from that.

Actually, if you have paid attention to the lines, you should notice that the value of that +.5 goal had been decreased this season.

Last year, it was about 45 to 50 cents. But this year, its mostly about 40 cents, sometime between 40 to 45 cents.

So, if you really concern about losing in OT. Why not bet the moneyline? Why need that stinky half goal?

Or, as I mentioned last season.

Find an Euro book, they offer 3-way lines at hockey.

[Skybook]

Ray
Great answer.I was about to repond when i saw your post. Up until this year i figured the half a goal was worth about 50 cents. I lost so many games already this year taking half a goal in overtime that I stopped betting hockey for a while. I dont even think even though it is now adjusted that the half is worth the 40 cents. I am done taking half a goal. I will only bet the money line.
Of course the one ond only time I layed bet the money line instead of taking half a goal this year the game ended in a tie. I have giving up on hockey.
Take care Steve

[cashusking]

Don't care for the time and effort to
run a book right now but mine would be

REGULATION SCORES ONLY. IN ALL SPORTS.

What business that would bring in! of course you would get lots of dog and under bettors and your line would reflect it. The over and favorite bettors would bet you because your spread and totals would be lower.

But overtime insurance is a GREAT IDEA.
There is no reason books can't offer this with all the sophisticated software at their command now.

As for the naysayers it is ridiculous to say it can't be done. It might have been reasonable to say it about getting a man on the moon and splitting atoms at one time but NO ONE is exactly splitting atoms in this neandrethal business.

[OLD MAN]

what you need to do is find a book that
will let you parlay the straight money
into the CANADIAN line ON THE SAME GAME.

[Bob]

I have to disagree. First of all let me say I've been burned as much as anyone with the tie this year.

But really, from a wagering standpoint, what happens in extra time is irrelevant, you just have to bet the game the way its set up.

There have been 389 games this year and 53 ties. Without overtime there would have been 389 games and 91 ties.

Whatever the case you make your bet where the math takes you. And really don't you get the same sinking feeling when a third period goal sinks your bet as when an overtime one does?

Maybe they should only count the first two periods.

[Skybook]

Bob
I think your missing what we are saying. That is a lot if your stats are correct. You are saying that there have been 91 ovetime games this year and 38 of them ended without a tie. That is a lot. I know without checking anything if you check the first 91 overtime games from last year it would be a lot less then 38 of them endind with a victory. We are saying the new 4 on 4 rule in overtime is what is making the difference
Thanks Steve

[Skybook]

Bob
I agree with you also though that overtime is part of the bet and should be considered and count in the bet always
Steve

[Bob]

Sky...you are right. It is a lot different than last year. Actually, two things are different. MORE games are going into overtime and LESS are ending in ties.

But the four on four rule isn't the main reason...the main reason is that once into overtime both teams are guaranteed one point no matter what happens. There's a free point to either team that can score a goal and so everyone is just gunning it.

Look at Edmonton, they've got 27 points in 28 games even though they're six games below .500. They've already gone into overtime 11 times this year and so far they're 0-6-5...but they still got 11 points out of it. They're trying to win and they don't care if they lose. It's exciting to watch....nothing but breakaways and odd man rushes. Last year in the minors when the league trial runned the format one coach pulled his goalie in every overtime trying to get a win...He lost almost every time but didn't care.

What I'm saying, though, is that in the end its irrelevant. Ties are happening 13.6% of the time and that's all you got to know in asessing the tie's value when making your play. It doesn't really matter how you get to a result....just what the result is.

[Skybook]

Bob
I agree 100%. I have been saying for years in all sports only one score matters. THE FINAL SCORE. It doesnt matter how you got there.
Of course in hockey this year the final score has always been bad for me, But then again I have a lot of nerve betting hockey anyway. I know nothing about it.
lol Steve

[Hartley]

Bingo Bob .

The teams play all out because they don't care if they lose - they get a point lose or tie. And 4 on 4 hockey is totally different than 5 on 5. So why should the bettor be penalized (or benefit) from a different game within a game?

The argument that overtime is a part of the game I hear used by Roxy and other oddsmakers all the time. And up until this year I would agree. But with the new rule change stating that a team will get 1 point for a tie and 2 points for a win changed that. Now OT is a free for all. In soccer, golden goals (goals in extra time) are never counted in betting. So why should it be the case in hockey? I never understood this argument that OT is important and a part of the North American sports whereas it isn't a part of normal games in Europe.

As for betting moneylines how does that change the fact that OT has changed the betting in disfavor of most bettors?

[Bob]

Well, I guess I'd make two points Hartley. First of all the overtime format is tainting regular time just as much. More games are going into overtime this year because teams are tiptoeing through the third period in close games so they can get into overtime.
In that sense, paying off after three periods is no more legimate because the real game stops being played halfway through the third period in close games anyway. As discussed above 91 games have gone into overtime this year (92 after tonight) which is an inflated number caused by the overtime format. If my team goes into a shell in the third and waits for overtime to try and win the game then I'm going to feel like I had a fair chance to win my wager. The overtime format has screwed me even if only three periods count.

The other point is that overtime is not as wildly different from regular time as you might think. Prior to tonight there had been 2046 goals scored in the NHL this year during regular time. That's one goal every 684 seconds of play. In overtime, there had been 38 goals scored. That's approx. one goal every 568 seconds of play (assuming that ON AVERAGE the overtime goal is scored at the 2:30 mark). If teams played the overtime 5 on 5 over 30 of the 38 games decided in overtime so far would have been decided anyway. In the end there's probably only been a half dozen games or so that have been pushed over the edge.

[Bob]

Sorry, I meant to say "didn't have a fair chance to win my wager."

Also, Hartley you asked a question that I didn't address. I don't think you can say that overtime has operated to the disfavour of most bettors. I saw in Bookieshell that you lost three overtime games in a row the other night when someone scored in each. That was most unlucky, but I can only assume that those on the other side of those wagers were rejoicing at the new format. If overtime has cost you money, it's made someone else just as much....minus the juice of course.

[ray]

Like I said earlier,

if you will bet a favor in a hockey game, say the line is,

Det -.5 +120

or moneyline is,

Det -120

I think you you should better think about taking Det at Canadian line instead of the moneyline.

Especially if that team is better on offense than defense.

On the other hand, it would also be better for you to take the dogs on moneyline rather to take that stinky half goal.

But remember, 1.5 goal is a totally different story.

I believe that 10 cents cut down from last year still can't reflect the change of value on that half goal.

It would be better for you to grab the money instead.

[AussieVamp2]

Hartley,

Lots of European hockey leagues do have overtime, so of them have no games that end in ties.........

however, European 3-way lines are still prevalent, great if you are a bookie, huge percentage take for you