Not entirely sure what you mean by that but it sounds like you're just removing a fixed margin from the closing line for calculating the no vig line. That's problematic because margins increase as odds increase. That's probably why you are off a little bit.
yeah I assume that the margin will be what is pretty standard for the market of -104 -104 across the board on sides can you please give me an example of where that margin is grossly off my every game -104 margin amount, please
Show the math on how you reached your no vig numbers on that Mets game you asked for as an example. First you said one number that differed from mine, then a second number shortly after that still differed. Changing your number arbitrarily is always bad. Will try to see where you are errant.
I mean understand there is some small and slight variations from -104 but really enough to make you have to do for and against odds on every bet, I already do weighted CLV anyway!
I'm sorry I'm not really following your thought process at first glance. I will expand on the math I shared in post #32 later for you to better understand how to properly calculate the no vig closing line.
I understand your math clearly on that one. What I am saying is you are calculating the CLV on every individual game by +- and I am just saying pinny charges a -104 margin which equates to .0097.
so if it was -122 to -122 the net CLV for me would be -.97%
and if it was -122 to -123 the net clv for me would be -.77%
instead of taking every single game and adding the plus and minus and getting the actual margin for each game. I think there is a slight difference as the numbers move but in reality I think .97% is pretty darn close overall, dont you agree to that?
yeah that is what is said Old timer, like huh wow amazing, good job trying to catch me slipping but I was basically saying wonder why not that his line is bad
Comments
+114 = .4673
((.5516 * 100) - ((.5516 * 100) + (.4673 * 100) - 100) / 2) / 100 = .5421
-122 = .5495
.5421 - .5495 = -.0074
so I would say 77
bought at 54.95
sold 55.16
leaves .2
margin at -104 -104 is .97
.97 -.2 leaves .77
so if it was -122 to -122 the net CLV for me would be -.97%
and if it was -122 to -123 the net clv for me would be -.77%
instead of taking every single game and adding the plus and minus and getting the actual margin for each game. I think there is a slight difference as the numbers move but in reality I think .97% is pretty darn close overall, dont you agree to that?
SF/PHI Over 7.5 -125
CLE/MIL Under 8 -105
KC +132
SEA -121
HOU -125
LAA +123
NYY -195
5/9
DET +113
KC +114
CLE -147
LAA +133
5/9
MIA/CHC Under 11.5 -105
huh??? Angels?
It was +133 for another 4 hours after he posted looks legit and very nice.
5/10
SF/PHI Over 9 -111
ATL/MIA Under 8 -114
MIL +142
BOS +133
STL -133
Csh, did you always wear a beard
MIN/LAA Under 8.5 -110
WSH -190
BOS -175
LAA -170
CHC -221
MIL +141
5/12
MIL/COL Over 11 -107
TEX/HOU Under 8.5 -103
NYM -154
OAK +168
MIN +131
WSH -180
5/12
TB G1 -137
BOS -128
WSH/ARI Over 8 -108
TB/BAL Under 9 -117
KC/CLE Under 8 -102
NYM +110
KC +254
Sides 38-32 (54.3%) +3.23u +1.59% CLV
Totals 15-17 (46.9%) -3.93u +3.23% CLV
Running well below expectation, especially on totals. Gets frustrating at times.
5/14
CHC -149
5/15
HOU/LAA Over 7.5 -117
TOR/NYM Under 7.5 -119
DET +121
NYY -116