Gambling odds on Michigan starting QB week 1

Gambling odds on Michigan starting QB week 1

Submitted by Bigku22 on July 24th, 2017 at 8:57 PM

As a gambling degenerate, I always have my eye on a number of different offshore sites looking at new postings. just posted some "College Football Special Props", and they have odds on Week 1 starting QBs for a number of teams including Michigan. I found the odds MUCH closer than I would have anticipated. 

Michigan Starting QB Week 1

Speight -105 (51.22% implied probability, meaning you need to bet $105 to win $100)

Peters +110 (47.62% implied probability, meaning a $100 bet wins $110)

Almost a coinflip. This does not mean they have inside info or anything, and this isn't a Vegas prop it's only offshore, but setting close to even was quite surprising to me. I would have had Speight closer to 60-70%.

Mike Florio: "Supreme Court drops NFL into a gambling minefield"

Mike Florio: "Supreme Court drops NFL into a gambling minefield"

Submitted by LLG on July 1st, 2017 at 10:28 AM

"A deep dive into the potential legalization of sports wagering and what it mean for the NFL" is the description by Pro Football Live via Audioboom.  Florio does a decent job of explaining why there is a good shot that the Court will allow states to legalize gambling.

Florio's title is a bit over-the-top as I don't think it is a "minefield."  It also misses the point that the NCAA is the first named defendant along with the National Basketball Association, the National Football League, the National Hockey League, and the Office of the Commissioner of Baseball.

For those of you interested in the case but don't want to listen, here are links to the legal briefs via SCOTUSblog on New Jersey Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, No. 16-477.

The issue is whether Congress may, consistent with the Tenth Amendment, prohibit States from authorizing sports-gambling schemes. The federal statute is the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA), which Congress passed “to stop the spread of State-sponsored sports gambling.”  The law prohibits private persons from operating sports-gambling schemes pursuant to state law. 28 U.S.C. 3702(2).

I agree with Florio:  There is a really good chance the Supreme Court allows states to legalize gambling.  I'm interested in what people think about that from a policy perspective and how it would change college football -- if at all.

Michigan Opens -34 vs UNLV

Michigan Opens -34 vs UNLV

Submitted by Bigku22 on September 15th, 2015 at 5:15 PM

UM opens up -34 in Vegas. 

My initial reaction is to pass. Been on the right side for weeks 1 and 2, but this will be a no play for me. UNLV QB injured last week, but UM does not play the type of offense that makes you comfortable laying 5 TDs. Gun to my head I would take the points, but I will pass. 

Other lines:

Ohio State -34 vs Northern Illinois

LSU -7 vs Auburn

Miami -3 vs Nebraska 

GT -2 vs ND

Michigan State -27 vs Air Force

Opening lines: UM +5.5 vs ND

Opening lines: UM +5.5 vs ND

Submitted by Bigku22 on August 31st, 2014 at 3:13 PM

UM +5.5 vs ND. Also: MSU opens +11 vs Oregon Really like taking the points for both teams. Think UM has a ton of early season value based off last year. UM on the money line could be very nice.

EDIT: Lines have already moved, UM down to +5, MSU up to +12

Correcting O/U win totals for moneylines

Correcting O/U win totals for moneylines

Submitted by m1jjb00 on May 25th, 2014 at 4:37 PM

The fact that over/under win totals come with moneylines provide no real complication for the betting public.   Convert the moneylines to a return, ask whether the probability is better than the return and bet accordingly.  But, what of rest of the public who want to read the over/under’s as Vegas’s expected wins?  How can you convert the combination of the moneylines and O/U’s to an expected win value?  To be concrete Michigan is at 7.5 (-140 over/+100 under) according to the odds just released.  Penn State is at 8.5 but (+100/-140).  How far apart are they?  My results suggest Michigan’s expected number of wins is just a little higher at 7.6, while Penn State’s is a ½ win lower than its O/U at 8.0.  In 2013, there were a few teams whose moneylines were so extreme that they implied expected wins a full win less than the O/U.

Let p denote the probability of winning more games than the O/U.  Then the implied expected number of wins is p E[wins|wins>O/U] + (1-p) E[wins|wins<O/U] where the expected values can be read as the average number of wins when a team comes above or below the over/under.  The probability p is calculated from the moneylines and Table 1 contains estimates of these averages, which depend on the level of the over/under.

The way to interpret the moneylines depends on whether they’re positive or negative.  If positive, the line gives you the extra amount you win if you bet $100.  If negative, it gives you the amount you have to bet to win an extra $100.  Let p(o) and p(u) denote the probabilities read directly from the moneylines, and denote by m as the absolute value of the number in the moneyline.  If the moneyline is positive, then the probability is 100/(m+100); if negative it’s m/(100+m).  In Michigan’s case, p(o) = 140/(100+140) = 0.583 and p(u) = 100/(100+100) = 0.500.  If you think the probability that Michigan wins more than 7-1/2 games is greater than 58.3%, bet the over; if you think the probability is less than 50%, bet the under. 

Note, however that p(o)+p(u) is greater than one.  That’s Vegas’s juice to make money.  We want a fair probability for our purposes, so we convert them by setting p = p(o)/(p(o)+p(u)).  In Michigan’s case, p = 0.583/(0.583+0.500) = 0.538.

Table 1 contains the applicable expected values for various over/under's calculated under two different methodologies.  The first method takes actual over/under’s from 2010-2013.  The second method takes Chris Stassen’s data on preseason magazine ratings and converts them as a decent ex-ante estimate of an O/U.  Then for each I calculate the average wins when the teams come in above and when they come in below the totals.  For my calculations below I then take an average of the two estimates.  In Michigan’s case, the applicable expected values are  E[wins|wins>O/U] = 9.20, which is the midpoint of the range and E[wins|wins<O/U] = 5.75, likewise.  Weighting by 0.538 gives 7.6 wins.

Table 1

Conditional Win Averages





 5.20 --   4.80

2.00 -- 2.17


 6.69 --   7.11

2.86 -- 2.67


 7.18 --   8.00

3.26 -- 3.52


 8.16 --   8.00

4.87 -- 4.40


 9.33 --   9.06

5.86 -- 5.64


 9.86 – 10.24

6.41 -- 6.05


10.73 -- 10.45

7.53 -- 7.11


11.00 -- 11.33

9.50 -- 9.50


12.00 -- 12.00

n.a. -- 11.00

To be sure my estimated expected wins in table 1 could be improved upon, and the method as a whole could be augmented by arguing that the expected values should vary with the moneyline.

Table 2 gives expected wins for all Big Ten teams and Notre Dame for those over/under’s provided by Kegs ‘N Eggs.  Note that Notre Dame’s expected wins is 0.7 below the O/U.

Table 2

Big Ten Expected Wins







+145 over / -185 under




+100 over / -140 under




-140 over / +100 under




-155 over / +115 under




-130 over / -110 under


Notre Dame


+110 over / -150 under




-140 over / +100 under




+100 over / -140 under




-110 over / -130 under




-135 over / -105 under






The 2013 Big Ten: A Gambler's Preview

The 2013 Big Ten: A Gambler's Preview

Submitted by jamiemac on August 30th, 2013 at 8:11 AM

Fuller - 8358990143_96557d2556_o

Remember that Mattison is back and Ryan should be [Fuller]

Ed-Seth: Before every season a million prognosticators will tell you how the coming year shall unfold. Among these, usually the most accurate are those by the gamblers, for it is they more so than bloggers who ply their trade by ruthlessly excising their biases. Of these oddsplayers, our go-to guy is jamiemac of Just Cover Blog. For this reason I asked him to give us his own preview of the things that concern us, and he asked me to put pretty pictures in it, for it is at pretty picturing that we bloggers truly excel.


Football Study Hall riled up the Michigan base earlier in the week with their pessimistic projection of 7-5, 4-4. That would be a disaster. We're all anticipating much better after all. My simple expectation alone is make it to the Ohio State game controlling our own fate in the division. It's a lock that I would use up my allotment of FIRE HOKE ROD jokes on twitter if the season spirals towards that record.

But I'm don't come to bury the math. I do come to mention their projection puts them on the opposite side of the betting community. Over at, the Wolverines have moved to betting favorites in the Legends Division race after spending portions of the summer behind Nebraska and Michigan State. Michigan is chalk at +220 odds, followed by Nebraska, +290; Michigan St, +300; Northwestern, +325; Iowa, +1500; and Minnesota, +2900.

Upchurch - 8172287748_962edd05e4_o
How quickly they forget what I look like
in pads. [Upchurch]

There are reports that the Over 8.5 wins on Michigan has become one of the most popular bets of the summer. Another sign is simple point spread movement in favor of Michigan on the various Games Of The Year boards. Seven of the 10 Michigan games offered this summer have seen an adjustment based on Michigan action coming into their coffers. Take a look at the shifts:

vs Central Michigan: Opened, -26; Current, -31.5

vs Notre Dame: Opened, pick 'em; Current -3

vs Minnesota: Opened, -15; Current, -17

at Penn St: Opened, -2.5; Current, -3

at Michigan St. Opened, +3; Current, +2.5

at Northwestern. Opened +3; Current, -3

vs Ohio St: Opened +6; Current, +4

Some of those movements aren't that significant. But in five of those games, the line has shifted at least two points, including in the two most important home games of the season. In the case of the Northwestern game, the Wolverines have gone from underdogs to chalk. One line did move against Michigan, it's November road game at Iowa where Michigan opened as -10.5 favorites only to see the number come down to -9.5. Two lines have stayed the same the whole way through: -4 vs Nebraska and -12 at UConn, the latter line continuously balanced by Heiko throwing his MGoWages on the Huskies. Probably. Maybe. WOTS, at least.

[More good things after the jump]

Vegas: Michigan Underdogs vs. Louisville

Vegas: Michigan Underdogs vs. Louisville

Submitted by Michiganguy19 on April 7th, 2013 at 12:05 PM

Looks like the line opened at Michigan +3.5 and has moved overnight to Michigan +4 (Moneyline is Michigan +155/+165 depending on the sites).

Kenpom has Louisville, at a 5pt favorite.

ESPN pickcenter has some data up as well... with Michigan an underdog according to several of their statistical models.


Michigan is 20-16-1 vs. the Spread this year... Michigan is 5-0 vs. the Spread so far in the NCAA Tournament.


OT: Are you a degenerate gambler?

OT: Are you a degenerate gambler?

Submitted by JeepinBen on March 28th, 2013 at 11:26 AM

Todd Fuhrman has a funny quiz up today, to see how bad of a gambling problem you have. It's all in good fun, and I'm rather proud of my low score despite having at least 2 items in each section.

I figured the Board may get a kick of of it, as JamieMac, the resident gambling expert thought that his number wasn't so bad. Also, couldn't help but think of coverage on this site:

College hockey lines, junkie?

I scored a 37, how did you do?

Filling out your brackets: Any good tips?

Filling out your brackets: Any good tips?

Submitted by profitgoblue on March 12th, 2012 at 11:00 AM

March Madness has us all in its grips, squeezing the picks out of us.  Every year I sweat and swear as I fill out my bracket, knowing all along that my first round picks will be decent and then my bracket will go to sh-t.  Its all I can do to have even just one team in the damn Final Four.  So I was wondering if you all have any interesting ways of picking "toss up" games or filling out your backets in general.

One interesting tidbit I found on Yahoo is this"

Make difficult picks using the "mascot fight" theory

Two of the hardest games to pick in last year's first round were UCLA-Michigan State and Vanderbilt-Richmond.  They were veritable toss-ups. But looking at these games in retrospect, they were all too easy to pick. Bruins vs. Spartans?  Hmm, a vicious bear or a person who shuns the conveniences of modern living?  I saw "Grizzly Man."  I know how that story ends.

(I deleted the reference to "Friends" in that blurb because, well, "Friends" and NCAA basketball should never be uttered in the same discussion.)

Fork over your secrets!



Online sports betting site recommendations

Online sports betting site recommendations

Submitted by bdsisme on August 28th, 2011 at 2:39 PM

Does anyone have any recommendations for online sportsbooks?  With the coming of the college football and NFL seasons, I'm looking to (hopefully) profit off of the vast amount of time that I spend following the sport.  Does one specific site have more betting opportunities (especially w/r/t college football), or less fees, or better sign-up bonuses?


I know that this topic has been addressed in the past, but the relatively recent restrictions the government has placed on sportsbooks (re: paperwork/payout/deposit) as well as the ever-changing sign-up bonuses and types of bets that can be placed (proposition bets, lines, moneyline, etc) may have changed the experienced users' recommendations since the last post.


And before anyone mentions it, mgoposter jamiemac has the Just Cover Blog, which can be helpful for bets.  Jamiemac -- what's your opinion?


EDIT: Just read that Bodog is leaving the U.S. betting market at the end of the year. Some googling results in a lot of people saying they prefer