Dear Mark, I have found over the years that betting on sports and beating
the bookmaker is no easy task. Nevertheless, exactly what percentage of games
do I have to win just to break even? Mark M.
To kick off (puns offered at no extra charge for people with the right
name, Mark), the person you are really trying to outfox is the
oddsmaker, and his analysis on each team's chances, not necessarily the
bookmaker as your question implied.
The bookmaker is simply a middleman who operates on a small profit
margin and, ideally, is looking for half the money wagered on one team,
and half that bet on the other. If too much of the money is wagered on
one team, the bookmaker merely moves the point spread to prop up
betting on the other team. What assures him of a profit is balancing
his books.
As to a specific answer to your question, at odds of 10/11 (bet $11 to
win $10) you only have to win 52.4% of your bets to overcome the
bookmaker's profit and break even. While that may not seem like very
high win-ratio, Mark, watching sports from a lazy-boy chair is one
thing, while betting and winning them is quite another.
Dear Mark, Ditto to Lester’s comment last week, and thanks for the
increase in poker coverage. Anyhow, I just have a one short question if I may.
You being a student of the game, what is the most sound advice you have ever
received? Dell G.
It’s probably from The Gambler himself, singer Kenny Rogers (who by
the way doesn’t gamble, then again, he’s been married five times),
whose biggest contribution to the game of poker also just happens to be
my Golden Poker Rule #1: “You got to know when to hold 'em, know when
to fold 'em.”
Put more concisely, Dell, you need to maximize the size of the pots
that you win; and to minimize the money in the pots that you lose. This
simple rule of poker is the most overlooked stratagem among most of
those who play the game, and a real fortune-builder for those who
follow it.
Dear Mark, Last week in your column you explained the never-bust was a bad
bet and advised players that you need to hit "plenty of those stiff hands.”
My question concentrates strictly with the player having a 12 against a two
or three. Wouldn’t the smart move be to always stand since it seems that
every time I hit a 12 when the dealer is showing a 2 or 3, I always get a 10
and bust. What’s wrong with standing instead of giving the dealer that
bust card? Kevin M.
Without even considering depletion of the deck, a 12 in hand is
somewhat different from most other "stiff" hands because you have
a 9
out of 13 chance of not busting if you take a hit. Likewise, if you
decide against hitting, your only chance of winning with a 12 is for
the dealer to bust, and he has that same 69.2% plus chance of making
his hand that you did.
The negative aspect of hitting a 12 is that even if you do take a hit,
you will still lose money over the long haul, since a 12 against a
dealer’s 2 or 3 is a losing proposition. Yet, you should always hit a
12 against a two or three in order to save from 2-5% of the money
wagered as compared to standing.
Granted, Kevin, you won’t win any additional money by hitting, but it
will help keep you from losing more than you should.
Gambling Wisdom of the Week: “You got to know when to hold ’em,
know when to fold ’em, Know when to walk away and know when to run. You
never count your money when you’re sittin’ at the table. There’ll
be time enough for countin’ when the dealin’s done." –Kenny
Rogers, The Gambler
