Baseball Musings
Baseball Musings
December 15, 2006
What are the Odds

FishStripes posts the World Championship odds for all 30 major league teams. I notice the Nationals are 150:1. Bill James once wrote that no team in baseball is truly worse than 100:1 to win the World Series, making the Nationals a good long shot bet. Looking at the ranking, I'd say the Cubs are too high and the four teams listed 20:1 to 25:1 are too low.


Posted by David Pinto at 08:09 AM | Predictions | TrackBack (0)
Comments

No team is really too high or too low. These aren't predictions but rather betting lines intended to get a maximum amount wagered while limiting the risk to the book maker. These type of futures wagers are the surest money makers for Vegas every year. Obviously only one team can win so the great majority of bettors lose. It is actually funny hearing announcers during an upset claim that Vegas must hate that. Nope. Vegas loves upsets since even at 150/1 odds the Nationals would pay out less $ than NYY, BOS, etc.

Posted by: LargeBill at December 15, 2006 08:59 AM

I disagree with you that these aren't predictions. Betting odds are actually pretty good predictors of things. You're combining the wisdom of many people into a single number. That's why futures markets are such a good indicator of where prices are going.

Posted by: David Pinto at December 15, 2006 09:06 AM

I'd bet the Indians, Twins and D'backs at those odds, and short the Cubs and Jays. Except of course that I won't, because these are the ultimate sucker bet, as LargeBill notes. Odds on specific games may be decent predictors, but WS (or Super Bowl) odds are just designed to coax the impulse bettor into blow a little dough on his favorite team.

Posted by: Chris R at December 15, 2006 09:15 AM

I know James was speaking from a purely statistical point of view...but to be fair, the Nats have a chance to have one of the absolute worst rotations in history. Right now their depth chart only includes 3 starting pitchers, one of whom was hurt last year (Patterson) and the other two have 26 starts between them (Shawn Hill and Mike O'Connor). They weren't particularly good starts, either. They really do look like a 100-120 loss team; I know people thought the Fish would be awful last year, but at least they had clear upside.

Posted by: the other josh at December 15, 2006 12:45 PM

Betting odds like these also take the number of fans a given team has into account as well as their actual probablity of winning. So in terms of predictions, they are probably not that good.

Does anyone think that the White Sox are 2.5X more likely to win the World Series than the Twins or Indians? And 20% more likely to win it than the Tigers?

Or is it just that there are more White Sox fans.

Ivan

Posted by: Ivan at December 15, 2006 02:34 PM

i agree with largebill on this one. I'm a cub fan and you know how we are. there are a lot of cub fans that throw money on them to win no matter what. that's why their odds are better than they should.
so, if they are actually 25-1, they know their getting bets no matter what, so they jack it to 12-1 so in the off chance it happens, they don't lose as much.

Posted by: Boomer at December 16, 2006 12:21 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?