newper wrote:
When he does these units, everything pays off at a 1:1 ratio. So if he bets 100 units on the Devil Rays to win game 1, and say they are a -150, he claims that he has a profit of 100 units when in reality he would only win 75 units. The same with football lines (the majority of point spread bets are at -110 units) where he is betting 100 units, he should be winning 91 units. I do not know, however, if he bets say a boxing match where the guy is +480 if he will claim a 480 unit victory on a 100 unit bet, or if he just says he won 100 units. Jen Jen is their boxing expert and she hasn't made a pick yet, so we'll have to wait and see.
I don't want to be too nitpicky, but at -150, he wouldn't win 75, he'd win 66.7. In baseball you can be super-abusive with the "no juice" rule, but even in football those little quantities add up. Look at it this way: let's say his "500 unit play" was -110, which most bets are. He'd win 90.9 for every 100 bet, or 464.5 instead of 500. That's a huge difference in the long run.
Or for another example, let's say he has 100 wins and that all those wins were -110 and "100 units" (I know unrealistic, but bear with me.) Under Mike's system he'd have won 10000 units minus whatever he lost (100 * 100 = 100000). But at -100, you only get back 90.9, so the true value is 9090 (100 units * 90.9 = 9090), or 910 units less than he claims. That's why you can't just hit 50% in football; you need to hit 53% to stay profitable.