# What are the best odds?

## What is the best system for odds?

• ### Malay

• Total voters
22
Because betting odds aren't actually a prediction of the probability of an event. They're an attempt to lure people into putting money on the whichever side doesn't yet have enough money on it, for the book to make the maximum profit. Getting the projections right is only a means to an end. The "implied probability" column here only applies when the initial odds on an event are released. After that, the odds are adjusted based on how much money is coming in on one side or the other and the "implied probability" becomes a function of the popularity of the two sides, against one another. (In the case of a "prop bet" the two sides are "this thing will happen" vs. "this thing will not happen", or an "over-under", or a point-spread, or whatever.)
That is one way of looking at it, but in the same vein I could say a mortgage interest rate is "an attempt to lure people into borrowing money". Depending on what he means by "a percentage" it probably is approximately one or other odds systems. I would say they are both commonly agreed metrics of a proposed contract.

On interpretation, in an efficient market they kind of are a prediction of the probability of an event. In the same way that one can calculate the metrics like probability of default from borrowing costs we can interpret implied odds as predicted odds. To dispute that one could claim that the corporate funding market is more rational and efficient than the political betting market, which I am very far from convinced of.

That is one way of looking at it, but in the same vein I could say a mortgage interest rate is "an attempt to lure people into borrowing money". Depending on what he means by "a percentage" it probably is approximately one or other odds systems. I would say they are both commonly agreed metrics of a proposed contract.

On interpretation, in an efficient market they kind of are a prediction of the probability of an event. In the same way that one can calculate the metrics like probability of default from borrowing costs we can interpret implied odds as predicted odds. To dispute that one could claim that the corporate funding market is more rational and efficient than the political betting market, which I am very far from convinced of.
An efficient market is as much a fantasyland as Narnia. When betting odds are first released, until the book has had time to adjust them, they could be taken as the book's best estimate about the likelihood of the various outcomes. This is just a means to an end, though. After money has started coming in on the two sides, the book adjusts the odds so that new bettors will continue to put money on both sides. Once that starts to happen, if we continue to use betting odds as a prediction of the outcome, we're relying on people who've placed bets being rational, expert, and objective. A smart gambler watches the odds change and places money when they think the odds no longer properly represent the likely outcome, even putting money on the unlikely outcome from time to time, knowing that the payoff will exceed the risk. A smart gambler takes the long view, knowing that while most bets placed on unlikely outcomes won't pay off, those that do will not only cover the losses they will provide a profit, because they knew when the odds had gone too far and were no longer correctly predictive of the chances of the outcome happening. Of course these bets placed by smart gamblers taking the long view themselves contribute to the book readjusting their odds back in the other direction, so that they can make money in the long run. If too many gamblers start placing money on one outcome - whether the bettors are smart, or are simply driven by loyalty to a team or superstition or whatever - the odds will start shifting in the other direction and then the good gamblers will stop placing their money on that. This is a kind of "market equilibrium", but it's not about finding the likelihood of the various outcomes, it's about finding the discrepancy between the odds and the likelihood of the outcomes. At any given moment, an average gambler won't know whether the "market of the betting" has happened to find the correct predictive power on the outcome of the event being wagered upon. Knowing when the odds happen to be predicting the outcome and when they aren't is what makes a gambler good at gambling (it's not the only thing, but that's part of it).

EDIT: I tried betting on MMA for about a year, when I was deep in following the sport. I wasn't bad at predicting the outcomes - I was well above .500 - but I slowly lost my stake over the course of 14-15 months, because I wasn't good at playing the odds. If the odds were merely predictions of the outcome of the event, I'd have been making money. But from the book's perspective - the very person or firm that sets and then constantly adjusts the odds - that's exactly how it's supposed to work. I was the perfect mark.

Last edited:
So the main idea was to have x1 and x2 be (forcefully) inversely proportionate (x1 the bet placed on negative Usodd, x2 on positive; likewise for the sums of those bets) and consequently trigger fluctuations on the odds as the money accumulates on both sides. Has @Samson presented the system of equations? ^^

Last edited:
...we can interpret implied odds as predicted odds.

That is what the bookie wants you to believe. Instead, the implied odds are an upper bound to the predicted odds (if we believe in the prediction). The bookie will set the implied odds higher than the predicted odds to carve out their margin.

On which one is better: I can see the discussion of payout vs profit (Decimal vs Hong Kong). But what is the point of using strange fractions? Can anyone really tell at a glance whether 3/7 is more than 4/9? The decimal representation does not make me do multiplication in my head just to see which number is bigger.

That is what the bookie wants you to believe. Instead, the implied odds are an upper bound to the predicted odds (if we believe in the prediction). The bookie will set the implied odds higher than the predicted odds to carve out their margin.

On which one is better: I can see the discussion of payout vs profit (Decimal vs Hong Kong). But what is the point of using strange fractions? Can anyone really tell at a glance whether 3/7 is more than 4/9? The decimal representation does not make me do multiplication in my head just to see which number is bigger.
I think the fraction is supposed not to have you easily calculate the probability, just to multiply the fraction by the bet to see how much profit a win would make. After all, you wouldn't typically say (eg) it's 2 to 1 to present a 1/3 probability, let alone when you have largish primes in the numerator (and possibly the sum in the denominator).
Maybe part of the parasitic industry is about on the spot selling of pencil/pen and paper ^^

Last edited:
But what is the point of using strange fractions? Can anyone really tell at a glance whether 3/7 is more than 4/9? The decimal representation does not make me do multiplication in my head just to see which number is bigger.
I do not know, but my suspicion is that it is easier when you are announcing and negotiating odds verbally at say a racecourse. "Three to one, Seven to two, fifteen to four" gives an easier to say progression that "Three, three and a half, three and three quarters".

I voted for the British one since it seems the most logical one and easiest to understand for someone who knows absolutely nothing about gambling.

1/10? What does that mean? 1 in 10 odds, duh.

The European way seems fairly easy to decipher too.

The American system makes zero sense if you have never seen it before. 200 is 50% odds? Okay fine, looking at the chart I can see the pattern, but that doesn't feel as natural as saying 1/2 or even 1.50. I actually went through this exact exercise the first time I put money on sports. I have only done so twice ever. The first time I had to scratch my head a bit and do some googling. But if it had said 1/2 odds! I would have known exactly what that means. Or if it said "The payout is 1.50 of your bet". Yep, that is super easy to understand too.

I occasionally place bets in the US. If I'm in Louisiana and I see action I like, I throw a few bucks at it.

It's like freedom units. Easy to follow if you're familiar with it.

This poll should be multiple choice. Because gambling is how the Giant Death Robots are bankrupting you!

I voted for the British one for largely the same reason as warpus. It's simple - odds of one/odds of the other. The only thing that might be tricky to remember is which side is the odds that your event will happen (right) and which one is the odds it won't happen (left).

Second place goes to Hong Kong. It's also fairly simple - the odds are the ratio of the opposite of your bet happening, to it happening. Europe seems to be the same thing, but add one, which seems unnecessary, so I prefer Hong Kong. Indonesia is Hong Kong but for people who don't like numbers between zero and one, but IMO Hong Kong is simpler yet again.

American is Indonesian but multiplied by 100, that's not an improvement, and I have never been able to make heads nor tails of American odds-makings despite living in the U.S. (my motivation to learn it is also low, see also the giant death robots). Malaysia seems to have the least intuitive pattern of all.

Implied probability of course makes the most sense of all, but that seems like a cop-out vote since it isn't a system used in practice according to the chart.

But in everyday life? I prefer Quintillus Odds. If I think there's a 60% chance that Civ VII will be the best game ever, I'll say "There's a 60/40 chance that Civ VII is the best game ever." Number on the left is the chance something will happen, and you express it with two numbers that add up to 100. Simple, easy to remember, and consistent with the everyday saying "It's 50/50" for something that's equally likely and unlikely.

The ones I am never told.

I think I have found an advantage the fractional or Hong Kong has over the decimal, it makes it very easy to see the spread. Compare the decimal and factional odds it is easy to see that the spread is only the odds of someone else winning, being 5/6 to 6/5.

I think I have found an advantage the fractional or Hong Kong has over the decimal, it makes it very easy to see the spread. Compare the decimal and factional odds it is easy to see that the spread is only the odds of someone else winning, being 5/6 to 6/5.

Only in this special case though, when they are exactly reciprocal. For 4/6 (why not 2/3?) and 11/10, the spread is much less clear to me than 1.67 and 2.1

I like the US odds. You know exactly what amount to bet for the amount you want to win.

I care about they payout, not the relative chances according to the book. I make my own judgment about the chances.

I mainly just use percentages when dealing with probabilities (defacto, decimals). Fractions, unless it’s 1/4, 1/2, or 3/4 (.25, .50, and .75 respectfully), I’d have to sit down and do the math.

I say implied probability. Gambling is how the ruthless tax the greedy and stupid. So I have no great moral objection to it. But of all the versions the least objectionable is one that is at least honest about it.

Where's the 1:1 for 50%?

Where's the 1:1 for 50%?
Unless the answer is the UK, I am not sure what you mean.

oh, the UK is just objectively wrong in notation?

Because 1/1 is 100%. 1/2 is 50%.

oh, the UK is just objectively wrong in notation?

Because 1/1 is 100%. 1/2 is 50%.
1/1 means if you stake 1 and win you win 1.

Replies
450
Views
17K
Replies
34
Views
1K
Replies
61
Views
3K
Replies
368
Views
13K
Replies
33
Views
1K