PDA

View Full Version : Sox 50-1 to win series


SoxxoS
11-10-2004, 10:37 AM
Get this bet in now, b/c if/when we get one of the big 3 (Zito, Hudson or Johnson) this will go to about 25-1. And you know KW wiil make a move, it's just a matter of when.

50-1...we aren't getting much respect in Vegas. Matter of fact-Seattle, the Orioles, and the Washington D.C. team are all 50-1.

Flubbies are 8 to 1. (To all the people who are reading this and would think about betting on the Cubs to win the W.S. at 8-1. How about you give me your address, I come over, and I kick you in the mid-section as hard as I can...and we call it a day.)

fquaye149
11-10-2004, 10:41 AM
i thought with sports betting they determined the payout at the end based on how many people bet on whom.

so it wouldn't matter WHEN you got in.

am i wrong?

jabrch
11-10-2004, 10:56 AM
i thought with sports betting they determined the payout at the end based on how many people bet on whom.

so it wouldn't matter WHEN you got in.

am i wrong?
Yes - you are wrong. Otherwise why would anyone bet anything now? They'd just wait until "the end" and then bet...

Odds change every minute - and you get a ticket with odds on it - that's your number.

mantis1212
11-10-2004, 11:00 AM
Yes - you are wrong. Otherwise why would anyone bet anything now? They'd just wait until "the end" and then bet...

Odds change every minute - and you get a ticket with odds on it - that's your number.
This is true except for horse racing- that's probably what he was thinking of...

mweflen
11-10-2004, 11:01 AM
Frankly, given the Sox' recent losses and their history of acquiring impact players in the offseason, 50-1 sounds just about right.
I agree that acquiring one of the 'big 3' would improve the odds by at least half. But I also agree that monkeys might fly out of my butt.

:bandance:

How could they change the odds on a bet already taken mid-bet? What would be the point of taking a long shot, then? There would be absolutely no incentive to bet until the last minute when you had a good idea of the outcome.

FightingBillini
11-10-2004, 11:09 AM
How could they change the odds on a bet already taken mid-bet? What would be the point of taking a long shot, then? There would be absolutely no incentive to bet until the last minute when you had a good idea of the outcome.
If you place a bet now on the Sox, you will get a 50-1 pay out. That is regardless of what the odds change too. The payout is what the odds where whenever you placed the bet. Say you took 300-1 odds on the Bengals to win the Superbowl in august. If they reach the Superbowl, their odds will be probably 3-1 then, or something similar. If they win, you would win $300 for every dollar bet, while a person who just placed one would win $3 for ever dollar bet. That is my understanding, though I have never gambled.

Soxzilla
11-10-2004, 11:51 AM
Where can I place a bet?

Hell, if I put down 50 bucks on these guys and they win ... that is a 2500 dollar pay out.

And if they lose ... meh? only 50 bucks lost :cool:

TDog
11-10-2004, 11:56 AM
No matter how good the White Sox become, you would have to set long odds to attract betting on the team to win. Gambling odds are not power ratings.

Flight #24
11-10-2004, 12:02 PM
If you place a bet now on the Sox, you will get a 50-1 pay out. That is regardless of what the odds change too. The payout is what the odds where whenever you placed the bet. Say you took 300-1 odds on the Bengals to win the Superbowl in august. If they reach the Superbowl, their odds will be probably 3-1 then, or something similar. If they win, you would win $300 for every dollar bet, while a person who just placed one would win $3 for ever dollar bet. That is my understanding, though I have never gambled.
The thing to do is place a bet on the Sox at 50-1, then if/when the odds drop to say 30-1 (or whatever), take a bet from someone willing to bet on the Sox with those new odds. A nice little arbitrage, assuming you can find someone who'll place a bet with for the Sox to win.

Of course, if they do nothing in the offseason and the odds decline, then you'll be SOL.

MUsoxfan
11-10-2004, 12:19 PM
I was out in Vegas a couple years ago and the Devil Rays were 450-1. I thought about putting $5 on it just in case. Instead, I bet red and lost

ewokpelts
11-10-2004, 12:43 PM
If you place a bet now on the Sox, you will get a 50-1 pay out. That is regardless of what the odds change too. The payout is what the odds where whenever you placed the bet. Say you took 300-1 odds on the Bengals to win the Superbowl in august. If they reach the Superbowl, their odds will be probably 3-1 then, or something similar. If they win, you would win $300 for every dollar bet, while a person who just placed one would win $3 for ever dollar bet. That is my understanding, though I have never gambled.usually in march, the odds get better..the sox were 15-1 to win the 2004 world series when i was in vegas during spring training....needless to say, my five bucks went to waste.....
Gene

santo=dorf
11-10-2004, 12:54 PM
usually in march, the odds get better..the sox were 15-1 to win the 2004 world series when i was in vegas during spring training....needless to say, my five bucks went to waste.....
Gene:reinsy
"See what happens when you spend some money hoping for a World Series victory? Why bother?"

DSpivack
11-10-2004, 03:41 PM
Why would you ever bet money on a team that needs a RF, 3B, C, SS, Starter, and a few relievers?

jabrch
11-10-2004, 03:45 PM
Why would you ever bet money on a team that needs a RF, 3B, C, SS, Starter, and a few relievers?
Because you could have said something similar about the Marlins, Angels, D-Backs, etc. in years they won... That's why it pays 50:1.

munchman33
11-10-2004, 03:45 PM
Why would you ever bet money on a team that needs a RF, 3B, C, SS, Starter, and a few relievers?
Well, that's your opinion. But some of us believe Crede is servicable, Visquel is in the bag at SS, our catching platoon works well enough, and the bullpen is underrated. I agree with the need for another SP and a RF. But lets at least give Kenny a chance to address this.

soxwon
11-10-2004, 09:06 PM
odds from vegas.com:
MLB2005 World Series
Updated November 3, 2004TeamCurrentNew York Yankees7/2Oakland Athletics 10/1Arizona Diamondbacks 300/1Atlanta Braves 10/1San Francisco Giants15/1St. Louis Cardinals7/1Anaheim Angels 8/1Boston Red Sox7/2Houston Astros 8/1Los Angeles Dodgers20/1Seattle Mariners 100/1Minnesota Twins 15/1New York Mets50/1Philadelphia Phillies 15/1Chicago White Sox20/1Chicago Cubs 6/1Cincinnati Reds 100/1Toronto Blue Jays100/1Cleveland Indians 30/1Texas Rangers 35/1Florida Marlins 30/1San Diego Padres20/1Washington Expos 300/1Colorado Rockies 100/1Baltimore Orioles 50/1Pittsburgh Pirates 200/1Kansas City Royals400/1Detroit Tigers 125/1Milwaukee Brewers 200/1Tampa Bay Devil Rays150/1

Soxzilla
11-10-2004, 09:22 PM
Chicago Cubs 6/1:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

JUribe1989
11-10-2004, 09:38 PM
Why would you ever bet money on a team that needs a RF, 3B, C, SS, Starter, and a few relievers?
Burke and Davis might not be the best catchers, but Davis was clutch for awhile and on a hot streak, and Jamie Burke was an excellent hitter. I also hear that Carl Everett is working out and losing weight in the offseason. Remember what a threat he was the second half of 2003. If he's back to that, he's our new rightfielder. As far as starters go I would love signing Russ Ortiz, then look at the rotation.

Rotation
Garcia
Buerhle
Ortiz
Contreras
Garland (A good FIFTH starter)

I think Ortiz is realistic. Kenny has had his eye on him, and we all know he had his eye on Contreras for awhile before he got him.

idseer
11-10-2004, 09:51 PM
Well, that's your opinion. But some of us believe Crede is servicable, Visquel is in the bag at SS, our catching platoon works well enough, and the bullpen is underrated. I agree with the need for another SP and a RF. But lets at least give Kenny a chance to address this.
servicable? there's a high recommendation. this is nothing more than blind faith at work. there is nothing to suggest he will live up to expectations so far. could that change? sure. would i bet on it? no!
viz at short isn't really in the bag ... it's still just rumor. and even so he won't be too much an upgrade over jose last year all things considered.
our catching platoon works? i don't see this and neither does anyone else.
bullpen underrated? must be joking. the bullpen is terrible. other than shingo (and even he is still a ? and is on the old side) there isn't one dependable arm in there. how is that underrated?

the original statement holds. serious help is needed at 6 spots. i wouldn't take 500 to 1 odds on this team as it stands.

idseer
11-10-2004, 09:57 PM
Burke and Davis might not be the best catchers, but Davis was clutch for awhile and on a hot streak, and Jamie Burke was an excellent hitter.
davis is a lifetime .230 hitter who dropped to .207 with the sox this past season.
burke has a total of 72 major league games under his belt and is 33 years old.
this doesn't strike me as an adequate platoon for a contending team. or even a .500 team for that matter.

JUribe1989
11-10-2004, 09:59 PM
davis is a lifetime .230 hitter who dropped to .207 with the sox this past season.
burke has a total of 72 major league games under his belt and is 33 years old.
this doesn't strike me as an adequate platoon for a contending team. or even a .500 team for that matter.
We were over .500 with them this year and Burke hit .333
Older players are in these days as shown by Julio Franco, Roger Clemens, and Randy Johnson.

FightingBillini
11-10-2004, 10:02 PM
viz at short isn't really in the bag ... it's still just rumor. and even so he won't be too much an upgrade over jose last year all things considered.
Dude, thats ridiculous. Vizquel is still gold glove caliber. Even if he did lose a step, he is still much much better than Jose. Also, Omar hit 75 points higher than Jose. He is a gigantic upgrade over Jose, even if you argue that we dont have $4mil to spend on him. That isnt the question, the question is whether Willie is enough of an upgrade over Jose.

idseer
11-10-2004, 10:22 PM
Dude, thats ridiculous. Vizquel is still gold glove caliber. Even if he did lose a step, he is still much much better than Jose. Also, Omar hit 75 points higher than Jose. He is a gigantic upgrade over Jose, even if you argue that we dont have $4mil to spend on him. That isnt the question, the question is whether Willie is enough of an upgrade over Jose.
viz iz old. be realistic. don't expect him to maintain that average of last year. don't forget, he's a lifetime .270 hitter. a good bet is he's more likely to hit around .260/.265. also, his power doesn't compare to jose's. and even tho i disagree ... many here believe jose is close to being a gold glover too.

i DID agree he'd be an upgrade. i only said not THAT much of an upgrade.

idseer
11-10-2004, 10:26 PM
We were over .500 with them this year and Burke hit .333
Older players are in these days as shown by Julio Franco, Roger Clemens, and Randy Johnson.
pfffhh.
older players are ALWAYS in. but please don't insult me by asking me to believe burke is in the same catagory as franco, clemens or johnson.

it's so like sox fans to pick out the very best instance of a sox player and EXPECT them to go nowhere but up from there.