PDA

View Full Version : Sox prop bet in Las Vegas


cards press box
03-22-2008, 03:17 PM
I thought the posters here might find this interesting. Several casinos in Las Vegas were offering the following proposition bet: who has the better regular season record -- White Sox + 11 games or the Cubs?

fquaye149
03-22-2008, 03:18 PM
I thought the posters here might find this interesting. Several casinos in Las Vegas were offering the following proposition bet: who has the better regular season record -- White Sox + 11 games or the Cubs?

If the Cubs win 90 the Sox would have to win 80?

I think that would be a ssmart bet to take. What is the money line?

cards press box
03-22-2008, 03:20 PM
If the Cubs win 90 the Sox would have to win 80?

I think that would be a ssmart bet to take. What is the money line?

It is a -120 bet (i.e., you bet $12 to win $10.)

fquaye149
03-22-2008, 03:23 PM
Make it so.

That's the best bet I've seen in a while.

TDog
03-22-2008, 03:33 PM
If you want to place the bet, you could wait the line attracts enough Cubs fans to make the potential payoff more favorable. It's a sucker bet for people convinced the Cubs are going to win 110 games, although I don't know if the odds would become more favorable or the games would go up or down.

Of course, the fact that such a proposition would be legally offered in Las Vegas is reason (quite justifiable) to keep Las Vegas from getting a major league baseball team.

cards press box
03-22-2008, 03:35 PM
Make it so.

That's the best bet I've seen in a while.

I think so, too. There were long stretches last year where the Sox ran a bad Triple-A outfield out there as well as the worst bullpen in over 50 years (with the exception of Bobby Jenks). And still, the Sox only finished 12 games behind the Cubs in 07. Swisher, Cabrera, Linebrink, Dotel and the other additions make the Sox a much stronger team in 08. Barry Rozner wrote an article today making this very argument.

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=157048

In contrast, the Cubs had no pressure on them last year. That may not be the case this year and I don't think that the Cubs added that much in the offseason (they added Fukodome but lost Cliff Floyd and Jacque Jones).

WhiteSox5187
03-22-2008, 03:42 PM
I think so, too. There were long stretches last year where the Sox ran a bad Triple-A outfield out there as well as the worst bullpen in over 50 years (with the exception of Bobby Jenks). And still, the Sox only finished 12 games behind the Cubs in 07. Swisher, Cabrera, Linebrink, Dotel and the other additions make the Sox a much stronger team in 08. Barry Rozner wrote an article today making this very argument.

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=157048

In contrast, the Cubs had no pressure on them last year. That may not be the case this year and I don't think that the Cubs added that much in the offseason (they added Fukodome but lost Cliff Floyd and Jacque Jones).
I'd make that trade...

I don't think the Cubs are as sure a thing as everyone is talking about. I look at them and see that there are issues with their bullpen (no closer!), the rotation is a bit suspect (you never know which Zambrano will show up, Lilly has never thrown as many innings as he did last year, Hill is getting rocked in ST and only has two pitches really, and any rotation that includes Dempster has to be questioned as being suspect), but then again, 83 wins might be enough to win that divison. But this whole "Cubs are guarenteed to win 90+ games" arguement, I don't buy.

soxfanreggie
03-22-2008, 03:51 PM
Interesting line there. I may have to call some friends who are Cubs fans to see what they think of this-or bets they have made on this.

Vestigio
03-22-2008, 04:49 PM
If this true, I'll ask my parents to find where that line is when they go to Vegas on Monday.

cards press box
03-22-2008, 04:55 PM
If this true, I'll ask my parents to find where that line is when they go to Vegas on Monday.

I saw the bet offered at Bellagio, Mandalay Bay and Luxor.

SoxxoS
03-22-2008, 05:00 PM
Im going Thursday and I might have to drop some coin on that - I wish you could make the bet without paying until the end of the season...I had the Sox at 20-1 to win the W.S. and I lost the ticket!!!!

Luckily I had them at 50-1 at the start of the season, but still that was $200.00 down the tubes - made me sick.

voodoochile
03-22-2008, 05:17 PM
Im going Thursday and I might have to drop some coin on that - I wish you could make the bet without paying until the end of the season...I had the Sox at 20-1 to win the W.S. and I lost the ticket!!!!

Luckily I had them at 50-1 at the start of the season, but still that was $200.00 down the tubes - made me sick.

Is there a way to file a lost ticket claim? Saw this on CSI the other night, so figured I'd toss it out there. For all I know it's not possible, but if you put it on a CC, you'd have some kind of paper trail to follow.

kittle42
03-22-2008, 05:17 PM
Im going Thursday and I might have to drop some coin on that - I wish you could make the bet without paying until the end of the season...I had the Sox at 20-1 to win the W.S. and I lost the ticket!!!!

Luckily I had them at 50-1 at the start of the season, but still that was $200.00 down the tubes - made me sick.

I am also going Thursday - we should meet for a drink during the games.

It's Dankerific
03-22-2008, 05:19 PM
Is there a way to file a lost ticket claim? Saw this on CSI the other night, so figured I'd toss it out there. For all I know it's not possible, but if you put it on a CC, you'd have some kind of paper trail to follow.

I don't think they let you make the bets with a CC. Cash or house credit only.

cards press box
03-22-2008, 05:26 PM
I don't think they let you make the bets with a CC. Cash or house credit only.

I don't think so, either. I also recall that the casinos recommend making a xerox copy of tickets for prop bets as a way of dealing with this very problem.

MarySwiss
03-22-2008, 05:48 PM
I'm driving up to Laughlin next Sunday. Sox are 40-1.

I wonder if that bet will be available there? If so, I may have to throw down a buck or two on it. :cool:

Palehose Pete
03-22-2008, 05:49 PM
I thought the posters here might find this interesting. Several casinos in Las Vegas were offering the following proposition bet: who has the better regular season record -- White Sox + 11 games or the Cubs?

I make this bet every year with a Cubs fan buddy for case of beer.

MarySwiss
03-22-2008, 05:51 PM
I make this bet every year with a Cubs fan buddy for case of beer.

I usually offer a similar friendly bet. $1 per game in the win column.

Railsplitter
03-22-2008, 10:23 PM
It is a -120 bet (i.e., you bet $12 to win $10.)

I'm not a betting man, so I am confused. You actually,lose money betting or do you get you $12 back plus the $10?

Cuck the Fubs
03-22-2008, 11:02 PM
I used to bet with several of my Cub fans buddies at $5 per game better record.

Following 05 - 06 no one will bet anymore, even after a miserable 72 win season in 07 they still won't bet:(:

cards press box
03-22-2008, 11:08 PM
I'm not a betting man, so I am confused. You actually,lose money betting or do you get you $12 back plus the $10?

It works like this: for a -120 bet, if you bet $12 and win, the casino will pay you $22 (your $12 bet plus $10). In contrast, for a +150 bet, if you bet $10 and win, the casino will pay you $25 -- your $10 bet plus $15 (1.5 times your $10).

PalehosePlanet
03-22-2008, 11:18 PM
I'm not a betting man, so I am confused. You actually,lose money betting or do you get you $12 back plus the $10?

Yes, if you're betting $12 to win $10, you'd get $22 back at the window meaning you've won $10.

PalehosePlanet
03-22-2008, 11:22 PM
I used to bet with several of my Cub fans buddies at $5 per game better record.

Following 05 - 06 no one will bet anymore, even after a miserable 72 win season in 07 they still won't bet:(:

Yes, this bet will work in your favor most years. Even in the cubs "magical" year of 2003, when we collapsed down the stretch, you were only out $10 (88 wins to 86.)

BTW: Super glad to hear your dad is doing better!

Cuck the Fubs
03-22-2008, 11:29 PM
BTW: Super glad to hear your dad is doing better!

:gulp: Thanks for all your support :gulp:

jabrch
03-23-2008, 04:57 PM
I'm driving up to Laughlin next Sunday. Sox are 40-1.

Are you sure? 2 weeks ago they were only 10:1 in Vegas.

champagne030
03-23-2008, 05:25 PM
Are you sure? 2 weeks ago they were only 10:1 in Vegas.

Yep. 40-1 everywhere.

kittle42
03-23-2008, 05:49 PM
Are you sure? 2 weeks ago they were only 10:1 in Vegas.

10-1??? That would be a horrible bet.

fquaye149
03-23-2008, 05:50 PM
I'm not a betting man, so I am confused. You actually,lose money betting or do you get you $12 back plus the $10?

You get it back, just like in blackjack when you win and pay $5 to get $5

TDog
03-23-2008, 06:33 PM
10-1??? That would be a horrible bet.

Actually, 40-1 would be a horrible bet as well.

MarySwiss
03-23-2008, 06:52 PM
Actually, 40-1 would be a horrible bet as well.

Well, in 2005, my friends told me that 30-1 was a horrible bet. I didn't listen then, and came out 3K to the good. Sorry, TDog, but I think I'll not listen now also. I'm still betting with money I won back then!

TDog
03-23-2008, 07:12 PM
Well, in 2005, my friends told me that 30-1 was a horrible bet. I didn't listen then, and came out 3K to the good. Sorry, TDog, but I think I'll not listen now also. I'm still betting with money I won back then!

If I bet $100 on the White Sox every year since I came of age as a baseball fan, I would still be hundreds of dollars down, even figuring hitting the jackpot in 2005. On the other hand, if I had put the money in T-bills ....

MarySwiss
03-23-2008, 07:42 PM
Well, in 2005, my friends told me that 30-1 was a horrible bet. I didn't listen then, and came out 3K to the good. Sorry, TDog, but I think I'll not listen now also. I'm still betting with money I won back then!

If I bet $100 on the White Sox every year since I came of age as a baseball fan, I would still be hundreds of dollars down, even figuring hitting the jackpot in 2005. On the other hand, if I had put the money in T-bills ....

Okay. But I had NEVER actually gone so far as to bet the Sox--other than Sox/Cubs bets with friends--prior (again, pardon the word) to 2005. So I can bet $100 every year from now until I'm in my 80s and still come out ahead.

jabrch
03-23-2008, 09:09 PM
Actually, 40-1 would be a horrible bet as well.

If I found 40:1, I'd bet something on it for fun...

It's Dankerific
03-23-2008, 09:57 PM
If I found 40:1, I'd bet something on it for fun...

I bet on the White Sox to win the Series every year.. regardless of the odds or likelihood of victory. This year, it just feels like burning money.

jabrch
03-23-2008, 11:00 PM
I bet on the White Sox to win the Series every year.. regardless of the odds or likelihood of victory. This year, it just feels like burning money.

I'm not sure why you'd say that at 40:1. If you have done it every year for, lets say 20 years, you have bet on a lot of seasons where we looked FAR worse than we do right now.

cards press box
03-24-2008, 12:19 AM
I wouldn't make the +11 Vegas bet this year.:o:

Is your reasoning based upon your expectations for the Sox, the Cubs or both?

TDog
03-24-2008, 12:30 AM
I'm not sure why you'd say that at 40:1. If you have done it every year for, lets say 20 years, you have bet on a lot of seasons where we looked FAR worse than we do right now.


The odds are irrelevant. If you lose your money, it doesn't matter that you could have multiplied it fortyfold.

It isn't just a matter of finishing first in your division -- or perhaps third or better overall in your league, because that's what it generally takes to win the wild card. A team has to win two rounds of playoffs, which are more than six months away. You don't know who will be having good seasons. You don't know who will be hurt. You have no idea today what any team will look like in September, let alone October.

Smart money never bets on baseball.

It's Dankerific
03-24-2008, 01:22 AM
I'm not sure why you'd say that at 40:1. If you have done it every year for, lets say 20 years, you have bet on a lot of seasons where we looked FAR worse than we do right now.

I've only been betting on them the last 8 years (legal age), and this is certainly the worst season they've been coming off since then. When I was younger, I just had blind faith in the team, regardless. Now, I have blind faith and a bet slip that is most likely going to be recycled in september.

jabrch
03-24-2008, 10:04 AM
I've only been betting on them the last 8 years (legal age), and this is certainly the worst season they've been coming off since then. When I was younger, I just had blind faith in the team, regardless. Now, I have blind faith and a bet slip that is most likely going to be recycled in september.

It is irrelevant what they are coming off of. You are talking about this coming season. For that, 40:1 would be a huge value bet if you could still get it. Vegas is giving 10:1.

jabrch
03-24-2008, 10:05 AM
The odds are irrelevant. If you lose your money, it doesn't matter that you could have multiplied it fortyfold.

I'm not sure how the odds are irrelevant in a discussion about betting on a team.

TDog
03-24-2008, 12:49 PM
I'm not sure how the odds are irrelevant in a discussion about betting on a team.

Odds are irrelevant because when all is said and done, your money will be lost. If you make a losing bet at 10-to-1, you haven't lost any more than if you made the bet at 40-to-1. A losing bet is a losing bet.

The way sports books work is they set the odds at a level to entice people to lose their money. If it's something you do for fun, knowing you're most likely going to lose it, it's one thing. If you are one of the suckers attracted by the long odds in hopes of a big score, you are making a bad investment and keeping a sleazy industry alive.

kittle42
03-24-2008, 01:05 PM
Odds are irrelevant because when all is said and done, your money will be lost. If you make a losing bet at 10-to-1, you haven't lost any more than if you made the bet at 40-to-1. A losing bet is a losing bet.

The way sports books work is they set the odds at a level to entice people to lose their money. If it's something you do for fun, knowing you're most likely going to lose it, it's one thing. If you are one of the suckers attracted by the long odds in hopes of a big score, you are making a bad investment and keeping a sleazy industry alive.

Gambling rules.

It's Dankerific
03-24-2008, 01:18 PM
It is irrelevant what they are coming off of. You are talking about this coming season. For that, 40:1 would be a huge value bet if you could still get it. Vegas is giving 10:1.

I got 25:1 in January when I was in Vegas, 25:1 on the Bears too..

IlliniSox4Life
03-24-2008, 01:56 PM
Odds are irrelevant because when all is said and done, your money will be lost. If you make a losing bet at 10-to-1, you haven't lost any more than if you made the bet at 40-to-1. A losing bet is a losing bet.

The way sports books work is they set the odds at a level to entice people to lose their money. If it's something you do for fun, knowing you're most likely going to lose it, it's one thing. If you are one of the suckers attracted by the long odds in hopes of a big score, you are making a bad investment and keeping a sleazy industry alive.

I'm sorry, but I don't think the odds are irrelevant. I get your point that a losing bet is a losing bet. The thing about bets though, is you don't know for sure which ones are going to lose before hand.

Instead of betting on the White Sox, think about betting on the Red Sox. A 1:1 bet would be stupid because the odds that they will win it all again aren't even. They do have a better than average shot at winning it, and a 40:1 bet on the Red Sox would be smart.

The same goes for the White Sox though. Sure the odds are hard to justify. You can say that they have a worse than 40:1 shot to win it, so that would be a bad bet. I would say they have better than a 10,000,000,000:1 shot though, so if somebody was giving out those odds, I would bet it.


And sports books are just trying to get the amount of money on both sides to cancel each other out so that they can skim off the money. They don't care who wins, they get to keep their cut no matter what if they are doing it right.

kittle42
03-24-2008, 02:15 PM
And sports books are just trying to get the amount of money on both sides to cancel each other out so that they can skim off the money. They don't care who wins, they get to keep their cut no matter what if they are doing it right.

Let's hear it for the vig!

jabrch
03-24-2008, 02:50 PM
Odds are irrelevant because when all is said and done, your money will be lost. If you make a losing bet at 10-to-1, you haven't lost any more than if you made the bet at 40-to-1. A losing bet is a losing bet.

The way sports books work is they set the odds at a level to entice people to lose their money. If it's something you do for fun, knowing you're most likely going to lose it, it's one thing. If you are one of the suckers attracted by the long odds in hopes of a big score, you are making a bad investment and keeping a sleazy industry alive.

I understand how odds move. But when you are talking about a "value bet" you are specifically talking about the odds.

Never bet the Cubs, Yanks, Redsox...because the odds are bad. But if you want to look at value, you find it in teams like the sox, surely at 40:1.

soxwon
03-24-2008, 06:19 PM
I'd make that trade...

I don't think the Cubs are as sure a thing as everyone is talking about. I look at them and see that there are issues with their bullpen (no closer!), the rotation is a bit suspect (you never know which Zambrano will show up, Lilly has never thrown as many innings as he did last year, Hill is getting rocked in ST and only has two pitches really, and any rotation that includes Dempster has to be questioned as being suspect), but then again, 83 wins might be enough to win that divison. But this whole "Cubs are guarenteed to win 90+ games" arguement, I don't buy.


Whoa Balsa Wood is the closer, Case closed.
He was on the news walking on Lake Michigan, The savior has returned!!!

TDog
03-24-2008, 07:10 PM
I think the Cubs have a shot at 95 wins and the Sox are more of a 78-81 win team this year.

Only Baseball Prospectus knows how many games teams will win this year. If the numbers look wrong come October, it will only be because we have a different definition of wins and losses.

Seriously, you have no idea how fate will intervene in the upcoming baseball season. I don't believe in curses, but stuff does happen to more than a few teams every year. Before the 2004 season, I saw predictions of 106 wins for the Cubs, who were adding Maddux to the pitching staff led by Prior and Wood. I saw some pretty wild predictions for the 1984 Sox, who added Seaver to a team that won 99 games with lights-out pitching and two 20-game winners.

This isn't to say that betting on the Sox in this prop bet would be a smart thing to do. There is a chance that you won't win. And if you do, your return will be less than you put up.

I am fortunate that my financial well being isn't tied to the fact that I remain a White Sox fan, win or lose -- something Cubs fans deride me for, even though many have grandparents who weren't alive the last time their team won. The fact is, people don't bet on the White Sox because it's a good bet. It's a losing bet at 10-to-1 or 100-to-1. People bet on the White Sox because they are White Sox fans. Betting on the Cubs doesn't come out of financial wisdom. But there is a lot of it, and it comes from Cubs fans.

Every team this year faces heavy odds against them winning the World Series this year. Some teams face longer odds than others. I think the Sox can win this year, and I certainly hope they win this year. But the probability is certainly longer than 40-to-1 for the White Sox to win the 2008 World Series. The only reason the odds against the White Sox don't reflect the true probability this far out of winning is that the odds don't need to be any longer to attract bets from people who want to throw their money away because of fan loyalty.

As if tickets aren't expensive enough.

kaufsox
03-25-2008, 01:51 PM
Every team this year faces heavy odds against them winning the World Series this year. Some teams face longer odds than others. I think the Sox can win this year, and I certainly hope they win this year. But the probability is certainly longer than 40-to-1 for the White Sox to win the 2008 World Series. The only reason the odds against the White Sox don't reflect the true probability this far out of winning is that the odds don't need to be any longer to attract bets from people who want to throw their money away because of fan loyalty.

As if tickets aren't expensive enough.

Man, you are quite the wet blanket. So I put $10 on the Sox at 22/1, it's not a waste of money. I enjoy doing it, I don't see it as an investment, just a floater for a laugh. You may see it as a throwing money away, I see it as entertainment and it doesn't figure into my budget for tickets. Finally, what's ten bucks? a movie? a couple of cups of coffee? its a wash if you ask me.

PennStater98r
03-25-2008, 03:42 PM
Man, you are quite the wet blanket. So I put $10 on the Sox at 22/1, it's not a waste of money. I enjoy doing it, I don't see it as an investment, just a floater for a laugh. You may see it as a throwing money away, I see it as entertainment and it doesn't figure into my budget for tickets. Finally, what's ten bucks? a movie? a couple of cups of coffee? its a wash if you ask me.

:gulp:

I'll drink to that - the true waste is in bold up top!

TDog
03-25-2008, 10:11 PM
Man, you are quite the wet blanket. So I put $10 on the Sox at 22/1, it's not a waste of money. I enjoy doing it, I don't see it as an investment, just a floater for a laugh. You may see it as a throwing money away, I see it as entertainment and it doesn't figure into my budget for tickets. Finally, what's ten bucks? a movie? a couple of cups of coffee? its a wash if you ask me.

I have probably spent more time in Las Vegas than anyone here who doesn't live in the state of Nevada. I used to spend every Friday night casino-hopping in Laughlin. Anyone who isn't brain dead can get a lot more fun with $10 at a $2 minimum twenty-one table (where they deal out of a shoe with, maybe five decks) or a low stakes roulette table (even with the 5 percent house cut) than they can by placing a sports bet. Learn to shoot craps. Your money will last longer and you'll get more entertainment for your $10.

There is no such thing as a "good" or "value" bet on the White Sox. Nick the Greek famously said, "Never bet on anything that can talk." That's especially true with baseball.

soxwon
03-25-2008, 10:23 PM
I heard of a vegas bet. Sox wins vs cubs wins sox get +11
Would you take this?

Law11
03-26-2008, 08:11 AM
Im heading out there in 3 weeks and hope the 40-1 is still the mark.
I laid down $50 in Jan 05 when the sox were 40-1 and come October was an extra happy camper..

Steelrod
03-26-2008, 08:32 AM
If I bet $100 on the White Sox every year since I came of age as a baseball fan, I would still be hundreds of dollars down, even figuring hitting the jackpot in 2005. On the other hand, if I had put the money in T-bills ....
Not really, TDog. At 55 to one, you would have a 50 year plus cushion. That would put you well ahead, as I know you are not in your 60's. And if you were, you would have lost several years t-bills by being too young to tell mom and dad that you bought them!

jabrch
03-26-2008, 10:10 AM
Im heading out there in 3 weeks and hope the 40-1 is still the mark.
I laid down $50 in Jan 05 when the sox were 40-1 and come October was an extra happy camper..

Two weeks ago it was 10:1.

jdm2662
03-26-2008, 10:24 AM
10-1??? That would be a horrible bet.

That's what it was at the Mirage when I was there last month. What was even a bigger joke, they were 12-1 favorites in May 2005... I knew I should've placed that bet. However, I stuck to my no betting on sports policy I've had pretty much my whole life. I hate betting on things I have no control over the outcome.

NoNeckEra
03-26-2008, 10:30 AM
Im heading out there in 3 weeks and hope the 40-1 is still the mark.
The odds don't change that much unless teams make a move like the Mets did by acquiring Santana for prospects. Plus the "10-1" odds I've seen in previous posts refers to the Sox to win the A.L. Central, not the W.S.

But in three weeks the season will be two weeks old, and most, if not all the sports books will have "taken down" the bet for good.

ArkanSox
03-26-2008, 10:56 AM
A month into the '05 season, at the off-shores, you could still get the Sox at 21/1 for the AL Championship and 42/1 as WS Champs. Hmmm...oddly similar to this year. I hope that's an omen. :?:

I will wait awhile to see if this year's Sox develop any team chemistry before I put any money on them. The future odds should remain about the same, especially with Detroit and Cleveland in our division.

jabrch
03-26-2008, 12:46 PM
The odds don't change that much unless teams make a move like the Mets did by acquiring Santana for prospects. Plus the "10-1" odds I've seen in previous posts refers to the Sox to win the A.L. Central, not the W.S.

But in three weeks the season will be two weeks old, and most, if not all the sports books will have "taken down" the bet for good.

No sir...a month ago I got a Vegas ticket at 10:1 to win the WS...

jabrch
03-26-2008, 12:51 PM
That's what it was at the Mirage when I was there last month. What was even a bigger joke, they were 12-1 favorites in May 2005... I knew I should've placed that bet. However, I stuck to my no betting on sports policy I've had pretty much my whole life. I hate betting on things I have no control over the outcome.

I have a photocopy of my 50:1 ticket from 05 lying around somewhere. Since I had 10 years of losses from prior to 05, I still 38 more years of cushion before this becomes a net/net losing proposition. :-)

I know - money lost is money lost - but I just don't care. It is lumped into my White Sox budget along with tickets, beer, parking, etc. An extra $100 either way won't make a difference - fortunately.

Mr. White Sox
03-26-2008, 12:59 PM
Make it so.

That's the best bet I've seen in a while.

I'd avoid a prop bet like that, just because there are so many variables involved. What if, somehow, the Cubs win (gasp!) 100 games? Even a strong White Sox season would lose the bet. Plus, at -120, I'd pass. Big time. If you think the Cubs will have 85 wins, then consider the Under bet, or the Over bet on the White Sox at 78. I'd avoid all of these, though.

Tampa Bay over 76, however, looks mighty appealing...if I was the gambling sort, that is. And if Kazmir stays healthy...

*cough* and Seattle Under 83.5 *cough*

cards press box
03-26-2008, 09:33 PM
I'd avoid a prop bet like that, just because there are so many variables involved. What if, somehow, the Cubs win (gasp!) 100 games? Even a strong White Sox season would lose the bet. Plus, at -120, I'd pass. Big time. If you think the Cubs will have 85 wins, then consider the Under bet, or the Over bet on the White Sox at 78. I'd avoid all of these, though.

Tampa Bay over 76, however, looks mighty appealing...if I was the gambling sort, that is. And if Kazmir stays healthy...

*cough* and Seattle Under 83.5 *cough*

Wow, there really is no consensus on the Sox/Cubs prop bet. The spirited debate is, however, quite interesting.

champagne030
03-27-2008, 02:28 PM
Two weeks ago it was 10:1.

No sir...a month ago I got a Vegas ticket at 10:1 to win the WS...

Man, you got hosed. It was 40-1 10 days ago and it still is today.

soxwon
03-27-2008, 10:43 PM
No sir...a month ago I got a Vegas ticket at 10:1 to win the WS...

i got a 20-1 on us at 10 bucks just two weeks ago

Law11
03-28-2008, 11:05 AM
The odds don't change that much unless teams make a move like the Mets did by acquiring Santana for prospects. Plus the "10-1" odds I've seen in previous posts refers to the Sox to win the A.L. Central, not the W.S.

But in three weeks the season will be two weeks old, and most, if not all the sports books will have "taken down" the bet for good.

Then it looks like I'll be looking at the NFL for my futures bet...

soxfanreggie
03-29-2008, 08:35 AM
Took a couple bets with friends. We usually do a few Sox-Cubs bets on their series and individual games, but this added another one to our list. Never high amounts, but it's all in good fun.

basilesox
03-30-2008, 08:50 AM
I wouldn't make the +11 Vegas bet this year.:o:

Actually thegreek.com (a pretty good offshore betting site) has the Cubs Over/Under at 87.5 and the Sox at 79.5. which is only 8 games...meaning 11 would be a bargain. However, they are putting heavy juice on The Cubs Over (-125) and even greater juice on the Sox Under (-160). This tells me that the house is looking for Sox under bets and Cubs over bets because they are moving the juice but not the game totals. This leads me to believe that they actually believe the Sox will win more than 79.5 and the Cubs less than 87.5 and they want as many bets on the opposite as possible.

basilesox
03-30-2008, 08:58 AM
I'd avoid a prop bet like that, just because there are so many variables involved. What if, somehow, the Cubs win (gasp!) 100 games? Even a strong White Sox season would lose the bet. Plus, at -120, I'd pass. Big time. If you think the Cubs will have 85 wins, then consider the Under bet, or the Over bet on the White Sox at 78. I'd avoid all of these, though.

Tampa Bay over 76, however, looks mighty appealing...if I was the gambling sort, that is. And if Kazmir stays healthy...

*cough* and Seattle Under 83.5 *cough*

Correct..here you are looking at the performance of two teams instead of one that comes with the standard win total bet on a team. But i think that your reasoning is a little flawed here. Just because there are more variables doesnt mean its a bad bet or you should stay away. The Cubs could win 100 or could win 75 (Its the Cubs after all). The Sox could over perform or under perform. If you analyze how you feel both teams will do (Maybe research some note worthy publications) and you feel 11 is too much then its as good as a bet as any.

I do feel that these win total bets are better than betting on a game straight up. My reasoning is that it is more difficult for vegas to set an accurate line than it would be for an actual game. The bad thing about these bets is that you have to sink your money in for about six months, which is difficult for most gamblers.

NardiIsHere
03-30-2008, 08:30 PM
i'd take that bet in a heartbeat even with the crap the nl central is throwin out there this year

PennStater98r
04-09-2008, 05:34 PM
All I know is that with 7 games into the season, it's certainly not looking like a bad bet now.

Law11
04-14-2008, 01:52 PM
All those saying that the futures for MLB were off the board.. NOT.
Just got back last night and every casino has futures for MLB.

I scouted out and found the Sox at 22-1 to win the series at Red Rock casino.
Laid $50 down.

Most of the strip casinos had them at 18-1.
Bears are at 25-1..

By the way Red Rock casino is a must visit for those heading out and want to see something off strip. Its 2 years old and one of the nicest casino Ive ever been at. And Ive been out there about 25 times.
http://www.redrocklasvegas.com/index.php

jabrch
04-14-2008, 01:56 PM
I scouted out and found the Sox at 22-1 to win the series at Red Rock casino.
Laid $50 down.

That's awesome value at this point.

Law11
04-14-2008, 02:02 PM
That's awesome value at this point.

Sunset Station also had them at 22-1 but I already laid the bet at RR.

kittle42
04-14-2008, 02:33 PM
By the way Red Rock casino is a must visit for those heading out and want to see something off strip. Its 2 years old and one of the nicest casino Ive ever been at. And Ive been out there about 25 times.
http://www.redrocklasvegas.com/index.php

I've hear this. About how far off the strip are they? I intend on going when I'm there in June.

Law11
04-14-2008, 02:48 PM
I've hear this. About how far off the strip are they? I intend on going when I'm there in June.

Kittle you have to go. You will not be disappointed.
I'd say its about 30 minutes off the strip. Just head to Red Rock Canyon.
Its on the main road you take to get there. And about 1 mile before you hit the canyon it jumps out on the left.

$5 and $10 BJ tables, we were there from about 2-6. abundance of Video Poker machines as well as slots. and its not crowded. We were there on Friday and there was plenty of room to move around.

Very upscale look and feel with local type of pricing at the tables as well as beer prices compared to the $8-10 a bottle price on the strip
Very Zen feel to it, waterfalls, stone, extremely contemporary.

You'll enjoy it. its worth the trip.

I actually talked about my trip this weekend in the vegas thread in the parking lot. Theres a ton going on in vegas since was out there 2 years ago.