Did we ever consider the missing 0.10 in Sports Betting Odds?

[jeremypwr]

No and I think that's standard juice in sports betting
Even though it is such a small amount, it does start to add up after many wagers

[Charles-Tim]

Most of us don't usually pay attention to sportsbook odds, so it will be difficult for us to notice this thing OP highlighted. And there is no doubt that must bettors here focus more on the winning teams, but someone like me doesn't really like betting on winners, instead I bet more on over market, especially over 2.5 goals. however, the profit the casino or gambling platform I'm gambling on will make it not really my concern, I just place my bet and let things be, beside I don't gamble with an amount of money that I can't comfortably afford to lose.

The house edge is all on the odds given in the market including the over and under 2.5. in short, the betting sites are for business and the gamblers are the ones that makes the gambling sites to be making money from the industry.

Most gamblers are not thinking of the odds differences of the house edge. But I have heard of bettors that will work the equation to look for odds that have positive EV and not think about the house edge.

[Orpichukwu]

No and I think that's standard juice in sports betting
Even though it is such a small amount, it does start to add up after many wagers

I don’t really pay attention to that number, and it doesn't matter to me either; if not for the op even bringing it up, I’m certain many bettors don’t look at that angle (maybe those who move from one sportsbook to the other because of odds differences might). We are more focused on how we can get our prediction right because winning is all that matters, and that 0.10 odds can be considered their own fee.

[Hispo]

...

I know sportsbooks need to make profit, but I just want to discuss this angle. Do most bettors really think about the juice, or do we only focus on picking the winning side?

Honestly, I don't think too much about how much profit if the bookie making thanks to their volume. It is very clear from my own personal perspective that they are supposed to get money from their operations... I mostly focus on picking the right team and try not to lose all my money in a single short session of betting.
Sport betting is a business after all, it would be foolish to assume casinos and bookies just provide those betting markets to us without taking a slice for themselves.

[alegotardo]

But if it is really an even market, should it not be 2.00 vs 2.00?
So where does that missing 0.10 go?

That is the juice where the sportsbook makes money. It looks small, but if we keep taking that kind of odds are we already at a disadvantage in the long run?

I know sportsbooks need to make profit, but I just want to discuss this angle. Do most bettors really think about the juice, or do we only focus on picking the winning side?

Tell me which betting site does not "reserve" an overround of the odds to cover its costs, a balanced bet is exactly thit: equal probabilities of winning for both sides and the plus money to house managing the game between both.

Of course... the casino makes even more profit from deposit fees, withdrawal fees, currency conversion and among other things... managing a betting site, providing bonuses, paying employees, suppliers, etc... is not cheap. But I’ve never worried about those "0.10", its something so insignificant that my concern is usually about winning and not losing everything, where the money goes or how it is used is not my concern

I know that odds are "not fair" — I think we can say that hedging bets never give you fair odds. That's why the casino always wins.
But for me, it doesn't matter: if I don't like the odds, I just don't bet. It's only my decision. I don't care about the casino's profit — the only thing that matters is whether my bet wins.

Exactly, and that is the point: most people do not care about it and they keep betting... let the casinos make their profits, that guarantees that we will be able to keep playing for a long time, because the day they no longer make a profit our fun will come to an end.

[yahoo62278]

Did we ever consider that the missing 0.10 in sportsbook odds is what beats us in the long run?

For example, in an even market like point spread, we usually see:

Code:

Team A: +5.5  1.90
Team B: -5.5 1.90

Most of us just choose between the two because we believe our pick will hit. But of course, there are also bettors on the other side thinking the same thing. And if the line does not move much, maybe that means the action is somehow balanced.

But if it is really an even market, should it not be 2.00 vs 2.00?
So where does that missing 0.10 go?

That is the juice where the sportsbook makes money. It looks small, but if we keep taking that kind of odds are we already at a disadvantage in the long run?

I know sportsbooks need to make profit, but I just want to discuss this angle. Do most bettors really think about the juice, or do we only focus on picking the winning side?

It's no different than if you are a dice player and playing x2. The house edge is there in everything almost. Sites, sportbook, lenders all need to make money to cover operating costs. They gotta make their money somewhere right?

I personally don't think about the juice. I am being offered a service and paying the vendor is how I view it.

[MiF]

Sportsbook operators are very professional in assigning odds for each game you see them include, and they do this mostly in such a manner when they already suspect that both sides have almost equal chances or opportunities to deliver as they may want. They wouldn't want to risk what they already perceive as the outcome by giving too much of a difference in the odds they provide.

Sportbooks would not want to be investigated for cheating hence their odds will always be balancing each other out and they know how  the system they use in generating the odds balanced each other perfectly. I do not really care about other odds when gambling as all my attention is on the odds that I'm choosing and if there is a particular percentage always left out then I would not know but then that might just be the percentage that  that keeps the system balance. If the bet is 50% for slot A,  D raw gets.30% and then 20% for slot B then there is no way you can get a loss if you stake on all odds, that's why there has to be a little difference so you can not cheat the odds hat way .

I believe the reason it's missing 0.10% is more about how the sportsbooks construct their margins than about them leaving out a percent of it. Although the odds may be almost equal between two teams. The odds offered will typically have a bookmaker's edge. Meaning that a bet on all possible outcomes is not a sure bet. This small difference is what makes the sportsbook safe from arbitrage and covers its operating risk. The key information for a bettor is not only the implied probability. But also if the betting odds are worth it relative to our own estimate of the odds.

[ralle14]

I used to overlook the juice back when I was still new to sports betting, but now i'm always checking because there's not much downside with my bankroll spread across a few sportsbooks.

There are times when I prioritize other stuff (promotions, rank progression, etc), but finding those extra odds is always nice because they're like a free boost.

[SamReomo]

I know sportsbooks need to make profit, but I just want to discuss this angle. Do most bettors really think about the juice, or do we only focus on picking the winning side?

To be honest, I never thought about that and I'll never think about it ever, for me the winning side matters the most that's where I can make money so if sportsbooks are making money with that 0.1 odd let them do that as long as I pick a winning team I'm happy because I make money by doing that. So in the end for a regular sports betting person the win matters the most not that juice I guess.

[Elainebue]

I think most people probably don't think about the juice until, they've been betting for a while. When you're looking at a match, it's easy to focus only on whether your pick is right but that small difference in the odds adds up over a lots of bets. Comparing odds between different books is probably one of the easier things you can actually control.

[Nrcewker]

First of all you need to understand that these are done because of the house edge. We have often heard that “the house always wins” and this is how they are able to make a profit from all bets. Moreover these odds are also provided by the provider to ensure that there is no arbitrage betting happening at any of the casinos.

So yes we can’t really blame the casino or sportsbook either because when registering or signing up, we agree to the terms and conditions regarding the house edge. Whether it’s online or offline, we will see some discrepancies in the odds. The same thing happens with casino games such as dice and roulette as well.

[bitbollo]

this can be just casual. most of bookmakers are not just hedging inside their own bookie but also using others.
this could lead to avoid "large odds" available or other discrepancies...

That demands an insane level of awareness and calculations for a regular gambler to spot out. The rtps, bonuses and free spins they usually offer is an expenses made from that little quotient of profit, which can eventually become millions on full matches for big events, say the champions League for instance.

Odds for sports gambling are based on previous events and after few years of gambling players could recognize the right odd just looking for time or score. The real point is...you will always have an estimate that allow bookmakers to hedge their bookie!

The only solution for players would be a live watching of different markets. It's not just "Monitors" stuffs... it was already well known also in the past.
If you have been in UK horse race there are still old bookies offering their odds by just writing on a blackboard!

[Dave1]

Did we ever consider that the missing 0.10 in sportsbook odds is what beats us in the long run?

That is the juice where the sportsbook makes money. It looks small, but if we keep taking that kind of odds are we already at a disadvantage in the long run?

I know sportsbooks need to make profit, but I just want to discuss this angle. Do most bettors really think about the juice, or do we only focus on picking the winning side?

In the beginning of our sports journey, maybe we really don't look at where that 0.10 goes or if it even exist. The only thing we know is that we put our bet in like the ML and then just hope that we will win in the end. But obviously, as we mature, we try to look at the numbers itself.

It doesn't mean though that we will go and try to outsmart the casino. No, sooner or later we learn that at some point, they will have to earn and make a profit and this is done thru that kind of odds and it is called margin.

[Tetu100]

I don't really know why but I don't just pay more attention to all of this odd stuff when ever I am gambling . I only choose a bet if I am pretty okay with it, once I find out any form of dissatisfaction with it all I do is switch to the next game if I think that will be fine and that's it. And again, one thing I have noticed that is sure in gamble is that, no matter what or how we try to be at the top in our gambling streak, the house hedge will always be ahead of us and that is the fact.

[TedMosby]

I am aware of the juice you are talking about, but in sports betting, my focus is just predicting and picking the winning side, because winning by picking the right side is already difficult for me.

Also, has anyone here realized that equal odds on each side can be abused by people who want to cash out bonuses that usually come with wagering requirements? It's easy for cheaters to abuse bonus systems like welcome bonuses and free bets. Apart from the wagering requirement, sportsbooks sometimes have minimum odds like 1.50 for the bonus bets. So, 2.00 on both sides is enough.

BTW, what about money laundering? You can deposit money and do hedging bets to make it delta neutral. Does it make sense?
CMIIW.

[Julien_Olynpic]

Bookmakers set their odds so that, firstly, the winning side's profit is covered by the losing side, and secondly, no matter who wins, the winner pays the bookmaker's commission. Thus, players essentially play against each other, and the losers pay the winners, while the winner pays a portion of their winnings to the bookmaker. Of course, there's no point in trying to achieve significant winnings in the long run based solely on odds. The goal of a successful bettor isn't to maximize winnings, but to maximize profits, even if you lose most of your games.

[leea-1334]

Funny to see a question like this honestly,,, did you not realize this is the equivalent of the house edge? I know USA people call it juice but I always see it as literal house edge so a 2x odds becoming 1.90 is 5% house edge in a way

The odds in 2x markets is actually not so bad, considering what sportsbooks are doing with the very big odds,,, what used to be 10x is nowadays 8x or even less. There is where they are really eating our profits.

For example today Arsenal vs Coventry: Arsenal is 1.20 to win. So a double chance for Coventry, that odds should be 6. But look at all the sportsbooks, double chance for Coventry is 4.5.

[Kelward]

~
I know sportsbooks need to make profit, but I just want to discuss this angle. Do most bettors really think about the juice, or do we only focus on picking the winning side?

I know that odds are "not fair" — I think we can say that hedging bets never give you fair odds. That's why the casino always wins.
But for me, it doesn't matter: if I don't like the odds, I just don't bet. It's only my decision. I don't care about the casino's profit — the only thing that matters is whether my bet wins.

You're correct we gamblers should focus on winning our bets, no need to be figuring out whether the bookmakers are making unfair profits on us, casinos are people's businesses so we shouldn't expect to be more profitable than them. We just have to accept the house edge in any form that it is and it's not as if they're doing anything behind our backs, if you don't like their edge then you shouldn't bet in their sites, it's just as simple as that. If we're in their shoes I believe that we would do the same to be able to make turnover so that the business would continue to run, I think that if you're lucky to win you should take what is due for you and leave the bookmakers to make make theirs.

[swogerino]

In the only casino where I have not yet ban myself from playing I don't mind that 0.10 in odd because their sportbook always offer odds much lower than other casinos. It does not mean anything to me because as long as I win the bet I don't care if I get a 0.10 odds lower and very few cents less than if played in other casinos. I know people though that spend a huge portion of the day finding the best and big odds before playing and usually these people play a lot of money so they want the maximum for every single buck.

[rbynxx]

But if it is really an even market, should it not be 2.00 vs 2.00?
So where does that missing 0.10 go?

That is the juice where the sportsbook makes money. It looks small, but if we keep taking that kind of odds are we already at a disadvantage in the long run?

I know sportsbooks need to make profit, but I just want to discuss this angle. Do most bettors really think about the juice, or do we only focus on picking the winning side?

The house has always an edge, it has been discussed a lot of times I guess. Players are always at a disadvantage and it's been known but what keeps people coming isn't that odd but the thing they'll win if their prediction is right. I think psychologically we just picking the winning side and not go through the hassle on where the juice is landing, it's not just in online gambling but even on traditional betting, this is a common thing.