> The odds are set based on what the expected payout will be on each team
> overall

> It doesn’t matter what betters think the odds are, what matters is the
> perceived risk factor of each line, based on the likelihood that any
> particular line will pay out.

This is where you’re missing an important fact – the payout is a function of how many bettors placed winning bets AND what odds the house gave them. Oddsmakers take this into account.

—

Maybe this would be clearer with an example. Let’s start out with a simple bet, rolling a die, where bettors can bet on “one” or “other”. Our oddsmaker knows that the die is weighted (“one” comes up 1 time in 10), but the public believes it is fair (they think “one” comes up 1 time in 6). We’ll consider how much, on average, the house stands to win or lose depending on how the odds are set, without any adjustment to give the house an explicit “cut”.

If he sets 9:1 on “one” and 1:9 on “other”, the house neither turns a profit nor posts a loss. When you bet “one”, the house has a 90% chance of taking your dollar (average gain of $0.90), and 10% chance of paying you nine dollars (average loss of $0.90, equal to average gain). On the other hand, when you bet “other”, the house has a 10% chance of taking your dollar (average gain of $0.10), and a 90% chance of paying you a ninth of a dollar (average loss of $0.10, equal to average gain).

If he sets 5:1 on “one” and 1:5 on “other”, the house’s profit depends on your bet. When you bet “one”, the house has a 90% chance of taking your dollar (average profit of $0.90) and a 10% chance of paying you five dollars (average loss of $0.50, LESS than average gain), which gives it a 40% profit. But when you bet “other”, the house has a 10% chance of taking your dollar (average gain of $0.10), and a 90% chance of paying you a fifth of a dollar (average loss of $0.18, more than average gain), which gives it an 8% loss.

Try to work out (a) the expected payoff for the house if they offer 7:1 on “one”, then calculate (b) what the public thinks the payoff would be (answer below). You’ll see why the oddsmakers do this – the bettor sees a strong incentive to place his bet on “one”, and the house makes a tidy profit when he does.

The same principle applies to football odds; if the fans of one team overestimate their chances, the oddsmakers take advantage of them by offering odds that look attractive but actually benefit the house. I picked on Saskatchewan because they’ve been talked up a lot around here recently, but the same idea applies to all the teams – optimism isn’t your friend when you place your bet.

(a) 20% house’s favour (b) 33% bettor’s favour

What team do you cheer for George? It’s hard to tell

OFTEN OVER DELIVER????
4 cups in a century is not OFTEN.consider too you have many year where you can’t over deliver because you miss playoffs

Only 17th?? Haven’t they won more than that?

No, and very no. That’s not how oddsmaking works at all. The odds are set based on what the expected payout will be on each team overall, based on the current state of the standings (which are currently at zero), and the current state of the teams (based on roster, skill levels, past success, etc).

There is actually a lot of behind-the-scenes analysis and modelling done (similar to the modelling we see on the CFL website later in the season) to assess the “risk” of each bet paying out. Then overall each bet is adjusted downward to provide an overall profit margin. Generally, that profit margin is adjusted very close to the actual risk so that it incents as many betters as possible, but it is normally a fixed rate (maybe 1% to 5% below “actual” odds).

It doesn’t matter what betters think the odds are, what matters is the perceived risk factor of each line, based on the likelihood that any particular line will pay out. The normal distribution of betting itself creates the profit margin.

Sorry. I meant Winnipeg has the better QB of the three. Not Montreal.

“Winnipeg & Riders have inferior QB’s to Mtl”

Yeah. No. Riders *maybe* have an inferior QB (I would say Kevin Glenn and Durant, at this stage in their careers, are about even). Montreal has the better quarterback of the three. By far.