Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email
Photo

Twins World Series Odds - What does Vegas know that we don't?

  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#1 John Bonnes

John Bonnes

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 5,894 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 11:53 AM

I guess I'm not that surpised with the overall number, but I am surprised with where the Twins are ranked. The Twins are 75:1 to win the World Series behind the Rays and .... the White Sox? Tied with the Royals?The only AL teams with worse odds are the Tigers and Athletics.

 

Anyone know what the professional gamblers know that we don't?

 

 

2018 WS Odds.JPG

  • glunn likes this

#2 Doomtints

Doomtints

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 2,904 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 12:04 PM

Probably a case of nothing to see here ... odds for most teams got worse. Maybe no one is betting ... or maybe even too many people are betting!

Edited by Doomtints, 11 December 2017 - 12:05 PM.

  • glunn likes this

#3 spinowner

spinowner

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 3,995 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 12:08 PM

Betting odds are not the same thing as the odds of winning the World Series. Betting odds are based strictly on the consequences of the house having to pay off a winning ticket. Odds change more because of which bets have been placed and are expected to be placed than because of changes occurring with a team. If a particular casino knows a whole bunch of Minnesotans will be visiting during a certain week they might change the Twins to 50:1 for that week.

  • glunn, gunnarthor, 70charger and 2 others like this

#4 spinowner

spinowner

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 3,995 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 12:11 PM

 

Probably a case of nothing to see here ... odds for most teams got worse. Maybe no one is betting ... or maybe even too many people are betting!

Most likely no one is betting so they increase the payoff to try to entice people to play.

  • glunn and Doomtints like this

#5 tarheeltwinsfan

tarheeltwinsfan

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 824 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 12:14 PM

I've never placed a bet through someone in Las Vegas. But I'll take the 75 to 1 odds against the Twins to win it all. I'm going to sign off now and see if I can figure out how to place a bet with a "reliable source".
  • glunn and Doomtints like this

#6 notoriousgod71

notoriousgod71

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,474 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 04:12 PM

Well there is no pitching so I'd say 75:1 is quite optimistic at this point in time.

  • jimmer likes this

#7 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 6,064 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 08:07 PM

Because without front line pitching, the Twins have practically zero chance of winning the whole thing. And the professional gamblers know this.
  • Platoon likes this

#8 tarheeltwinsfan

tarheeltwinsfan

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 824 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 08:08 PM

Well there is no pitching so I'd say 75:1 is quite optimistic at this point in time.

I'll bet you a dollar at 75 to 1.

#9 Halsey Hall

Halsey Hall

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,541 posts
  • LocationCurrently Hammond Stadium

Posted 11 December 2017 - 08:24 PM

The Yankees improvement upped the odds on the Twins.Everyone knows how we fare against them.

he gone!


#10 DaveW

DaveW

    Aaron Hicks update (5/17): .326 BA .464 OBP .616 SLG 1.080 OPS

  • Banned
  • 13,014 posts
  • LocationNYC aka Aaron Hicks Ville

Posted 11 December 2017 - 08:31 PM

Until they bring in 2 starters and significant bullpen help, I don't see how anyone can say they are better than 50:1

They got crushed by the Yankees last season, and likely would have lost in 5 games against either the Indians or Astros as well (at best)

The Yankees and Stros are only getting stronger, and their are teams in the 'middle' that are improving quite a bit as well (Mariners, Angels etc)

  • Platoon likes this
<p>Aaron Hicks 2017 stats so far (5/17/17): .326 BA .464 OBP .616 SLG 1.080 OPS 7 HR 19 RBI 6 SB 22 BBs 1.8WAR

#11 amjgt

amjgt

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,378 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 08:36 PM

I don't disagree with some of the opinions above about the state of our pitching staff, but when you compare it to other teams, 75-1 seems a bit low.

No "local" bookmakers are even taking MLB futures bets at this point, but if I was in Vegas right now I'd throw down $100 at 75-1, and go to confession every day.

The Twins likely have a top 3 AL offense next year.... one hot pitching signee and one pitching minor league flash-in-the-pan and we're in the conversation.

75-1 is a really good number.

Edited by amjgt, 11 December 2017 - 08:37 PM.


#12 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 27,585 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 08:43 PM

I don't disagree with some of the opinions above about the state of our pitching staff, but when you compare it to other teams, 75-1 seems a bit low.

No "local" bookmakers are even taking MLB futures bets at this point, but if I was in Vegas right now I'd throw down $100 at 75-1, and go to confession every day.

The Twins likely have a top 3 AL offense next year.... one hot pitching signee and one pitching minor league flash-in-the-pan and we're in the conversation.

75-1 is a really good number.


Likely to be top three? I'll take that bet, what odds? And how is it measured?

I remain hopeful on Buxton and Sano.....but I'd not bet the franchise on them.


#13 drjim

drjim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 8,783 posts
  • LocationSt. Paul

Posted 11 December 2017 - 08:48 PM

Likely to be top three? I'll take that bet, what odds? And how is it measured?


I won't bet, but the Twins were legitimately #4 by all reasonable measures, wRC+, wOBA, and runs.

I think they have a reasonable chance to pass the Indians too, but highly doubtful they touch Houston and especially New York. Not an outrageous statement.
Papers...business papers.

#14 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 27,585 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 08:49 PM

Reasonable chance? Agreed.

I remain hopeful on Buxton and Sano.....but I'd not bet the franchise on them.


#15 amjgt

amjgt

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,378 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 09:06 PM

Likely to be top three? I'll take that bet, what odds? And how is it measured?

I stand by my statement.

Measured by the only thing that matters. Runs.

Analytics can predict future results, but actual results can only be measured by one thing.
  • tarheeltwinsfan likes this

#16 Hosken Bombo Disco

Hosken Bombo Disco

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 9,269 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 09:27 PM

My guess is the House is setting prices to take advantage of casual bettors placing token offseason bets. Probabilities should add up to about 100 + juice but in the Twins case I think 75:1 is a great price, especially if they add a good starter.

I see the new Pitch to Contact guys in Detroit aren't getting much love :)
  • tarheeltwinsfan likes this

#17 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 6,064 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 09:29 PM

Well, there is an easy resolution for those that think the odds are too low...

#18 dgwills

dgwills

    Member

  • Members
  • 568 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 09:45 PM

I would have to agree with Dave. The Twin's just don't have the pitching to advance in the playoffs right now. Even if it was 100-1 I would still not make the bet. Just too far away right now.


#19 amjgt

amjgt

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,378 posts

Posted 11 December 2017 - 09:57 PM

Well, there is an easy resolution for those that think the odds are too low...

No there isn't.

The Supreme Court still needs to decide who can take my money.

#20 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 6,064 posts

Posted 12 December 2017 - 06:13 AM

No there isn't.

The Supreme Court still needs to decide who can take my money.

There are many places online that take sports bets.

Edited by Mr. Brooks, 12 December 2017 - 06:13 AM.