Dear Mark: Was there a chance to bet on the final outcome of that historic tennis match at Wimbledon on day three? Marty D.
Outside of hoping to see a woman win the Indy 500, I thought I had pretty much seen all I want to see when it comes to sports records. Then last week a friend in Lucerne, Switzerland emails me asking, “are you watching this?" No, but why miss a “where were you when?” moment.
With both ESPN channels on my cable covering the FIFA World Cup, I hopped on my laptop to the ESPN website to catch it at 28 all, fifth set. Then at 59-59 the match was called for the second day due to darkness and Nicolas Mahut and John Isner were told to show up courtside at 3:30 the following day, which as a rule would NOT lead to another betting opportunity.
Typically in tennis, in the event of circumstances like, a change of playing surface, a change of venue, second or third day play, or a change from indoor court to outdoor court or vice versa, your wager would stand, even if you bet the match two days earlier when it began. Betting a tennis match in progress I’m not familiar with.
Regrettably, Marty, your e-mail came three days after the conclusion of the match, so I didn’t get the opportunity to call someone in Las Vegas to check the boards to see if they were taking any bets at 59-all. My own curiosity though had me check websites abroad to find that many had listed the wager, but almost all had it OFF, no action. I did find a few online bookmakers willing to take your hard-earned money with odds set at N. Mahut (FRA) –110 and J. Isner (USA) –130, meaning, betting on Mahut -110 indicates you must risk $110 to win $100. Wagering on Isner -130 signifies you stake $130 to win $100.
I believe those third day odds were handicapped –130 Isner because he had the distinct advantage of serving first, forcing Mahut to hold serve to stay in the match.
This five-set thriller was not only the longest match in Wimbledon history, but it was also the longest match in tennis history. Isner finally sealed the deal with an incredible 70-68 win.
Dear Mark: Because you have to bet $110 to win $100 on most sports wagers, does that mean the house edge on a football game is 10 percent? That seems awful high to me. Dale C.
When it comes to sports betting, Dale, the last thing the casino wants is to be top heavy on any one team. They leave the gambling up to you and would prefer to just balance the books on every game. That’s what the point spread is for. Getting identical action on both sides.
Your cost – the house edge -- on any sporting bet where you wager $110 to win $100 is 4.55 percent. That extra $10 is NOT a percentage edge, but a commission or vigorish (a.k.a. vig), taken by the house as compensation for allowing you to bet on the game.
For example, let’s say that both you and I are betting on the Detroit/Green Bay football game. You favor the Packers, while I’m on the Detroit Lions. We each bet $110, which gives the sports book a total cash inflow of $220. If you win, you turn in your winning ticket and get back $210 --- your original $110 plus $100 in winnings. Now here's the barnyard math, Dale, which will get you to that 4.55 percent casino advantage.
The house edge is the $10 the casino keeps from the $220 total we staked on the game. Divide 10 by 220, and you get .0455. Now multiply .0455 by 100 to convert to a percentage, which gives the house 4.55 percent of total we bet on the game. Ah, but that’s the edge on both of our wagers. The percentage of sports bets you have to win to break even against the house is at least 52.28 percent of any point-spread wagers you make.
Dear Mark: I find horse racing one of the most enjoyable forms of casino gambling. For just $2 I can sit in an air conditioned race book and watch simulcast races from all across America. Wow! Any advice for a newbie horse player? Robert A.
I'm with you, Robert. A splash of stimulation and a $2 wager on a long-shot equine overdue for the glue factory can be an inexpensive diversion from a $25 minimum blackjack game. At $2 that is. But with Nevada's race books offering only pari-mutuel wagering, Robert, the house does hold an 18-22% edge on any straight bet you make at the sports book window.
That said, pony players in the know-not me, I go by the horse's biorhythms-believe the following factors are essential to your chances of picking winners.
1. knowledge of breeding
2. physical specifications of the race track (length, turns, surface, drainage, etc.)
3. track bias in the horse's previous starts
4. jockey skills
5. trainer skills
6. current form of the horse
7. how the horse likes track conditions
8. horse's ability at today's distance
9. predicted pace of the race
10. how to read a program or a Daily Racing Form
11. etc., etc., etc.
It was our beloved first president, George Washington, himself a racehorse owner who once said, "Horse racing is the child of avarice, the brother of iniquity, and the father of mischief."
Gitty up!