Toughest 3 seed game, 10th toughest game

[mu_hilltopper]

So you create this post based on the opening line and then suggest we should get past the concept of the opening line?

I didn't pick "opening line" .. I picked whatever was current at around 9am.  For all you and I know, money has already flowed in and moved the lines. -- Regardless, have any of the opening lines moved more than a point or so?   I don't have access to that, but I'll bet not.  

Regardless, it's a silly argument.  The debate isn't about Vegas' experts setting a line versus how the betting public move it.   Not sure why you are being obtuse about it.  According to opening or 9am odds, MU has the 10th toughest game.  I imagine that'll be damn close to what it is on Thursday.  Why argue about that detail?

[Henry Sugar]

I didn't pick "opening line" .. I picked whatever was current at around 9am.  For all you and I know, money has already flowed in and moved the lines. -- Regardless, have any of the opening lines moved more than a point or so?   I don't have access to that, but I'll bet not.  

By the way, from the same GWU paper that Pakuni linked. Again, emphasis mine.

The evidence is that the opening line that is established by the bookmakers is somewhat less accurate than the closing line established by the betting market. ( Gandar, et al., 1998). This indicates that experts are not as accurate as the market is in forecasting the winning margins.

[Pakuni]

Regardless, it's a silly argument.  The debate isn't about Vegas' experts setting a line versus how the betting public move it.   Not sure why you are being obtuse about it.  According to opening or 9am odds, MU has the 10th toughest game.  I imagine that'll be damn close to what it is on Thursday.  Why argue about that detail?

Here's what you're getting wrong ... you're using the line incorrectly to determine the "toughness" of the game. That's not what the line does or is intended to measure.
Hopefully I was less obtuse for you.

[mu_hilltopper]

Here's what you're getting wrong ... you're using the line incorrectly to determine the "toughness" of the game. That's not what the line does or is intended to measure.

Yet measure/indicate it, it does.   Or do you not think (predict) a favorite with a 20 point line is going to have an easier time of it than a favorite with a 4 point line?

[avid1010]

Point spreads are to drive betting, not predictors of who will win.

yeah they are...and it takes big $$$ to move a line

[TJ]

Our concern is simply because we have seen how good and how bad MU can me and we fear that the bad MU shows up.  If MU plays well, they win. 

If bad MU shows up it doesn't matter who they play, they won't win. 

[Lennys Tap]

So you create this post based on the opening line and then suggest we should get past the concept of the opening line?
I'll just suggest that a review of the opening line relative to similarly seeded matchups is perhaps not the best or most accurate way to determine the difficulty of a contest.
And that the market doesn't worry who wins or loses, nor is it a reflection of that.

You keep referring to "opening line" like it's going to change dramatically. It almost assuredly isn't. And it IS a predictor. A 4 point favorite will be about a 2-1 favorite on the money line. A 12 point favorite (like 4 seeded Michigan) will be 5 or 6 - 1. Vegas affords you the opportunity to put you're money where your mouth is, and if you really think MU is as likely to win as the other 3s (or even 4s) they'll pay you for it.

[Pakuni]

You keep referring to "opening line" like it's going to change dramatically. It almost assuredly isn't. And it IS a predictor. A 4 point favorite will be about a 2-1 favorite on the money line. A 12 point favorite (like 4 seeded Michigan) will be 5 or 6 - 1. Vegas affords you the opportunity to put you're money where your mouth is, and if you really think MU is as likely to win as the other 3s (or even 4s) they'll pay you for it.

You're missing the point.

[Lennys Tap]

You're missing the point.

I definitely am. Here's my point: A 4 point favorite has approximately a 1 in 3 chance of losing, much greater than a double digit favorite (like the other 3 seeds and even 4 seeds). That's because either 1) MU's power ranking is lower than the other 3s and 4s, 2) Davidson's is higher than the other 14s (and 13s) or 3) A combination of both. In this case it's 3.

[Pakuni]

I definitely am. Here's my point: A 4 point favorite has approximately a 1 in 3 chance of losing, much greater than a double digit favorite (like the other 3 seeds and even 4 seeds). That's because either 1) MU's power ranking is lower than the other 3s and 4s, 2) Davidson's is higher than the other 14s (and 13s) or 3) A combination of both. In this case it's 3.

Really?
I'd love to see the data set from which you're drawing the conclusion that a 4-point favorite has a 1 in 3 chance of losing.

[Lennys Tap]

Really?
I'd love to see the data set from which you're drawing the conclusion that a 4-point favorite has a 1 in 3 chance of losing.

A four point favorite will be approximately 2 to 1 on the money line.

[Pakuni]

A four point favorite will be approximately 2 to 1 on the money line.

1. That's very different from what you previously wrote.
2. None of the money lines of games in the neighborhood of four-point spreads currently reflect that.

[Lennys Tap]

Really?
I'd love to see the data set from which you're drawing the conclusion that a 4-point favorite has a 1 in 3 chance of losing.

The average of the money lines in Vegas I can find is MU - 1.65, Davidson + 1.45. That means that according to Vegas, for every 10 times Davidson would win, Marquette would win 15.5 times, or well less than 2 out of 3 (slightly more than 61%). If you think they're way off base on setting the line, you can go there and get legally, filthy rich, but it's been my experience that most things that look too good to be true aren't.

[Lennys Tap]

1. That's very different from what you previously wrote.
2. None of the money lines of games in the neighborhood of four-point spreads currently reflect that.

1. How so?
2. Please give examples, MU is currently considerably LESS than a 2-1 favorite on the money line, not surprising as many have the game at 3 or 3.5.

[Lennys Tap]

And for what it's worth, Nate Silver gives us a 65.8% chance of winning, Davidson 34.2%. So he too has us losing slightly more than once in every three games.

[brandx]

MU couldn't have asked for a better scenario. If they don't win this game by 10 or more, Buzz hasn't connected with them and we need better players.

The difference as in most games where there is a big difference in seeding is that if we play well, we won't lose. Davidson COULD play well and lose.