Gamblers Don't Bet Based on the FedExCup Rankings

by Ryan Ballengee on Sep 23, 2009 2:30 PM EDT

A few days ago, we talked about if golf would benefit in some way if it were to promote gambling in the way that the NFL tacitly does here in the States and is out in the open in the United Kingdom. Well, somewhat related to that, I was sent a message with the odds from online gambling site Bodog for each player to win the Tour Championship.

I've organized the odds for each player by where they are ranked in the FedExCup standings. Tell me if you see anything wrong with this picture.

1. Tiger Woods - 1/1
2. Steve Stricker - 18/1
3. Jim Furyk - 14/1
4. Zach Johnson - 18/1
5. Heath Slocum - 80/1
6. Padraig Harrington - 14/1
7. Sean O'Hair - 25/1
8. Scott Verplank - 33/1
9. Kenny Perry - 50/1
10. Jason Dufner - 100/1
11. Dustin Johnson - 40/1
12. Nick Watney - 50/1
13. Geoff Ogilvy - 33/1
14. Phil Mickelson - 22/1
15. Retief Goosen - 25/1
16. Marc Leishman - 66/1
17. Brian Gay - 80/1
18. Kevin Na - 50/1
19. David Toms - 50/1
20. Lucas Glover - 50/1
21. Y-E Yang - 66/1
22. Ernie Els - 33/1
23. Hunter Mahan - 33/1
24. Angel Cabrera - 40/1
25. Steve Marino - 50/1
27. Mike Weir - 40/1
26. Stewart Cink - 40/1
28. Luke Donald - 50/1
29. Jerry Kelly - 66/1
30. John Senden - 80/1

Heath Slocum is 80/1 to win and ranked fifth in the standings. Meanwhile, Jason Dufner - ranked 10th - has the longest odds of anyone to win at East Lake. Jim Furyk, who hasn't win on Tour in two years, is 14/1. At least YE Yang's odds at East Lake are better than what he went off as at Hazeltine.

Honestly, though, I would trust degenerate gamblers over the FedExCup rankings.

Tweet Comment 3 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

They sure have built a lot of casinos based on that degenerate advice. :-)

"this ball will fit in that fairway"

by courtgolf on Sep 23, 2009 2:45 PM EDT reply actions

The 50/1 odds on Glover and Perry...

…are very, very tempting.

As I believe I’ve mentioned before here, I’m an occasional horseplayer – the only gambling I do. And if wagering on golf were a done in a parimutuel manner like thoroughbred racing – i.e., an oddsmaker sets the morning line but then the odds are fluid based upon the handicapping decisions of the wagering public – I’d likely be way into it. One could even structure the wagering menu in a similar fashion (win-place-show, exacta, trifecta, etc.).

I’d play a Glover-Perry exacta box, a Glover-Perry-Woods trifecta box, and both Glover and Perry across the board and feel very confident that I’d made smart (and potentially lucrative) wagers.

"Golf is a game whose aim is to hit a very small ball into a even smaller hole, with weapons singularly ill-designed for the purpose." - Winston Churchill

by turnover on Sep 23, 2009 3:17 PM EDT reply actions

I would probably go with...

A $100 on Tiger, as a safety net. $50 on Ernie Els and $50 on Paddy Harrington. Els and Harrington are playing well and the payoff would be worth the risk. Tiger is >50% to win, so you have yourself covered there.

Here are the potential outcomes:

All 3 fail to win and I’m out $220.
Tiger wins, I break even, but lose the juice on Paddy & Ernie ($100 – $55 – $55 = -$10)
Paddy wins, I net $535 ($700 – $110 – $55 = $535)
Ernie wins, I net $1485 ($1650 – $110 -$55 = $1485)

Now you’ve got me thinking… and I do happen to have a BoDog account… ;-)

by MattSpence on Sep 24, 2009 8:35 AM EDT reply actions