A quick review of an important concept going into this weekend's Super Bowl:
The "point spread" for a football game is set at the level required to get equal numbers of bets on the two teams.
The spread is not the consensus opinion of expert observers as to the likely outcome of the game. The two are often similar, but the point spread is fundamentally about the behavior of bettors, not the prediction of outcomes.
This ought to be trivially obvious from the fact that you don't see anybody on ESPN taking the Patriots and giving the points. It's surprising how many people who make their living talking about sports can't seem to remember it.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
In game theory, perhaps the most important category of simple games is
something called zero sum games. It's also one of those mathematical
things that are widely abused by the clueless - you constantly hear
references to the term "zero-sum game" in all sorts of contexts, and they're
almost always…
I'd like to start with a quick apology. Sorry that both the abstract algebra and the new game theory posts have been moving so slowly. I've been a bit overwhelmed lately with things that need doing right away, and
by the time I'm done with all that, I'm too tired to write anything that
requires a…
Aren't you excited? The Superbowl is tomorrow!
OK, I know, most of you probably don't care. I know I don't; tomorrow is a lab prep day for me, and I'll be setting up fly stocks all afternoon. I don't even know who is playing, and I don't really care. Some of you might, and that's all right — my…
Dave and Jonah have both commented on this piece in The New York Times which is something of a mismash of recent studies coming out of the field of behavior genetics. The best thing about the piece, from my selfish angle, is that it references Contingency Table, now absorbed into my other weblog,…