Betting on the Other Team As Insurance

I thought about what it means to bet on one's favorite team. Conventionally, people put money on their own team. This means that if their team wins, they also win some money. Double payoff. But if their team loses, not only do they have to endure the pain of losing a big game, they're out some cashola, too. Double pain.

But what about betting on the other team? Fans often say things like, "I'll give anything for my team to win the Series/Superbowl, etc." So why not bet on the other team in the amount that one would give to see their own team win? If their team wins, then the monetary loss would be worth it. But if their team loses, then they win some money to console them in their misery. Before the 2002 World Series, I should have put up some good money on the Angels - the amount I would have given to see the Giants win - so that when the Giants lost, I could have afforded to drown my sorrows.

Lose 139 Games?

At 1-6, the Giants are on a pace to go 23-139. No team has ever lost more than 120 games. My friend Mike got a bet at 4:1 for a Giants/A's over/under of 200 losses. If each team lost 100 games, he would win the bet. But if the Giants lost 139 games, the A's could have the best record in baseball and win the World Series and he could still win the bet. I don't think the Giants will lose 139 games, but maybe 103.

Vegas Line on The '08 Season

I heard on the radio, during the Razor and Mr. T sports talk show on KNBR, some Vegas odds on the upcoming season. In the NL West, the odds were reported as such: to win the division, San Diego Padres 2:1, Colorado Rockies 2:1, Arizona Diamondbacks 2:1, Los Angeles Dodgers 2:1 and San Francisco Giants 20:1. Hmmmm. Not only that, but no team in all of Major League Baseball had longer odds (they were tied with a couple of other teams) of winning the World Series than the Giants, 100:1. Got a Benny?