betting on the oscars?
#1
Guest
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: behind you!!!
Posts: 2,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
betting on the oscars?
saw the link at the top of all the forums and had to click it. i couldn't makes heads or tails out of what was on the site, though. for instance here are the numbers for best pictures:
chicago 1.45
the hours 4.50
gangs of new york 5.00
the pianist 13.00
two towers 17.00
so what's the deal with the numbers? here is a link to the thread if you missed it.
chicago 1.45
the hours 4.50
gangs of new york 5.00
the pianist 13.00
two towers 17.00
so what's the deal with the numbers? here is a link to the thread if you missed it.
#2
DVD Talk Hero
Re: betting on the oscars?
Originally posted by WiccanPagan
saw the link at the top of all the forums and had to click it. i couldn't makes heads or tails out of what was on the site, though. for instance here are the numbers for best pictures:
chicago 1.45
the hours 4.50
gangs of new york 5.00
the pianist 13.00
two towers 17.00
so what's the deal with the numbers? here is a link to the thread if you missed it.
saw the link at the top of all the forums and had to click it. i couldn't makes heads or tails out of what was on the site, though. for instance here are the numbers for best pictures:
chicago 1.45
the hours 4.50
gangs of new york 5.00
the pianist 13.00
two towers 17.00
so what's the deal with the numbers? here is a link to the thread if you missed it.
#3
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 2,041
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those are essentialy the odds. E.g. if you bet $1 on Chicago you would receive $1.45 (1 * 1.45) if it won. If you bet $1 on The Hours you would receive $4.50 if it won (1 * 4.5).
#4
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: "Sitting on a beach, earning 20%"
Posts: 6,154
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I'm surprised to see The Pianist as such a long shot. I think it has a better chance than The Hours and definately a better chance than GONY. Sure it's foriegn, but it's about the holocaust and H'wood loves that.
I'd put the Piano as 3 to 1 but Chicago is 2 to 1 all the way, that f'er is the LOCK
I'd put the Piano as 3 to 1 but Chicago is 2 to 1 all the way, that f'er is the LOCK
#5
DVD Talk Hero
I think the betters have Pianist as a long shot due to the directors rape convictions and that he is not allowed into the country or he would be arrested.
#6
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: "Sitting on a beach, earning 20%"
Posts: 6,154
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally posted by Rypro 525
I think the betters have Pianist as a long shot due to the directors rape convictions and that he is not allowed into the country or he would be arrested.
I think the betters have Pianist as a long shot due to the directors rape convictions and that he is not allowed into the country or he would be arrested.
#7
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 2,041
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Pants
I'm surprised to see The Pianist as such a long shot. I think it has a better chance than The Hours and definately a better chance than GONY. Sure it's foriegn, but it's about the holocaust and H'wood loves that.
I'd put the Piano as 3 to 1 but Chicago is 2 to 1 all the way, that f'er is the LOCK
I'm surprised to see The Pianist as such a long shot. I think it has a better chance than The Hours and definately a better chance than GONY. Sure it's foriegn, but it's about the holocaust and H'wood loves that.
I'd put the Piano as 3 to 1 but Chicago is 2 to 1 all the way, that f'er is the LOCK
#8
Guest
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: behind you!!!
Posts: 2,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ah, so the odds are pretty crappy for chicago, then. bet a dollar make $.45 cents would have to bet a lot to make it worth it. has anyone seed other odds elsewhere? i wouldn't begin to know where to look.
#10
Guest
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: behind you!!!
Posts: 2,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
show you the door. no way he'll come close to that job. and i seriously hope colin farrel doesn't either. jackman would rule. he's dreamy.
Last edited by WiccanPagan; 03-11-03 at 06:24 PM.
#12
Guest
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: behind you!!!
Posts: 2,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gooding jr. easily gets my vote for academy award winner gone retarded. snow dogs and that gay cruise movie are just the tip of the iceberg for this man. be prepared for crap like you've never seen before.
#13
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 8,527
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it's ironic - miramax decides to hold back on the widespread release of Hero in order to promote City of God for the oscars. City of God didn't make the cut, thus it is eligible for next year. and because of the one nomination for best foreign film, Hero is no longer eligible for next year. gaaah...let this be a lesson to future foreign filmmakers to never go to miramax for distribution.
#14
Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by audrey
Unless the house is taking a position, that is adjusting the odds for who they believe will win to maximize their profits (and risk), those odds are intended to attract bets in a ratio to balance their books and lower their exposure---odds like this don't generally reflect actual odds of winning.
Unless the house is taking a position, that is adjusting the odds for who they believe will win to maximize their profits (and risk), those odds are intended to attract bets in a ratio to balance their books and lower their exposure---odds like this don't generally reflect actual odds of winning.
#15
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Posts: 3,807
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have an account with Sportsinteraction, the company in the ad, and was considering some of these bets, but really didn't see any odds that looked interesting. The only one i saw that really raised my interest was Jack Nicholson for 3.5 times your bet. I figure it's between him and Daniel Day-Lewis, but I'm not sure I would be willing to take a flyer on Jack or not.
Then again, either Streep or Zeta-Jones for supporting actress might be decent bets, but I'm never sure about who is going to win.
Then again, either Streep or Zeta-Jones for supporting actress might be decent bets, but I'm never sure about who is going to win.
#16
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 2,041
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by hogfat
so, there's not actually a 125% chance of one of those five films winning?
so, there's not actually a 125% chance of one of those five films winning?
Last edited by audrey; 03-11-03 at 10:22 PM.
#17
Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by audrey
No. It doesn't work like that; these are not "true" odds. These odds are calculated to attract bets in such a way so that no matter who wins the house makes money. They adjust the odds to attract bets with the goal of having an even risk/reward across all bets. When bets pile up on one team (or in this case movie) they lower the odds to attract bets on other choices. If a choice attracts too few bets, they raise the odds. I'm not sure why you think it s/d total 100%; it doesn’t--look at the lines on the sports page in any major paper.
No. It doesn't work like that; these are not "true" odds. These odds are calculated to attract bets in such a way so that no matter who wins the house makes money. They adjust the odds to attract bets with the goal of having an even risk/reward across all bets. When bets pile up on one team (or in this case movie) they lower the odds to attract bets on other choices. If a choice attracts too few bets, they raise the odds. I'm not sure why you think it s/d total 100%; it doesn’t--look at the lines on the sports page in any major paper.
#18
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 2,041
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by hogfat
i know. . . . you already stated as much in what i quoted. (background for what i stated above, if necessary: probability of outcomes cannot be greater than 1. probability of all possible outcomes, in fact, is 1. the probability of one of the five events occurring is 1.25. 1.25 > 1.)
i know. . . . you already stated as much in what i quoted. (background for what i stated above, if necessary: probability of outcomes cannot be greater than 1. probability of all possible outcomes, in fact, is 1. the probability of one of the five events occurring is 1.25. 1.25 > 1.)
#19
DVD Talk Legend
Originally posted by Pants
That's why he won't win Best Director. But there's nothing keeping them from giving the Oscar to the Pianist producers for Best Picture
That's why he won't win Best Director. But there's nothing keeping them from giving the Oscar to the Pianist producers for Best Picture
#20
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 2,041
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Despite some tepid recent work and the rape charge, Polanski remains one of my favorite directors. This article presents a fairly balanced view on the subject: http://www.calendarlive.com/movies/o...ovies-features
#22
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: "Sitting on a beach, earning 20%"
Posts: 6,154
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
From the article:
I think that's totally uncalled for. The Ninth Gate is very good, I think Polanski is proud of it, and I bet that quote was taken way out of context.
But otherwise great article. Thanks
By 2000, when he made the lukewarmly received occult thriller "The Ninth Gate," starring Johnny Depp, he was reduced to explaining: "I needed work. I had to do something.")
But otherwise great article. Thanks
#23
Guest
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: behind you!!!
Posts: 2,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Mittman
Best bets IMO are Scorsese at 2.37:1 and Paul Neuman at 6:1
Best bets IMO are Scorsese at 2.37:1 and Paul Neuman at 6:1
#24
Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by audrey
But if you understand how betting odds work, then you must realize that probability doesn’t apply—this isn’t like calculating the chances of rolling an eleven with a pair of dice. I’m not following your point.
But if you understand how betting odds work, then you must realize that probability doesn’t apply—this isn’t like calculating the chances of rolling an eleven with a pair of dice. I’m not following your point.
#25
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 2,041
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by hogfat
probability cannot exceed 1. 1.25 > 1. 1.25 != probability . . . feigning ignorance for humor; sardonic comments; etc.
probability cannot exceed 1. 1.25 > 1. 1.25 != probability . . . feigning ignorance for humor; sardonic comments; etc.