Docteur Bet
Advanced · module 3 / 6

Advanced devig methods

Power, Shin, odds ratio: correcting the favourite-longshot bias.

9 min read

The multiplicative and additive methods spread the margin "mechanically". But bookmakers don't spread their margin evenly: they put proportionally more on outsiders. This is the favourite-longshot bias, well documented in most betting markets.

The consequence: the multiplicative method overestimates the probability of outsiders, and can make you see value where there isn't any.

The power method

Find the exponent kk such that:

∑i(1oddsi)k=1,pi=(1oddsi)k\sum_i \left(\frac{1}{\text{odds}_i}\right)^k = 1, \qquad p_i = \left(\frac{1}{\text{odds}_i}\right)^k

Since k>1k > 1, small probabilities are reduced proportionally more than large ones. Simple, and often very effective.

Shin's method

An economic model (Shin, 1991-1993): the bookmaker protects itself against a proportion zz of insider bettors. The fair probability is:

pi=z2+4(1−z) πi2S−z2(1−z)p_i = \frac{\sqrt{z^2 + 4(1 - z)\,\dfrac{\pi_i^2}{S}} - z}{2(1 - z)}

where πi=1/oddsi\pi_i = 1/\text{odds}_i and S=∑πiS = \sum \pi_i; zz is found numerically so that ∑pi=1\sum p_i = 1. Well suited to "horse racing" type markets or highly asymmetric ones.

The odds ratio method

Assume the bookmaker applies the same odds ratio cc to every outcome:

πi1−πi=c⋅pi1−pi⟹pi=πic+πi−c πi\frac{\pi_i}{1 - \pi_i} = c \cdot \frac{p_i}{1 - p_i} \quad \Longrightarrow \quad p_i = \frac{\pi_i}{c + \pi_i - c\,\pi_i}

with cc found numerically.

Comparison

Which one to choose?

There's no universally best method. The right approach:

  1. Gather a history of closing odds and results.
  2. Compare the methods using a calibration metric (log loss, Brier score: see the next module).
  3. Choose the method that predicts best, by sport and by market.

Interactive tool

Method

Educational tool. Results are theoretical estimates, not betting advice.

Test my knowledge (quiz)

The complete value betting guide · The glossary