Hole-in-One Ball Retrieving Etiquette

[nsxguy]

On 12/6/2021 at 2:23 PM, dhacker56 said:

Actually if the odds of the first HIO is 12500 to 1 then the odds of the second is also 12500 to one.  The odds of two HIOs in succession is 156,250,000 to one.  But once the first one is made the odds of the second one is still just 12500 to 1.  The odds of the first one have no bearing on the second once the first one is made. 

 

39 minutes ago, dhacker56 said:

Actually you said I quoted the odds.  WRONG.  I used the odds bobfoster quoted. 

 

Good grief Dude, what ARE you talking about ? 🤦‍♀️

 

I SAID bobfoster quoted the odds of ONE HIO.

 

I SAID, after someone else said they had no idea how to calculate the odds of TWO consecutive HIOs, that YOU, AGAIN, as above, already GAVE the correct answer.

 

I was YOU who quoted the correct odds of TWO HIOs in succession as 156,250,000 to 1.

 

I can't spell it out any clearer AGAIN so you get the last word/emoticon here,,,,,,,,,,,,

[Shilgy]

Is it really winter already?  Here in Arizona we sometimes forget but  reading wrx threads are like reading a calendar.

[bekgolf]

Hmm,

 

So 12,500:1 means if I play 150 rounds a year with 4 par three holes per round it should take almost 21 years to make a HIO.

 

FFS!

[LeoLeo99]

On 12/6/2021 at 2:23 PM, dhacker56 said:

Actually if the odds of the first HIO is 12500 to 1 then the odds of the second is also 12500 to one.  The odds of two HIOs in succession is 156,250,000 to one.  But once the first one is made the odds of the second one is still just 12500 to 1.  The odds of the first one have no bearing on the second once the first one is made. 

 You are correct if we ignore the players' ability and the difficulty of the hole and pin placement and solely rely on the probability to make a HIO.  

 

 

 

 

[LeoLeo99]

On 12/7/2021 at 10:56 PM, nsxguy said:

 

I wonder what the probability is of someone who's (probably ?) expert enough to explain the science of probability and odds, to make such a blunder that he(?) can't tell the difference between "lose" and "loose".

 

I probably wouldn't have a lot of faith in such an article. 

Probabilities and odds (and moneyline) are different ways to express the same thing.  https://www.investopedia.com/articles/dictionary/042215/understand-math-behind-betting-odds-gambling.asp

[LeoLeo99]

On 12/4/2021 at 7:51 PM, ArtMBgolf said:

Maybe if you are all chipping from the side of the green and the first guy 
hole it and also maybe the holed ball isn't all the way down.      
 
From the tee, nobody is thinking about a holed ball stopping them from 
holing out.   On tour they don't wait for the HIO guy to retrieve his ball 
before others hit.  
  
What HIO etiquette hasn't been mentioned is: You should allow the HIO 
owner to retrieve their ball from the hole.  Do not get it for them.    

 

Based on the thread's title, I thought someone made a HIO and someone else in the group retrieved the ball for them and they were salty.  

[newbsauce]

Well, if the person to hit the HIO is supposed to walk to the hole, then this is the proper walking etiquette.

 

 

[Phireside]

I have a real love hate relationship with the internet 

[Halebopp]

7 hours ago, bekgolf said:

Hmm,

 

So 12,500:1 means if I play 150 rounds a year with 4 par three holes per round it should take almost 21 years to make a HIO.

 

FFS!

 

But it becomes more likely to have one than not to after only 8663 par threes.

[TwistedSister]

5 hours ago, Halebopp said:

 

But it becomes more likely to have one than not to after only 8663 par threes.

Given that you have not had one in the first 8663 tries the odds you would get one in one of those tries is ZERO. So you odds the next time definitely are better.

[Shilgy]

1 hour ago, dhacker56 said:

Given that you have not had one in the first 8663 tries the odds you would get one in one of those tries is ZERO. So you odds the next time definitely are better.

But not everyone gets one in 12,500.  So even if you missed the first 8663 your odds stay the same…..I would think.  Or does everyone automatically get one after missing the first 12,499?

[Halebopp]

31 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

But not everyone gets one in 12,500.  So even if you missed the first 8663 your odds stay the same…..I would think.  Or does everyone automatically get one after missing the first 12,499?

 

Nah, there's still a 37% chance you wouldn't get one with 12 500 attempts. You'd need 37 446 attempts to have Knowledge or Virtual Certainty you'd make at least one. 🙂 

[Mr. Bean]

What are the odds me already having made three HIO's myself ? And what are the odds that his thread should not continue any longer?

[bekgolf]

6 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

What are the odds me already having made three HIO's myself ? And what are the odds that his thread should not continue any longer?

3 HIO I'd say the odds are 1:1 🙂

 

This is a fun thread, it will run it's course in a natural manner. 

 

Odds are someone will bring it back to life sometime in the future.

[TwistedSister]

2 hours ago, Shilgy said:

But not everyone gets one in 12,500.  So even if you missed the first 8663 your odds stay the same…..I would think.  Or does everyone automatically get one after missing the first 12,499?

My point is that the odds of getting a HIO after you take the shot is ZERO.  The next time its 1 in 12500  so your odds are indeed better on the second try than on the first try (after you have taken the first try).  I am not good at writing my posts.

[Shilgy]

1 hour ago, Mr. Bean said:

What are the odds me already having made three HIO's myself ? And what are the odds that his thread should not continue any longer?

Don’t know your odds but I have 5.  Some were good shots and some were…….not so good.   But they all went in.  I have a mid to lower cap buddy….usually a 5 or 6 CH type….that has none but his wife has 5 and his son 1.  Bothers him to no end.

 

I hope the odds for him get better soon!

[oikos1]

Has it been determined yet if the chances are less with an occupied hole?

 

Inquiring minds want to know.

[Purple Toupee]

On 12/7/2021 at 11:31 PM, mokedaddy said:

 

So are they closely related or have nothing to do with each other?

Betting odds are about spreading the bets out so the house doesn’t lose money.  As bets are placed, the betting odds change.  Doesn’t mean the probabilities changed.

[mokedaddy]

7 minutes ago, Purple Toupee said:

Betting odds are about spreading the bets out so the house doesn’t lose money.  As bets are placed, the betting odds change.  Doesn’t mean the probabilities changed.

Ok?

[nsxguy]

22 minutes ago, mokedaddy said:

Ok?

 

 

Yeah, I didn't understand that one either,,,,,,,,

[mokedaddy]

33 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

 

Yeah, I didn't understand that one either,,,,,,,,

I’m guessing he’s talking about the money line but I don’t think that has been discussed in this thread.  I do know the probability of who will win the super bowl changes all the time.

Edited December 11, 2021 by mokedaddy

[LeoLeo99]

6 hours ago, Purple Toupee said:

Betting odds are about spreading the bets out so the house doesn’t lose money.  As bets are placed, the betting odds change.  Doesn’t mean the probabilities changed.

The house gambles, too.  It's a common misconception that the house needs/wants the bets to balance out half and half on both sides. 

[Shilgy]

3 minutes ago, LeoLeo99 said:

The house gambles, too.  It's a common misconception that the house needs/wants the bets to balance out half and half on both sides. 

Hmmm….who to believe?

 

https://www.mytopsportsbooks.com/guide/why-betting-lines-move/

[Mr. Bean]

8 hours ago, Shilgy said:

Hmmm….who to believe?

 

https://www.mytopsportsbooks.com/guide/why-betting-lines-move/

 

Always believe WRX Forum posters!! 🧐

[LeoLeo99]

9 hours ago, Shilgy said:

Hmmm….who to believe?

 

https://www.mytopsportsbooks.com/guide/why-betting-lines-move/

But yet the sportsbooks win or lose millions of dollars each week with sometimes 90% of the action going one side.  It is not as simple than the action is 50/50 and the house keeps the vig.  In last year's Superbowl 65% of the money was bet on the Chiefs.  Here is one example of a big sportsbook loss when the dogs side wins. These things couldn't happen if they balanced the action 50/50 each game. 

 

https://www.thelines.com/las-vegas-sportsbooks-historic-losses-nfl-sunday/

Edited December 12, 2021 by LeoLeo99

[Shilgy]

49 minutes ago, LeoLeo99 said:

But yet the sportsbooks win or lose millions of dollars each week with sometimes 90% of the action going one side.  It is not as simple than the action is 50/50 and the house keeps the vig.  In last year's Superbowl 65% of the money was bet on the Chiefs.  Here is one example of a big sportsbook loss when the dogs side wins. These things couldn't happen if they balanced the action 50/50 each game. 

 

https://www.thelines.com/las-vegas-sportsbooks-historic-losses-nfl-sunday/

They TRY to balance out the action.  No one said they always succeed.

[nsxguy]

1 hour ago, LeoLeo99 said:

But yet the sportsbooks win or lose millions of dollars each week with sometimes 90% of the action going one side.  It is not as simple than the action is 50/50 and the house keeps the vig.  In last year's Superbowl 65% of the money was bet on the Chiefs.  Here is one example of a big sportsbook loss when the dogs side wins. These things couldn't happen if they balanced the action 50/50 each game. 

 

https://www.thelines.com/las-vegas-sportsbooks-historic-losses-nfl-sunday/

 

C'mon Leo. That's like saying you made a 50 foot putt yesterday so you should always make a 50 foot putt.

 

Outliers don't disprove a "rule".

 

A single player bets $100 on 17 on the roulette wheel and wins $3,500. The house LOSES $3,500. Should they abandon roulette ?

 

Even though the house has a (roughly) 5% edge ?

 

Over TIME, the law of averages is seldom defeated. 👍

[miamistomp]

 Working in the Casino. I once saw a guy roll 6  "12s" in a row

  But as you say, the law of averages will win out

  The casino wins in the end  because the dice or wheels never stop so the little blips even out

 

Pro casino gamblers know that money management of their bets is the key-not a lucky streak

 

 

[LeoLeo99]

56 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

C'mon Leo. That's like saying you made a 50 foot putt yesterday so you should always make a 50 foot putt.

 

Outliers don't disprove a "rule".

 

A single player bets $100 on 17 on the roulette wheel and wins $3,500. The house LOSES $3,500. Should they abandon roulette ?

 

Even though the house has a (roughly) 5% edge ?

 

Over TIME, the law of averages is seldom defeated. 👍

Roulette has a fixed house advantage.  Sports betting does not.  The casino's take from roulette is very predictable.  No so for sports betting.  Sportsbetting is highly variable.  As you say, though, the law of big numbers is seldom defeated.  The books will sometimes let 90% of the money fall on one side because they believe that other side has a larger than 10% chance of winning.  The books get killed when the 90% side wins but the books clean up when the 10% side wins and they think the 10% side will win more than 10% of the time.  That's what I mean by my first statement that the house gambles along with the bettors and why they do not always strive for a 50/50 balance.  

 

This is the breakdown for NFL week 14.  Only a few games are close to 50/50:

 

 

[nsxguy]

4 minutes ago, LeoLeo99 said:

Roulette has a fixed house advantage.  Sports betting does not.  The casino's take from roulette is very predictable.  No so for sports betting.  Sportsbetting is highly variable.  As you say, though, the law of big numbers is seldom defeated.  The books will sometimes let 90% of the money fall on one side because they believe that other side has a larger than 10% chance of winning.  The books get killed when the 90% side wins but the books clean up when the 10% side wins and they think the 10% side will win more than 10% of the time.  That's what I mean by my first statement that the house gambles along with the bettors and why they do not always strive for a 50/50 balance.  

 

This is the breakdown for NFL week 14.  Only a few games are close to 50/50:

 

 

 

I understand sports betting is a bit different but the "house" isn't.

 

The house is running a BUSINESS based on betting. And while technically they ARE betting, their aim is NOT to bet but to take a percentage of the handle - kinda like a horse race where the house is NEVER betting. Or a stock brokerage taking commissions.

 

You seem to be implying there was a case where a sportsbook ALLOWED 90% on one side rathe than try to balance the action. In other words they WERE betting on the result as opposed to looking for 50/50 balance and taking their "commission".

 

Any links to such a thing ? I'd like to read about it.

 

They are SO good at setting a line to get equal money on both sides. The line, excepting some unusual occurrence or injury to a key player, seldom moves more than a point or 2 (football of course).

 

A bettor seldom sees a line and absolutely LOVES one team or the other.

 

Occasionally the books WILL get "killed", just like occasionally we WILL make that 50 foot putt,,,,,,,,,, but that's more than offset by the percentages in their favor. And that's not counting their edge on "prop" bets which are now all the rage.

 

As for your chart, "vig" is easy to understand and calculate. $100 on each side and you have 1 win and 1 loss and the loser pays $110. Profit to the "dealer", $10, or 10%. Easy peasy.

 

But I am quite sure all the sportsbooks have far more complicated and advanced algorithms that tell them how and when to adjust the lines/odds/etc. to get as close as possible to a desirable "winning" % of the total action - a "commission" if you will.