https://www.teamrankings.com/ncb/conference-tournaments/pac-12-bracket/

Ahead of Washington

Checked out a couple betting websites to find Pac 12 tournament odds. What does Cal +25,000 mean?

oskidunker said:

---

https://www.teamrankings.com/ncb/conference-tournaments/pac-12-bracket/

Ahead of Washington

---

So, you are telling me there's a chance...

pierrezo said:

---

Checked out a couple betting websites to find Pac 12 tournament odds. What does Cal +25,000 mean?

---

That means a $100 bet gets you $25000 (i.e 250:1 odds).

Will anyone make that bet?

I wouldn't. I bleed Blue and Gold, but, I have seen nothing from Knowlton and his hand-picked MBB Coach to give me confidence.

Go Bears, Bring Back Respect To Cal MBB!

Go!Bears said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

https://www.teamrankings.com/ncb/conference-tournaments/pac-12-bracket/

Ahead of Washington

---

So, you are telling me there's a chance...

---

never been a fan of the tourney. Hopefully, it actually makes money after adjusting for the fewer regular season games played, but I'm a skeptic. But inviting the bottom dwellers for one-and-done is just a waste of time and money. Heck, a replay of the women's gymnastics would probably be higher rated than Cal-OSU for #4 this year.

(yeah, I get that the youngsters get one more game, but how much muscle memory will actually occur? They jump on the nearest bus and go home to sleep and then study and dream of next year.

Big Dog said:

---

never been a fan of the tourney. Hopefully, it actually makes money after adjusting for the fewer regular season games played, but I'm a skeptic. But inviting the bottom dwellers for one-and-done is just a waste of time and money. Heck, a replay of the women's gymnastics would probably be higher rated than Cal-OSU for #4 this year.

(yeah, I get that the youngsters get one more game, but how much muscle memory will actually occur? They jump on the nearest bus and go home to sleep and then study and dream of next year.

---

Fox is going to install the Syracuse zone and beat Osu.

There just isn't any way for a team like Cal to go on a run and make it to the championship (ok prove me wrong).

CALiforniALUM said:

---

There just isn't any way for a team like Cal to go on a run and make it to the championship (ok prove me wrong).

---

Cal is 3-17 in PAC-12 play, but that includes wins against Colorado and at Utah? I think that means Cal has a 15% chance of playing a good game, good enough to beat anyone in the PAC-12. That is essentially a dice role. 1 you win, anything else you lose. To win the Tournament we only need to win three games. That is like rolling three 1s in a row. It is about a third of one percent. Definitely possible, just not very likely. However, the universe is a strange place. Weirder things have happened.

Isnt it 4 games?

calumnus said:

---

CALiforniALUM said:

---

There just isn't any way for a team like Cal to go on a run and make it to the championship (ok prove me wrong).

---

Cal is 3-17 in PAC-12 play, but that includes wins against Colorado and at Utah? I think that means Cal has a 15% chance of playing a good game, good enough to beat anyone in the PAC-12. That is essentially a dice role. 1 you win, anything else you lose. To win the Tournament we only need to win three games. That is like rolling three 1s in a row. It is about a third of one percent. Definitely possible, just not very likely. However, the universe is a strange place. Weirder things have happened.

---

I'm forgetting exactly how the tournament is structured, but don't the bottom-dwellers have to win FOUR games? And on consecutive days? This is what makes it a near-impossibility.

On the other hand, maybe this is why the crafty Fox has been playing 10-11 guys! He's prepping us for a March surprise!

oskidunker said:

---

Isnt it 4 games?

---

Uh, yes somehow I thought with 11 teams (no Arizona) it could be done in 3, but they gave more byes and of course as the last seed....anyway, it is like rolling a dice and getting a 1 four times in a row. Or really .15^4 or .05%

Actually the odds being given by the OP are not nearly good enough. Still, my other point stands, this universe can be a strange place.

oskidunker said:

---

Will anyone make that bet?

---

I put $10 down on Cal +30000.

Website went into some weird mode with an hourglass on it.

A minute later they finally accepted my bet, then moved the line to +20000.

They're scared I'm gonna win. Haha.

calumnus said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

Isnt it 4 games?

---

Uh, yes somehow I thought with 11 teams (no Arizona) it could be done in 3, but they gave more byes and of course as the last seed....anyway, it is like rolling a dice and getting a 1 four times in a row. Or really .15^4 or .05%

Actually the odds being given by the OP are not nearly good enough. Still, my other point stands, this universe can be a strange place.

---

What the OP cites from the article of 0.11% actually gives Cal a better chance that your 0.05%. 0.11% > 0.05%.

Of course, the chances of winning the first round game for the Bears is greater than the chances of winning the second or third or fourth round game, that site the OP links to gives the Bears a little over 26% chance of winning the first game, but the odds go down from there. Importantly, if we make it to the second round, we're playing a team that didn't play the night before and is fresher than we are, and, in theory, a better than the team we play in the first round. It is unlikely the Bears ever play a team that has played as many games as the Bears have, and chances are, in the fantasy world where the Bears keep winning, in theory, they keep playing better teams.

But ignoring all that, if the odds of winning a game never change, there is a 15% chance of winning each game, then yes, the chances of winning the whole thing are about 0.05%. If we have a 0.10-0.11% chance of winning the whole thing, and the chances of winning each game are identical, working backwards that would mean about an 18% chance of winning each game.

If the gambling books have Cal at +25,000, that means you should bet Cal if you think Cal's chances of winning are better than 0.4%. I think Cal's chances are worse than that. Maybe not as low as what the OP cited, 0.11%, or your 0.05%. I'm perhaps an optimist (even if I could never get MOC like KAB did), I might have Cal at closer to 0.16% chance to win the whole thing, but still, that means that Cal needs the pay off to be better than +62,500 before it makes economic sense to bet them. I think I'll keep my money in my pocket.