On This Page
College Football Money Lines
Introduction
I rarely find what I believe to be a good bet on an underdog on the money line. The following chart shows the probability of winning by point spread, based on historical data (from 1983 to 2005).
The following table shows the actual data. The estimated probability of winning is based on smoothing out the ups and downs. The fair money line is based on the estimated probability of winning. This table does not factor in "key numbers" in the NFL. In other words, some margin of victories are much more likely than others, especially 3 and 7. It is a much bigger handicap to be given 3.5 points compared to 2.5, thus the 3.5-point underdog is going to have a significantly lower chance of winning compared to a 2.5-point underdog. I'll leave adjustment to the reader (sorry).
To find the fair money line on a favorite, just multiply by -1. For example, a 7-point underdog shows an estimated probability of winning of 30.2%, which corresponds to a fair money line of +231. Thus, a 7-point favorite would have a 69.8% chance of winning, for a fair money line of -231.
Probability of Winning in the NFL by Point Spread
| Spread | Wins | Loses | Actual Probability | Estimated Probability | Fair Money Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 472 | 944 | 50.0% | 50.0% | 100 |
| 1.5 | 132 | 284 | 46.5% | 45.5% | 120 |
| 2 | 141 | 280 | 50.4% | 44.1% | 127 |
| 2.5 | 164 | 376 | 43.6% | 42.6% | 135 |
| 3 | 246 | 540 | 45.6% | 41.1% | 143 |
| 3.5 | 134 | 358 | 37.4% | 39.7% | 152 |
| 4 | 135 | 337 | 40.1% | 38.3% | 161 |
| 4.5 | 93 | 259 | 35.9% | 36.9% | 171 |
| 5 | 74 | 213 | 34.7% | 35.5% | 182 |
| 5.5 | 101 | 294 | 34.4% | 34.1% | 193 |
| 6 | 109 | 343 | 31.8% | 32.8% | 205 |
| 6.5 | 121 | 383 | 31.6% | 31.5% | 217 |
| 7 | 146 | 493 | 29.6% | 30.2% | 231 |
| 7.5 | 84 | 332 | 25.3% | 29.0% | 245 |
| 8 | 73 | 243 | 30.0% | 27.8% | 260 |
| 8.5 | 67 | 227 | 29.5% | 26.6% | 276 |
| 9 | 62 | 225 | 27.6% | 25.5% | 293 |
| 9.5 | 64 | 250 | 25.6% | 24.3% | 311 |
| 10 | 79 | 320 | 24.7% | 23.3% | 330 |
| 10.5 | 43 | 210 | 20.5% | 22.2% | 350 |
| 11 | 56 | 217 | 25.8% | 21.2% | 372 |
| 11.5 | 38 | 142 | 26.8% | 20.2% | 395 |
| 12 | 37 | 179 | 20.7% | 19.3% | 419 |
| 12.5 | 38 | 176 | 21.6% | 18.4% | 445 |
| 13 | 42 | 237 | 17.7% | 17.5% | 472 |
| 13.5 | 42 | 210 | 20.0% | 16.6% | 501 |
| 14 | 56 | 328 | 17.1% | 15.8% | 532 |
| 14.5 | 28 | 194 | 14.4% | 15.0% | 565 |
| 15 | 19 | 157 | 12.1% | 14.3% | 599 |
| 15.5 | 20 | 123 | 16.3% | 13.6% | 636 |
| 16 | 22 | 171 | 12.9% | 12.9% | 675 |
| 16.5 | 14 | 144 | 9.7% | 12.2% | 717 |
| 17 | 29 | 239 | 12.1% | 11.6% | 761 |
| 17.5 | 17 | 134 | 12.7% | 11.0% | 808 |
| 18 | 8 | 121 | 6.6% | 10.4% | 858 |
| 18.5 | 6 | 89 | 6.7% | 9.9% | 910 |
| 19 | 18 | 142 | 12.7% | 9.4% | 966 |
| 19.5 | 10 | 83 | 12.0% | 8.9% | 1,026 |
| 20 | 9 | 136 | 6.6% | 8.4% | 1,089 |
| 20.5 | 12 | 109 | 11.0% | 8.0% | 1,156 |
| 21 | 10 | 138 | 7.2% | 7.5% | 1,227 |
| 21.5 | 4 | 94 | 4.3% | 7.1% | 1,303 |
| 22 | 5 | 128 | 3.9% | 6.7% | 1,383 |
| 22.5 | 7 | 71 | 9.9% | 6.4% | 1,468 |
| 23 | 7 | 115 | 6.1% | 6.0% | 1,558 |
| 23.5 | 5 | 76 | 6.6% | 5.7% | 1,654 |
| 24 | 6 | 122 | 4.9% | 5.4% | 1,756 |
| 24.5 | 3 | 68 | 4.4% | 5.1% | 1,864 |
| 25 | 5 | 62 | 8.1% | 4.8% | 1,978 |
| 25.5 | 2 | 61 | 3.3% | 4.5% | 2,100 |
| 26 | 1 | 78 | 1.3% | 4.3% | 2,229 |
| 26.5 | 4 | 55 | 7.3% | 4.1% | 2,366 |
| 27 | 1 | 79 | 1.3% | 3.8% | 2,512 |
| 27.5 | 2 | 56 | 3.6% | 3.6% | 2,666 |
| 28 | 6 | 93 | 6.5% | 3.4% | 2,830 |
| 28.5 | 2 | 41 | 4.9% | 3.2% | 3,004 |
| 29 | 1 | 52 | 1.9% | 3.0% | 3,189 |
| 29.5 | 1 | 38 | 2.6% | 2.9% | 3,385 |
| 30 | 1 | 52 | 1.9% | 2.7% | 3,594 |
| 30.5 | 3 | 33 | 9.1% | 2.6% | 3,815 |
| 31 | 2 | 58 | 3.4% | 2.4% | 4,049 |
Written by: Michael Shackleford
