Aug
Football Betting: Would you profit end of the entire season if u put $ on the top team in every league game?
Im asking this Qn based on the theory of Dollar Cost Averaging. How would u calculate your % of profit if ur money was on the top team in every league game they played regardless whether they win, lose or draw. Those who are familiar with football bettings should be familiar with this. Would it be a gd strategy? Any other strategies to offer for football bettings?
If we could answer this question, we would all make millions of dollars. The problem is that it varies from year to year. Two years ago, the favorites won and covered spreads very consistently, so betting on the favorites was very lucrative. Then, last season, the underdogs beat the spread at a very high rate (and even won outright at a very high rate), so last season betting on the favorites got people in big trouble.
The other problem is that when you bet on spreads, you generally bet $100 to win $190. So you have to win 10 out of 19 times just to break even. That works out to about 55%, and that would be tough to average over the long term (hence sports books make tons of money at this).
You could look at historical percentages and bet with the idea that over the span of several years, the deviations from the norm would average out, but there is no guarantee, and it could take years for the historical percentages to pan out.
Now, conspiracy theorists would say this: the natural tendency of the general public is to bet on the favorite. So, sports books make the most money when the favorites don't cover the spread. I've heard theories that two years ago, casinos lost a lot of money when the favorites did so well, and so they somehow fiddled with the spreads last season to make it so that picking the favorite would be a losing strategy. I don't really think they would go quite that far, but the companies that generate the spreads each week pay a lot of attention to what is going on, along with the general trends of the outcomes relative to the spread.
When it comes to strategies, there isn't really anything that is sure to work because the games are so unpredictable. One of my favorites is to find a sports writer who does a bad job of making picks, then pick the opposite of him (for instance, Peter King at SI.com or Chris Carter at yahoo sports). Another good strategy involves betting on the over/under for a team's overall record. There are always a few teams each season that get a ton of preseason hype, but a studious observer can see that they are probably not good enough to win as many games as is predicted (like the Arizona Cardinals pretty much every season).
One last method is to form a pick-em league at CBS Sportsline with your friends. That way, everyone has equal payouts, and you don't get hurt by the sports book's "take".
I think it would be a wash. From what I remember, 61% (somewhere in that neighborhood) of favorites cover. If you are betting with a bookie or casion, you have to wager an additional 10% as a vig for the house. So, over the course of a season it looks like you might make a profit of 1% or so.
May 13th, 2007 at 11:23 pmReferences :
This is a good theory but it might not work as well as you think. Even great teams that finish with a great record end up with a losing record "against the spread". I you bet the best teams all year, you may end up losing because of point spreads.
May 14th, 2007 at 8:05 amWhen it comes to football betting there are many strategies. One of my basic ones is to try and bet home underdogs. They come through with the win more times than not. I also like to bet the over/unders. There are many trends to follow and these can be easier to predict more often than the games themselves. Good luck!
References :
If we could answer this question, we would all make millions of dollars. The problem is that it varies from year to year. Two years ago, the favorites won and covered spreads very consistently, so betting on the favorites was very lucrative. Then, last season, the underdogs beat the spread at a very high rate (and even won outright at a very high rate), so last season betting on the favorites got people in big trouble.
The other problem is that when you bet on spreads, you generally bet $100 to win $190. So you have to win 10 out of 19 times just to break even. That works out to about 55%, and that would be tough to average over the long term (hence sports books make tons of money at this).
You could look at historical percentages and bet with the idea that over the span of several years, the deviations from the norm would average out, but there is no guarantee, and it could take years for the historical percentages to pan out.
Now, conspiracy theorists would say this: the natural tendency of the general public is to bet on the favorite. So, sports books make the most money when the favorites don't cover the spread. I've heard theories that two years ago, casinos lost a lot of money when the favorites did so well, and so they somehow fiddled with the spreads last season to make it so that picking the favorite would be a losing strategy. I don't really think they would go quite that far, but the companies that generate the spreads each week pay a lot of attention to what is going on, along with the general trends of the outcomes relative to the spread.
When it comes to strategies, there isn't really anything that is sure to work because the games are so unpredictable. One of my favorites is to find a sports writer who does a bad job of making picks, then pick the opposite of him (for instance, Peter King at SI.com or Chris Carter at yahoo sports). Another good strategy involves betting on the over/under for a team's overall record. There are always a few teams each season that get a ton of preseason hype, but a studious observer can see that they are probably not good enough to win as many games as is predicted (like the Arizona Cardinals pretty much every season).
One last method is to form a pick-em league at CBS Sportsline with your friends. That way, everyone has equal payouts, and you don't get hurt by the sports book's "take".
May 16th, 2007 at 10:12 amReferences :