Common Sports Betting Futures Mistakes To Avoid
Sports betting futures wagers can be an entertaining and profitable investment, but there are a number of pitfalls. These are some things to avoid:
You gotta shop around: More specifically, you have to 'shop points' just as you would with a straight bet. This is crucial in all forms of sports betting but particularly key with futures wagers. There are often greater variances in the prices from book to book on future plays than any other type of wagering proposition. The reason for this is simple--most books are less concern with what the 'other guys' are doing as they are with keeping their own position 'in balance'. All in all, the sports betting marketplace just doesn't react as quickly to changing futures prices as it does to individual game lines.
Don't fixate on picking the winner from a competitive field: This may sound like strange advice, but from a theoretical standpoint it makes perfect sense. As with every other element of sport wagering its crucial to always focus not on winners and losers, but on the value you're getting on individual bets. For example, in most years there are several teams with a realistic shot of winning at the start of the NCAA basketball tournament. The problem is that these top teams invariably offer low paybacks that are less than their 'true odds' of winning. Every team is subject to the same variables like injuries, slumps, bad matchups but backing teams that are 'under the radar' at higher prices offer more compensation for these 'risks'.
To put this in more theoretical terms, the "true odds" of Duke winning the NCAA Championship are almost certainly higher than the price we're getting. Obviously, determining the "true odds", or actual probability of a future event is an inexact science but think of it this way: if the NCAA tournament was played 100 times would Duke wind up winning 50 of those? Given the number of other good teams and the propensity for upsets along the way, its doubtful. For the sake of argument, lets say that Duke has a 33% chance to win the tournament. That means that I wouldn't consider a bet on Duke to be a good value unless I was getting a price that a) accurately reflected the true probability of their winning and b) gave me some compensation for assuming the "risk of the unknown" inherent in taking the position so far in advance. At +500 I might be interested, but at +200 the value just isn't there.
Note that the more competitive the market, the more difficult it is to find good value on a favorite. In a smaller field, or in a field with one dominant competitor it can be easier. For example, say the UFC were to have a tournament involving heavyweight champion Brock Lesnar and three male figure skaters. Even if Lesnar was slightly injured, or not at the top of his game he'd essentially have a 100% chance of beating the smaller, effeminate men who are untrained to fight. If a book installed Lesnar as a -1000 favorite in this spot, it could still be considered a good value. It's never easy to risk a lot to win a little, but from strictly a mathematical standpoint it makes sense.
Don't try to make a huge profit with little risk: Sports betting provides few opportunities to make a 'big killing'. It may happen occasionally, but even the big payouts when it occurs doesn't make chasing big longshots a good value. If you're serious about sports betting it is crucial to maintain your focus on the underlying numbers and look for value at all times. If you want to take a longshot at a huge jackpot, play the lottery but don't try to do it at a sportsbook.
On a more theoretical level, a big price alone is no way to justify a wager. The concept of value works the same at the bottom of the barrel as it does at the top: make sure the price you're getting on an underdog accurately reflects their "true odds" of winning.
Don't bet one sided props: Sometimes sports books will offer silly bets just to get publicity or in some cases just to be funny. While there may be life on other planets, the 'true odds' of a Martian being named to President Obama's cabinet wouldn't justify a +5000 line that it would occur. - 2361
You gotta shop around: More specifically, you have to 'shop points' just as you would with a straight bet. This is crucial in all forms of sports betting but particularly key with futures wagers. There are often greater variances in the prices from book to book on future plays than any other type of wagering proposition. The reason for this is simple--most books are less concern with what the 'other guys' are doing as they are with keeping their own position 'in balance'. All in all, the sports betting marketplace just doesn't react as quickly to changing futures prices as it does to individual game lines.
Don't fixate on picking the winner from a competitive field: This may sound like strange advice, but from a theoretical standpoint it makes perfect sense. As with every other element of sport wagering its crucial to always focus not on winners and losers, but on the value you're getting on individual bets. For example, in most years there are several teams with a realistic shot of winning at the start of the NCAA basketball tournament. The problem is that these top teams invariably offer low paybacks that are less than their 'true odds' of winning. Every team is subject to the same variables like injuries, slumps, bad matchups but backing teams that are 'under the radar' at higher prices offer more compensation for these 'risks'.
To put this in more theoretical terms, the "true odds" of Duke winning the NCAA Championship are almost certainly higher than the price we're getting. Obviously, determining the "true odds", or actual probability of a future event is an inexact science but think of it this way: if the NCAA tournament was played 100 times would Duke wind up winning 50 of those? Given the number of other good teams and the propensity for upsets along the way, its doubtful. For the sake of argument, lets say that Duke has a 33% chance to win the tournament. That means that I wouldn't consider a bet on Duke to be a good value unless I was getting a price that a) accurately reflected the true probability of their winning and b) gave me some compensation for assuming the "risk of the unknown" inherent in taking the position so far in advance. At +500 I might be interested, but at +200 the value just isn't there.
Note that the more competitive the market, the more difficult it is to find good value on a favorite. In a smaller field, or in a field with one dominant competitor it can be easier. For example, say the UFC were to have a tournament involving heavyweight champion Brock Lesnar and three male figure skaters. Even if Lesnar was slightly injured, or not at the top of his game he'd essentially have a 100% chance of beating the smaller, effeminate men who are untrained to fight. If a book installed Lesnar as a -1000 favorite in this spot, it could still be considered a good value. It's never easy to risk a lot to win a little, but from strictly a mathematical standpoint it makes sense.
Don't try to make a huge profit with little risk: Sports betting provides few opportunities to make a 'big killing'. It may happen occasionally, but even the big payouts when it occurs doesn't make chasing big longshots a good value. If you're serious about sports betting it is crucial to maintain your focus on the underlying numbers and look for value at all times. If you want to take a longshot at a huge jackpot, play the lottery but don't try to do it at a sportsbook.
On a more theoretical level, a big price alone is no way to justify a wager. The concept of value works the same at the bottom of the barrel as it does at the top: make sure the price you're getting on an underdog accurately reflects their "true odds" of winning.
Don't bet one sided props: Sometimes sports books will offer silly bets just to get publicity or in some cases just to be funny. While there may be life on other planets, the 'true odds' of a Martian being named to President Obama's cabinet wouldn't justify a +5000 line that it would occur. - 2361
About the Author:
Ross Everett is a freelance sports writer and highly respected authority on sports betting odds comparison. He writing has appeared on a variety of sports sites including sports news and betting odds portal sites. He lives in Southern Nevada with three Jack Russell Terriers and an emu. He is currently working on an autobiography of former interior secretary James Watt.
posted by Marcondes Allen at 12:18 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home