faves and dogs___________faves and dogs

[Half Smoke]

_____________



a thread so great the title had to be stated twice_____(~:/


.
from googling all over the place I have found that of the major pro sports MLB seems to be the most unpredictable

according to various sites dogs win there at about a 44% clip but only at about a 34% clip in the NHL and the NFL (referring to money line dogs). Edit: I somehow managed to forget about the NBA - what I found is that dogs only win about 33% of games there on the money line

of course, these sites could be wrong or their data could be outdated, but I don't think so

and very surprisingly nobody has data on the R.O.I. of small faves at -about -120 versus big faves at about -220

from personal observation I believe the small faves of -120 or less have a significantly greater R.O.I. than the big faves of, for example, -220 in MLB

but I cannot prove this - I don't have the means or the energy to go back over a couple of thousand games to see if I'm right

even in this age of easy numbers crunching thanks to powerful computers this data is still not available

or at least I can't find it




here is something else - this blogger who calls himself "the sports geek" says he went back over 10 years of NBA betting and found that simply betting the fave on the money line was profitable_________________(~:/_________________he doesn't say by how much so I would guess by a tiny margin

is this really true_________???____________I dunno but the guy's blog is pretty impressive

.


https://www.thesportsgeek.com/blog/1...vorite-trends/


.

[ranchwest]

Predictability probably has something to do with legit scoring opportunities. My WAG is that the NBA has about 80+ goals per game. That tends to even out anomolies over the course of a game. In the NHL, they score in the neighborhood of 5 goals a game... most anything can happen in a game. MLB could range anywhere from 1 to 15 or more scores in a game... injuries and slumps play a big role and the scoring opportunities are crazy sometimes. NFL has about 6 to 10 scores in a game and most of those are based on talent and coaching.

So, the stats you found seem reasonable to me.

[Robert Fischer]

I don't know.

Can tell you that obvious favorites who are favored because of legitimate factors do offer you a coin flip or dice roll, but they are long-term-losers. You are essentially paying for the pleasure of a gamble. You aren't sharping anybody with these bets.

I stink at any horse or sports gambling stuff in which I don't see some specific, significant thing that is being badly mispriced.



stats and trends are often useful factors, but can be generally misleading, and again - the obvious, legitimate stuff is generally priced in.


You may see something like "on college bowl week" or "on March Madness" heavier '>5...' favorites are 'xworse/better' than '≤ 1.5' points favorites etc... where you hope to attribute the fan $ to some expected inefficiency...
In other words, you want synergy with the stats and some other thoughtful insight/Reason.

[Half Smoke]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

I don't know.

Can tell you that obvious favorites who are favored because of legitimate factors do offer you a coin flip or dice roll, but they are long-term-losers. You are essentially paying for the pleasure of a gamble. You aren't sharping anybody with these bets.

I stink at any horse or sports gambling stuff in which I don't see some specific, significant thing that is being badly mispriced.



stats and trends are often useful factors, but can be generally misleading, and again - the obvious, legitimate stuff is generally priced in.


You may see something like "on college bowl week" or "on March Madness" heavier '>5...' favorites are 'xworse/better' than '≤ 1.5' points favorites etc... where you hope to attribute the fan $ to some expected inefficiency...
In other words, you want synergy with the stats and some other thoughtful insight/Reason.

I have a very different point of view about betting sports

last season I paper bet about 75 NHL games just to see how I would do.
I didn't go into depth - I just scoped out the home and away records to see if the money line looked out of balance - I ended up with a positive 4.5% R.O.I.

I'm well aware that that doesn't prove anything but still

I believe beating sports is much easier than beating racing - the much lesser house hold is one reason, but there are others

I don't believe the sports betting crowd is all that sharp or that you have to go into great depth to find an edge

I was watching a sports wagering show on Comcast yesterday - it looked ridiculous - the guy was touting dozens of bets - mostly props - for no good reason

I believe large numbers are betting just because that's their home team

fixed odds - so it definitely helps to bet early - the sharps definitely plunge late and make it harder if you wait

you may have missed what I posted last year re road dogs in the NFL
I won't dish up the whole thing again until the season begins
but the main thing is that Statistician Mike Shackleford tracked more than 2,000 games and found that road dogs had a positive R.O.I. of 2.57% (see link)
not much but still pretty amazing since it involves no handicapping
I have tweaked that and done much better - will post before the 1st game




https://wizardofodds.com/games/sports-betting/nfl/



.