Genius New Strategy
 

For a while now, I've been considering adopting a radical new sports betting strategy. First, a bit of background:

I've been a big time sports fan for 20 years, and within the last couple of years, began betting sports fairly regularly for not insignificant portions of my income. However, as I'm sure is the case for 90% or more of amateurs venturing into the handicapping field, I've steadily donated to sports books during this time. I'm not a guy that will go 5-5 and lose to the juice; rather, I'll go 2-8 and lose significantly more money to losing bets than to the juice. I mostly bet college football, NFL, and MLB, and my handicapping approach is unsophisticated - I'll bet mostly on my first instinct upon looking at the lines, using my sports knowledge, opinions, and a minor amount of collaborative research to place bets.

Given these circumstances, let's say that going forward, I continue with my tried and true losing handicapping methods as usual...except I fade myself on all bets. Every time the home team looks good, I throw a unit on the away team. Every time it looks like a favorite is laying too many points to cover, I'll throw a unit on the underdog. Etc etc.

How can this not produce results? My theory is that I'm a losing sports better, not that I merely struggle to beat the vig, and I have a moderate sample size of data to support this assertion.

The easiest application of this strategy will be on football games, where the spread -110 either way, as opposed to MLB where the flip side of the +125 moneyline steals I think I see is a garbage -130 payout. Any advice or insight before I roll this approach out full bore come NCAA season?

cliff notes: Losing sports bettor can win big $$$ by maintaining handicapping approach and simply fading self?

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

Without even asking you, I'm already sure you have sample size issues since you end up hitting 20% against the spread. Spreads are designed to be 50-50 bets. You were just running bad to hit 20%, in the future you should expect to hit around 50% so fading yourself wont work.

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

This will 10,000% not work. Just face the fact you won't make any money and do it for entertainment purposes.

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

If losing to the vig is the worst case scenario, that already translates into a huge improvement over last season. At one point I calculated my expected value assuming all point spread bets were 50/50, and the amount I had actually lost made people question the efficacy of EV calculations themselves.

Realistically, this was probably hitting 35-40% of bets, on a sample size of around 70, so I won't claim to have a statistically soundproof theorm....but it's also unconvincing to think I just ran bad for the duration of NCAAF, NFL, and now MLB seasons.

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

A sample of 70 is nothing. A sample of 1,000 is not even that convincing.

You did just run bad. If you were a monkey throwing darts on a board to pick winners you should be hitting ~45-50% depending on the vig you pay.

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

[ QUOTE ]
A sample of 70 is nothing. A sample of 1,000 is not even that convincing.

You did just run bad. If you were a monkey throwing darts on a board to pick winners you should be hitting ~45-50% depending on the vig you pay.

[/ QUOTE ]

aha, but what if you fade the picks the dart throwing monkey chooses? then you'd hit 50-55%!! foolproof!

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

Why would he expect to hit 50%? He's NOT throwing darts at a board. He's capping the games and getting himself on the wrong side by virtue of being a square.

I can't say the sample size is very convincing, but with the right bettor, it is possible for this strategy to work. He sounds like he could be that guy.

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

So you're telling me if every losing bettor would just fade themselves, there would never be a losing sports bettor on this planet?

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

I had a friend who tried this. It only works for 3 weeks. After that, you will unconsciously start to over compensate. That's when you need to take it to the next level... fade of the fade.

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

[ QUOTE ]
I had a friend who tried this. It only works for 3 weeks. After that, you will unconsciously start to over compensate. That's when you need to take it to the next level... fade of the fade.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

After awhile, you will need to fade your fading of the fade. 3rd level thinking. Guaranteed $$$. If you can get someone to fade your fading and then fade them, that'll work too.

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

If you believe it's possible for a capper to consistently hit over 50% of his picks, surely you believe there are cappers that consistently hit under 50%. The catch is that they have to be completely honest with themselves and their system to fade themselves correctly.

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

"Genius New Strategy"? You just stole this idea from George Costanza. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Opp...eld_episode%29

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

[ QUOTE ]
After awhile, you will need to fade your fading of the fade. 3rd level thinking. Guaranteed $$$. If you can get someone to fade your fading and then fade them, that'll work too.

[/ QUOTE ]

Once I figured out how to properly 37th level think, all my fades became real picks, I became profitable, and turned into a real boy!

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
After awhile, you will need to fade your fading of the fade. 3rd level thinking. Guaranteed $$$. If you can get someone to fade your fading and then fade them, that'll work too.

[/ QUOTE ]

Once I figured out how to properly 37th level think, all my fades became real picks, I became profitable, and turned into a real boy!

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, sort of. I believe it's the 40th level. At level 37, you're probably still made of wood.

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

Have you hit rock bottom when you fade yourself??

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

I think this is a solid plan. In the NFL, the majority of my sports bets are just simple fades of the public (taking the under on a MNF game between two high-profile offenses, etc., etc.) and I did quite well for myself last year. I can see the subconsciously second-guessing yourself screwing you in the long run, but there's nothing wrong with giving this method a try.

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

Unless you can find an inefficient market where you can spot edge greater than the vig, throwing darts at a board should yield the same results as putting minor thought into you picks (losing to the vig in the long run). Most major sports markets are too efficient and priced correctly to beat outright, IMO.

There are a few exceptions. Take the scenario where a large metropolitan area team is playing another team from a much smaller city, and presumably smaller fan base. It is possible (but not always the case) that fans from the much larger metropolitan city may artificially push the line up from "true" fair value, making a bet for the other team preferable. Might want to focus on finding scenarios like this and other inefficient markets.................ie WNBA. (love the NY Liberty -3.5 btw)

Re: Genius New Strategy
 

Wasn't the Barstool Pundit thread (last year or the year before) real popular? This was a fade/contrarian play. I don't remember how it fared and I haven't searched yet, but I remember it being very popular and at least moderately successful.