This is so basic I'm embarrassed...total newbie

[bcubed72]

I thought of something about sports betting...I am going to try starting out, betting small. I know I'll be -EV, but I'd like a little something to make games interesting, even knowing I'll lose in the long run.

At first, I thought betting one team, every week, would be such that you'd get a long term result of losing exactly the juice. But then I got to thinking...

I know a bookie wants to get even money on both sides of the wager, that way he can earn his vig regardless. He doesn't want to essentially be gambling himself, regardless of whether or not he thinks he's getting the best of it.

Considering that many people bet for other reasons than EV (i.e. team loyalty), could popular teams be -EV to bet on over the long haul? I know pro bettors try to take advantage of inefficiencies in the market, but they can't be completely sucessful, or every bet would be equaly good (or bad). A good college example might be Notre Dame, which seems to have a large following that might bet out of loyalty, not odds.

(An aside: it's not so much of an issue these days with the internet allowing bets from all over the world, but back in the day when this stuff was done in the back rooms of bars, it must have been tough to give good enough odds to allow equal betting for and against hometown heroes.)

[DCWildcat]

[ QUOTE ]
Considering that many people bet for other reasons than EV (i.e. team loyalty), could popular teams be -EV to bet on over the long haul? I know pro bettors try to take advantage of inefficiencies in the market, but they can't be completely sucessful, or every bet would be equaly good (or bad). A good college example might be Notre Dame, which seems to have a large following that might bet out of loyalty, not odds.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is a good question. I'm new to sports betting, so I'm not sure about this, but I think the answer is yes. Notre Dame might be a good example, and the Yankees are definately an example. They have a huge market base (NYC) and a huge following outside of it as well.

Of course, the extra money pouring in and pushing the line from the "team loyalist" types could likely be offset by sharps knowledgeable of that fact betting the other side. I don't know.

[splashpot]

I've just started as well, but I've read that fading the public should theoretically work. natedogg posts weekly "Bar Stool Pundits" (BSP) picks for the NFL. Bar Stool Pundits are typical sports bar joes who basically just pick games by hype/loyalty, etc.

[youtalkfunny]

I always laugh when I call my friend back home, who just laid -7½ on the Patriots with his local bookie, when they're -6 everywhere else in the world.

So yes, getting a free 1.5 points by fading the home team is very, very +EV.

As for cyber bookies, they know the Yankees are going to be bet heavily every day, and they dial the line accordingly, to punish those who blindly bet them every day.

I read a few weeks ago that bettors who backed the KC Royals every game this season would be showing a profit.

[ubercuber]

[ QUOTE ]
I read a few weeks ago that bettors who backed the KC Royals every game this season would be showing a profit.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would still make fun of them.

GO TWINS!

[primetime32]

Blindly fading a team or blindly fading the public is not +ev. While it is always good to look for value and many teams value can be found fading a team like the yankees or fading the public, you will not make money long term.

[jaybee]

"I know a bookie wants to get even money on both sides of the wager, that way he can earn his vig regardless."

This is a common misconception. Balanced action is seldom achieved. It's a myth that balancing the action is the purpose of the line. This is explained well in SSB - a must read.

[checkmate36]

[ QUOTE ]
Considering that many people bet for other reasons than EV (i.e. team loyalty), could popular teams be -EV to bet on over the long haul

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this what they call square money?

[Performify]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Considering that many people bet for other reasons than EV (i.e. team loyalty), could popular teams be -EV to bet on over the long haul

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this what they call square money?

[/ QUOTE ]

From the FAQ:

Squares – unsophisticated bettors, collectively known as “the public”

Money on popular teams isn't specifically called square money... but it often is square money. Capiche? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[checkmate36]

[ QUOTE ]
Capiche?

[/ QUOTE ]

TY [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]