Tips for the new sports bettor

[Jibba]

I look forward to reading this thread more thoroughly later, but I had a question I was hoping someone could help me with. I guess it's kind of a theory question.

Do veteran sports bettors view their wagers in the same light as poker players in a ring game? More specifically, if you're getting good enough odds, do you accept the fact that you may lose more games than you win (while possibly making money)? Since this might not make sense, I'll use an example. This weekend I saw the Baltimore moneyline at +241. Now, I wasn't sure by any means that Baltimore would actually win, but I thought they'd put up a good fight and, theoretically, that they should win at least 1 time out of 3 (and in this light be a profitable play). I let the odds dictate my play as if I were on a flush draw getting 5-1 to see the turn. So do veterans view their wagers like this, or do they completely live in the here and now, only wagering when they think there's a 50+% chance they will win?

[silentbob]

[ QUOTE ]
I let the odds dictate my play as if I were on a flush draw getting 5-1 to see the turn. So do veterans view their wagers like this, or do they completely live in the here and now, only wagering when they think there's a 50+% chance they will win?

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, there are no implied odds in sports betting. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Anyway, I'm hardly a veteran, but isn't this why you only bet 1 or 2 percent of your BR? So that you can take hits (e.g., betting underdogs on the moneyline) in the short run as long as a certain type of play is +EV in the long run as rjp noted in the other thread.

Speaking of which, when you all talk about BR, are you referring to the sum of all money that you have at the various sportsbooks, or only the amount that you have at a particular place? Because let's say I have $5000. If I want to spread it in $1000 over 5 sportsbooks, then would I be making $10-$20 bets because that's 1 to 2 percent of I have at any given place, or $50-$100 bets because that's 1 to 2 percent of what I have period?

If it's the first, what's the recommended number of sportsbooks where we should have money, so that we can line shop/arb sufficiently but not spread our BR too thin?

[mrbaseball]

[ QUOTE ]
if you're getting good enough odds, do you accept the fact that you may lose more games than you win (while possibly making money)?

[/ QUOTE ]

Absolutely! This is the cornerstone of successful sports betting. I have written extensively in the past about selecting bets that have value in the line and NOT trying to pick the winner. This is what seperates long term winners from losers. See my post "Who beat the moneyline?" from the other day. The KC Royals only won 62 games this year but produced more units than any other team. The Yankees won 97 but ended up with a decent negative. Value is what wins in the long term.

[Homer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if anyone has done a bonus whoring 101 for sportsbooks(like homer's poker site thread) it would be awesome to have the link

[/ QUOTE ]

i would think homer's new arb site would have this on it. of course, it's more difficult because sportsbook bonuses take forever to clear if you're a small bettor who's not arbing.

[/ QUOTE ]

FWIW, I have an article up on 'introduction to arbitrage'. It doesn't delve too much into bonuses, but that is because there really isn't much to it. Find reputable sites and max out the bonuses. The rest is understanding how to arb to clear the bonuses.

[Jibba]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, there are no implied odds in sports betting. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, consider it in an all-in type situation. No matter what the actual amount, I was going for the +EV in the long run angle, which you kind of touched on in the rest of your post.

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, I'm hardly a veteran, but isn't this why you only bet 1 or 2 percent of your BR? So that you can take hits (e.g., betting underdogs on the moneyline) in the short run as long as a certain type of play is +EV in the long run as rjp noted in the other thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is kind of what I was thinking. Obviously I don't bet large amounts of my BR by any means. And I'm not just picking underdogs and hoping to hit. I'm picking games where I think the underdog is undervalued and therefore potentially +EV in the longrun (even though there may be a 2-1 chance I won't win that particular game).

[ QUOTE ]
Speaking of which, when you all talk about BR, are you referring to the sum of all money that you have at the various sportsbooks, or only the amount that you have at a particular place? Because let's say I have $5000. If I want to spread it in $1000 over 5 sportsbooks, then would I be making $10-$20 bets because that's 1 to 2 percent of I have at any given place, or $50-$100 bets because that's 1 to 2 percent of what I have period?

If it's the first, what's the recommended number of sportsbooks where we should have money, so that we can line shop/arb sufficiently but not spread our BR too thin?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think BR means entire sportsbook BR. As for your second question, I'd imagine that the more sportsbooks you're signed up at the better. I'm signed up at 5 or 6 right now and I'll be adding to that number as I gain experience and see good deals. I just don't keep money at all of the ones I've signed up at. The money is always a click away in my Neteller account.

[Homer]

[ QUOTE ]
or do they completely live in the here and now, only wagering when they think there's a 50+% chance they will win?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure others already answered, but...

I bet when I think I have an edge. A good example was the 25-1 on no HR prop that crockpot posted last week. I certainly didn't expect to win 50+% of the time, but I knew I'd win more than 4% of the time, and that's all that counts.

[Jibba]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
or do they completely live in the here and now, only wagering when they think there's a 50+% chance they will win?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure others already answered, but...

I bet when I think I have an edge. A good example was the 25-1 on no HR prop that crockpot posted last week. I certainly didn't expect to win 50+% of the time, but I knew I'd win more than 4% of the time, and that's all that counts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, that's the way I was looking at it. In essence, I took Baltimore Monday night because I thought they'd win more than 25-30% of the time and had odds of +200 and +241. So in that light I thought it was a good play (although whether the basis was solid is debateable). As long as I'm thinking in the right mindset.

[Homer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
or do they completely live in the here and now, only wagering when they think there's a 50+% chance they will win?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure others already answered, but...

I bet when I think I have an edge. A good example was the 25-1 on no HR prop that crockpot posted last week. I certainly didn't expect to win 50+% of the time, but I knew I'd win more than 4% of the time, and that's all that counts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, that's the way I was looking at it. In essence, I took Baltimore Monday night because I thought they'd win more than 25-30% of the time and had odds of +200 and +241. So in that light I thought it was a good play (although whether the basis was solid is debateable). As long as I'm thinking in the right mindset.

[/ QUOTE ]

For whatever reason, this reminded me of something I read about a casino accidentally offering 80-1 on a certain sicbo bet rather than 60-1. Gamblers flew in overnight for the affair. Check out "Pricing Mistakes" in thie article -- http://gaming.unlv.edu/subject/casinomath.html



edited to fix link -P

[Thremp]

Take the period out of the hyperlink.

[rjp]

[ QUOTE ]
Do veteran sports bettors view their wagers in the same light as poker players in a ring game? More specifically, if you're getting good enough odds, do you accept the fact that you may lose more games than you win (while possibly making money)? Since this might not make sense, I'll use an example. This weekend I saw the Baltimore moneyline at +241. Now, I wasn't sure by any means that Baltimore would actually win, but I thought they'd put up a good fight and, theoretically, that they should win at least 1 time out of 3 (and in this light be a profitable play). I let the odds dictate my play as if I were on a flush draw getting 5-1 to see the turn. So do veterans view their wagers like this, or do they completely live in the here and now, only wagering when they think there's a 50+% chance they will win?

[/ QUOTE ]

It is theoretically correct to take the play with the highest expectation, but the difference between sports betting and poker is that these situations don't come up as often in sports betting as they do in poker.

Although it might be the play with the highest expectation, it may actually be better to take the UNDERDOG against the spread. It's a risk/reward that you must take into account in your money management plan.

I personally only take UNDERDOGs on the money line if I feel they have atleast a 50/50 chance of winning. This is my personal preference in regards to my own money management plan. Yours might be different, and it's not wrong to go the other side. Theoretically it's the better way to go. For big DOGs I prefer to reduce my risk and take the play that might not have as much expected value but does have a positive expectation.

Edit: This only applies to sports like football and basketball. In baseball always take the odds instead of the run line, as these situations come up every day. Your risk is reduced in baseball as you'll get these chances on a consistent basis.