72 Hole Match Bets

[Ian]

Looking at my own stats for the year and realised only place I win is on 72 hole matchups.
Outright play results are clouded by the assumption that the odd winner at long odds seems to give a feel good factor and that in the long run keeps you backing in the outright markets in the belief you will pick another winner.
Personally I will not back 18 hole matchups as I think anything might happen in such a short period of play.
Just thought I would throw this in for general discussion
One other quick question - being from the other side of the pond the larger bookmakers over here realised a few years back that they were vulnerable in 72 hole matchups and started stopping offering odds or putting on stringent rules such as minimum trebles etc Is this likely to happen with the "American" sportsbooks or have they been offering these matchups on golf for a long time?
Luckily with the advent of the internet and more and more bookmakers coming on line the opportunities are increasing

Here's hoping for my matchups on the week
Wessels over Woosnam - Volvo
Verplank over Price
Dimarco over Langham
Henninger over Lewis SFB
All at -110 I'll rarely take anything less

 

[Stanley]

Ian, I'll start off the discussion though I hope others will share their thoughts.

As long as I have been wagering online - which is only 18 months - virtually all the North American sportsbooks have been offering 72-hole matchups, though usually they have been the standard eight matchups originating from the Las Vegas Sports Consultants (LVSC). There was no need for a golf linemaker - these lines were used and adjusted according to money flows. Apparently these standard 72-hole golf matchups have been offered in Las Vegas for years.

They were always offered as singles and I don't see anything other than a move towards that as more bookmakers try to move online to keep their punters. A number of golf line-makers have reported a increased demand for their services since last summer because of Tiger Woods and his effect on the golf betting market. More and more sportsbooks are offering matchups independent of the LVSC ones and a limited number offer 18-hole matchups on a consistent basis. In terms of golf coverage for betting purposes, the online books are starting to catch up with the enormous range of betting angles we have on golf each week in the UK and similarly as the UK bookmakers move online they will have to reduce their juice, allow singles and be more competitive.

With the outright plays, the mark-up is so huge I don't think there is much value in the 100/1 shots, their 'real' probabilites should yield odds of 500/1 and above. This is because it is a 175% market on the outrights [have read this figure, rather than checked it myself, though it seems about right], while it is generally a 110% market on the 72-hole matchups. But there are no golden rules with outright plays, just make sure it is a first five payout on the e/w bets and exploit the differences between the bookmakers.

On the 18-hole matchups I don't think it is too short a course. I'm not that keen on keeping my funds tied up for four days and if I can avoid the 'ties lose' approach of European books, then it is best way to press home an advantage. It is area in which the linesmakers know least about how players will play from one to another, hence the 'leaderboard' stats on my site. The most common pattern is that players tend to go good round, bad round, but knowledge of how players tend to perform under certain leaderboard conditions can provide an edge which is a little harder to secure for the 72-hole matchups as they have more time to research and prepare sharper lines.

Just my thoughts, I hope others have more.

 

[AussieVamp2]

Originally posted by Stanley:
With the outright plays, the mark-up is so huge I don't think there is much value in the 100/1 shots, their 'real' probabilites should yield odds of 500/1 and above. This is because it is a 175% market on the outrights [have read this figure, rather than checked it myself, though it seems about right], while it is generally a 110% market on the 72-hole matchups.

Ok, I have looked at this - the tournament last week with Mr. Waldorf, for one. The LVSC total market with the 114 head 'Field' player was 175%. Other places like Centrebet, Sportodds, Sportstab were around 200%. This does seem to gel with what Stanley says in that the super longshot nohopers in general are bad value (similar to Nascar I guess, in that none of them are going to win, usually).

So a fairly big percentage to beat, unless you automatically discount a lot of players as 'no chance'.

Stanley, what percentage of players have never finished top 5 ever? That would be interesting - perhaps they dont stay around long though?

 

[AussieVamp2]

something else I read in a publication from Ian and Stan's little island suggested that if you do good ratings etc., you can hit 60% on golf matchups, as another golf service had written a couple of articles for them - another subscriber did say they were achieving somewhere around there - so if this is possible then obviously golf matchups are beatable if you know what you are doing, and what wind suits Bermuda Grass greens before 9 a.m. on a Saturday in November.

 

[AussieVamp2]

speaking of services and of course Stans is the best value for money

http://www.sports-betting.co.uk/

these were the guys with the articles in Smartsig that said you could beat golf matchups