Originally posted by buckeye:
AV2,
I am impressed, if I am understanding correctly, you have shown a profit in betting all of those sports and leagues on your long list
-- Basically, yes. Amounts involved are not very exciting of course, being just a 'recreational' punter. Irish soccer league, for example, might have had two bets, and could be 1-1 -0.4 or something, so it would not technically be true in all cases. Perhaps slightly behind in Turkey, for example.
I didn't think anyone could be that good spread so thin. Considering most experts estimate 98% or more of all bettors lose, it is a remarkable task to win at so many sports/leagues - VERY IMPRESSIVE INDEED!
-- 98% would seem unlikely to me. However, it is also a lot of work to do the research, so could have something to do with it.
Lest you misunderstand my statement about capping sports that I watch, let me explain. I don't do stupid things like bet all the tv games so I can watch them with a vested interest.
-- Right, well I didn't think that. Will admit to doing that with the Superbowl, only game that gets shown on tv here in the NFL, but have also got 3 of the last 4 right, so that is ok(bloody Falcons couldn't score)
What I mean is that I have been watching those sports on tv for 30+ years and have gleaned some insight through watching all of that coverage and hearing the commentators analysis and following the coaches, players, recruiting, etc. I never thought I'd one day use any of it to bet with, but I do.
-- Can't hurt I guess.
I also watch games/tourneys in part to gain insight on potential angles for the next round or next game - not just hoping to win a bet on the current one. Sometimes half time bets are in order, or "interactive" trades or other means to take advantage of what I have observed during the game. I don't watch every game I bet on, and certainly don't bet every game I watch, but seeing how a guy is playing or how they finish is sometimes more telling than just looking at their scorecard or the final score. While I use a decent amount of stats in capping the sports I cap, I also feel that other angles/knowledge can be leveraged outside of pure stats and numbers, some "feel" involved which can best be gained by watching the game.
-- Sure, think this can be more important in collision football codes is my personal opinion, anyway.
Some use only stats and don't care about watching games, I watch some of them and try to gain more insight for future plays - as well as just watching as a fan - as I always have! To me, it is only logical to bet the sports I know and am familiar with.
-- Well, I took somewhat the opposite approach.
As for my motivations for asking, I assure you I am just curious. I get the impression you are worried that I am setting you up for ridicule. I am not, trust me.
-- Not really, I would not believe me probably though if I said 'I have made a little money on a lot of things' particularly not if was coming from an American background where the number of different sports/leagues you get exposed to from other places is minimal.
I truly would like to learn something - I have learned very little from statements like "any sport is beatable". Which do you consider "most beatable"?
--- Good question, not sure I currently have an answer for that one? As to 'most' as I am still working on things, should know more in a year!
I understand that inside knowledge, like you seem to have on AFL, would help anyone and make any sport beatable. I am asking what sports, other than golf, NASCAR, and baseball, do you consider to be the easiest to beat without inside info - just purely statistically if you prefer?
-- currently, basketball (not NBA), ice hockey, college football, soccer,.
Never studied golf/tennis so no idea there, really, but having it as a basis always seems useful to me.
I am not asking you to reveal some magic secret formula, just teach me something! I have shared a lot of tips, techniques, angles, etc. both in forums and privately with many people.
-- Well privately, sure, with people that share similar interests and have input.
I am not paranoid that others will "ruin" lines based on them or that bookies will use them to sharpen their lines.
-- No, not if they have been doing the same thing for years and are not too likely to change, perhaps not.
As a stats guy, I assume you understand why I rail about vig so much. At -120 each way you must win 54.55% of your picks just to break even, at 20 cents its 52.38, at 10 cents its 51.22.
-- The lower the better, of course, but as I think someone else mentioned, you can over worry about it. Problem you have with the American betting market is a large degree of what you could term 'oligopolic collusion' I guess, same with the Asian soccer thing, so lines are identical thanks to such horrible things as line services, from a punting point of view, these are long term very bad for your ROT. Others do not suffer as much from this, but may do so in the future.
Some may think it trivial, but considering that many think picking 55% is impressive, and at 60% you are a "god",
-- Anders, next time someone asks you if you are a good, you can say yes.
that couple percent difference can be "very" significant to your ROI. Obviously I am talking spread betting like fb and hoops here, but the same "relative" concept can be extrapolated to any sport and $lines, futures, etc. The higher the hold/vig, the better you must be to counteract/offset it. Not that it is impossible, just relatively more difficult - all other things being equal ( which they obviously won't be for all punters ).
