Betting on sports 'futures' is an enjoyable and potentially profitable way to wager, but there are several potential risks that can lead to losses. Here's a rundown of things to avoid:
Don't bet at the first place you look: In other words, shop around for the best price. This is essential to all aspects of sports betting, but especially important with futures wagers. You'll find more disparity between prices from book to book on futures than any other betting proposition. From a theoretical standpoint, a little work can yield much better value. From a practical standpoint, that means a higher payout should you win. The reason for this is that individual sportsbooks' aren't as worried about what the other guys are doing as they are with most other bets. Once the futures "market" is set books move the lines almost exclusively on their own financial position. The market simply doesn't respond as quickly to futures wagers as it does to individual game lines so it is essential to do the extra work to get the best price on your proposition.
Don't fixate on picking the winner from a competitive field: This may sound like strange advice, but from a theoretical standpoint it makes perfect sense. As with every other element of sport wagering its crucial to always focus not on winners and losers, but on the value you're getting on individual bets. For example, in most years there are several teams with a realistic shot of winning at the start of the NCAA basketball tournament. The problem is that these top teams invariably offer low paybacks that are less than their 'true odds' of winning. Every team is subject to the same variables like injuries, slumps, bad matchups but backing teams that are 'under the radar' at higher prices offer more compensation for these 'risks'.
In mathematical terms, we're simply not being offered odds on a favorite that offer a good value in comparison with the 'true odds' of the event occurring. Let's say we bet Duke at +200 to win the NCAA tournament. If we could magically play the NCAA tournament over 100 times, would Duke come out on top more than 33 times? If not, they're a poor value at the price. At a higher price, I might be interested but at +200 the value is simply not there.
Note that the more competitive the market, the more difficult it is to find good value on the favorites. Since you can make a case for quite a few teams to win the NCAA tournament at this point this particular futures market is clearly a very competitive one. In a less competitive marketplace it might be possible to "pick the winner" and have it be a good value though you will pay a price for this. Here's a (thankfully) hypothetical example: let's say the UFC decided to hold a one night round robin tournament with 5 competitors. Competitor #1 would be heavyweight champion Brock Lesnar. The other four competitors would be professional figure skaters Elvis Stojko, Rudy Gallindo, Brian Boitano and Evgeni Plushinko. Even if he didn't bring his "A game", Lesnar would be essentially have a 100% certainty of beating the four untrained fighters, who also happen to be rather effeminate. If a sportsbook installed Lesnar as a -1000 favorite a bet on the 63 265 pound takedown would still be theoretically a good value. It's always difficult to risk so much to win a little, but from a strictly theoretical standpoint its a good play.
Don't try to make a huge profit with little risk: Sports betting provides few opportunities to make a 'big killing'. It may happen occasionally, but even the big payouts when it occurs doesn't make chasing big longshots a good value. If you're serious about sports betting it is crucial to maintain your focus on the underlying numbers and look for value at all times. If you want to take a longshot at a huge jackpot, play the lottery but don't try to do it at a sportsbook.
On a more theoretical level, a big price alone is no way to justify a wager. The concept of value works the same at the bottom of the barrel as it does at the top: make sure the price you're getting on an underdog accurately reflects their "true odds" of winning.
Don't bet one-sided futures or propositions: Though many of these are not futures per se, a lot of sportsbooks offer silly propositions on nonsport events as a way to get publicity, or just to be funny. Its important to make a distinction between this type of silly bet and more realistic nonsport propositions which frequently present good wagering value. Im talking the really outlandish stuff here. Not too long ago, a sportsbook posted a line on Martians landing on earth and painting the White House red by the end of the year. The "YES" was +2500 or thereabouts, which is far from reflective of the "true odds" of this unlikely event. Even if you're the type that collects classic Art Bell shows on tape and believes in UFOs you wouldn't place the probability of this happening at more than a fraction of a percent. The book only offered the "YES" side of the proposition, meaning that you couldn't lay even a huge price on the more likely outcome. Another book had a futures offering for what would happen first with Ashton Kutcher, Demi Moore and Bruce Willis. All of the options were very unlikely--Ashton and Bruce fighting on PPV and my favorite--and the longest odds--Ashton, Bruce and Demi hopping in bed together and releasing a porno video documenting the event. You'd receive a sizable payback if any of the events ever transpired, but I'm not exactly sure how to compute the "true odds" on "when pigs fly.
Don't bet at the first place you look: In other words, shop around for the best price. This is essential to all aspects of sports betting, but especially important with futures wagers. You'll find more disparity between prices from book to book on futures than any other betting proposition. From a theoretical standpoint, a little work can yield much better value. From a practical standpoint, that means a higher payout should you win. The reason for this is that individual sportsbooks' aren't as worried about what the other guys are doing as they are with most other bets. Once the futures "market" is set books move the lines almost exclusively on their own financial position. The market simply doesn't respond as quickly to futures wagers as it does to individual game lines so it is essential to do the extra work to get the best price on your proposition.
Don't fixate on picking the winner from a competitive field: This may sound like strange advice, but from a theoretical standpoint it makes perfect sense. As with every other element of sport wagering its crucial to always focus not on winners and losers, but on the value you're getting on individual bets. For example, in most years there are several teams with a realistic shot of winning at the start of the NCAA basketball tournament. The problem is that these top teams invariably offer low paybacks that are less than their 'true odds' of winning. Every team is subject to the same variables like injuries, slumps, bad matchups but backing teams that are 'under the radar' at higher prices offer more compensation for these 'risks'.
In mathematical terms, we're simply not being offered odds on a favorite that offer a good value in comparison with the 'true odds' of the event occurring. Let's say we bet Duke at +200 to win the NCAA tournament. If we could magically play the NCAA tournament over 100 times, would Duke come out on top more than 33 times? If not, they're a poor value at the price. At a higher price, I might be interested but at +200 the value is simply not there.
Note that the more competitive the market, the more difficult it is to find good value on the favorites. Since you can make a case for quite a few teams to win the NCAA tournament at this point this particular futures market is clearly a very competitive one. In a less competitive marketplace it might be possible to "pick the winner" and have it be a good value though you will pay a price for this. Here's a (thankfully) hypothetical example: let's say the UFC decided to hold a one night round robin tournament with 5 competitors. Competitor #1 would be heavyweight champion Brock Lesnar. The other four competitors would be professional figure skaters Elvis Stojko, Rudy Gallindo, Brian Boitano and Evgeni Plushinko. Even if he didn't bring his "A game", Lesnar would be essentially have a 100% certainty of beating the four untrained fighters, who also happen to be rather effeminate. If a sportsbook installed Lesnar as a -1000 favorite a bet on the 63 265 pound takedown would still be theoretically a good value. It's always difficult to risk so much to win a little, but from a strictly theoretical standpoint its a good play.
Don't try to make a huge profit with little risk: Sports betting provides few opportunities to make a 'big killing'. It may happen occasionally, but even the big payouts when it occurs doesn't make chasing big longshots a good value. If you're serious about sports betting it is crucial to maintain your focus on the underlying numbers and look for value at all times. If you want to take a longshot at a huge jackpot, play the lottery but don't try to do it at a sportsbook.
On a more theoretical level, a big price alone is no way to justify a wager. The concept of value works the same at the bottom of the barrel as it does at the top: make sure the price you're getting on an underdog accurately reflects their "true odds" of winning.
Don't bet one-sided futures or propositions: Though many of these are not futures per se, a lot of sportsbooks offer silly propositions on nonsport events as a way to get publicity, or just to be funny. Its important to make a distinction between this type of silly bet and more realistic nonsport propositions which frequently present good wagering value. Im talking the really outlandish stuff here. Not too long ago, a sportsbook posted a line on Martians landing on earth and painting the White House red by the end of the year. The "YES" was +2500 or thereabouts, which is far from reflective of the "true odds" of this unlikely event. Even if you're the type that collects classic Art Bell shows on tape and believes in UFOs you wouldn't place the probability of this happening at more than a fraction of a percent. The book only offered the "YES" side of the proposition, meaning that you couldn't lay even a huge price on the more likely outcome. Another book had a futures offering for what would happen first with Ashton Kutcher, Demi Moore and Bruce Willis. All of the options were very unlikely--Ashton and Bruce fighting on PPV and my favorite--and the longest odds--Ashton, Bruce and Demi hopping in bed together and releasing a porno video documenting the event. You'd receive a sizable payback if any of the events ever transpired, but I'm not exactly sure how to compute the "true odds" on "when pigs fly.
About the Author:
Ross Everett is a experienced freelance writer specializing in travel, poker and sports handicapping. He is a staff handicapper for Anatta Sports where he is responsible for providing daily free sports picks. In his spare time he enjoys fine dining, fencing and scuba diving. He lives in Southern Nevada with four dogs and a pet coyote.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar