Getting better at betting on football games (1 Viewer)

[jwvdcw]

Fact #1: I have a very analytical mind. I play poker as my sole source of income, and that has helped develop many skills that one would think would be useful in other forms of gambling such as betting on sports.Fact #2: I know a lot about pro football(insert joke here ). I can tell you random scores of games from years ago and recite statistics that theres no good reasoning for me to know.Fact #3: I am NOT a winning long term football bettor. Sure I've had hot streaks, and sure I think that I'm better at picking games and I think its even possible that I may be able to come close to breaking even over the long term. But theres no way I can say that I'm confident in my ability to make money doing this.Fact #4: I want to get better and make money doing something I love(football).So this thread is dedicated to making us all better at picking games. This thread is NOT a thread to brag about past successes or to show off. One thing that I've taken from poker is that ego is one of your biggest enemies at the table. If we can admit that we need to get better, then we're already ahead of 50% of the people out there. I honestly don't have a whole lot to teach here, but I'm sure that many here do and I really want to learn.First things first: Is it possible to be a consistent and long term winner betting on football? And don't rush to conclusions to answer this. There are tons of people out there who know everything there is to know about football who simply can't beat the spreads(and the juice) consistently. I think this is a very valid question.Now I don't have a whole lot of insight here- as I said, I am not a winning long term bettor yet. I start this thread more for me to learn than to teach. However, I will give a few random thoughts, hopefully a few of them will get us started in our discussion:1. One thing that I think continuously clouds our judgment and our ideas of our own ability is that we don't recognize luck enough. Let me illustrate using poker: If someone told you that they have won $100 for 5 straight days playing poker, most astute poker players would not be all that impressed. Rather, they would want to know the details. And if after looking the details they discovered that the person was merely getting lucky cards, then they not only wouldn't be impressed but they wouldn't think highly of the player at all. Conversely its possible for a poker player to lose money yet his play can still be very impressive when studied.However, we don't seem to do this with football betting. With football betting, we are all about results. "Oh you are 14-4 against the spread so far this year? Oh, you must be good! Tell me what you think about this week's games!!"Let me propose a hypothetical extreme to illustrate my point: Team A is a 5.5 point favorite over Team B. Two sports bettors both do their homework on the game and one of them chooses Team A and one chooses Team B. Team B dominates the game and has a 7 point lead with 10 seconds to go in the 4th quarter. Team A hits a hail mary to tie the game. Team A wins the coin toss in overtime. Then Team A catches a tipped pass and goes in for a TD on the first play of OT to win the game by 6 points. Which bettor was more right: The one that chose Team A and won the bet or the one that chose Team B and lost?I think that one's record against the spread is meaningless unless it is over a very long period of time. Rather I propose that when evaluating ourselves we should use a different type of system. I think that we should award ourselves points for each of our plays. Here is my initial thought on the score keeping system, although I'm sure that it can and will be revised(probably the -.25 category is the one which I'm most unsure of- How many negative points should that be worth?):2 points: This is for a game that you won and were totally right about. For example, if you had Carolina +3 this past week against the Giants, you get 2 points.1 point: This is for a bet that having watched the game(not just highlights) you can honestly say that you'd make that bet again if the game was repeated. Notice that the outcome of the game is not mentioned anywhere here and is irrelevant.-.25 points: This is a game that you think came down to one or two lucky plays which determined the winner of the bet. The -.25 reflects the money reflects the money that you'll lose on the juice over time on these bets which you'll theoretically win exactly 50% of the time. This is basically a bet that if you could go back and repick, you'd chose not to pick because its such a crapshoot. Please note that I think that a large majority of bets will fall into this category.-1 point: Exact opposite of the +1 point. This is a bet that if you could go back and redo the entire bet and game, you'd take the other side.-2 points: A game you lost and were totally wrong about.And then obviously you multiply the points times the number of units you bet on that game to get your score. I think that using this sytem will more accurately reflect how well one is picking games and will give us a better understanding if we are doing well or not. This is key because I believe that one of the worst mistakes that can be made in gambling is too think we are doing well when really its just short term luck- This makes us continue to use such losing methods for far longer than we should and when our luck finally evens out, we think that we're just in an unlucky period.2. How many games should be bet each week? Obviously there is no hard fast rule, but I think its pretty clear that the common bettor bets on too many games because he craves action. My first thought is that there are probably only one or two games that are great picks each week, so we should probably limit ourselves to those. Also, do you guys think that one can effectively bet on or against his home team or rival team without letting his judgment be clouded?3. A few quotes about sports betting from Slansky and Malmuth's book "How to Mkae $100,000 a Year Gambling for a Living":-"You only have to bet on those situations where you have an edge. These edges do occur, and they occur often enought that an astute person who is willing to work hard enough can make a good living. In fact, the most successful gamblers are the big sports bettors. There is an obvious reason for this. Sports betting is the only game where you can increase your bets in proportion to your bankroll and still have virtually teh same edge. You can't do this at the racetrack without dropping your odds. Increase your bet size in blackjack and expect more "heat". Move up to bigger stakes in poker and you run into other pros who will cut down your potential win rate dramatically. Such is not the case in sports. So if you really do learn to beat sports, do your homework, watch as many games as you can, keep records, and treat it like a business, you can forget about that measly $100,000 a year we promised you. In sports, the sky's the limit."-"The line that the bookie puts up is usually 'correct.' When this is the case, you shouldn't make a bet. Since you normally have to lay 11-10 the line must be significantly 'off' for your bet to be profitable. If you bet lots of games where the bookie's line is right, you will slowly lose your money no matter how knowledgeable you may be."Now I realize that I havn't said a whole lot here. As I said, I'm trying to learn myself here. What I would like to hear are some success stories from people who have won consistently from year to year. What games do you look for and why do you think you are successful? What steps do you recommend to get better?

 

[Wilbur Wood]

"Market Efficiency" exists in the NFL. There is so much visibility and action in the NFL that, on average, the NFL spreads already internalize all relevant factors that go into handicapping the outcome of an NFL game. It is a market driven "indifference point". It is still fun to bet and do office pools, but if you're looking to make $$ you need to go lower down on the food chain -- try college basketball and even then stay away from the big schools. Try some of the more obscure bets that exist in Vegas on NFL football, other than the games -- Over/Under on player stats, etc.Within any normal distribution, you will find some outliers, but that's all they are.Don't waste your time on NFL game betting studies.

 

[munga30]

Your weighting system allows enough bias into the weightings that I think it would be *less* useful than simple betting units won and lost. It takes the luck out of the picks whenever you (or some plurality of opinion) says so. The oddsmaker has to set the line taking those "lucky" situations into account, so you should too. As you are well aware, gambling decisions are to be evaluated on the information available to you at the time you act. Outcomes should not matter, so don't let the play on the field change your decision because you can't *know* how the game will unfold. Based on that, I can think of one way to improve your system. If you find out that there was some piece of information that you could have reasonably discovered before the game started, then you could feel more or less confident about your pick based on the info.

 

[jdoggydogg]

This is a subject that fascinates me. Since I started obsessing over fantasy football, I have spent less and less time on betting. But I did learn some valuable lessons.I have had a few years where I have lost a little, a couple where I broke even, and a couple where my winning percentage was really solid. What became evident, especially during my last couple of years where I won money, was that the notion of betting "lock" games was defunct. The idea of a lock is great: all the trends, all the stats, and all the signs point to a 21 point margin. But locks are a trap.So using this theory, the first couple of years, I stopped betting one or two large bets a week and subdivided the same amount of money into three or four bets. That worked pretty well, but still, it was sometimes hard to have winning seasons.My best two seasons involved betting most or all the games. I bet $10 on 10 to 14 games per week. Rarely did I go under .500, and if I had a bad week or two, I always rebounded with a solid week. I have run out of time as far as researching football betting, but I found the system to be fairly successful.

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

I only care if you can make us "boatloads of cash"!

 

[culdeus]

As far as 1. goes you could probably do just as well assigning arbitrary values for:1 point: Favorite won SU and ATS-.5 points: Favorite won SU lost ATS-2 points: Favorite lost SU and ATS1 point: Dog won ATS lost SU2 points: Dog won SU and ATS-1 point: Dog lost ATS and SUOr something like that. When you put too many emotions into a grading system it has lots of potential for error.2. No more than 6. If you exceed six then do something exotic with 1U parlays of those games if you HAVE to have action.3. I don't have 10k to throw around for any grambling. I dunno, I usually break about even year to year. I don't bet much at all online. I certainly don't do it for a living. When I go to vegas I raise the bet considerably. Consistent winners typically:-Don't chase-Don't vary their units by more than 5x-Raise their base unit when on a streak-Rarely tease/parlay more than 3 things together-Watch line moves

 

[perry147]

Fact #1: I have a very analytical mind. I play poker as my sole source of income, and that has helped develop many skills that one would think would be useful in other forms of gambling such as betting on sports.

Fact #2: I know a lot about pro football(insert joke here ). I can tell you random scores of games from years ago and recite statistics that theres no good reasoning for me to know.

Fact #3: I am NOT a winning long term football bettor. Sure I've had hot streaks, and sure I think that I'm better at picking games and I think its even possible that I may be able to come close to breaking even over the long term. But theres no way I can say that I'm confident in my ability to make money doing this.

Fact #4: I want to get better and make money doing something I love(football).

So this thread is dedicated to making us all better at picking games. This thread is NOT a thread to brag about past successes or to show off. One thing that I've taken from poker is that ego is one of your biggest enemies at the table. If we can admit that we need to get better, then we're already ahead of 50% of the people out there. I honestly don't have a whole lot to teach here, but I'm sure that many here do and I really want to learn.

First things first: Is it possible to be a consistent and long term winner betting on football? And don't rush to conclusions to answer this. There are tons of people out there who know everything there is to know about football who simply can't beat the spreads(and the juice) consistently. I think this is a very valid question.

Now I don't have a whole lot of insight here- as I said, I am not a winning long term bettor yet. I start this thread more for me to learn than to teach. However, I will give a few random thoughts, hopefully a few of them will get us started in our discussion:

1. One thing that I think continuously clouds our judgment and our ideas of our own ability is that we don't recognize luck enough. Let me illustrate using poker: If someone told you that they have won $100 for 5 straight days playing poker, most astute poker players would not be all that impressed. Rather, they would want to know the details. And if after looking the details they discovered that the person was merely getting lucky cards, then they not only wouldn't be impressed but they wouldn't think highly of the player at all. Conversely its possible for a poker player to lose money yet his play can still be very impressive when studied.

However, we don't seem to do this with football betting. With football betting, we are all about results. "Oh you are 14-4 against the spread so far this year? Oh, you must be good! Tell me what you think about this week's games!!"

Let me propose a hypothetical extreme to illustrate my point: Team A is a 5.5 point favorite over Team B. Two sports bettors both do their homework on the game and one of them chooses Team A and one chooses Team B. Team B dominates the game and has a 7 point lead with 10 seconds to go in the 4th quarter. Team A hits a hail mary to tie the game. Team A wins the coin toss in overtime. Then Team A catches a tipped pass and goes in for a TD on the first play of OT to win the game by 6 points. Which bettor was more right: The one that chose Team A and won the bet or the one that chose Team B and lost?

I think that one's record against the spread is meaningless unless it is over a very long period of time. Rather I propose that when evaluating ourselves we should use a different type of system. I think that we should award ourselves points for each of our plays. Here is my initial thought on the score keeping system, although I'm sure that it can and will be revised(probably the -.25 category is the one which I'm most unsure of- How many negative points should that be worth?):

2 points: This is for a game that you won and were totally right about. For example, if you had Carolina +3 this past week against the Giants, you get 2 points.

1 point: This is for a bet that having watched the game(not just highlights) you can honestly say that you'd make that bet again if the game was repeated. Notice that the outcome of the game is not mentioned anywhere here and is irrelevant.

-.25 points: This is a game that you think came down to one or two lucky plays which determined the winner of the bet. The -.25 reflects the money reflects the money that you'll lose on the juice over time on these bets which you'll theoretically win exactly 50% of the time. This is basically a bet that if you could go back and repick, you'd chose not to pick because its such a crapshoot. Please note that I think that a large majority of bets will fall into this category.

-1 point: Exact opposite of the +1 point. This is a bet that if you could go back and redo the entire bet and game, you'd take the other side.

-2 points: A game you lost and were totally wrong about.

And then obviously you multiply the points times the number of units you bet on that game to get your score. I think that using this sytem will more accurately reflect how well one is picking games and will give us a better understanding if we are doing well or not. This is key because I believe that one of the worst mistakes that can be made in gambling is too think we are doing well when really its just short term luck- This makes us continue to use such losing methods for far longer than we should and when our luck finally evens out, we think that we're just in an unlucky period.

2. How many games should be bet each week? Obviously there is no hard fast rule, but I think its pretty clear that the common bettor bets on too many games because he craves action. My first thought is that there are probably only one or two games that are great picks each week, so we should probably limit ourselves to those. Also, do you guys think that one can effectively bet on or against his home team or rival team without letting his judgment be clouded?

3. A few quotes about sports betting from Slansky and Malmuth's book "How to Mkae $100,000 a Year Gambling for a Living":

-"You only have to bet on those situations where you have an edge. These edges do occur, and they occur often enought that an astute person who is willing to work hard enough can make a good living. In fact, the most successful gamblers are the big sports bettors. There is an obvious reason for this. Sports betting is the only game where you can increase your bets in proportion to your bankroll and still have virtually teh same edge. You can't do this at the racetrack without dropping your odds. Increase your bet size in blackjack and expect more "heat". Move up to bigger stakes in poker and you run into other pros who will cut down your potential win rate dramatically. Such is not the case in sports. So if you really do learn to beat sports, do your homework, watch as many games as you can, keep records, and treat it like a business, you can forget about that measly $100,000 a year we promised you. In sports, the sky's the limit."

-"The line that the bookie puts up is usually 'correct.' When this is the case, you shouldn't make a bet. Since you normally have to lay 11-10 the line must be significantly 'off' for your bet to be profitable. If you bet lots of games where the bookie's line is right, you will slowly lose your money no matter how knowledgeable you may be."

Now I realize that I havn't said a whole lot here. As I said, I'm trying to learn myself here. What I would like to hear are some success stories from people who have won consistently from year to year. What games do you look for and why do you think you are successful? What steps do you recommend to get better?

There was a great article about sports betting a few months ago by Dr. Z on CNNSI and his conclusion was that without inside information betting NFL football is a losing venture. The level of play in the NFL is so close that the margin of winning bets is often very small when compared with the spread. My brother used to gamble a lot; you could ask him the spread on a game and without looking he would tell you what it would be within 1/2 point. He still lost money long term.

 

[stevec]

I managed to do pretty well at one time using an straddle concept. It works much better if you are doing friendly wagers at say, college, where you'll have a circle of fans of different teams and you get people who are so confident they'll give you a point or a point and a half. You also have no juice to deal with.You bet both sides of the game, but you want different spreads. Ideally you'd do something like Dog + 9.0 now, and hope to get Fav - 7.5 later. That gives you an area where you can get double paid, but gives you.I'd think the key to that strategy would be to pick a line you're sure is going to move at least 1 point and that you know the direction of the move. However, I don't know if it's reasonable to expect enough lines to move that much in the pro arena.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

The best material I've seen on NFL wagering is at King Yao's blog.

Here's an old article from there that I liked:

Sports Betting: How to beat Parlay Cards in Vegas

Many sportsbooks in Las Vegas have parlay cards. It is usually the highest profit area in the sportsbook due to the bad odds and the stupid bettors. However, there are ways to beat the parlay cards.

There are many different variations, but I'll stick with one example to illustrate. With just a few adjustments, you should be able to calculate the numbers for any other variation using this example as a guide.

The example I'll choose is one that has the least variance, and the highest chance of the player winning – the 3 team parlay. Some casinos will have different parlay cards, so you have to be careful in checking the odds that are offered (see the back of the card). The odds that is usually the best are the ones that offer 6.5 for 1. This means the casino will pay you $6.50 for every $1 that you bet. In other words, it really is 5.5 to 1, since you are only winning $5.50 for every $1 you bet. They are just refunding you the $1 that you wagered to begin with. This is a tricky way to state odds, and is different than the way sportsbooks state their odds for futures bets. It's similar to how some craps table shows the odds (10 for 1 or 8 for 1 on some hardways bets).

So, 6.5 for 1 = 5.5 to 1 = 1/6.5 = 15.38%

Since there are three teams, we take the cube root of 15.38%. This is not as scary as it sounds. Simply type in =15.38%^(1/3) in excel. This means taking 15.38% to the 1/3rd power. The answer is 53.58%.

So we need to be able to win each game at the rate of 53.58% in order to break even to the parlay card. In order to check the work, multiply 53.58% by itself 3 times:

53.58% x 53.58% x 53.58% = 15.38%

For four or more teams, do a similar analysis. Say a 4 team parlay pays 11 for 1. In percentages, 11 for 1 = 1/11 = 9.09% Take 9.09% to the (1/4) power, and you get: 9.09% ^ (1/4) = 54.9%. These odds are worse than the 3 team 6.5 for 1 payout.

Typically, these odds wouldn't be exciting. Since betting a team at -110 is a breakeven rate of 52.4%, having to win at 53.58% is a bad bet. However, the difference is that the lines on the parlay cards may not be accurate at the moment. These parlay cards are printed earlier in the week (Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday), so when the lines move as the week progresses, the lines in the parlay card will be off a touch. The casinos realize this too, and will often post something like "Game #15 is off the parlay card". So when a game line moves a few points, you won't get to take advantage of them. However, a line doesn't have to move all that much for the player to gain some edge. The key is to know what a half point or a point is worth depending on the game (College or NFL) and the value of the point.

So aside from looking for 1 or 2 point differences on the card versus the board, you want to look for parlay cards that show half points only or ties win. And then compare those lines to the current lines. The NFL is typically better for half point differences because the frequency of pushes on certain key points is greater than it's College counterpart (see Stanford Wong's Sharp Sports Betting for more info). The most common is when the favorite is a 3 point favorite – in that case the probability of the favorite winning the game by exactly 3 points is about 10%. So let's imagine there are 3 games lined at 3 in the NFL. If you can find a parlay card with half points or ties win, then you have a decent wager and can beat the parlay card. Here's an example.

Current lines show

ATL -3 DAL

PIT -3 NYJ

SD -3 OAK

But the parlay cards show:

ATL -2.5 DAL

PIT -3.5 NYJ

SD -2.5 OAK

In this case, you would consider taking ATL, NYJ and SD in the parlay card, because you are getting the free half point. So how often do you expect to win given the free half point? Here's some quick math:

ATL -3 DAL

ATL is expected to win by exactly 3 points roughly 10% of the time. If the line is efficient, then that means they should win by more than 3 about 45% of the time, and lose the game (or win by 1 or 2) about 45% of the time.

ATL wins by 4 or more: 45%

ATL wins by 3 : 10%

ATL wins by 1 or 2 or loses the game: 45%

Total: 100%

If you can twist the 3 into a win, then that would make your winning chances go up to 55% (45% + 10%).

So ATL -2.5 is a 55% play.

The same can be show for NYJ +3.5 and SD -2.5….and so you have 3 55% plays.

55% x 55% x 55% = 16.64%

That is greater than the breakeven rate of 15.38% that is on the 6.5 for 1 parlay cards. So we have a winning bet.

Now in practice, it isn't as easy as this. Often you may find two games that are off, but not a third. Since the minimum number of games needed on the parlay cards is typically three games, you'll have to find another game. This is when you'll need to know the push percentages of every key point in the NFL. So say you find:

ATL -2.5 (current line -3)

PIT -2.5 (current line -3)

But no other game that is off by a half point from the 3. But you do find:

IND -6.5 (current line -7)

Then you'll need to know exactly what the 7 is worth. It is about 6%. So that means IND -6.5 is a 53% winner if the IND -7 is a fair market line. 53% is less than the 53.58% we require to breakeven, but may still be useful to use this game, even though it is less than 53.58% because otherwise we wouldn't be able to take advantage of the two 55% games.

55% x 55% x 53% = 16.03%

In fact, if we have two 55% games, we need a third game of greater than 50.85% in order to give us an edge in the parlay cards. Knowing this is helpful, you can use a "losing bet" in order to get that 3rd team in.

It gets a bit dicier if there is only one game off by a half point from the 3, but two games off a half point from the 7. Then you get:

55% x 53% x 53% = 15.45%

15.45% is only a smidge greater than 15.38%. If you have an opinion on any of those games and would have bet them anyway, then this may be worthwhile because you are getting into a zero expectancy bet, and don't have to lay the vig in order to get your action.

Once you start playing these parlay cards, you'll see some other issues which will become important. For example, how do you adjust a game when the current line is:

ATL -3 -120 NYJ

NYJ +3 +100 ATL

So the line is a bit shaded towards ATL -3, and the fair market line is ATL -3 -110.

In that case, if you see ATL -2.5 on the parlay card, then it is greater than a 55% play. But if you see NYJ +3.5, then it is a worse than a 55% play.

So you will have to keep abreast of the current lines, know how to adjust based on the vig on the line.

Profitability:

Let's use the example where we had 3 teams lined at 3, and we are getting a free half point on each of them on the parlay card. In that case, the expected winning percentage of the 3 team parlay is 16.64%. If the wager was for $100, then the expectancy is:

= ($550 x 16.64%) + (-$100 x (100% - 16.64%))

= ($550 x 16.64%) + (-$100 x 83.36%)

= $91.52 - $83.36

= $8.16

The Return on Investment is very high. 8.16%.

Actually betting:

Casinos and their employees are not the brightest people in the world, but they are not dumb either. Especially after some losses, they will re-think their position and make a few adjustments. As for these parlay cards, they do keep an eye when there are many games lined at 3. And when game lines move away from the posted lines on the parlay cards, they will take them off the card and not allow bettors to take advantage of them. If you try to put too many high dollar wagers, they may stop you and take a small portion or none of them. By a high dollar wager, I mean a $300 bet or higher. Usually this is nothing for an individual game, even in the smaller casinos, but because the payoff is higher (the casino could lose $1650 on a $300 wager), they often have to get approval from the supervisor.

It takes a lot of work to bet these parlay cards profitably. Because of the low dollar amount that most books will take, the way to do it correctly is to stay under the radar and to bet them at many books for low dollar amounts. You can imagine how much work this takes. A ton of driving, a ton of walking. It's a real tough job to do it right for a significant amount of money. But one doesn't have to do it for a living to have fun with it while getting positive expectancy.

 

[Benchwarmers]

I visit service message boards where they give out the services for free. I see who is hot and who sucks and bet either with them or against them. I have won over 8 grand this past year doing it this way. I use to pay for services but have found that most services are posted for free on the internet message boards. I bet at least $100 a game and sometimes $500. Betting takes money management. If your down for a week take the lose and dont try to win it all back on Sunday night. I try to win early in the week and then bet my winnings on Saturday and then again on Sunday. It seems to be working for me. Everyone has a system it seems. I only bet what I can lose and so I do not effect my lifestyle if I lose. I do not stress over making a bet or have to bet. I do not bet just to make a bet. Especially if it is on TV. I have friends that bet only on games that they can watch. I keep track of my wagers and if im on a losing streak I cut back on my size wagers and when I am on a streak I double up.Just my two cents...

 

[culdeus]

I managed to do pretty well at one time using an straddle concept.

It works much better if you are doing friendly wagers at say, college, where you'll have a circle of fans of different teams and you get people who are so confident they'll give you a point or a point and a half. You also have no juice to deal with.

You bet both sides of the game, but you want different spreads. Ideally you'd do something like Dog + 9.0 now, and hope to get Fav - 7.5 later.

That gives you an area where you can get double paid, but gives you.

I'd think the key to that strategy would be to pick a line you're sure is going to move at least 1 point and that you know the direction of the move. However, I don't know if it's reasonable to expect enough lines to move that much in the pro arena.

The biggest line moves outside of some late injury situation are found on the sunday and monday night games. Get on the right side early and you can get a middle.

 

[coolnerd]

(pros no, but college yes) I will give a short version tonight. College football is a better money maker than the NFL. Basically, the problem is that too much information is known on too few teams in the NFL for you to get more than "hot." In the pro the best bit is the total, followed by the moneylines. I have consistently finished around 60% winners for 5 or so years in college. I bet no more than 5 games a week. I bet on a relative small handful of teams (change each year), but normally no more 20 or so which information is easy for me to get because they are either local or a huge program. In most years, there are 5-10 teams that odds makers just never figure out and your job is to bet on two or three of those that you find and the best two or three "other" games.

 

[jeff_eaglz]

(pros no, but college yes)

I will give a short version tonight. College football is a better money maker than the NFL. Basically, the problem is that too much information is known on too few teams in the NFL for you to get more than "hot." In the pro the best bit is the total, followed by the moneylines.

I have consistently finished around 60% winners for 5 or so years in college. I bet no more than 5 games a week. I bet on a relative small handful of teams (change each year), but normally no more 20 or so which information is easy for me to get because they are either local or a huge program. In most years, there are 5-10 teams that odds makers just never figure out and your job is to bet on two or three of those that you find and the best two or three "other" games.

College has more of an "imperfect market" so you can gain an advantage. The NFL is watched and analyzed and overanalyzed far too much to get any advantage. The lines "telling you something" - that means that the VERY intelligent people in Vegas found either (1) the point at which both sides will bet evenly (which is their goal), or (2) they know something. Often it is both.

Colin Cowherd says the same thing and his "locks" this season did quite well. All college.

NFL has way too much of a luck factor involved to bet the straight lines. Turnovers / defensive scores and such are a much bigger factor when you know going in to most games that it will be within 7 points either way. A turnover here, an injury there, and everything's way off course.

There is one interesting method I analyzed once but did not reach a consensus - and that is what I call "The Box Method". It basically is a teaser wager (adding 6 points to one side of a bet, but odds go down) on a line. If you draw a 2-dimensional number line grid based on the current point spread and the current over-under, you can draw a "box" around the spread and the over-under. The size of the box is twice the teaser bet, one "teaser" in each direction.

If you bet the teaser all 4 ways, equal amounts, you hope that the game falls within "the box". Then you win 4x your wager. If you get 2 right and 2 wrong, then you lose the vig, if any. Of course it is possible to be way off and only wind up in one quadrant, thus losing 3 wagers and winning 1 - therefore losing the vig and 2x your wager.

Example in case I'm not explaining this well:

Current line for NE/Den is Denver (-3) with over-under (O/U) of 44.

Box bet $100 x 4, 6 point teaser (2-1 odds)=

$100 on NE +9/Over 38

$100 on Denver +3/Over 38

$100 on NE +9/Under 50

$100 on Denver +3/Under 50

If the game is within 3 points either way, you win $$ (since a tie is not a loss, usually - just get your $$ back). But forget the ties - I think you can tell that if the game is Denver 24, NE 21 you win $400, if it is Denver 27, NE 13 you break even, but if the game is NE 31 Denver 3 you lose $200.

I haven't done much with this thought - but I believe the concept is a pretty good one to use, especially in the NFL where the lines are usually close to right. If you believe that the line is close to what the outcome would be, give or take 6 points, then you're basically have a big upside with little downside.

Comments / analysis welcome.

 

[tombonneau]

(pros no, but college yes)

I will give a short version tonight. College football  is a better money maker than the NFL.  Basically, the problem is that too much information is known on too few teams in the NFL for you to get more than "hot."  In the pro the best bit is the total, followed by the moneylines.

I have consistently finished around 60% winners for 5 or so years in college. I bet no more than 5 games a week. I bet on a relative small handful of teams (change each year), but normally no more 20 or so which information is easy for me to get because they are either local or a huge program.  In most years, there are 5-10 teams that odds makers just never figure out and your job is to bet on two or three of those that you find and the best two or three "other" games.

College has more of an "imperfect market" so you can gain an advantage. The NFL is watched and analyzed and overanalyzed far too much to get any advantage. The lines "telling you something" - that means that the VERY intelligent people in Vegas found either (1) the point at which both sides will bet evenly (which is their goal), or (2) they know something. Often it is both.

Colin Cowherd says the same thing and his "locks" this season did quite well. All college.

NFL has way too much of a luck factor involved to bet the straight lines. Turnovers / defensive scores and such are a much bigger factor when you know going in to most games that it will be within 7 points either way. A turnover here, an injury there, and everything's way off course.

There is one interesting method I analyzed once but did not reach a consensus - and that is what I call "The Box Method". It basically is a teaser wager (adding 6 points to one side of a bet, but odds go down) on a line. If you draw a 2-dimensional number line grid based on the current point spread and the current over-under, you can draw a "box" around the spread and the over-under. The size of the box is twice the teaser bet, one "teaser" in each direction.

If you bet the teaser all 4 ways, equal amounts, you hope that the game falls within "the box". Then you win 4x your wager. If you get 2 right and 2 wrong, then you lose the vig, if any. Of course it is possible to be way off and only wind up in one quadrant, thus losing 3 wagers and winning 1 - therefore losing the vig and 2x your wager.

Example in case I'm not explaining this well:

Current line for NE/Den is Denver (-3) with over-under (O/U) of 44.

Box bet $100 x 4, 6 point teaser (2-1 odds)=

$100 on NE +9/Over 38

$100 on Denver +3/Over 38

$100 on NE +9/Under 50

$100 on Denver +3/Under 50

If the game is within 3 points either way, you win $$ (since a tie is not a loss, usually - just get your $$ back). But forget the ties - I think you can tell that if the game is Denver 24, NE 21 you win $400, if it is Denver 27, NE 13 you break even, but if the game is NE 31 Denver 3 you lose $200.

I haven't done much with this thought - but I believe the concept is a pretty good one to use, especially in the NFL where the lines are usually close to right. If you believe that the line is close to what the outcome would be, give or take 6 points, then you're basically have a big upside with little downside.

Comments / analysis welcome.

Jeff, really like this concept. I'm a big fan of mitigating risk when gambling (prob. why I'm not much of a gambler).A game that I think has a really nice "sweet spot" this week is chi -3 car, o/u 30.5.

A box tease looks like:

Chi +3/Over 24.5

Chi +3/Under 36.5

Car +9/Over 24.5

Car +9/Under 36.5

If Chicago can win that game anywhere from 14-13 to 21-14 you hit all four quads. Or if they lose a 17-16, 16-14, kind of game as well.

 

[Franknbeans]

There was a great article about sports betting a few months ago by Dr. Z on CNNSI and his conclusion was that without inside information betting NFL football is a losing venture.  The level of play in the NFL is so close that the margin of winning bets is often very small when compared with the spread. My brother used to gamble a lot; you could ask him the spread on a game and without looking he would tell you what it would be within 1/2 point.  He still lost money long term.

I am not sure if it was the same article you are referring to but here's another one on betting on the NFL. The 2 plays mentioned in the article for 2005 were the over for the Cardinals (wrong) and the under for the Eagles (right). Dr. Z was wrong on his pick of the under for Seattle.Was it this one?

 

[DoctorDetroit]

 

[nygiants56]

Fact #1: I have a very analytical mind. I play poker as my sole source of income, and that has helped develop many skills that one would think would be useful in other forms of gambling such as betting on sports.

Fact #2: I know a lot about pro football(insert joke here ). I can tell you random scores of games from years ago and recite statistics that theres no good reasoning for me to know.

Fact #3: I am NOT  a winning long term football bettor. Sure I've had hot streaks, and sure I think that I'm better at picking games and I think its even possible that I may be able to come close to breaking even over the long term. But theres no way I can say that I'm confident in my ability to make money doing this.

Fact #4: I want to get better and make money doing something I love(football).

So this thread is dedicated to making us all better at picking games. This thread is NOT a thread to brag about past successes or to show off. One thing that I've taken from poker is that ego is one of your biggest enemies at the table. If we can admit that we need to get better, then we're already ahead of 50% of the people out there. I honestly don't have a whole lot to teach here, but I'm sure that many here do and I really want to learn.

First things first: Is it possible to be a consistent and long term winner betting on football? And don't rush to conclusions to answer this. There are tons of people out there who know everything there is to know about football who simply can't beat the spreads(and the juice) consistently. I think this is a very valid question.

Now I don't have a whole lot of insight here- as I said, I am not a winning long term bettor yet. I start this thread more for me to learn than to teach. However, I will give a few random thoughts, hopefully a few of them will get us started in our discussion:

1. One thing that I think continuously clouds our judgment and our ideas of our own ability is that we don't recognize luck enough. Let me illustrate using poker: If someone told you that they have won $100 for 5 straight days playing poker, most astute poker players would not be all that impressed. Rather, they would want to know the details. And if after looking the details they discovered that the person was merely getting lucky cards, then they not only wouldn't be impressed but they wouldn't think highly of the player at all. Conversely its possible for a poker player to lose money yet his play can still be very impressive when studied.

However, we don't seem to do this with football betting. With football betting, we are all about results. "Oh you are 14-4 against the spread so far this year? Oh, you must be good! Tell me what you think about this week's games!!"

Let me propose a hypothetical extreme to illustrate my point: Team A is a 5.5 point favorite over Team B. Two sports bettors both do their homework on the game and one of them chooses Team A and one chooses Team B. Team B dominates the game and has a 7 point lead with 10 seconds to go in the 4th quarter. Team A hits a hail mary to tie the game. Team A wins the coin toss in overtime. Then Team A catches a tipped pass and goes in for a TD on the first play of OT to win the game by 6 points. Which bettor was more right: The one that chose Team A and won the bet or the one that chose Team B and lost?

I think that one's record against the spread is meaningless unless it is over a very long period of time. Rather I propose that when evaluating ourselves we should use a different type of system. I think that we should award ourselves points for each of our plays. Here is my initial thought on the score keeping system, although I'm sure that it can and will be revised(probably the -.25 category is the one which I'm most unsure of- How many negative points should that be worth?):

2 points: This is for a game that you won and were totally right about.  For example, if you had Carolina +3 this past week against the Giants, you get 2 points.

1 point: This is for a bet that having watched the game(not just highlights) you can honestly say that you'd make that bet again if the game was repeated. Notice that the outcome of the game is not mentioned anywhere here and is irrelevant.

-.25 points: This is a game that you think came down to one or two lucky plays which determined the winner of the bet. The -.25 reflects the money reflects the money that you'll lose on the juice over time on these bets which you'll theoretically win exactly 50% of the time. This is basically a bet that if you could go back and repick, you'd chose not to pick because its such a crapshoot. Please note that I think that a large majority of bets will fall into this category.

-1 point: Exact opposite of the +1 point. This is a bet that if you could go back and redo the entire bet and game, you'd take the other side.

-2 points: A game you lost and were totally wrong about.

And then obviously you multiply the points times the number of units you bet on that game to get your score. I think that using this sytem will more accurately reflect how well one is picking games and will give us a better understanding if we are doing well or not. This is key because I believe that one of the worst mistakes that can be made in gambling is too think we are doing well when really its just short term luck- This makes us continue to use such losing methods for far longer than we should and when our luck finally evens out, we think that we're just in an unlucky period.

2. How many games should be bet each week? Obviously there is no hard fast rule, but I think its pretty clear that the common bettor bets on too many games because he craves action. My first thought is that there are probably only one or two games that are great picks each week, so we should probably limit ourselves to those. Also, do you guys think that one can effectively bet on or against his home team or rival team without letting his judgment be clouded?

3. A few quotes about sports betting from Slansky and Malmuth's book "How to Mkae $100,000 a Year Gambling for a Living":

-"You only have to bet on those situations where you have an edge. These edges do occur, and they occur often enought that an astute person who is willing to work hard enough can make a good living. In fact, the most successful gamblers are the big sports bettors. There is an obvious reason for this. Sports betting is the only game where you can increase your bets in proportion to your bankroll and still have virtually teh same edge. You can't do this at the racetrack without dropping your odds. Increase your bet size in blackjack and expect more "heat". Move up to bigger stakes in poker and you run into other pros who will cut down your potential win rate dramatically. Such is not the case in sports. So if you really do learn to beat sports, do your homework, watch as many games as you can, keep records, and treat it like a business, you can forget about that measly $100,000 a year we promised you. In sports, the sky's the limit."

-"The line that the bookie puts up is usually 'correct.' When this is the case, you shouldn't make a bet. Since you normally have to lay 11-10 the line must be significantly 'off' for your bet to be profitable. If you bet lots of games where the bookie's line is right, you will slowly lose your money no matter how knowledgeable you may be."

Now I realize that I havn't said a whole lot here. As I said, I'm trying to learn myself here. What I would like to hear are some success stories from people who have won consistently from year to year. What games do you look for and why do you think you are successful? What steps do you recommend to get better?

There was a great article about sports betting a few months ago by Dr. Z on CNNSI and his conclusion was that without inside information betting NFL football is a losing venture. The level of play in the NFL is so close that the margin of winning bets is often very small when compared with the spread. My brother used to gamble a lot; you could ask him the spread on a game and without looking he would tell you what it would be within 1/2 point. He still lost money long term.

we're quoting Dr Z now?!? uggh..ever seen his fearless NFL predictions in preseason? lol..I'd rather listen to Miss Cleo's predictions..

 

[RedRaiders]

(pros no, but college yes)

I will give a short version tonight. College football  is a better money maker than the NFL.  Basically, the problem is that too much information is known on too few teams in the NFL for you to get more than "hot."  In the pro the best bit is the total, followed by the moneylines.

I have consistently finished around 60% winners for 5 or so years in college. I bet no more than 5 games a week. I bet on a relative small handful of teams (change each year), but normally no more 20 or so which information is easy for me to get because they are either local or a huge program.  In most years, there are 5-10 teams that odds makers just never figure out and your job is to bet on two or three of those that you find and the best two or three "other" games.

College has more of an "imperfect market" so you can gain an advantage. The NFL is watched and analyzed and overanalyzed far too much to get any advantage. The lines "telling you something" - that means that the VERY intelligent people in Vegas found either (1) the point at which both sides will bet evenly (which is their goal), or (2) they know something. Often it is both.

Colin Cowherd says the same thing and his "locks" this season did quite well. All college.

NFL has way too much of a luck factor involved to bet the straight lines. Turnovers / defensive scores and such are a much bigger factor when you know going in to most games that it will be within 7 points either way. A turnover here, an injury there, and everything's way off course.

There is one interesting method I analyzed once but did not reach a consensus - and that is what I call "The Box Method". It basically is a teaser wager (adding 6 points to one side of a bet, but odds go down) on a line. If you draw a 2-dimensional number line grid based on the current point spread and the current over-under, you can draw a "box" around the spread and the over-under. The size of the box is twice the teaser bet, one "teaser" in each direction.

If you bet the teaser all 4 ways, equal amounts, you hope that the game falls within "the box". Then you win 4x your wager. If you get 2 right and 2 wrong, then you lose the vig, if any. Of course it is possible to be way off and only wind up in one quadrant, thus losing 3 wagers and winning 1 - therefore losing the vig and 2x your wager.

Example in case I'm not explaining this well:

Current line for NE/Den is Denver (-3) with over-under (O/U) of 44.

Box bet $100 x 4, 6 point teaser (2-1 odds)=

$100 on NE +9/Over 38

$100 on Denver +3/Over 38

$100 on NE +9/Under 50

$100 on Denver +3/Under 50

If the game is within 3 points either way, you win $$ (since a tie is not a loss, usually - just get your $$ back). But forget the ties - I think you can tell that if the game is Denver 24, NE 21 you win $400, if it is Denver 27, NE 13 you break even, but if the game is NE 31 Denver 3 you lose $200.

I haven't done much with this thought - but I believe the concept is a pretty good one to use, especially in the NFL where the lines are usually close to right. If you believe that the line is close to what the outcome would be, give or take 6 points, then you're basically have a big upside with little downside.

Comments / analysis welcome.

Jeff, really like this concept. I'm a big fan of mitigating risk when gambling (prob. why I'm not much of a gambler).A game that I think has a really nice "sweet spot" this week is chi -3 car, o/u 30.5.

A box tease looks like:

Chi +3/Over 24.5

Chi +3/Under 36.5

Car +9/Over 24.5

Car +9/Under 36.5

If Chicago can win that game anywhere from 14-13 to 21-14 you hit all four quads. Or if they lose a 17-16, 16-14, kind of game as well.

This is so incredibly -EV it's unfathomable people would consider this a good bet. I have no problem with mitigating risk and backing up an open wager or an open teaser bet by setting up a middle but teasing the same game to start is a bad idea and then throwing in a 12 point total window makes it even worse. You need so many things to go your way to just break even (middle the total but of course you're losing the vig) in this example.

 

[Wheelhouse]

 

[BassNBrew]

I've been pretty successful this year by following one principal...bet on the best team. About once a week I'll see a game where the wrong team is favored (ie: Oakland was actually favored by 3 over San Diego). I've stopped playing dogs I don't think will win outright. I probably need to move into the modern world of online gambling to take advantage of moneyline plays.Another area that you might want to look at as we move into the playoffs...Proposition bets and quarter totals. Local guys will often let you stack these bets. For instance a 3 play parlay of over Q1, over Q2, and over 1st half. If the first two hit the third is a give me.

 

[Jefferson the Caregiver]

I've been pretty successful this year by following one principal...bet on the best team.  About once a week I'll see a game where the wrong team is favored (ie: Oakland was actually favored by 3 over San Diego).  I've stopped playing dogs I don't think will win outright.  I probably need to move into the modern world of online gambling to take advantage of moneyline plays.

This was a very abnormal year IMO. The best favorites seem to win and cover week after week, this hardly ever happens with the consistency I saw this season. I think Joe Public had a pretty good year in the NFL and would not be surprised to hear that the books took a few weeks on the chin.The home dogs did not come in with the regularity I would have expected either.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

(pros no, but college yes)

I will give a short version tonight. College football  is a better money maker than the NFL.  Basically, the problem is that too much information is known on too few teams in the NFL for you to get more than "hot."  In the pro the best bit is the total, followed by the moneylines.

I have consistently finished around 60% winners for 5 or so years in college. I bet no more than 5 games a week. I bet on a relative small handful of teams (change each year), but normally no more 20 or so which information is easy for me to get because they are either local or a huge program.  In most years, there are 5-10 teams that odds makers just never figure out and your job is to bet on two or three of those that you find and the best two or three "other" games.

College has more of an "imperfect market" so you can gain an advantage. The NFL is watched and analyzed and overanalyzed far too much to get any advantage. The lines "telling you something" - that means that the VERY intelligent people in Vegas found either (1) the point at which both sides will bet evenly (which is their goal), or (2) they know something. Often it is both.

Colin Cowherd says the same thing and his "locks" this season did quite well. All college.

NFL has way too much of a luck factor involved to bet the straight lines. Turnovers / defensive scores and such are a much bigger factor when you know going in to most games that it will be within 7 points either way. A turnover here, an injury there, and everything's way off course.

There is one interesting method I analyzed once but did not reach a consensus - and that is what I call "The Box Method". It basically is a teaser wager (adding 6 points to one side of a bet, but odds go down) on a line. If you draw a 2-dimensional number line grid based on the current point spread and the current over-under, you can draw a "box" around the spread and the over-under. The size of the box is twice the teaser bet, one "teaser" in each direction.

If you bet the teaser all 4 ways, equal amounts, you hope that the game falls within "the box". Then you win 4x your wager. If you get 2 right and 2 wrong, then you lose the vig, if any. Of course it is possible to be way off and only wind up in one quadrant, thus losing 3 wagers and winning 1 - therefore losing the vig and 2x your wager.

Example in case I'm not explaining this well:

Current line for NE/Den is Denver (-3) with over-under (O/U) of 44.

Box bet $100 x 4, 6 point teaser (2-1 odds)=

$100 on NE +9/Over 38

$100 on Denver +3/Over 38

$100 on NE +9/Under 50

$100 on Denver +3/Under 50

If the game is within 3 points either way, you win $$ (since a tie is not a loss, usually - just get your $$ back). But forget the ties - I think you can tell that if the game is Denver 24, NE 21 you win $400, if it is Denver 27, NE 13 you break even, but if the game is NE 31 Denver 3 you lose $200.

I haven't done much with this thought - but I believe the concept is a pretty good one to use, especially in the NFL where the lines are usually close to right. If you believe that the line is close to what the outcome would be, give or take 6 points, then you're basically have a big upside with little downside.

Comments / analysis welcome.

Jeff, really like this concept. I'm a big fan of mitigating risk when gambling (prob. why I'm not much of a gambler).A game that I think has a really nice "sweet spot" this week is chi -3 car, o/u 30.5.

A box tease looks like:

Chi +3/Over 24.5

Chi +3/Under 36.5

Car +9/Over 24.5

Car +9/Under 36.5

If Chicago can win that game anywhere from 14-13 to 21-14 you hit all four quads. Or if they lose a 17-16, 16-14, kind of game as well.

This is so incredibly -EV it's unfathomable people would consider this a good bet. I have no problem with mitigating risk and backing up an open wager or an open teaser bet by setting up a middle but teasing the same game to start is a bad idea and then throwing in a 12 point total window makes it even worse. You need so many things to go your way to just break even (middle the total but of course you're losing the vig) in this example.

Add to the fact that in the playoffs the margin of victory actually increases, despite the fact that the worst 20 teams are gone. Look at last week's games as an example.

Teasers work better in the regular season, and even then should be used to cross key numbers like 3 & 7 (turn two 8 point favorites into 2 point favorites for example).

 

[Franknbeans]

I've been pretty successful this year by following one principal...bet on the best team.  About once a week I'll see a game where the wrong team is favored (ie: Oakland was actually favored by 3 over San Diego).  I've stopped playing dogs I don't think will win outright.  I probably need to move into the modern world of online gambling to take advantage of moneyline plays.

This was a very abnormal year IMO. The best favorites seem to win and cover week after week, this hardly ever happens with the consistency I saw this season. I think Joe Public had a pretty good year in the NFL and would not be surprised to hear that the books took a few weeks on the chin.The home dogs did not come in with the regularity I would have expected either.

True dat. There were only 5 9-7 or 8-8 teams this year which is not the norm. There were a lot of teams that were very good and very bad this year which made Joe Public betting much easier.

 

[BassNBrew]

I've been pretty successful this year by following one principal...bet on the best team.  About once a week I'll see a game where the wrong team is favored (ie: Oakland was actually favored by 3 over San Diego).  I've stopped playing dogs I don't think will win outright.  I probably need to move into the modern world of online gambling to take advantage of moneyline plays.

This was a very abnormal year IMO. The best favorites seem to win and cover week after week, this hardly ever happens with the consistency I saw this season. I think Joe Public had a pretty good year in the NFL and would not be surprised to hear that the books took a few weeks on the chin.The home dogs did not come in with the regularity I would have expected either.

True dat. There were only 5 9-7 or 8-8 teams this year which is not the norm. There were a lot of teams that were very good and very bad this year which made Joe Public betting much easier.

Wouldn't that just support my point?I first watched this play out on during the "greatest show on turf" year. The public never caught up with the Rams. Last year playing Indy virtually every week was a sure winning strategy. This year, when a line like Pitt in a must win game (- less then double digits) v. a cellar dwellar shows up repeatedly, I play the better team. Indy and Seattle were very reliable this year.

 

[Franknbeans]

I've been pretty successful this year by following one principal...bet on the best team.  About once a week I'll see a game where the wrong team is favored (ie: Oakland was actually favored by 3 over San Diego).  I've stopped playing dogs I don't think will win outright.  I probably need to move into the modern world of online gambling to take advantage of moneyline plays.

This was a very abnormal year IMO. The best favorites seem to win and cover week after week, this hardly ever happens with the consistency I saw this season. I think Joe Public had a pretty good year in the NFL and would not be surprised to hear that the books took a few weeks on the chin.The home dogs did not come in with the regularity I would have expected either.

True dat. There were only 5 9-7 or 8-8 teams this year which is not the norm. There were a lot of teams that were very good and very bad this year which made Joe Public betting much easier.

Wouldn't that just support my point?I first watched this play out on during the "greatest show on turf" year. The public never caught up with the Rams. Last year playing Indy virtually every week was a sure winning strategy. This year, when a line like Pitt in a must win game (- less then double digits) v. a cellar dwellar shows up repeatedly, I play the better team. Indy and Seattle were very reliable this year.

Yes, when did I refute your point? I was just agreeing that from a betting stand point, this year was not the norm. Usually there are many more upsets because there are more middle of the pack teams.

 

[bshipper]

There is one interesting method I analyzed once but did not reach a consensus - and that is what I call "The Box Method". It basically is a teaser wager (adding 6 points to one side of a bet, but odds go down) on a line. If you draw a 2-dimensional number line grid based on the current point spread and the current over-under, you can draw a "box" around the spread and the over-under. The size of the box is twice the teaser bet, one "teaser" in each direction.

If you bet the teaser all 4 ways, equal amounts, you hope that the game falls within "the box". Then you win 4x your wager. If you get 2 right and 2 wrong, then you lose the vig, if any. Of course it is possible to be way off and only wind up in one quadrant, thus losing 3 wagers and winning 1 - therefore losing the vig and 2x your wager.

Example in case I'm not explaining this well:

Current line for NE/Den is Denver (-3) with over-under (O/U) of 44.

Box bet $100 x 4, 6 point teaser (2-1 odds)=

$100 on NE +9/Over 38

$100 on Denver +3/Over 38

$100 on NE +9/Under 50

$100 on Denver +3/Under 50

If the game is within 3 points either way, you win $$ (since a tie is not a loss, usually - just get your $$ back). But forget the ties - I think you can tell that if the game is Denver 24, NE 21 you win $400, if it is Denver 27, NE 13 you break even, but if the game is NE 31 Denver 3 you lose $200.

I haven't done much with this thought - but I believe the concept is a pretty good one to use, especially in the NFL where the lines are usually close to right. If you believe that the line is close to what the outcome would be, give or take 6 points, then you're basically have a big upside with little downside.

Comments / analysis welcome.

At my first glance I thought this was a good idea as well. However, I went back to week 1 of this season for some analysis. After looking at the lines I had recorded for each game and the results, there was only 1 game where all 4 hit (NE vs OAK). 8 of the games had 2 winners and 2 losers, whil the other 7 games only had 1 winner and 3 losers. Making a $10 bet on each game would have resulted in a loss of $137 for week 1 (assuming that a winning bet makes $10 and a losing bet loses $11).

 

[TheRegulator]

I've been pretty successful this year by following one principal...bet on the best team.  About once a week I'll see a game where the wrong team is favored (ie: Oakland was actually favored by 3 over San Diego).  I've stopped playing dogs I don't think will win outright.  I probably need to move into the modern world of online gambling to take advantage of moneyline plays.

This was a very abnormal year IMO. The best favorites seem to win and cover week after week, this hardly ever happens with the consistency I saw this season. I think Joe Public had a pretty good year in the NFL and would not be surprised to hear that the books took a few weeks on the chin.The home dogs did not come in with the regularity I would have expected either.

Actually, we a have seen two straight years of Chalk Heaven. 04/05 was a good "public" year as well.

 

[Macdaddy_2004]

How's the oatmeal job going ??

 

[tombonneau]

There is one interesting method I analyzed once but did not reach a consensus - and that is what I call "The Box Method". It basically is a teaser wager (adding 6 points to one side of a bet, but odds go down) on a line. If you draw a 2-dimensional number line grid based on the current point spread and the current over-under, you can draw a "box" around the spread and the over-under. The size of the box is twice the teaser bet, one "teaser" in each direction.

If you bet the teaser all 4 ways, equal amounts, you hope that the game falls within "the box". Then you win 4x your wager. If you get 2 right and 2 wrong, then you lose the vig, if any. Of course it is possible to be way off and only wind up in one quadrant, thus losing 3 wagers and winning 1 - therefore losing the vig and 2x your wager.

Example in case I'm not explaining this well:

Current line for NE/Den is Denver (-3) with over-under (O/U) of 44.

Box bet $100 x 4, 6 point teaser (2-1 odds)=

$100 on NE +9/Over 38

$100 on Denver +3/Over 38

$100 on NE +9/Under 50

$100 on Denver +3/Under 50

If the game is within 3 points either way, you win $$ (since a tie is not a loss, usually - just get your $$ back). But forget the ties - I think you can tell that if the game is Denver 24, NE 21 you win $400, if it is Denver 27, NE 13 you break even, but if the game is NE 31 Denver 3 you lose $200.

I haven't done much with this thought - but I believe the concept is a pretty good one to use, especially in the NFL where the lines are usually close to right. If you believe that the line is close to what the outcome would be, give or take 6 points, then you're basically have a big upside with little downside.

Comments / analysis welcome.

At my first glance I thought this was a good idea as well. However, I went back to week 1 of this season for some analysis. After looking at the lines I had recorded for each game and the results, there was only 1 game where all 4 hit (NE vs OAK). 8 of the games had 2 winners and 2 losers, whil the other 7 games only had 1 winner and 3 losers. Making a $10 bet on each game would have resulted in a loss of $137 for week 1 (assuming that a winning bet makes $10 and a losing bet loses $11).

Week 1 lines aside (as even Vegas hasn't figured out the NFL yet) I'd be curious to see what the outcome was for games with 1-4 pt lines for the majority of the season. I certainly wouldn't attempt this strategy with any lines larger than that where a blowowout would be more likely to occur. But if you figure Vegas is usually pretty spot on with the majority of small line, as well as with the o/u, this is one strategy that actually takes their accuracy and uses it to your advantage.

 

[jeff_eaglz]

For the record, I never said that "The Box" was a tried and true method, just something to consider and analyze.Things to consider:Rivalry games (i.e. Dallas/Washington). Tends to be close. Divisonal games especially.Monday night games (seems to follow the line well, if I recall).7 pt or less games.3 pt games.I haven't done all the math obviously, but just thought I'd throw it out there and let the sharks chew on it for a while .And for the record - there are sites that do allow 6 point teasers at 2:1 odds with no "vig", so going 2-2 is a $0 loss.

 

[bshipper]

At my first glance I thought this was a good idea as well. However, I went back to week 1 of this season for some analysis. After looking at the lines I had recorded for each game and the results, there was only 1 game where all 4 hit (NE vs OAK). 8 of the games had 2 winners and 2 losers, whil the other 7 games only had 1 winner and 3 losers. Making a $10 bet on each game would have resulted in a loss of $137 for week 1 (assuming that a winning bet makes $10 and a losing bet loses $11).

Week 1 lines aside (as even Vegas hasn't figured out the NFL yet) I'd be curious to see what the outcome was for games with 1-4 pt lines for the majority of the season. I certainly wouldn't attempt this strategy with any lines larger than that where a blowowout would be more likely to occur. But if you figure Vegas is usually pretty spot on with the majority of small line, as well as with the o/u, this is one strategy that actually takes their accuracy and uses it to your advantage.

Through the first 3 weeks of the season, there were 27 games with lines of less than 5 points. In those games, there were 3 games that won all 4 bets. There were 10 that only won 1 bet and 14 that split. That is a loss of $159 when betting $10.

 

[bshipper]

And for the record - there are sites that do allow 6 point teasers at 2:1 odds with no "vig", so going 2-2 is a $0 loss.

Out of my curiousity, since I am not a huge gambling expert, when you say "6 point teasers at 2:1 odds", what are you talking about?It looks like to me you are teasing the line by 6 points and parlaying that with teasing the O/U by 6 points. If I make a $10 bet, how much would I win if both hit and how much would I lose if they don't?

 

[BassNBrew]

I've been pretty successful this year by following one principal...bet on the best team.  About once a week I'll see a game where the wrong team is favored (ie: Oakland was actually favored by 3 over San Diego).  I've stopped playing dogs I don't think will win outright.  I probably need to move into the modern world of online gambling to take advantage of moneyline plays.

This was a very abnormal year IMO. The best favorites seem to win and cover week after week, this hardly ever happens with the consistency I saw this season. I think Joe Public had a pretty good year in the NFL and would not be surprised to hear that the books took a few weeks on the chin.The home dogs did not come in with the regularity I would have expected either.

True dat. There were only 5 9-7 or 8-8 teams this year which is not the norm. There were a lot of teams that were very good and very bad this year which made Joe Public betting much easier.

Wouldn't that just support my point?I first watched this play out on during the "greatest show on turf" year. The public never caught up with the Rams. Last year playing Indy virtually every week was a sure winning strategy. This year, when a line like Pitt in a must win game (- less then double digits) v. a cellar dwellar shows up repeatedly, I play the better team. Indy and Seattle were very reliable this year.

Yes, when did I refute your point? I was just agreeing that from a betting stand point, this year was not the norm. Usually there are many more upsets because there are more middle of the pack teams.

Not really debating you, just exploring if this method will continue to work. The "norm" is for Vegas to get equal money on each side. This year they did that with relative low lines when good teams played poor teams. Does this mean that more uninformed people are gambling, hence making winning easier for those informed?

 

[jeff_eaglz]

And for the record - there are sites that do allow 6 point teasers at 2:1 odds with no "vig", so going 2-2 is a $0 loss.

Out of my curiousity, since I am not a huge gambling expert, when you say "6 point teasers at 2:1 odds", what are you talking about?It looks like to me you are teasing the line by 6 points and parlaying that with teasing the O/U by 6 points. If I make a $10 bet, how much would I win if both hit and how much would I lose if they don't?

2-1 odds means that you get twice what you gamble if you win.$10 lost if you lose, $20 if you win.

 

[bshipper]

And for the record - there are sites that do allow 6 point teasers at 2:1 odds with no "vig", so going 2-2 is a $0 loss.

Out of my curiousity, since I am not a huge gambling expert, when you say "6 point teasers at 2:1 odds", what are you talking about?It looks like to me you are teasing the line by 6 points and parlaying that with teasing the O/U by 6 points. If I make a $10 bet, how much would I win if both hit and how much would I lose if they don't?

2-1 odds means that you get twice what you gamble if you win.$10 lost if you lose, $20 if you win.

So, going 2-2 under this approach would actually make money. Assuming $10 bets on each pair, you would get $40 for the 2 wins and lose $22 for the 2 losses, net +$18. If you hit all 4, then you make $80. Winning 1 bet (+$20) and losing 3 bets (-$33) turns out to be a loss of only $13.If this is true, then this approach is definitely the way to go, because you are guaranteed to win at least one bet, so your maximum risk is -$13 per game with the potential to win $80.

Whereas earlier I posted that week 1 would have been -$137, it now turns into +$133.

This cannot be right, can it?

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Most books give you even money or less on a two team/six point teaser. I'm not sure what you guys are talking about.

 

[bshipper]

Most books give you even money or less on a two team/six point teaser. I'm not sure what you guys are talking about.

That would make more sense to me, getting 2:1 odds on this sounds like stealing. I was basing my original numbers on $10 bets that win $10 and lose $11.

 

[jeff_eaglz]

And for the record - there are sites that do allow 6 point teasers at 2:1 odds with no "vig", so going 2-2 is a $0 loss.

Out of my curiousity, since I am not a huge gambling expert, when you say "6 point teasers at 2:1 odds", what are you talking about?It looks like to me you are teasing the line by 6 points and parlaying that with teasing the O/U by 6 points. If I make a $10 bet, how much would I win if both hit and how much would I lose if they don't?

2-1 odds means that you get twice what you gamble if you win.$10 lost if you lose, $20 if you win.

So, going 2-2 under this approach would actually make money. Assuming $10 bets on each pair, you would get $40 for the 2 wins and lose $22 for the 2 losses, net +$18. If you hit all 4, then you make $80. Winning 1 bet (+$20) and losing 3 bets (-$33) turns out to be a loss of only $13.If this is true, then this approach is definitely the way to go, because you are guaranteed to win at least one bet, so your maximum risk is -$13 per game with the potential to win $80.

Whereas earlier I posted that week 1 would have been -$137, it now turns into +$133.

This cannot be right, can it?

No, not quite. You get $20 if you win, $10 if you lose. You have already put in $10.So if you go 2-2, you win $40 but have placed four $10 wagers for -$40. Break even.

The payoffs for a 2:1 6point spread ($10 wager):

4-0: $40

2-2: $0

1-3: ($-20).

So you are risking 20 to make 40 with a decent chance of a push / breakeven.

Also keep in mind that if the spread or O/U is a whole number (not 6.5, but 6 or 7), there is a chance you can tie some.

 

[culdeus]

One thing that amateur gamblers (like myself) usually get trapped into thinking is that the line is set in such a way to get 50/50 action. This rarely if ever happens if you track "players picks" on the large innenrnet gambing places. Whether this is intetional or otherwise is a subject of great debate. What you must really be aware of is when the line moves opposite the action (barring injuries). i.e. 70% of public on chalk -3 and then the line moves to -2. Why? These situations usually mean you cancel your chalk play or take the other side. I would say the average gambler doesn't really have a handle on where bookies clean up. One of those grambling rags in Vegas had some stats that basically said the books break roughly even on sides/totals maybe making 10% of their profits on that. They make a vast majority of profits on teasers/parlay/props/ponies. The old joke still holds:Guy calls his bookie at 2am "Hey I want to get a bet down"Bookie "Too late call me in the morning"Guy "I just want a parlay on Kansas and Villanova"Bookie "Let me get my pen"And despite popular opinion books can and do occasionally lose vast amounts of money. I believe for most places 2004 NFL was very red for Vegas.

 

[houndirish]

I've consistently bet the NFL games the past two years and have been fortunate enough to make money. I was on fire last year (68%) but cooled off a bit this season (59%). I tend to bet between 2 and 4 games each week. More than anything else, the biggest difference in my results was research. I'd spend about 2 hours on Friday's simply looking into the trends that existed for the weekend's matchups. However, trends too, must be taken with a grain of salt. They don't reflect current injuries and at times can be a product of current ones. For ex. last year the Eagles had an excellent spread record. However next year their history will look horrible due to their 2005 flop. Would I bet strongly against a healthy McNabb right out of the box next season? Probably not. However, I've found that a good dose of research had a positive effect on my winnings.Next, look at the over/unders. Seems like people don't even consider them and proceed directly to the pointspreads. I think historical trends are more accurate with O/U's than point spreads. If the GB-Minnesota game in GB has been an under 8 straight times, that's worth noting. This is especially true in the case of divisional games where a truer history can be found. Lastly, I've had great success betting against bad teams down the stretch. Every year there appear to be teams who've mailed it in by the time December rolls around. Picking against these clubs tends to net good results.The other strategy I started using this year was to hedge some of my action with money line bets. There were a few weeks where I wasn't as confident as I'd like to with my picks so in the hopes of lightening potential losses I put some money on what I considered obvious money line winners. Whoever mentioned there is no longer any such thing as a lock is 100% correct. I haven't been stung by this strategy yet but I can't help but feel like I dodged disaster a couple of times. I was this close (fingers millimeters apart) to dropping a heavy sum on Cincinnati-Buffalo in week 16. I had bet on the Niners to cover versus the Rams as well as Pitt over Cleveland. Betting on terrible teams makes me nervous, even if it makes sense (it did in this case), so I felt the need to "take some insurance" with the money line. Fortunately I stood pat as the "insurance bet" would've ruined what turned out to be a real nice week for me.

 

[BassNBrew]

One thing that amateur gamblers (like myself) usually get trapped into thinking is that the line is set in such a way to get 50/50 action. This rarely if ever happens if you track "players picks" on the large innenrnet gambing places. Whether this is intetional or otherwise is a subject of great debate.

What you must really be aware of is when the line moves opposite the action (barring injuries). i.e. 70% of public on chalk -3 and then the line moves to -2. Why? These situations usually mean you cancel your chalk play or take the other side.

I would say the average gambler doesn't really have a handle on where bookies clean up. One of those grambling rags in Vegas had some stats that basically said the books break roughly even on sides/totals maybe making 10% of their profits on that. They make a vast majority of profits on teasers/parlay/props/ponies.

The old joke still holds:

Guy calls his bookie at 2am "Hey I want to get a bet down"

Bookie "Too late call me in the morning"

Guy "I just want a parlay on Kansas and Villanova"

Bookie "Let me get my pen"

And despite popular opinion books can and do occasionally lose vast amounts of money. I believe for most places 2004 NFL was very red for Vegas.

I agree with your second point, but please point me to anything substantiating your first. Why on earth would anyone risk a 10% instant return on any business they get? The only possible answer is that the games are fixed. I know for a fact that books off load business when to much action is flowing one direction.

 

[AB in DC]

College has more of an "imperfect market" so you can gain an advantage. The NFL is watched and analyzed and overanalyzed far too much to get any advantage.

The one exception is in week one (and maybe week two) of the NFL. As someone said earlier, even Vegas has no idea where to set the line for these games. If you take the time during the offseason to really understand how every team has changed (which most of us will do anyway because of ff), there's some real potential to take advantage of this asymmetry.

 

[jwvdcw]

How's the oatmeal job going ??

I got fired. I wrote about it in the thread.

 

[BassNBrew]

College has more of an "imperfect market" so you can gain an advantage.  The NFL is watched and analyzed and overanalyzed far too much to get any advantage.

The one exception is in week one (and maybe week two) of the NFL. As someone said earlier, even Vegas has no idea where to set the line for these games. If you take the time during the offseason to really understand how every team has changed (which most of us will do anyway because of ff), there's some real potential to take advantage of this asymmetry.

Wow...I feel just the opposite. I like to lay low early in the season to see how teams are coming together.

 

[houndirish]

College has more of an "imperfect market" so you can gain an advantage.  The NFL is watched and analyzed and overanalyzed far too much to get any advantage.

The one exception is in week one (and maybe week two) of the NFL. As someone said earlier, even Vegas has no idea where to set the line for these games. If you take the time during the offseason to really understand how every team has changed (which most of us will do anyway because of ff), there's some real potential to take advantage of this asymmetry.

Wow...I feel just the opposite. I like to lay low early in the season to see how teams are coming together.

Same ... I always felt week 1 was a minefield. I never go heavy. Preseason tells very little.

 

[Mike]

This thread hasn't been nearly as helpful as I thought it might turn out to be. Wrong forum perhaps?

 

[BassNBrew]

Favorites covered 63% of the games this year. A record from the 1980 to current time period.

 

[AB in DC]

College has more of an "imperfect market" so you can gain an advantage. The NFL is watched and analyzed and overanalyzed far too much to get any advantage.

The one exception is in week one (and maybe week two) of the NFL. As someone said earlier, even Vegas has no idea where to set the line for these games. If you take the time during the offseason to really understand how every team has changed (which most of us will do anyway because of ff), there's some real potential to take advantage of this asymmetry.

Wow...I feel just the opposite. I like to lay low early in the season to see how teams are coming together.

By the time you see how teams are coming together, every other bettor does too. There's no advantage to that.

 

[AB in DC]

Same ... I always felt week 1 was a minefield. I never go heavy. Preseason tells very little.

Exactly...too many bettors read too much into preseason games. If you learn enough about teams' offseason moves to get a sense about how they will really play, that's where you make your money.

 

[The Real Goodfellas]

Hi All!Obviously, you have to take each season as it comes. If you do your homework and spot trends early in the season it works to your advantage. I try to encapsulate every season into quarters. Don't fall in love with a certain team and likewise be willing to bet on a team that is rising. One rule that I do have is that as a season wears on the cream tends to rise to the top. Good teams get better and bad teams tend to play worse. You must watch the games and look at factors like poor O' line play, team chemistry, players returning from injury, trends against certain teams. Always, Always look for trends and ride the trend until it ends. On the road, at home etc. Don't ask me why but they happen and they work. Certain players play better against certain teams. You might have a high profile player hosting his former team at home the following season, not only will he be motivated but in most cases, he knows the offensive and defensive tendencies. I've done well in the preseason (yes you can bet in the preseason) by looking for teams that draft well and have good quality backup QB's. The theory is that when the starters are gone and the backup QB is in, there should not be too much of a dropoff in talent, whereas the other team could have a rookie in for extended playing time and he could stink it up. The point is, you want to spot a mismatch whenever possible.This year the favorites have done better and I also noticed less home dogs covering the spread. The Home dog on Monday night is usually a good bet. Not so this year. I adjusted my strategy accordingly. Teams I loved to bet against in the 1st half of the season were the Saints (after the 1st game) the Jets and the Texans. The 49ers surprised me now and then by hanging tough in some games.I did very well with 3 team parlays. They're not that hard to hit and you take your top 2 locks and combine them with other games you like. If your 2 locks come in you can win big. Generally always take the good teams against the bad teams regardless of the lines. The good teams can change every year based on strength of schedule.Fantasy Football and the amount of information out there has helped my betting tremendously. Stats, trends, etc. I'm of the mind that every year is different and you have to adjust accordingly. Don't fall in love with one team or several teams but analyze them and bet accordingly. You can beat Vegas because they use past history of teams that play each other every year and factor that in when they make the lines. Here's one that made me alot of money. Oakland vs Denver or San Diego. I bet big on both Denver and S.D. both times they played the Raiders and won all four times. The book kept the lines relatively close based on the rivalry factor but none of the games were that close. You could tell once Moss got hurt the team was going in the tank. No chemistry at all and Norv couldn't hold it together. One thing to keep in mind is the football isn't round, when its on the ground no one knows which way it will bounce. Turnovers and injuries are something you cannot predict and can/will make or break you.Here are my picks this week from a earlier thread. I'm trying to get everyones opinion on this weekends games. you can post on my other thread to not clutter up this one.Seattle -9 vs Washington: Sure the Redkins have won 6 straight games including a squeaker @ Tampa Bay last week. However, they should have lost that game and only two early TD's, both which came courtesy of Bucs turnovers, saved their season. Washington could only manage something like 121 yards for the entire game. Tampa almost pulled it out but came up short when Edell Shepherd could not hold on to a perfect strike from Simms. The Seahawks had a much needed week of rest and will be ready to go out and put some points on the board. Their defense is a bit of a question mark but should be good enough to check the Redskins' offense. If seattle gets ahead by 2 TD's early that will take away the 'skins running game and without that they have no prayer. Portis is also banged up and Brunell will be blitzed unmercifully. Alexander after his MVP season will be on fire to prove he can lead this team in the playoffs. I see 3 Wash turnovers and 2 TD's from Alexander. Hasselbeck will have a efficient game and has played well all season.Final score: Seahawks 31 Redskins 17Chicago -3 vs Carolina: I know alot of people are jumping on the Carolina bandwagon but there's no tougher place to play in the NFL in January than Soldier field. Chicago has a killer Defense and its no secret that Defense wins playoff games. I look for a low scoring game that will be decided by a Deshaun Foster fumble. Jake Delhomme will be pressured into several mistakes and will not have time to throw. Steve Smith is the wildcard in this game. if the bears can slow him down they will win. The Bears took a 13-3 affair earlier in the season and I expect more of the same. The Bears offense also has improved with Grossman back under center and that will also be a factor. Carolina's Defense has come on late but I don't think it will be enough. Muhammad will have a good game and is motivated to play well against his former team. Look for him to move the chains to keep the long Bear drives alive.Final score: Bears 20 Panthers 16Colts -9 vs Steelers:Several things to note here. Pittsburghs defense looked pretty porous in the 1st half against the Bungles. If it weren't for Carson Palmers freak injury the Bengals might have won the game. As it was, receivers were consistently getting open against the defense the Steelers opened with (virtually no pressure on the QB) Pittsburgh made some nice 2nd half adjustments and blitzed much more and in general were in position to make plays. However I was not impressed with their defense, it seemed to me Kitna was just not willing to throw the ball in the 2nd half. He looked indecisive and afraid to make a mistake. Peyton Manning will have no such problem and the Colts should have no trouble picking up the Pittsburgh blitz. They can run the ball and beat the blitz with Edge James. The Colts simply have too many weapons and will use the middle of the field to their advantage. One thing to consider is the over in this game (currently 47) I fully expect the Steelers to score at least 3 TD's. The Colts should have 5 scores including a field goal or two. I like the over in this game. Final score Colts 38 Steelers 24The last game is the hardest to pick. The Patriots are the 2 time defending Champs and they are healthy and peaking at the right time. However, asking them to win 3 straight games on the road to make it to the Super Bowl is a tall task. I am a proponent of the "let the trend be your friend" mantra, however two huge trend are colliding this week. The Broncos are undefeated at home this year while the Patriots are 10-0 in the playoffs under Brady. Generally, when I see something like this: two pretty evenly matched teams, both well coached and both on a roll, I'll look to the Quarterbacks for both teams. Tom Brady has the clear edge here over Jake Plummer. Plummer does not seem to play well in big games while of course, Brady is the consummate big game player. I'll look to Brady to pull out this game and since the Patriots are getting 3 points I guess I'll have to take them. if the line moves either way I'm going the opposite way! 2.5 I'm taking Denver...The Pick: Patriots +3 over BroncosFinal scoreatriots 21 Broncos 20Thanks very much!The Real Goodfellas