Over/Under Bet in Sports Betting
Thread Rating:
December 6th, 2010 at 8:25:05 PM
permalink
Never made a sports bet in my life, haven't seen a game of any kind in 25 years. Is the over under bet a good bet? If you can make 12 bets and win 7 and lose 5, is that good? I know it over 50%, but at that hit rate, the next time you bet you'll break even, than lose 2, then break even, then win 9 and lose 3. And so on. At that hit rate it will be all over the map. You'll come out ahead in the end, but is it worth all the work is my question. I always hear about these sports wiz dudes who bet on 13 games and win 11 of them. Thats a nice hit rate.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
December 6th, 2010 at 9:20:15 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobNever made a sports bet in my life, haven't seen a game of any kind in 25 years. Is the over under bet a good bet? If you can make 12 bets and win 7 and lose 5, is that good? I know it over 50%, but at that hit rate, the next time you bet you'll break even, than lose 2, then break even, then win 9 and lose 3. And so on. At that hit rate it will be all over the map. You'll come out ahead in the end, but is it worth all the work is my question. I always hear about these sports wiz dudes who bet on 13 games and win 11 of them. Thats a nice hit rate.
I suck at the over/under.
But hitting 58% on a -110 bet is pretty good, and would satisfy a lot of the pro-bettors I've read about.
It might just take a long time to be sure your hit rate IS 7 from 12. 39% of people betting randomly over 12 games would hit 7 from 12 (or better). The profit would be $15 if you made 12 $11 bets at -110 on the over under).
Only 27% of people would hit 14 from 24 or better , and only 20% would hit 21 or better from 36.
The sports wiz dudes who are hitting 11 from 13 are probably not doing it every week.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
December 6th, 2010 at 9:20:31 PM
permalink
<double post>
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
December 6th, 2010 at 9:27:43 PM
permalink
Quote: thecesspitI suck at the over/under.
But hitting 58% on a -110 bet is pretty good, and would satisfy a lot of the pro-bettors I've read about.
Really? I would think they want it higher.
>>>It might just take a long time to be sure your hit rate IS 7 from 12.>>>
Why? You have all those past seasons results to work from.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
December 6th, 2010 at 9:32:40 PM
permalink
Well if you have 200 games picked and are hitting 58% from that many... I thought you meant if someone has only picked 12 and gotten 7 correct.
58-60% is enough for the pro's. It gives them an edge over the book that they can work with over time. Or at least the math and tales I've seen points that way. I'm sure they'd want it higher, but what they want, and what they can reasonably get...
58-60% is enough for the pro's. It gives them an edge over the book that they can work with over time. Or at least the math and tales I've seen points that way. I'm sure they'd want it higher, but what they want, and what they can reasonably get...
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
December 6th, 2010 at 9:39:04 PM
permalink
The over under for baseball is 8 or 9, for hockey its 5, what is it for basketball?
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
December 6th, 2010 at 9:39:53 PM
permalink
Quote: thecesspit
58-60% is enough for the pro's. It gives them an edge over the book
How much of an edge over the book?
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
December 6th, 2010 at 9:43:27 PM
permalink
Depends on the teams.
Hockey ranges from 5-6, baseball 8-11 (as I recall, it may go much wider than that, not a sport I bet on), football 30-ish to high 40's. Basketball I've seen well over 200 to under 170 (in the Detroit Pistons shutdown defence days, which were glorious for my flea bite betting days)
I am assuming total points here...
Hockey ranges from 5-6, baseball 8-11 (as I recall, it may go much wider than that, not a sport I bet on), football 30-ish to high 40's. Basketball I've seen well over 200 to under 170 (in the Detroit Pistons shutdown defence days, which were glorious for my flea bite betting days)
I am assuming total points here...
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
December 6th, 2010 at 9:51:52 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobHow much of an edge over the book?
58% pick rate would be an expected value of about 10%. You need just under 53% to break even over the book. 60% is 14.5% edge.
60% is huge, and if your hitting that, your probably not betting enough games (if you can get more games and still hit 58%, you turn your money over quicker, and there fore do better, quicker). Of course, you could up your bet per game at 60% and use the Kelly Criteria to decide on a bet size.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
December 6th, 2010 at 9:55:17 PM
permalink
Quote: thecesspit58% pick rate would be an expected value of about 10%. You need just under 53% to break even over the book. 60% is 14.5% edge.
60% is huge, and if your hitting that, your probably not betting enough games (if you can get more games and still hit 58%, you turn your money over quicker, and there fore do better, quicker). Of course, you could up your bet per game at 60% and use the Kelly Criteria to decide on a bet size.
It sounds like a long slow way to make money, and a lot of work to boot. If you bet every hockey and basketball game every day, that about 12-15 games, depending on where you in the week. Lot of work.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
December 6th, 2010 at 9:59:52 PM
permalink
http://professionalgambler.com/ is an interesting site. Course he's selling picks ultimately, but there's some interesting topics on there.
If you get 4 picks a day, and bet 1% of your bank roll per game, you'd have bet it all in 25 days, and will make 10%. $550 bets, win 58 of them : $5,900 winnings. Per month. Would do for me, I think in terms of income. In terms of effort and risk? Maybe not.
I am assuming tax free... I know thats not true south of the border.
Of course that's average, and we can get into how good/bad and deviations from that, yadda, yadda, yadda.
If you get 4 picks a day, and bet 1% of your bank roll per game, you'd have bet it all in 25 days, and will make 10%. $550 bets, win 58 of them : $5,900 winnings. Per month. Would do for me, I think in terms of income. In terms of effort and risk? Maybe not.
I am assuming tax free... I know thats not true south of the border.
Of course that's average, and we can get into how good/bad and deviations from that, yadda, yadda, yadda.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
December 6th, 2010 at 10:01:55 PM
permalink
Quote: thecesspit.
If you get 4 picks a day, .
I would think you'd want to bet all the games you could so your hit rate would manifest itself.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
December 6th, 2010 at 10:03:58 PM
permalink
Not if you think the Line is about right.
Remember, you're trying to pick the games you think you have an advantage on. If the line is 5.5 goals (hockey) and you think it's 50/50 if it'll be above or below that line, you should pass.
So you pick the games where you think you've got an edge over the house.
Remember, you're trying to pick the games you think you have an advantage on. If the line is 5.5 goals (hockey) and you think it's 50/50 if it'll be above or below that line, you should pass.
So you pick the games where you think you've got an edge over the house.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
December 6th, 2010 at 10:19:46 PM
permalink
Why is no one asking me how to master the art of the Over/Under?? In fact, the NFL in general. Did you not know that I'm a whopping +85 units ahead for the 2010 season? That my friends is another true measure of success. Alan Boston, Jim Feist, Fezzik, move over. NOW!
December 6th, 2010 at 10:20:15 PM
permalink
Quote: thecesspit
I am assuming tax free... I know thats not true south of the border.
I'm remembering what turned me off in the past about this. There's a paper trail with sports betting so you can take another 35% off your winnings for the gov't. Oh boy..
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
December 6th, 2010 at 10:25:35 PM
permalink
I may get a higher rate of income tax up here but :
The following types of income are not taxed in Canada (this list is not exhaustive):
- gifts and inheritances;
- lottery winnings;
- winnings from betting or gambling for simple recreation or enjoyment;
The following types of income are not taxed in Canada (this list is not exhaustive):
- gifts and inheritances;
- lottery winnings;
- winnings from betting or gambling for simple recreation or enjoyment;
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
December 6th, 2010 at 10:27:32 PM
permalink
Quote: JerryLoganWhy is no one asking me how to master the art of the Over/Under?? In fact, the NFL in general. Did you not know that I'm a whopping +85 units ahead for the 2010 season? That my friends is another true measure of success. Alan Boston, Jim Feist, Fezzik, move over. NOW!
Do you bet over/under on other sports as well?
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
December 7th, 2010 at 4:47:52 AM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobNever made a sports bet in my life, haven't seen a game of any kind in 25 years. Is the over under bet a good bet? If you can make 12 bets and win 7 and lose 5, is that good? I know it over 50%, but at that hit rate, the next time you bet you'll break even, than lose 2, then break even, then win 9 and lose 3. And so on. At that hit rate it will be all over the map. You'll come out ahead in the end, but is it worth all the work is my question. I always hear about these sports wiz dudes who bet on 13 games and win 11 of them. Thats a nice hit rate.
Bob- If someone has figured out a way to consistently win 7 of 12, meaning 58.3%, then flat betting would lead to significant winnings for you. But remember, the people who claim to be able to achieve those results are generally trying to sell you something. The 'line' is built , at least theoretically, with all factors that should affect the total score. For example (I am making up the numbers), outdoor games might average 42, indoor 44. Thursday games 42, Sunday 44. Cold weather 41, warm weather 45, etc. Individual player injuries might also affect lines (Colts game with Peyton Manning 48, without, 43). The person who asserts that they can win 7 of 12 is saying that they are smarter than the linemakers, or have some not available to the public information. I will now make my over/under challenge-
I will offer even money to anyone who thinks that they can correctly pick 35 of 60 over under games in the NFL, with triple payout if they hit 40, but triple payout to me if they only hit 30.
December 7th, 2010 at 4:59:30 AM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobDo you bet over/under on other sports as well?
No, and I'm just kidding anyway. I'm no better at sportbetting than I am at video poker, which is why I'm getting my first lesson at the machines early Sat. morning from Rob Singer here at one of the Indian casinos.
December 7th, 2010 at 10:20:00 AM
permalink
Quote: SOOPOO, with triple payout if they hit 40, but triple payout to me if they only hit 30.
40 out of 60? Unlikely.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
December 7th, 2010 at 10:34:49 AM
permalink
Quote: SOOPOOI will now make my over/under challenge-
I will offer even money to anyone who thinks that they can correctly pick 35 of 60 over under games in the NFL, with triple payout if they hit 40, but triple payout to me if they only hit 30.
If you can hit 35 from 60, a player would have a 10% advantage on that bet, but still lose the three-fer about 11% of the time (and hit 40+ about the same number of times)
If you can only do 50/50, you've got a huge disadvantage. Even a sportsplayer who can hit 55% would be around -0.72 Units on this bet.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
December 7th, 2010 at 11:44:08 AM
permalink
Of course, that's my point. Since I know, or at least belive, that anyone who claims to hit that frequently is a liar trying to sell something. If I could pick 58.3% correct, I am right now on line at bodog, 5 dimes, sportsbet, etc... And at the MGM, Rio, Bellagio, etc... not making commercials....
December 7th, 2010 at 11:49:07 AM
permalink
You are correct! My goal every year is 55%, I am 51.5%. 60% or better is a pipe dream (unless of course you hit 3 of 5 and quit forever). I would guess most pros would be estatic to be in the 57-59% area.?
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes." ~ William Gibson
December 7th, 2010 at 12:05:08 PM
permalink
I think the OP's basic question was whether totals are inherently more beatable than the basic pointspread line. I've had the suspicion that this might be the case, simply because the "likelihood of points being scored" seems less chaotic than "the likelihood of one team scoring more points than the other".
My experience has been that I've been very successful with totals bets, but then, I've also been ridiculously successful with betting sides, which means my sample size is way too small to mean anything. A few years back, I won $5500 for about $100 by guessing the exact score of the Super Bowl, which was fluky, but the bet I felt most confident about was the total. I tend to bet playoff games "under", especially the AFC/NFC championship games, because the public is dazzled by the teams' success and focuses on their offensive prowess, but those games are usually played quite conservatively, which tends to depress scoring.
My experience has been that I've been very successful with totals bets, but then, I've also been ridiculously successful with betting sides, which means my sample size is way too small to mean anything. A few years back, I won $5500 for about $100 by guessing the exact score of the Super Bowl, which was fluky, but the bet I felt most confident about was the total. I tend to bet playoff games "under", especially the AFC/NFC championship games, because the public is dazzled by the teams' success and focuses on their offensive prowess, but those games are usually played quite conservatively, which tends to depress scoring.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
December 7th, 2010 at 6:08:26 PM
permalink
Quote: SOOPOOIf I could pick 58.3% correct, I am right now on line at bodog, 5 dimes, sportsbet, etc... And at the MGM, Rio, Bellagio, etc... .
It seems like you'd have to place a lot of bets to make any real money. You can bet Bodog's sports book legally in the States?
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
December 7th, 2010 at 6:53:05 PM
permalink
I don't think any of the on line books are legal. I do not use them. But I do not think that there is a shortage of Americans that do. My point was this- just spread your bets out enough so no one bet alerts anyone. I could be wrong, but I do not think that if you make, say, 2 $5000 bets per day at at legal Nevada sports book and win 58.3% of them that you would be prevented from further betting. But others here would be able to take a better stab at that.
