And again if luck will not be on your side, whatever kind of research and assessment that you it will still burned your selections, though I also take this kind of parlay, trying to look for teams that have history of not making points and try to see the opponents defense, if things works on my analysis then I'll take 3-4 games and hope that luck will permits that selection to win, no guarantee but giving the possibilities that risk still involve then it will easy to move forward whatever the outcome might be.
Topic: Betting experiment with low odds on football main leagues - page 6. (Read 2148 times)
And again if luck will not be on your side, whatever kind of research and assessment that you it will still burned your selections, though I also take this kind of parlay, trying to look for teams that have history of not making points and try to see the opponents defense, if things works on my analysis then I'll take 3-4 games and hope that luck will permits that selection to win, no guarantee but giving the possibilities that risk still involve then it will easy to move forward whatever the outcome might be.
And again if luck will not be on your side, whatever kind of research and assessment that you it will still burned your selections, though I also take this kind of parlay, trying to look for teams that have history of not making points and try to see the opponents defense, if things works on my analysis then I'll take 3-4 games and hope that luck will permits that selection to win, no guarantee but giving the possibilities that risk still involve then it will easy to move forward whatever the outcome might be.
The experiment is pretty simple,
- Each Thursday-Friday I pick all matches from 5 leagues in which a team is under 1.5 to win (odds from Stake
)And again if luck will not be on your side, whatever kind of research and assessment that you it will still burned your selections, though I also take this kind of parlay, trying to look for teams that have history of not making points and try to see the opponents defense, if things works on my analysis then I'll take 3-4 games and hope that luck will permits that selection to win, no guarantee but giving the possibilities that risk still involve then it will easy to move forward whatever the outcome might be.
The experiment is pretty simple,
- Each Thursday-Friday I pick all matches from 5 leagues in which a team is under 1.5 to win (odds from Stake
)hero member
Activity: 462
Merit: 767
Instant cryptocurrency exchange with own reserves!
Tree of Liberty went to post at 1/25, this is 1.04 odds, with an official rating of 144, and lost to the single other horse running with a rating of 98.
So, top this
So, top this
I am curious if you are continuing to place bets in low-odds matches, given that you may have started to realize what will happen at the end. Some other members and I think it might end up negative. But if you want to continue experimenting, it's up to you. But I would say that the final result is pretty much obvious.
I want to mention another thing: I have seen a scam accusation thread where the victim said that the casino refused to pay him because he was placing bets on low odds. I don't think Stake is going to do that. If I am not wrong, that platform was rollbit. I didn't follow up on that thread, so I am not sure if that guy was able to withdraw his funds or not. The bottom line is, even if you get success in the experiment, probably it won't work on every sportsbook.
Just as you've said, odds are basically set by the bookies based on the possibility of winning or losing the game which is determined by the current form of both team. In other word odds are as a result of bookies prediction. Football is a game were result can change within the wrinkle of an eye, and the least thought for consideration could become the reality of the day. Selection small odds has no guarantee that you'll be wining the game, but it keeps you in a less risky position for your bets to be won. However i prefer going for small odds than betting on bigs odds because majority of my wins are from small odd selected games out together.
It's quite simple. The games or rather game outcomes that have a higher likelihood of happening usually comes with smaller odds since based on team and statistics the risk on betting on that particular possibility is low relative to an opposite possibility or other possibilities like a draw game. If a very good team plays against a team with very low stats, the betting odds for the good team will be very small when compared to the team that's of a lower winning stats.Similarly you will notice that if both teams are good the odds of getting a draw in that game will be smaller and the difference between a draw and that of any the two teams winning won't be large. As a gambler you have to understand these simple logics because if you bet based on the size of the odds you will likely lose majority of the games you place.
I have come to realize that even low odds are not really safe because it's all risky. If you allow small odds to entice you it would make you lose as an active gambler. There are people that have staked millions on low odds and lost the bet. To me odds are just ideas on which team has the highest potential of winning which is sometimes misleading, instead of just playing by the odds do a deep dive and play according to analysis, this way you can at least try to give yourself a little leverage over the bookmakers
Just as you've said, odds are basically set by the bookies based on the possibility of winning or losing the game which is determined by the current form of both team. In other word odds are as a result of bookies prediction. Football is a game were result can change within the wrinkle of an eye, and the least thought for consideration could become the reality of the day. Selection small odds has no guarantee that you'll be wining the game, but it keeps you in a less risky position for your bets to be won. However i prefer going for small odds than betting on bigs odds because majority of my wins are from small odd selected games out together.
It's not really a hidden strategy, for years most top teams have proven that are profitable on constant betting, it has worked for Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern, there are tons of people doing this for years, I just grabbed the first model from a forum as an example:
Bookies can't do much about this as the odds reflect the form, if they would lower too much then it would mean too big odds on handicaps for the other team so they just go along with it, it's not a very profitable scheme, it looks a lot of capital and there are just a few teams with which you can play, you're barely beating the stock market but yes, it's positive.
Bookies can't do much about this as the odds reflect the form, if they would lower too much then it would mean too big odds on handicaps for the other team so they just go along with it, it's not a very profitable scheme, it looks a lot of capital and there are just a few teams with which you can play, you're barely beating the stock market but yes, it's positive.
Can you explain what strategy is "hidden" in this table? And by the way, from what I see - 10 teams are profitable, 10 are unprofitable. It seems that there are more profitable teams in the top, but not so much to make a profit from this or to be sure that this will be the case every year.
In certain years, such declines as those recently seen by Napoli, Bayern, Liverpool would ruin a player using such a strategy, wouldn't they?
It all started from this thread with a gambler considering on betting exactly on 1.50 odds 3 times a week.
I thought this would be an inclusive experiment since it would be about fixed odds and cherry-picked matches, pretty much gambling on what matches to gamble, which leads to a lot of bias in the results, then, how about betting on all football matches from 5 leagues, only on the favorite under 1.5 to win, would those "sure" lol, prove to be easy money or an easy money pit that grows with each week played? My experience with betting on the favorite in horse racing tells me the latter, but who knows?
The experiment is pretty simple,
- Each Thursday-Friday I pick all matches from 5 leagues in which a team is under 1.5 to win (odds from Stake)
- A bet is considered at 1 unit, so a loss is -1 , a win at 1.25 is +0.25
- The game will stop at -100, if we reach that point I think it's obvious the strategy is flawed to the max
Fast forward, Round 1!
LE:
Because too many are confused about the screenshot,no, it's not a multiplier, I just added them to save space.
Each bet is on an individual match!
6 matches
Total Stake Est. Payout
6.0 7.98
Update:
Since there is so much talk about multipliers I will track this too, for the 6 games above: Total Odds 5.59.
This will be done independently from the single bets.
Round 1 results
- Individual bets balance +0.27
- Multiplier balance -1
I thought this would be an inclusive experiment since it would be about fixed odds and cherry-picked matches, pretty much gambling on what matches to gamble, which leads to a lot of bias in the results, then, how about betting on all football matches from 5 leagues, only on the favorite under 1.5 to win, would those "sure" lol, prove to be easy money or an easy money pit that grows with each week played? My experience with betting on the favorite in horse racing tells me the latter, but who knows?
The experiment is pretty simple,
- Each Thursday-Friday I pick all matches from 5 leagues in which a team is under 1.5 to win (odds from Stake
)- A bet is considered at 1 unit, so a loss is -1 , a win at 1.25 is +0.25
- The game will stop at -100, if we reach that point I think it's obvious the strategy is flawed to the max
Fast forward, Round 1!
LE:
Because too many are confused about the screenshot,no, it's not a multiplier, I just added them to save space.
Each bet is on an individual match!
6 matches
Total Stake Est. Payout
6.0 7.98
Update:
Since there is so much talk about multipliers I will track this too, for the 6 games above: Total Odds 5.59.
This will be done independently from the single bets.
Round 1 results
- Individual bets balance +0.27
- Multiplier balance -1
I have come to realize that even low odds are not really safe because it's all risky. If you allow small odds to entice you it would make you lose as an active gambler. There are people that have staked millions on low odds and lost the bet. To me odds are just ideas on which team has the highest potential of winning which is sometimes misleading, instead of just playing by the odds do a deep dive and play according to analysis, this way you can at least try to give yourself a little leverage over the bookmakers
So update on round 2
Round 2 results
- Individual bets balance -1.2
- Multiplier balance -1
Total results
- Individual bets balance -0.93
- Multiplier balance -2
- Amount wagered on single bets 17
- Pecentage loss -5.4%
- Amount wagered on multi -2
- Percentage loss 100%
It's exactly my point, if the bookie considers these factors before publishing the bets it means that they are also off by a factor, right, since the low odds they publish are also wrong, basically what this experiment will also prove on top of that is that despite their reputation they also gamble a lot when doing those, a ton of shots in the dark just like the rest of us!
Tree of Liberty went to post at 1/25, this is 1.04 odds, with an official rating of 144, and lost to the single other horse running with a rating of 98.
So, top this
Round 2 results
- Individual bets balance -1.2
- Multiplier balance -1
Total results
- Individual bets balance -0.93
- Multiplier balance -2
- Amount wagered on single bets 17
- Pecentage loss -5.4%
- Amount wagered on multi -2
- Percentage loss 100%
~
I share your view about the series of events but I don't seem to 100% understand you and you are mixing some points up. You need to know that bookies consider lots of factors before resulting in certain odds for teams and not only about the goals scored though it's one of the factors, unless you are referring to that as one of the factors in an example way.It's exactly my point, if the bookie considers these factors before publishing the bets it means that they are also off by a factor, right, since the low odds they publish are also wrong, basically what this experiment will also prove on top of that is that despite their reputation they also gamble a lot when doing those, a ton of shots in the dark just like the rest of us!
I have experience in losing a bet under 1.1 odds because soccer is a minute game. A single minute can change the game. Imagine I bet for a team already in the lead, and it's last minute. I will lose my bet if the opponent scores at the last minute.
Tree of Liberty went to post at 1/25, this is 1.04 odds, with an official rating of 144, and lost to the single other horse running with a rating of 98.
So, top this
innovative betting experiments can be used as a reference for me, because honestly I just found out about it, I just found your thread, hopefully I don't miss your betting results
your chances of winning will definitely be there but I don't know how big it will be successful
your chances of winning will definitely be there but I don't know how big it will be successful
It is interesting, though, many point out that the returns would be small, and the risks - too high.
Nevertheless, it's still interesting to watch the results for yourself, indefinitely.
There is no perfect strat in gambling or in sports betting, as Josefjix said.
Again it's a matter of how many times at what odds!
If a team scores 5 times in a row the odds for it will be low, if it gets destroyed after that series by the one last placed its odds would instantly go up, this is less about an event and more about a series of events, you can't argue that the bookie make the odds and at the same time they are better yet losing on them, we could change this and bet against the favorite then each time, it would be inevitable that at one point a team would bring the gains and another the losses.
I share your view about the series of events but I don't seem to 100% understand you and you are mixing some points up. You need to know that bookies consider lots of factors before resulting in certain odds for teams and not only about the goals scored though it's one of the factors, unless you are referring to that as one of the factors in an example way.If a team scores 5 times in a row the odds for it will be low, if it gets destroyed after that series by the one last placed its odds would instantly go up, this is less about an event and more about a series of events, you can't argue that the bookie make the odds and at the same time they are better yet losing on them, we could change this and bet against the favorite then each time, it would be inevitable that at one point a team would bring the gains and another the losses.
The feats of the teams are collectively weighted having considered their past and present statuses and this automatically assigns a low odd to the stronger team and a high odd for the lower ones, scoring alone can't do that but overall considerations of qualities and past results. This naturally gives clues to the chances of the team winning as said in the last post and has been so useful for me to personally know the weak and the strong teams because my analysis often agrees with the odds of bookies, except in some situations where the strength/chance of the teams are close. However, I will never consider betting against the favourite, it's all about the analysis and what it eventually guides me to do. I then manage my portfolio rightly in case the unforeseen happens.
hero member
Activity: 462
Merit: 767
Instant cryptocurrency exchange with own reserves!
I have experience in losing a bet under 1.1 odds because soccer is a minute game. A single minute can change the game. Imagine I bet for a team already in the lead, and it's last minute. I will lose my bet if the opponent scores at the last minute. You will probably win most of the matches if you bet on 1.5 odds. But that is not enough to cover your loss.
If you win ten bets with 1mBTC each on 1.4 average odds, that is 4mBTC. But if you lose five bets, you are 1mBTC down. A better idea will be to research the team before you bet. You should not blindly bet on a team just because of the odds.
If you win ten bets with 1mBTC each on 1.4 average odds, that is 4mBTC. But if you lose five bets, you are 1mBTC down. A better idea will be to research the team before you bet. You should not blindly bet on a team just because of the odds.
This experiment will most likely end in red. Can't call this a betting strategy, of course, but, yeah, it is flawed. For one, profitable betting on sports requires that you are aware of what you're betting on. Meaning, it's based on a certain amount of analysis or familiarity.
Also, betting on odds like 1.30 or 1.40 is actually risky since their opponents still hold relatively high chances of winning. And you will get a low return if you win. You have to win more or less 3 times to recover your starting bet, but what is the chance that out of three games, one will end in an upset? Again, not really a huge upset since 1.30 or 1.40 aren't like sure wins. Every loss means you need to add another 3 wins. If in 3 games, you will lose twice, you need to win 6 times to recover. That's not easy.
Also, betting on odds like 1.30 or 1.40 is actually risky since their opponents still hold relatively high chances of winning. And you will get a low return if you win. You have to win more or less 3 times to recover your starting bet, but what is the chance that out of three games, one will end in an upset? Again, not really a huge upset since 1.30 or 1.40 aren't like sure wins. Every loss means you need to add another 3 wins. If in 3 games, you will lose twice, you need to win 6 times to recover. That's not easy.
You can only be successful in them if you are consistent with the winning but if you are not, a single loss will ruin the party. Imagine, if you bet three matches with 1.3 odds, it will take a single loss to clear all your 3 initial winnings, and it will take you 3 winnings to meet up with a single loss, so how convenient is that? The right risk management is not included in this kind of low-odd betting so I try as much as possible to avoid them.
This is the point of the experiment, can top team beat the odds or not!?
Bookies offer odds, but they don't offer really chances for it more like risks for gains percentages, if those were really chances you could go by all results and turn the whole thing into a predetermined outcome, bookies have no way of dealing with you a blow if Madrid for example goes on a rampage and beats every single team in the championship, and if they fail once in such a streak the odds for the next match after a failure would definitely pick up.
There is no perfect strategy in gambling, especially in sports betting; it all depends on what you want. If you're trying to build a balance, picking bookies' favorites with a good stake amount is the right strategy; no risk is taken. However, if you already have a good balance, you can always try a more risky odds parlay with a minimum stake once in a while; it doesn't always come, but when it does, it covers all initial losses.
I enjoy betting on bookies' favorites, but anything less than 1.40 odd is a waste of time for me. Football has changed, bookies' favorites struggle, and there are always upsets, but it is still a better strategy to accumulate profits..
Liverpool losing to Nottingham Forrest was really odd, considering their current form and unbeaten or conceiving record for a while now. No one actually expected that. Odds which can sometimes help in determining the form or the outcome of the match failed in their game with Nottingham forest, analysis also failed. These days I've been making small odds selection and I sum it up to 4 or 2 odds, yet there is still a single loss all the time. And that is another reason to prove that both small and huge odds can still change your bet status to loss. The best way to gamble is reducing your stake so you don't get affected if anything other than your predictions happens.
Sincerely a vst majority didn't see that coming and even the bookies had taught they would be able to win as it reflected in their odds, if it were to be like a few knew Liverpool was going to loose this game,then most casinos should be paying through their nose now but the odds for Liverpool was small. Now it's important to understand the concept behind odds that they are only assigned according to the expectations and projections of the bookies to fair degree to attract gamblers there by making us understand that there's no degree to accuracy or assurance arising from this odds allocated as theya re only the reflection of the bookies taughts so anything can still happen, you can follow your guys at some point, who knows they may be wright. You can only be successful in them if you are consistent with the winning but if you are not, a single loss will ruin the party. Imagine, if you bet three matches with 1.3 odds, it will take a single loss to clear all your 3 initial winnings, and it will take you 3 winnings to meet up with a single loss, so how convenient is that? The right risk management is not included in this kind of low-odd betting so I try as much as possible to avoid them.
This is the point of the experiment, can the top team beat the odds or not!?
Quote
Bookies offer odds, but they don't offer really chances for it more like risks for gains percentages, if those were really chances you could go by all results and turn the whole thing into a predetermined outcome, bookies have no way of dealing with you a blow if Madrid for example goes on a rampage and beats every single team in the championship, and if they fail once in such a streak the odds for the next match after a failure would definitely pick up.
Just like anyone who knows how to analyse matches and the possible outcome very well, they would have known the possible odds of bookies on matches depending on the distinction of strength/weakness of the meeting teams. For this, it is an automatic way of knowing the chance of winning or losing of either of the teams, so invariable, those with low odds have the higher chance of winning especially if your analysis agrees with the odds of bookies, so technically they (bookies) has already hinted the chance of winning with the odds.Liverpool losing to Nottingham Forrest was really odd, considering their current form and unbeaten or conceiving record for a while now. No one actually expected that. Odds which can sometimes help in determining the form or the outcome of the match failed in their game with Nottingham forest, analysis also failed. These days I've been making small odds selection and I sum it up to 4 or 2 odds, yet there is still a single loss all the time. And that is another reason to prove that both small and huge odds can still change your bet status to loss. The best way to gamble is reducing your stake so you don't get affected if anything other than your predictions happens.
Two matches still to go but I won't be able to watch them tonight so this is the stats right now, hope I got everything right
Liverpool -1
Manchester City +1.19
Brighton -1
Aston Villa +1.50
Atletico TBD
Borussia +1.38
Leipzig -1
Bayern +1.26
Bayer +1.51
Ac Milan +1.31
Inter TBD
PSG +1.30
Total gambled 12 Current Returs 9.45 Loss 2.55
Even if both teams tonight win the return would be 0.10
If anything it looks like a way to increase your roll!
Again it's a matter of how many times at what odds!
If a team scores 5 times in a row the odds for it will be low, if it gets destroyed after that series by the one last placed its odds would instantly go up, this is less about an event and more about a series of events, you can't argue that the bookie make the odds and at the same time they are better yet losing on them, we could change this and bet against the favorite then each time, it would be inevitable that at one point a team would bring the gains and another the losses.
Liverpool -1
Manchester City +1.19
Brighton -1
Aston Villa +1.50
Atletico TBD
Borussia +1.38
Leipzig -1
Bayern +1.26
Bayer +1.51
Ac Milan +1.31
Inter TBD
PSG +1.30
Total gambled 12 Current Returs 9.45 Loss 2.55
Even if both teams tonight win the return would be 0.10
If anything it looks like a way to increase your roll!
This is still the same thing but in a different format. The top team will beat the odds more times but luck is also needed here because no matter how better a team is against the other, there is always a time when the underdogs win which will ruin the party.
Again it's a matter of how many times at what odds!
If a team scores 5 times in a row the odds for it will be low, if it gets destroyed after that series by the one last placed its odds would instantly go up, this is less about an event and more about a series of events, you can't argue that the bookie make the odds and at the same time they are better yet losing on them, we could change this and bet against the favorite then each time, it would be inevitable that at one point a team would bring the gains and another the losses.
You can only be successful in them if you are consistent with the winning but if you are not, a single loss will ruin the party. Imagine, if you bet three matches with 1.3 odds, it will take a single loss to clear all your 3 initial winnings, and it will take you 3 winnings to meet up with a single loss, so how convenient is that? The right risk management is not included in this kind of low-odd betting so I try as much as possible to avoid them.
This is the point of the experiment, can the top team beat the odds or not!?Quote
Bookies offer odds, but they don't offer really chances for it more like risks for gains percentages, if those were really chances you could go by all results and turn the whole thing into a predetermined outcome, bookies have no way of dealing with you a blow if Madrid for example goes on a rampage and beats every single team in the championship, and if they fail once in such a streak the odds for the next match after a failure would definitely pick up.
Just like anyone who knows how to analyse matches and the possible outcome very well, they would have known the possible odds of bookies on matches depending on the distinction of strength/weakness of the meeting teams. For this, it is an automatic way of knowing the chance of winning or losing of either of the teams, so invariable, those with low odds have the higher chance of winning especially if your analysis agrees with the odds of bookies, so technically they (bookies) has already hinted the chance of winning with the odds. 
innovative betting experiments can be used as a reference for me, because honestly I just found out about it, I just found your thread, hopefully I don't miss your betting results
your chances of winning will definitely be there but I don't know how big it will be successful
your chances of winning will definitely be there but I don't know how big it will be successful
Jump to: