What do you think about this Golf Strategy? [Betting €5400 on the US Open]

leea-1334

hero member

Activity: 2338

Merit: 953

Temporary forum vacation

Quote from: Get-Paid.com on June 24, 2022, 02:44:13 AM

Quote from: leea-1334 on June 23, 2022, 12:06:23 AM

I guess you need to try this strategy more times to get a bigger dataset to know if you can validate your theory or not

Yes, indeed, if anyone wants to try it, bet around €6 on 50 longshot players and see how far it would go - he's more than welcome, it's a risk of €300 but then if you get 1 or 2 players reaching 20 or less then you already cover the €300 risk (if you get 5-6 players then you can hit €1800) - but it's risky, and you might want to close the position at 50 to 1 or so.

It's interesting for sure, but requires discipline, luck and and to be hands on on it.

I suppose the same can be said for some American sports (basketball/football/baseball) as I seldom see the preseason favorites ending up winning and then you see odds change so drastically from 300x to 20x just over the course of quarter season. I think baseball especially.

I definitely thought about this style (to keep betting on longshots and adjust betting as others become longshorts) but the discipline, time,,, and willingness to keep doing it even after losses on first attempts. I would merit that type of thread a lot!

The data is needed for sure before we can conclude efficacy.

Get-Paid.com

sr. member

Activity: 1877

Merit: 389

Quote from: leea-1334 on June 23, 2022, 12:06:23 AM

I guess you need to try this strategy more times to get a bigger dataset to know if you can validate your theory or not

Yes, indeed, if anyone wants to try it, bet around €6 on 50 longshot players and see how far it would go - he's more than welcome, it's a risk of €300 but then if you get 1 or 2 players reaching 20 or less then you already cover the €300 risk (if you get 5-6 players then you can hit €1800) - but it's risky, and you might want to close the position at 50 to 1 or so.

It's interesting for sure, but requires discipline, luck and and to be hands on on it.

leea-1334

hero member

Activity: 2338

Merit: 953

Temporary forum vacation

Quote from: Get-Paid.com on June 22, 2022, 02:05:37 PM

The OP has already updated the thread with the results:

I meant the original post sorry,,, not original poster (like directly edit the first post or add a link to the result in the first post so people see immediately result of it all.

I guess you need to try this strategy more times to get a bigger dataset to know if you can validate your theory or not, seriously even if you got a profit for this, it would not have been enough to say it worked.

Consolation merit for you Tongue

Get-Paid.com

sr. member

Activity: 1877

Merit: 389

Quote from: leea-1334 on June 22, 2022, 06:22:09 AM

Anyway, hope to see OP updated with results if this 'strategy' holds Wink

The OP has already updated the thread with the results:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.60399991

Grin

leea-1334

hero member

Activity: 2338

Merit: 953

Temporary forum vacation

Quote from: Get-Paid.com on June 21, 2022, 09:38:14 PM

Quote from: leea-1334 on June 21, 2022, 02:16:46 AM

but I guess in gold it can be even easier to bet on odds as you can check back daily on tournaments right?

Yes, each player has a certain time when he plays the 18 holes, there's a proper schedule so it's all very organized.
A player can go "red hot" (i.e. score so many holes under par) and then the price changes accordingly.

You can also lay the favorite, in this case Rory McIlroy was the one to lay or Jon Rahm, it's a bit risky but they both didn't perform well.

I just realized I wrote gold instead of golf but anyway,,, understood

I do not really follow golf so it is hard for me to say anything other than Tiger Woods who of course,,, is not the same man who ripped up everything in his path but from what I know of the news a new name or someone unexpected usually has good chances at top finish, plus there is always a weird hole-in-one to mess up bookies.

Probably best to just avoid favorites in this sport I would say. Anyway, hope to see OP updated with results if this 'strategy' holds Wink

Get-Paid.com

sr. member

Activity: 1877

Merit: 389

Quote from: leea-1334 on June 21, 2022, 02:16:46 AM

but I guess in gold it can be even easier to bet on odds as you can check back daily on tournaments right?

Yes, each player has a certain time when he plays the 18 holes, there's a proper schedule so it's all very organized.
A player can go "red hot" (i.e. score so many holes under par) and then the price changes accordingly.

You can also lay the favorite, in this case Rory McIlroy was the one to lay or Jon Rahm, it's a bit risky but they both didn't perform well.

leea-1334

hero member

Activity: 2338

Merit: 953

Temporary forum vacation

Quote from: Get-Paid.com on June 20, 2022, 08:10:29 AM

Quote from: leea-1334 on June 20, 2022, 02:01:46 AM

I think a riskier yet better bankroll approach is to go for the ones you think have outside chance to win like above 5x-20x.

Then as tournament progress, those below 5x who do not perform if they dip, you also bet on them.

Yes, you're right - you back the outsiders with $6 each, then if their chances improve you "sell" (lay) it in the exchange and make profit from it - but it requires you to be hands on on the odds, and watch them go up and down, and likewise you never know when you're reaching the bottom - but it's definitely a nice strategy to try.

That is right! Back outsiders work the same in football, and even during live matches you can for example hedge the bets IF they score first by taking bets on the favorite then (which the odds will rise if they go behind),,, but I guess in gold it can be even easier to bet on odds as you can check back daily on tournaments right?

I believe there are now some back/lay markets that also allow limit orders but maybe not for crypto. That would be so cool.

Get-Paid.com

sr. member

Activity: 1877

Merit: 389

Quote from: leea-1334 on June 20, 2022, 02:01:46 AM

I think a riskier yet better bankroll approach is to go for the ones you think have outside chance to win like above 5x-20x.

Then as tournament progress, those below 5x who do not perform if they dip, you also bet on them.

Yes, you're right - you back the outsiders with $6 each, then if their chances improve you "sell" (lay) it in the exchange and make profit from it - but it requires you to be hands on on the odds, and watch them go up and down, and likewise you never know when you're reaching the bottom - but it's definitely a nice strategy to try.

leea-1334

hero member

Activity: 2338

Merit: 953

Temporary forum vacation

I totally agree with swogerino,,, almost risk free is as good as high risk when the results do not go your way.

I can compare this to rolling dice at 1% house edge for 1.01 profit (you still have 2/100 losing outcomes). Sounds perfect because it is in our minds virtually impossible to hit on one big roll but so many people lost before including me.

I think a riskier yet better bankroll approach is to go for the ones you think have outside chance to win like above 5x-20x.

Then as tournament progress, those below 5x who do not perform if they dip, you also bet on them.

Kakmakr

legendary

Activity: 3542

Merit: 1965

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

I hate betting on Golf, because there are so many variables to take into consideration to determine the end result. On any given day, one of the low ranking players can have a excellent day or even two days and they shoot to the top. Players can have injuries (like Tiger Woods...and they can drop out from the tournament... giving low ranked players the opportunity to push up in the tournament)

The weather and the green and fairway conditions is crucial for the playing style of some of the players in the tournaments, so it is just too unpredictable. (Your strategy might have worked this time.... but it is very risky) Roll Eyes

I play Golf, so I know when I have a "On" or "Off" day...... and professional players also experience the same thing.

Get-Paid.com

sr. member

Activity: 1877

Merit: 389

One more thing to add - the link in the first post takes you to a new tournament now, this is because Orbit is using the very same link for other tournaments.

Get-Paid.com

sr. member

Activity: 1877

Merit: 389

Practically this is what I got from all this - €1.39 and lots of tension for 4 days Undecided

Reason: Hedging for/against weaker players, and it doesn't seem to worth it.

If anything - the best thing to do is to bet €6 (min. stake) on each player with 200 - 1000 odds.

You get guys like Adam Hadwin reaching 30 to 1 so from 700 to 1 you go down to 30 to 1.

That means you risk €6 to win €4200 and then you have €4200 to "sell" the position at 30 to 1 (make €140 profit).

Golf is so unpredictable that guys with 200 to 1 can easily swing the odds. Even today Rory the favorite was 500 to 1 and then went down to 60 to 1.

Fitzpatrick was 29 to 1 in Bet365 before the event, so that just tells you how things are so unpredictable.

Get-Paid.com

sr. member

Activity: 1877

Merit: 389

One more thing really amazes me is Callum Tarren is 3 under par (-3) and had a longer shot pre-event (900 to 1), yet he is 111 to 1 in the bookies (200 to 1 in the exchanges) yet Adam Hadwin who is one more than him (-4) but the leader, hits 30 to 1 in the exchange (26 to 1 in the bookies) and pre-event was over 150 to 1 in the bookies.

Psychologically because he's the leader then bookies make it look as if he has more chances (and honestly he had a few misses, could have easily made it -5 or more yesterday and so is Rory) - but still - it's either a trap or the market knows something different. The exchanges definitely don't justify 30 to 1 unless there's more to uncover here.

Kevin Na had similar odds yesterday, reaching 40 to 1 in the exchange, and then started missing shots - he's now 1000 to 1 in the exchange with no lay options).

The markets in golf can be extremely lethal, one hit or miss and the numbers can crunch really nicely.

Get-Paid.com

sr. member

Activity: 1877

Merit: 389

Quote from: Hydrogen on June 16, 2022, 06:05:42 PM

Matchmakers in MMA and the UFC often try to setup matches where the public doesn't see underdog upsets coming.

It could be interesting what you said, as if there is more to it than just the game alone.

The current leader, Adam Hadwin, has a tee time around 8am in the morning (more cloudy & windy), whilst the favorite Rory McIlroy is going to do so around 1pm, so 1pm (sunny) is definitely more comfortable than 8am and Hadwin also was among the ones golfing in the evening yesterday i.e. they make it tight for him and more under pressure.

The 2nd favorite, Jon Rahm, is also scheduled for 1pm, whilst Justin Thomas gets 7am.

You can try to make some assumptions from these - in the end of the day these players are the ones who need to bring in their A game in order to win.

Also check this out:

The bookmakers believe Gary Woodland (81 to 1 now) has a good chance to perform better than Hadwin in the 2nd round - yet they leave Hadwin as 6 to 1 (!!!) chances to keep on being the leader after the 2nd round.

btw MarathonBet for instance doesn't even have Hadwin listed as a potential winner - you can have "Others on request".

Does it tell you who makes money from all this in the end of the day? Grin

Get-Paid.com

sr. member

Activity: 1877

Merit: 389

Quote from: suzanne5223 on June 16, 2022, 04:22:32 PM

not in the way where gamblers have to risk €5400 in order to win €439 which not to be a profitable concept

At the moment the potential profit is going to be €712, and this was just 1 way of looking at it.

Adam Hadwin who was trading around 500 to 1 is now trading at 30 to 1, so if you waited with your bankroll before starting it you can lay him now for close to €200.

Joel Dahmen who was trading 900 to 1 before the event is now 90 to 1 = €60.

You can also go against Jordan Spieth now (2+ after the 1st round) who is 120 to 1 so it would bring in another close to €50 of profits - but for me a rule of thumb is to not go against those who opened with low odds before the event.

See this:
https://sports.yahoo.com/us-open-betting-adam-hadwin-was-100-1-to-be-the-first-round-leader-014506212.html

Yahoo had an article about how Hadwin was 100 to 1 to be the 1st round leader - so big odds can win - but this is about the winner by Sunday which requires from the underdogs to remain consistants for 4 days - that's the hard part in Golf.

Hydrogen

legendary

Activity: 2562

Merit: 1441

This is a statistics debate revolving around the frequency of how often big underdogs won the US open in golf.

Betting underdogs might be a viable strategy in MMA where some events result in greater than 50% of underdog bets cashing.

What you're looking for with this approach is a sport and niche area where underdogs historically have very high statistics for pulling upsets. Identifying specific conditions and scenarios for underdogs winning also helps.

Matchmakers in MMA and the UFC often try to setup matches where the public doesn't see underdog upsets coming. The judging criteria is also in question recently. That could be a good place to look.

suzanne5223

hero member

Activity: 2660

Merit: 651

Want top-notch marketing for your project, Hire me

Quote from: Get-Paid.com on June 15, 2022, 11:40:26 AM

Quote from: suzanne5223 on June 15, 2022, 05:56:07 AM

Gambling and risk are pals.

There is no free money in gambling but judging by history - these kind of bets are value bets, not the opposite.

Yes, there's no free money in gambling, and thats the reason the risk involved is the price to pay. Judging by history, the strategy betting you illustrate may prove product but not in the way where gamblers have to risk €5400 in order to win €439 which not to be a profitable concept and I believe it better take my chances with the game risk because it may be my lucky day.

Get-Paid.com

sr. member

Activity: 1877

Merit: 389

Potential profit is now €650 and should be a bit up by tomorrow.

Now here's a tip for you:

Brian Harman was at fixed odds of 175 to 1 and 250 to 1 in the exchange.
Now trading at 80 to 1 in the exchange.

If you can lay - now it's the time. Get €70 profit for laying this one.

MarathonBet btw is offering 151 on Harman if you believe he could scoop it, more than twice the price of the exchange:
https://www.marathonbet.com/en/betting/Golf+-+10

Get-Paid.com

sr. member

Activity: 1877

Merit: 389

The tournament has started.
Those of you who like to do some arbitrage - some players who were 1000 to 1 are now trading as 600 to 1.
There is no doubt why this kind of tournament brings a lot, a lot of trading opportunities - the angle presented here is only one single way of looking at trading this event.

Get-Paid.com

sr. member

Activity: 1877

Merit: 389

Quote from: Poker Player on June 15, 2022, 11:54:40 PM

Do you mean that based on the bets and odds you will bet €5,350 and the expected profit value is €5,950?

Yes, exactly.

However, during the tournament, players such as Seamus Power (90 to 1) might hit 500 to 1 in the exchange (due to poor performance and very slim chances of winning) - so if it feels right you can lay them as well €5400 against 500 to 1 is about €11 profit. This is just an estimate.

Jason Kokrak is definitely a threat but his past performance in the US open hasn't been great. Still, laying him might lead to some swings, he could definitely hit the 50 to 1 odds during the tournament, it's even likely.

Anyway,
This kind of betting activity is basically predicting that the winner would come from a group containing more than the top 40 players in the world.

If you want to be greedy and bet the winner would come from the top 20 players in the world then your potential profit would be higher, but it's good to remember it's always better to be safe than sorry.

The oddsmakers have been quite spot-on in the past years with their odds on favorites, it's amazing how Jordan Spieth is 26 to 1, seems like quite a lot of value, he plays in his home turf, literally.

Topic: What do you think about this Golf Strategy? [Betting €5400 on the US Open] (Read 268 times)