Sports Betting Theory Question

TTChamp · #1 09-17-2005, 04:54 PM

I am a poker player who is getting into sports betting. I follow the NFL and Big East Football closely so those are the areas where I am the most comfortable betting.

Here is my question: why would you ever bet more than one NFL game per week. Shouldn't you just review the schedule and make one big bet on the game you are most confident in?

I understand that betting multiple games can lead to less variance, but the amount I bet on sports is much less than my available bankroll, so variance isn't a major concern for me.

#2 09-17-2005, 05:06 PM

If you can't estimate win probabilities for wagers, then it probably doesn't matter what format you use to make your bets. The best strategy for a non-estimating gambler is to bet whatever games you think are strong. If limiting yourself to one game a week creates that strength threshold you need, then go with it.

TTChamp · #3 09-17-2005, 06:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If you can't estimate win probabilities for wagers, then it probably doesn't matter what format you use to make your bets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry for the noob question, but can you expand on estimating win proboblities?

Matt24 · #4 09-17-2005, 06:34 PM

You should be on more than one, because you think more than one has value. Whereever you think there is an edge, you should be betting.

#5 09-17-2005, 06:51 PM

If you are able to mathematically predict the chance that a wager will win, then you'll know exactly when to bet and how much (see past threads about Kelly betting). If you don't, you will need a strength threshold that "tells" you when to bet a game or not. If keeping yourself to one play per week is what you need to feel good about a game, so be it, but there really should be no limit to when you make your plays (what Matt said).

TomCollins · #6 09-17-2005, 11:09 PM

But suppose you bet 1 unit on 5 games that you think you have some edge on. Assume your EV on each game is .1, .2, .3, .4, and .5.

It makes a lot more sense to just bet 5 units on the .5 game, at least from a +EV point of view.

Xelent · #7 09-17-2005, 11:22 PM

Tom, that statement makes no sense. If all of them are positive EV than it doesn't matter how many units you are betting as long as you are betting. Betting 5 units on each of those games is better than betting 5 units on just one game. Of course, bankroll considerations have to be taken into consideration.

TTChamp · #8 09-18-2005, 12:48 AM

Tom expressed my point well, and I think he is right. If you feel the most confident about one game, you should bet as much of your bankroll as possible on that one game. If you had an infinite bankroll, then it would make sense to lay as much as you could on several games that you felt were +EV(without betting so much that you actually begin to affect the lines). However, if you have a finite bankroll, then you should pick the game you think is most +EV and bet as much as you are comfortable betting. Anything more is undisciplined IMO.

I'm thinking of an anolgy to poker. You can't just wait until you have aces in poker because there are blinds and antes. Given that you can choose when you bet in sports betting, why not just wait until you have the equivalent of aces and bet as much as possible?

craig r · #9 09-18-2005, 12:57 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Tom expressed my point well, and I think he is right. If you feel the most confident about one game, you should bet as much of your bankroll as possible on that one game. If you had an infinite bankroll, then it would make sense to lay as much as you could on several games that you felt were +EV(without betting so much that you actually begin to affect the lines). However, if you have a finite bankroll, then you should pick the game you think is most +EV and bet as much as you are comfortable betting. Anything more is undisciplined IMO.

I'm thinking of an anolgy to poker. You can't just wait until you have aces in poker because there are blinds and antes. Given that you can choose when you bet in sports betting, why not just wait until you have the equivalent of aces and bet as much as possible?

[/ QUOTE ]

For the same reason if you are table hopping (wonging) in blackjack. If the count goes positive, you bet. The higher the count, the more you would bet. Why would it be any different with sports betting? The only reason I used "wonging" as opposed to just counting and playing at one table is because you can pick your spots just like you can with blackjack.

craig

#10 09-18-2005, 07:00 AM

[ QUOTE ]
But suppose you bet 1 unit on 5 games that you think you have some edge on. Assume your EV on each game is .1, .2, .3, .4, and .5.

It makes a lot more sense to just bet 5 units on the .5 game, at least from a +EV point of view.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
TT Champ: Tom expressed my point well, and I think he is right.

[/ QUOTE ]

So can you or can you not estimate win probabilities, TT? You seemed to imply that you don't. If you can, the above statement is wrong. The 0.5 +EV game can and will lose a certain percentage of the time. The point isn't that you bet 1 unit on each of the 5 games -- you stagger the wagers in ever increasing amounts. Check out the Kelly betting thread.