Betting on sports 'futures' is an enjoyable and potentially profitable way to wager, but there are several potential risks that can lead to losses. Here's a rundown of things to avoid:
Search for the best price: A common mistake is to assume that the price on a specific futures wager position will be the same at every sportsbook. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, you'll often see a greater degree of difference between futures prices from book to book than any other form of bet. This is because that books aren't as worried about what price other outfits are offering as they are about keeping their own financial position balanced.
Don't fixate on picking the winner from a competitive field: This may sound like strange advice, but from a theoretical standpoint it makes perfect sense. As with every other element of sport wagering its crucial to always focus not on winners and losers, but on the value you're getting on individual bets. For example, in most years there are several teams with a realistic shot of winning at the start of the NCAA basketball tournament. The problem is that these top teams invariably offer low paybacks that are less than their 'true odds' of winning. Every team is subject to the same variables like injuries, slumps, bad matchups but backing teams that are 'under the radar' at higher prices offer more compensation for these 'risks'.
In more theoretical terms, the 'true odds' of a Duke or similar top team winning the tournament are almost always higher than the price offered. Think of it this way--say we're betting Duke to win the national title at 2/1. This means that the Blue Devils would have to win more than 33% of the time to break even. So lets say, for the sake of argument, that we could play the tournament over 100 times. Would Duke come out on top more than 33 of these times? If not, they represent a poor value. Let's say that they win 30 of 100 times. This means that any price under +333 or thereabouts is a poor wagering value.
Note that the more competitive the market, the more difficult it is to find good value on the favorites. Since you can make a case for quite a few teams to win the NCAA tournament at this point this particular futures market is clearly a very competitive one. In a less competitive marketplace it might be possible to "pick the winner" and have it be a good value though you will pay a price for this. Here's a (thankfully) hypothetical example: let's say the UFC decided to hold a one night round robin tournament with 5 competitors. Competitor #1 would be heavyweight champion Brock Lesnar. The other four competitors would be professional figure skaters Elvis Stojko, Rudy Gallindo, Brian Boitano and Evgeni Plushinko. Even if he didn't bring his "A game", Lesnar would be essentially have a 100% certainty of beating the four untrained fighters, who also happen to be rather effeminate. If a sportsbook installed Lesnar as a -1000 favorite a bet on the 63 265 pound takedown would still be theoretically a good value. It's always difficult to risk so much to win a little, but from a strictly theoretical standpoint its a good play.
Don't go for the big killing: Sports wagering is not a good arena in which to make a 'big killing'. It may happen from time to time, but it is extremely rare. A perennial doormat can come out of nowhere to win a championship at a big price, but the fact that it happens from time to time doesn't make it a good value. If you're a recreational player and want to throw a few dollars at a big long shot, no real harm. If you aspire to any degree of seriousness as a sports better, however, you need to maintain your discipline and commitment to value at all times. If you want to hit a big jackpot play the lottery or the slot machines, but don't try to do it in a sports betting paradigm.
Wagering value is just as important at the bottom of the barrel as it is at the top. Just because you're getting a huge potential payback on a big dog doesn't make it a good value. Make sure that the payback you're getting presents an overlay situation--even on a huge underdog.
Don't bet one-sided futures or propositions: Though many of these are not futures per se, a lot of sportsbooks offer silly propositions on nonsport events as a way to get publicity, or just to be funny. Its important to make a distinction between this type of silly bet and more realistic nonsport propositions which frequently present good wagering value. Im talking the really outlandish stuff here. Not too long ago, a sportsbook posted a line on Martians landing on earth and painting the White House red by the end of the year. The "YES" was +2500 or thereabouts, which is far from reflective of the "true odds" of this unlikely event. Even if you're the type that collects classic Art Bell shows on tape and believes in UFOs you wouldn't place the probability of this happening at more than a fraction of a percent. The book only offered the "YES" side of the proposition, meaning that you couldn't lay even a huge price on the more likely outcome. Another book had a futures offering for what would happen first with Ashton Kutcher, Demi Moore and Bruce Willis. All of the options were very unlikely--Ashton and Bruce fighting on PPV and my favorite--and the longest odds--Ashton, Bruce and Demi hopping in bed together and releasing a porno video documenting the event. You'd receive a sizable payback if any of the events ever transpired, but I'm not exactly sure how to compute the "true odds" on "when pigs fly.
Search for the best price: A common mistake is to assume that the price on a specific futures wager position will be the same at every sportsbook. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, you'll often see a greater degree of difference between futures prices from book to book than any other form of bet. This is because that books aren't as worried about what price other outfits are offering as they are about keeping their own financial position balanced.
Don't fixate on picking the winner from a competitive field: This may sound like strange advice, but from a theoretical standpoint it makes perfect sense. As with every other element of sport wagering its crucial to always focus not on winners and losers, but on the value you're getting on individual bets. For example, in most years there are several teams with a realistic shot of winning at the start of the NCAA basketball tournament. The problem is that these top teams invariably offer low paybacks that are less than their 'true odds' of winning. Every team is subject to the same variables like injuries, slumps, bad matchups but backing teams that are 'under the radar' at higher prices offer more compensation for these 'risks'.
In more theoretical terms, the 'true odds' of a Duke or similar top team winning the tournament are almost always higher than the price offered. Think of it this way--say we're betting Duke to win the national title at 2/1. This means that the Blue Devils would have to win more than 33% of the time to break even. So lets say, for the sake of argument, that we could play the tournament over 100 times. Would Duke come out on top more than 33 of these times? If not, they represent a poor value. Let's say that they win 30 of 100 times. This means that any price under +333 or thereabouts is a poor wagering value.
Note that the more competitive the market, the more difficult it is to find good value on the favorites. Since you can make a case for quite a few teams to win the NCAA tournament at this point this particular futures market is clearly a very competitive one. In a less competitive marketplace it might be possible to "pick the winner" and have it be a good value though you will pay a price for this. Here's a (thankfully) hypothetical example: let's say the UFC decided to hold a one night round robin tournament with 5 competitors. Competitor #1 would be heavyweight champion Brock Lesnar. The other four competitors would be professional figure skaters Elvis Stojko, Rudy Gallindo, Brian Boitano and Evgeni Plushinko. Even if he didn't bring his "A game", Lesnar would be essentially have a 100% certainty of beating the four untrained fighters, who also happen to be rather effeminate. If a sportsbook installed Lesnar as a -1000 favorite a bet on the 63 265 pound takedown would still be theoretically a good value. It's always difficult to risk so much to win a little, but from a strictly theoretical standpoint its a good play.
Don't go for the big killing: Sports wagering is not a good arena in which to make a 'big killing'. It may happen from time to time, but it is extremely rare. A perennial doormat can come out of nowhere to win a championship at a big price, but the fact that it happens from time to time doesn't make it a good value. If you're a recreational player and want to throw a few dollars at a big long shot, no real harm. If you aspire to any degree of seriousness as a sports better, however, you need to maintain your discipline and commitment to value at all times. If you want to hit a big jackpot play the lottery or the slot machines, but don't try to do it in a sports betting paradigm.
Wagering value is just as important at the bottom of the barrel as it is at the top. Just because you're getting a huge potential payback on a big dog doesn't make it a good value. Make sure that the payback you're getting presents an overlay situation--even on a huge underdog.
Don't bet one-sided futures or propositions: Though many of these are not futures per se, a lot of sportsbooks offer silly propositions on nonsport events as a way to get publicity, or just to be funny. Its important to make a distinction between this type of silly bet and more realistic nonsport propositions which frequently present good wagering value. Im talking the really outlandish stuff here. Not too long ago, a sportsbook posted a line on Martians landing on earth and painting the White House red by the end of the year. The "YES" was +2500 or thereabouts, which is far from reflective of the "true odds" of this unlikely event. Even if you're the type that collects classic Art Bell shows on tape and believes in UFOs you wouldn't place the probability of this happening at more than a fraction of a percent. The book only offered the "YES" side of the proposition, meaning that you couldn't lay even a huge price on the more likely outcome. Another book had a futures offering for what would happen first with Ashton Kutcher, Demi Moore and Bruce Willis. All of the options were very unlikely--Ashton and Bruce fighting on PPV and my favorite--and the longest odds--Ashton, Bruce and Demi hopping in bed together and releasing a porno video documenting the event. You'd receive a sizable payback if any of the events ever transpired, but I'm not exactly sure how to compute the "true odds" on "when pigs fly.
About the Author:
Ross Everett is a experienced freelance writer who covers travel, casino gambling and sports handicapping. He is a consulting handicapper for Anatta Sports where he is responsible for providing daily free sports picks. In his spare time he enjoys fine dining, fencing and deep sea diving. He lives in Southern Nevada with four dogs and a pet coyote.
No comments:
Post a Comment