Playing the line vs picking the fighter to win

JustOnce

On Hiatus
@Gold
Joined
Jan 22, 2015
Messages
23,244
Reaction score
26,401
So the theory goes, if you play the odds in the long run, and you are right the assumption is, you will make profit off that. Since the bookies are putting out odds that aren't true, so theoretically speaking, you need to be picking fighters who can even perform better than the odds that's put out by the oddsmakers.

If the fighter A has a +200 line to win it, the real winning odds could be closer to + 230, but your own odds may stand at + 180.

Of if the fighter B has a -200 to win it, the real winning odds could be closer to - 180, but you may think that fighter has a winning odds of -250.

Or the theory seems to goes, in the long run, if you play the odds, you will eventually make money off you betting on fights.

That's my understanding anyways.

However, not everyone has the luxury of betting on fights in the long run. So in the short run, it must be imperative that you pick fights based on who you think will win, not who you think has the wrong odds and has better chance to win that fight than people give credit for, bettors or the bookies.

So, to bet or not to bet on fighters you think will win, or on the betting odds that you think is wrong and thus has a better chance to win than people give credit for, 'tis the question.

What says you Sherbros?

tumblr_mb1h5glX1n1r4c1k8o1_250.gif
 
So the theory goes, if you play the odds in the long run, and you are right the assumption is, you will make profit off that. Since the bookies are putting out odds that aren't true, so theoretically speaking, you need to be picking fighters who can even perform better than the odds that's put out by the oddsmakers.

If the fighter A has a +200 line to win it, the real winning odds could be closer to + 230, but your own odds may stand at + 180.

Of if the fighter B has a -200 to win it, the real winning odds could be closer to - 180, but you may think that fighter has a winning odds of -250.

Or the theory seems to goes, in the long run, if you play the odds, you will eventually make money off you betting on fights.

That's my understanding anyways.

However, not everyone has the luxury of betting on fights in the long run. So in the short run, it must be imperative that you pick fights based on who you think will win, not who you think has the wrong odds and has better chance to win that fight than people give credit for, bettors or the bookies.

So, to bet or not to bet on fighters you think will win, or on the betting odds that you think is wrong and thus has a better chance to win than people give credit for, 'tis the question.

What says you Sherbros?

tumblr_mb1h5glX1n1r4c1k8o1_250.gif





WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
So the theory goes, if you play the odds in the long run, and you are right the assumption is, you will make profit off that. Since the bookies are putting out odds that aren't true, so theoretically speaking, you need to be picking fighters who can even perform better than the odds that's put out by the oddsmakers.

If the fighter A has a +200 line to win it, the real winning odds could be closer to + 230, but your own odds may stand at + 180.

Of if the fighter B has a -200 to win it, the real winning odds could be closer to - 180, but you may think that fighter has a winning odds of -250.

Or the theory seems to goes, in the long run, if you play the odds, you will eventually make money off you betting on fights.

That's my understanding anyways.

However, not everyone has the luxury of betting on fights in the long run. So in the short run, it must be imperative that you pick fights based on who you think will win, not who you think has the wrong odds and has better chance to win that fight than people give credit for, bettors or the bookies.

So, to bet or not to bet on fighters you think will win, or on the betting odds that you think is wrong and thus has a better chance to win than people give credit for, 'tis the question.

What says you Sherbros?

tumblr_mb1h5glX1n1r4c1k8o1_250.gif

Lol your threads are funny. :)

Why wouldn't you have the luxury of betting in the long run? Terminal illness or something?

In any case, you can easily combine BOTH incorrect odds AND a high chance of winning by finding favorites who should be bigger favorites, which is insanely common.

For example, I bet like $1500 on Vincente Luque to beat Woodley. I was incredibly confident that the bet was correct and would win money if repeated thousands of times, AND quite confident that it would win that night. I believe Luque had something like 90% chance of winning that fight.

Also, the margins you gave in your examples are insanely thin. Make no mistake, no matter how many losing MMA bettors there are out there, MMA is the singular sport with the highest potential value. In all team sports I know of, the margins of professional bettors is SUPER thin. In MMA, you can regularly find huge +EV bets. The most important skill in successful MMA betting is knowing when to pass. I think that's where most people go wrong when they try to become more serious about betting, they start searching for marginal value and making a high number of big bets in spots that aren't great. You can wait for the really insane spots, like Luque vs Woodley or Ngannou vs Stipe, and the value is just incredible.
 
Last edited:

Forum statistics

Threads
1,234,253
Messages
55,267,741
Members
174,714
Latest member
cartoonq123
Back
Top