1. The official Sherdog Store is back! Check it out! » Discuss it here! »

Non-MMA Sports Betting Discussion -- 2021 and Beyond

Discussion in 'MMA Betting Discussion' started by Black Paladin, Jul 3, 2018.

  1. PolarBearPaulVarelans Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2018
    Messages:
    4,683
    Likes Received:
    1,104
    You people surprise me.

    I thought it was widely known even by normies that pro football is hilariously corrupt and tons of games are fixed or have point-shaving? Don't get me wrong. There is still some money to be made on betting it. After all, I bet on tennis, and that's ludicriously corrupt/fixed, too.

    But serious gamblers and hardcore fans complaining that a woefully corrupt sport with heavy ties to organized crime is, in fact, corrupt is strange. You just have to accept it as part of the game, or find something else to watch.

    (If anyone is seriously arguing that pro football is NOT corrupt/fixed, I can link you to a bunch of material)
     
  2. chill doggie Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2014
    Messages:
    3,321
    Likes Received:
    2,122
    Location:
    154XnXhoNmWMGdUp1UVZ7ZEegCMpVNNm7J
    $2000 on Warriors +105 ML tonight

    Devin Booker the Suns’ leading scorer is out, GSW did play last night but they won comfortably and hopefully that’s just gonna keep the momentum rolling, Curry is an all-time great and the team is starting to gain traction.
     
    Black Paladin likes this.
  3. chill doggie Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2014
    Messages:
    3,321
    Likes Received:
    2,122
    Location:
    154XnXhoNmWMGdUp1UVZ7ZEegCMpVNNm7J
    what the fuck was that.
     
  4. Monster Meat Purple Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2016
    Messages:
    2,314
    Likes Received:
    371
    Knicks +1, Iowa team total 079.5
     
  5. Black Paladin Funniest Sherdogger, P4P

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Messages:
    7,224
    Likes Received:
    1,645
    Location:
    Akron, Ohio, USA, Earth
    Tampa Bay Downs

    RACE 7
    #5 Dreamin of Seville (8/1)

    Speed of the race. 8F on the turf.
     
  6. Monster Meat Purple Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2016
    Messages:
    2,314
    Likes Received:
    371
    Marquette +10.5 +7.5 live.
     
  7. Monster Meat Purple Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2016
    Messages:
    2,314
    Likes Received:
    371
    Rj barret o16.5 points -120
     
    Black Paladin likes this.
  8. Black Paladin Funniest Sherdogger, P4P

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Messages:
    7,224
    Likes Received:
    1,645
    Location:
    Akron, Ohio, USA, Earth
    I am trying to break an NBA slump.

    Memphis Grizzlies -1

    "One time!"--Anonymous
     
  9. PolarBearPaulVarelans Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2018
    Messages:
    4,683
    Likes Received:
    1,104
    I rarely pre-bet tennis, but an opportunity to fade Serena Williams against a legitimate opponent has me putting 1u down on Danielle Rose Collins at +217.

    Collins made me good money yesterday when I live-bet her at -105 against overrated fraud Karolina Pliskova, and the match against Serena has many parallels. Pliskova and Serena are both among the heaviest servers on the women's tour, and both have tremendously powerful groundstrokes, but in Collins, they were/are facing the rare opponent who can match their power and whose own serving is only slightly worse.

    The problem with Pliskova is that she is one of the most painfully slow players in the entire top 100, struggling to get to balls that aren't very close by. Thus, Collins, herself a mediocre mover, looked like Michael Chang in his prime by comparison. This was the slim difference between winning and losing, as Collins won two tie-breakers 7-6 7-6 in that match.

    While Serena is a relatively slow player now, a far cry from her prime almost 20 years ago, she is still nowhere near as woeful as Pliskova in that regard. This won't be nearly the advantage for Collins as in the Pliskova match. So why am I betting her, anyways?

    Because Serena's conditioning isn't up to snuff. Most of that is her advanced age, 39, but the fact that she always hated and often neglected conditioning during the entirety of her career surely doesn't help matters. Nowadays, she has to take breaks on certain points and even shots within points, not putting her entire strength into them. That was fine against her first two opponents in the tournament, who she could bully at will and won in straight sets. It might very well matter against Collins.

    Sure, Collins is a wild woman, going for crazy winners constantly, and often with poor shot selection. She can look bad at times, and there is certainly a chance that she is off her game, can't puncture Serena's serve, and goes down in straight sets. However, Serena won't be able to comfortably pick and choose when she will hit a powerful groundstroke because Collins will brutally punish her for it constantly, and her conditioning will certainly be tested.

    I probably wouldn't play Collins at evens, but at +217? That's way too high of a plus number.
     
    Black Paladin and svmr_db like this.
  10. stipeszn Green Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2018
    Messages:
    1,103
    Likes Received:
    173
    I'm not trying to argue with you but that sounds very interesting. Can you link an article?
     
  11. PolarBearPaulVarelans Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2018
    Messages:
    4,683
    Likes Received:
    1,104
    So very, very close! Could have hedged when Collins was down to +105 and Serena was only -143 heading into the deciding tie-breaker, but decided to let it ride.

    Still, I feel slightly salty about circumstances I wasn't aware of. Since they canceled the games yesterday due to a commie cough scare, rather than having a full 3rd set, games would instead have a first to 10 tie-breaker if it was tied after 2 sets. Normally, that's an advantage for the underdog because of the high variance. But in this case, I was heavily banking on Serena's lack of endurance, and obviously, playing a 5 minute tie-breaker is a hell of a lot easier than a 40+ minute set.

    So Serena won set 1, predictably slowed down, Collins won set 2, and we got to our tie-breaker. Serena had just enough left to take it.

    Depending on Serena's next opponent and the odds, I might fade her again!
     
    Black Paladin likes this.
  12. Black Paladin Funniest Sherdogger, P4P

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Messages:
    7,224
    Likes Received:
    1,645
    Location:
    Akron, Ohio, USA, Earth
    Tough break on the change in match setup. You had the analysis spot on, though.
     
    PolarBearPaulVarelans likes this.
  13. PolarBearPaulVarelans Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2018
    Messages:
    4,683
    Likes Received:
    1,104
    Heh, as an additional kick in the teeth, Serena withdrew from the tournament after the Collins match with a shoulder injury. There's a good chance she would have retired at some point in a full 3rd set.

    Oh well, I made that money back and then some when I managed to live-bet Osaka at -286 at a certain point in her match against Begu (Osaka was something like -1000 pre-match) and also hit Dan Evans at -175 AFTER winning the first set and on serve in the second against Coric. (I'm still very confused here)

    If anyone is curious, I can write up how I approach tennis live-betting.
     
    Brockstar and Black Paladin like this.
  14. Ryan Kelly Blue Belt

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2017
    Messages:
    810
    Likes Received:
    251
    Yo I’m super curious about this.
     
  15. PuertoRican Gold Belt

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2012
    Messages:
    15,509
    Likes Received:
    1,447
    Super Bowl 2021 bets:

    • $10 on KC longest kickoff return +115
    • $16.50 on T.Brady throws an interception -165
    • $20.25 on 1st coach's challenge = play overturned -135
    • $36 on P.Mahomes longest rush un 11½ / no rush -120
     
  16. PolarBearPaulVarelans Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2018
    Messages:
    4,683
    Likes Received:
    1,104
    The majority of my tennis live-bets (I will go over exceptions at the end) fall into the following category;

    Identify the clearly better player, and when he/she faces some adversity they can overcome, bet them at a much better price than their pre-match odds.

    Sounds really simple, right? Actually, it's not. It's complicated as hell, and I've been refining my approach for months. Seemingly straightforward, general terms like "clearly better" actually become very complex when you try to judge them concretely. Let's look at the three elements of that little sentence and what goes into each one;

    1. A clearly better player

    What we're looking for is a considerable, measurable disparity in player skill. This is, as usual, a lot easier in the women's game than the men's. In the men's game, even players ranked 150th in the world can be extremely dangerous and play great tennis for stretches of time. A player ranked 100th can absolutely upset the 10th ranked player, without the latter even performing that poorly on the day.

    In the women's game, such results are a lot rarer, and the 150th best player freaking sucks.

    Determining player skill is a mix of looking up match results (and potentially stats, although I don't incorporate that yet) and looking at the quality of play. I mentioned rankings, but they're only a very, very rough approximation and not particularly useful. Especially with how wonky they are in the pandemic era, with temporary new rules allowing results from 2019 to be counted, and the unusually small number of tournaments in 2020, you're better looking at recent results.

    When we look at match results, we're trying to get a sense of a player's typical performance, whether they're an older, declining player losing a bunch of a matches and going down the ladder, or on the flipside, a young, improving player rising up the ranks.

    One very important factor to consider too is playing surface, specifically clay or hard courts. (Carpets can be treated similar to hard courts and grass is really rare nowadays) This isn't as huge a distinction as it would have been 20 years ago, since they've slowed down hard courts so much, but it's still important.

    Christian Garin might be ranked 22nd in the world, but on hard courts, he's probably not even in the world's top 100. On clay courts, however, he is a top 10 player. Thus, on hard courts, for instance, it's possible that someone ranked 50th will be the clearly better player over Garin.

    On top of that, you really want to observe the players and what they do well and poorly, their various attributes, etc. I can't really give too much general advice here; I used to play tennis, so I know what to look for, and the sport is a HELL of a lot simpler than MMA. I've started a list of notes similar to what I have for MMA and am constantly editing and adding to it.

    One other important factor to consider is fatigue. How much tennis has each person played? Oftentimes, that may lead to a disparity that wouldn't otherwise be there. For instance, Dominic Thiem would normally be favored against Diego Schwartzman, even on clay. However, at last year's French Open, when they met in the quarterfinal, Thiem was absolutely exhausted late in the 4th set, a product of not only that match, but the tough matches he had previously in the tournament AND all the tennis and emotion he had exerted at the US Open he had recently won. He could still beat a ton of guys simply running on fumes, but not a legitimate top-10 talent with tremendous conditioning like Schwartzman, who won the 4th set tie-breaker and then destroyed him in the 5th and final set.

    Keep in mind too that the oddsmakers aren't completely dumb. Jannik Sinner is the best young prospect in tennis and while he is ranked 36th, the oddsmakers treat him like a borderline top 10. And honestly, they're probably not wrong to do so. Similarly, Sebastian Korda is the second-best young prospect in tennis and despite being ranked 119th at Delray Beach, was at even odds against 35th-ranked Huber Hurkacz in the finals. Considering he had beaten the 52th, 25th, and 74th best guys in the world to get there, this was also justified.

    2. Adversity they can overcome

    Firstly, we have to consider what kind of deficit can reasonably be overcome, and secondly, what was the cause of this deficit to begin with?

    Adversity I really love to see is an early break in the first set. Maybe the better player hasn't warmed up yet. Maybe he hasn't adjusted to his opponent's game. Maybe he lost it on purpose because he is point-shaving and/or partially fixing the match. (There is a TON of this in tennis, which is why I positively refuse to ever pre-bet Challengers and ITF matches and will only live-bet them)

    Whatever the reason, oftentimes this might afford a great opportunity, depending on the numbers.

    Of course, a weaker player simply keeping pace deep into the 1st set and/or getting a break opportunity or two can cause the odds to improve a lot. For instance, I mentioned betting Osaka against a very tired Begu (three straight matches that came down to the wire in the 3rd set) at -286 when she was about -1000 pre-match. All that was required was for the 1st set to be 4-4, with Osaka serving at 15-40. Now sure, Begu had 2 break point chances and would have served for the set, but the odds were still too good to pass up considering how clearly better Osaka is and how woefully tired Begu was. (which manifested itself later in the 1st set and a 2nd set she lost 6-1)

    Even dropping the first set might not be too big a deal. Osaka lost the first set to Katie Boulter, ranked 371st in the world. Now, Boulter is better than that rating, as she was 85th prior to an injury that caused an absence late in 2019 (if you don't play tournaments your ranking drops), and had beaten the 47th-ranked Coco Gauff in a tense 3-setter a round earlier.

    But seriously, come on. Osaka should wipe the fucking floor with Boulter. The difference in power alone is laughable. Thus, Osaka being something like -150 after dropping the first set was still great odds, despite how crazy it looked.

    Of course, this isn't fool-proof. Earlier in the tournament, Sabalenka lost the first to Kaia Kanepi, ranked 93rd in the world. Now, Kanepi used to be as high as 15th in the world, but that was almost a whole decade ago, and she is now 35 years old and plagued with injuries. Plus, Sabalenka dropping sets badly happens from time to time and normally she recovers easily to crush the opponent. So getting her at +100 felt like a gift.

    And indeed, Sabalenka crushed Kanepi 6-2 in the 2nd set and was something like a -550 favorite to start the 3rd. There, however, Kanepi played one of the best sets of tennis in her entire career. Sabalenka didn't even play that bad, but Kanepi just demolished her 6-1. Honestly, I doubt more than 5 female tennis players, and possibly far less than that could have beaten Kanepi with their average level of 3rd set play. These things happen!

    Also, when the "weaker" player is up a set and a break in a best of 3, it's time to give it up. Yes, occasionally you will get spectacular comebacks. For instance, Sofia Kenin was down a set and a break to Jessica Pegula and was something like +1000 at that point, and went on to record an incredible comeback victory, but you're going to lose 15 such bets for every one that you win.

    One thing that helps on deciding whether to bet is how the players got there. Ideally, you want it to be the better player performing below their level AND the weaker player playing out of their mind. That way, if only one regresses towards the mean, you get the result you want. Otherwise, if it's just the better player being awful, then it's possible the weaker player can raise their level. And if it's the weaker player being out of their mind, what if the better player has a poor set?

    Also, you want to look at things like unsustainable success and hitting tons of low-percentage shots.

    If a player is going for crazy cross-court forehand winners into the service box and keeps hitting them time and again, that's a great sign. There's just no way to do so consistently. If they're getting in 80% of their first serves, another great sign, as that's also an unsustainable percentage.

    On the flipside, it also helps to avoid betting against certain "weaker" players. Ekaterina Alexandrova is 33rd in the world and was recently facing the world #2, Simona Halep. I had little desire to bet on Halep after Alexandrova won the 1st because she is a ridiculously high-variance player, going for crazy winners on evey point, but is also fully capable of keeping this up for the duration of a full match. Of course, she struggles to do it for the duration of a tournament, but when she is on, she can blow much higher-rated opponents off the court, which is exactly what happened to Halep.

    3. Much better price

    This really depends on the situation in question and the disparity in skill. In general, I avoid anything that isn't -500 or better, but really, -2XX to small plus odds is the sweet spot. A quick bit of arithmetic will tell you that if two evenly matched opponents are playing, and A wins set 1, then B has 1/2*1/2 =1/4 chance of winning the next two and the match, or +300. The significance of breaks is more tricky and depends on what point in the set they occur and how good each player serves and returns.

    Other types of tennis live-bets-

    1. Over-hyped "name" players.

    Players who, due to fame or past great accomplishments, get way more respect than they deserve. Serena Williams nowadays being an example. Andy Murray when he was initially coming off hip replacement surgery was another example. Coco Gauff is presently a little bit of an example, but not as prominent.

    These are rare cases, since few players become so hyped, and most deserve it (I mentioned Sinner and Korda above, and Djokovic and Nadal are STILL worthy of their lofty odds), but they're good opportunities for a while, until people catch on.

    2. Very evenly-matched players where one guy is +120 or more for inexplicable reasons.

    More a pre-bet, but it occasionally seeps into live-bets, too. Essentially, most tennis capping I've read online is really bad, and a lot of their "reasoning" largely irrelevant to the results of a tennis match. Yet, it effects odds from players and oddsmakers alike. If you're scratching your head about why the +120 player isn't at least evens and know the sport, trust your read and play him/her.

    3. Weaker player is close in skill, is up a set, or up a set down a break, beginning of the 3rd, beginning of the tiebreaker, but isn't properly respected.

    Maybe, as you watch the match, you realize the two players are actually very close in skill. Not exactly equal, but far more level than you thought. Yet, the live odds don't reflect this at all. Maybe, when the weaker player has won a set and is down a break early in the second, he is still available at plus numbers. Definitely worth playing them in such cases.

    This becomes even better if it's early in set 3 and either both players or the better player are clearly fatigued. It becomes very close to a 50/50 then, but that's not always reflected. Tie-breaks can be fun, too.

    A great example of this, which I whiffed on betting because I was focused on the UFC card, was the match between Jennifer Brady and Ann Li. Li was playing on a very close level to the better Brady, with Li winning the 1st set in a tie-breaker, 7-6, and Brady winning the 2nd in a tie-breaker, 6-7. It doesn't get any closer!

    Yet, reflecting Brady's pre-match odds of something like -280, the deciding tie-break of first to 10 points had Brady as -200 to Li's +150! Sure, Brady is maybe a little bit better, but how prominent is that even going to be over so few points, when we've seen such parity over so many points?

    Li at +150 would have been a great play, and I sure wish I had made it.

    Anywho, there are a lot more details, but hope this helps.
     
  17. Black Paladin Funniest Sherdogger, P4P

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Messages:
    7,224
    Likes Received:
    1,645
    Location:
    Akron, Ohio, USA, Earth
    <JackieThumbsUp>

    I don't throw up the Jackie haphazardly. Good stuff.
     
    PolarBearPaulVarelans likes this.
  18. Monster Meat Purple Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2016
    Messages:
    2,314
    Likes Received:
    371
    Super bowl!
    Mgm free $10/110 Kelce mvp +1000
    free $10/$22.50 kelce and hill to score

    $224/$201.60 Chiefs +3.5 Over 49.5
    Sh free $150/$150 Mahomes MVP
    Bet ⭐️ chiefs u 3.5 punts $84/$50.40
    Bet kelce td $75/$50.25
     
    PuertoRican likes this.
  19. PuertoRican Gold Belt

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2012
    Messages:
    15,509
    Likes Received:
    1,447
    I'm still rolling with these bets.

    I might bet the losing team if they are losing by a big number and can get a good point spread on them. I think whoever wins will win by less than 7 points.
     
    svmr_db likes this.
  20. Kamais_Ookin Red Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2019
    Messages:
    7,518
    Likes Received:
    2,055
    was gonna say my bucs ml looking very gud but then chiefs get 4th down stop preventing 2nd td..
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.