Is randomly betting underdogs in Hockey a good idea?

**donjuan** · 10-12-10, 05:47 AM

Hockey goals are scored one at a time. Baseball runs are not. Also, baseball has higher totals.

**HedgeHog** · 10-12-10, 06:53 AM

A significant amount of games are decided by 1 goal, so laying 1.5 is not as advantageous as you might think.

**Flying Dutchman** · 10-12-10, 07:13 AM

Do yourself a favor. Bet in SBR's sportsbook with points earned rather than in a "real" book...

...when your scheme works there, then you might have something, and at no real cost to you other than time spent.

**TakeIt** · 10-12-10, 10:42 AM

Originally posted by dynamite140

I watch NFL, NBA and some MLB. I don't know anything about hockey nor its players. Few years ago i lost a ton of money betting baseball by laying heavy chalk on games and worst of all chasing bets. I use to bet really public plays etc and just went large on them and lost a bunch.

What intrigues me about NHL like MLB is you are betting mostly on the moneyline unlike nfl or nba where you bet on the spread where the juice is normally 10 percent max. I am wondering, would it be a disaster plan betting on underdogs or favorites on the puckline with plus money? But i won't just blindly bet an underdog. I would bet the underdog if say the public is getting lot of love. Also, i notice that many -225 favorites on the ML in hockey gets you at around +115 to +130 on the puckline. Is there a reason why Puckline prices seem to be higher than baseball prices? Also, i find it weird how a -167 ML favorite is around +170 on the puckline when usually its +120 or so on the RL in baseball.

there is no system that works. the books have all angles covered. betting sports and winning is the toughest thing you will ever do. those that do win spend 60 hours a week studying it...and if they hit 55% long term they are doing well.

treat it as a hobby and bet points or bet small. every possible thing you can think of has been tried.

nothing works in a vacuum.

**Dark Horse** · 10-12-10, 10:51 AM

Blindly betting dogs or faves is never a good idea. But 'blindly' betting against the public can be profitable.

Page Not Found - Sports Insights

http://sportsinsights.com/sports-betting-articles/nhl/bet-against-public/2010-season-review.aspx

**tripleblack1705** · 10-13-10, 11:29 AM

I prefer to bet the SPREAD on the heavy home favorites. These teams usually win at home and more often than not they get the empty netter to win by at least 2. So tonight Wash, Pit, and Chi are the plays.

**Jaug** · 10-13-10, 04:05 PM

Originally posted by Dark Horse

Blindly betting dogs or faves is never a good idea. But 'blindly' betting against the public can be profitable.

http://sportsinsights.com/sports-bet...on-review.aspx

This is a good answer imo.

**LtDementia** · 10-13-10, 07:27 PM

Originally posted by tripleblack1705

I prefer to bet the SPREAD on the heavy home favorites. These teams usually win at home and more often than not they get the empty netter to win by at least 2. So tonight Wash, Pit, and Chi are the plays.

Do you have a lower limit? The smallest of the 3 is the Pens at about -160.

M

**sharpcat** · 10-13-10, 08:12 PM

Originally posted by dynamite140

I watch NFL, NBA and some MLB. I don't know anything about hockey nor its players. Few years ago i lost a ton of money betting baseball by laying heavy chalk on games and worst of all chasing bets. I use to bet really public plays etc and just went large on them and lost a bunch.

What intrigues me about NHL like MLB is you are betting mostly on the moneyline unlike nfl or nba where you bet on the spread where the juice is normally 10 percent max. I am wondering, would it be a disaster plan betting on underdogs or favorites on the puckline with plus money? But i won't just blindly bet an underdog. I would bet the underdog if say the public is getting lot of love. Also, i notice that many -225 favorites on the ML in hockey gets you at around +115 to +130 on the puckline. Is there a reason why Puckline prices seem to be higher than baseball prices? Also, i find it weird how a -167 ML favorite is around +170 on the puckline when usually its +120 or so on the RL in baseball.

I would add my input here but I think it would serve you better to recommend that you learn to do some research yourself for a change rather than just accept various answers to your questions.

**Sawyer** · 12-12-10, 08:54 AM

Don't bet on all dogs blindly. You have to pick your spots.

**icecapper** · 12-13-10, 10:57 PM

Usually a few dogs worth looking at every night. Blind never a good idea.

**Data** · 12-13-10, 11:57 PM

Is randomly betting underdogs in Hockey a good idea?

Yes, it is certainly better than drinking.

**BallU13** · 12-14-10, 02:49 AM

Couldn't hurt really I suppose.

**JOHON8** · 12-14-10, 04:06 AM

Whether you bet or not, you have to have an "anti-public mentality", you can't blindly bet all dogs, and you can't pick all the favorites. You have to think about where the value lies and where the books are taking advantage of a team that shouldn't be that big of an underdog.

**Whitefin14** · 12-16-10, 11:36 AM

Yea, no heavy favorites in hockey usually

**Sawyer** · 12-16-10, 12:05 PM

Is randomly betting underdogs in Hockey a good idea?

No. You should handicap games and pick your spots.

**big0mar** · 12-16-10, 12:17 PM

Betting anything blindly is a terrible idea.

**Ruifgalmeida** · 12-16-10, 02:31 PM

bet blindly agaisnt the oilers and islanders and you will be fine

**DeeVeeOSs** · 12-16-10, 02:37 PM

I have NYI to win today just like I had NJD to win yesterday.
The big dog wins in the NHL are statistically impossible.
So GF/GA/SV% all of that is out the window.
It an upset, I'm not sure what causes them.
But like buddy said, the bookies do.
---
Today, there is somewhere around 60% action on ANA.
Now they are Powerrated(Fair Valued at about -220.)
They're being sold for -120.
This is a tip of the hand saying that NYI has *abnormally* good chances in this contest.
Work in how ANA doesn't like away games.
Work in how Selanne might not show.
Work in the streak synergy (6 straight for ANA, 3 straight for NJD)
Carry the 2 remainder the 4, and boom, you have NYI as plausible.
Oh yeah, also the most deadly factor in NHL upsets?
*The COMFORT factor.*
You were saying you'd wait for public and then jump on it like a transit bus?
And you would lose?
How many of those were top 10 vs bottom 10 teams?
Almost all of them huh?
Last year WSH was laid out by Carolina, repeatedly, of all teams.
It's my belief that this "COMFORT psyche" plays a vicious role.
Indeed, to the point where if WSH had played BOS or LAK they'd have won.
But due to look-over....
Also, in baseball, you've got pitchers that give up homeruns in the 1st inning.
OFTEN they throw near perfect until the 7th inning when they're pulled.
They decide this isn't how they want to play and most of all they're embarrassed.
So in games where the pitcher gave a up a HR in the 1st, it's common to see that team win.
---
Same with hockey right?
Several times this year I've seen team come back 3 and 4 goals.
Last night in the FLA game was one example, and I forget the other, TOR vs WSH !!!

5-4 the other day right?
---
You see that?
Not only are EARLY multiple goals a trigger to RELAX for one team, but they're a trigger to GET HYPER for the other. Hello synergy.
And in sports, there is NOTHING worse than losing your hunger. So if you think you're safe in the first, and have it won, with a 3-0 lead, you are officially your hardest opponent out there.
Same with baseball. You hit a homer early in, you feel like it's all yours. There will be more to follow and it's all but official.
----
So 2 biggest things about dogs in the NHL?
1.Watch that moneyline. When it doesn't make sense it doesn't make sense.
But when it does, it does.
---
2.Watch that comfort psyche. What's good is bad sometimes.
There is sex, like the sexy kind.
Then there is sex, the kind you need to see a doctor for afterwards.
Same with so-called "favorites" and "top 5s".

**DeeVeeOSs** · 12-16-10, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by tripleblack1705

I prefer to bet the SPREAD on the heavy home favorites. These teams usually win at home and more often than not they get the empty netter to win by at least 2. So tonight Wash, Pit, and Chi are the plays.

Let's tally up.

Loss, PIT 1-4. (Are PIT even favorite's at home?
Loss, WSH 1-2.
Loss. CHI 3-4.

Hmm.

So nothing's a mistake unless we learn from it right?

What can we gather about this?

Let's brain storm....

WSH in OT?

I think that ANA got a taste early and realized they weren't playing a peak condition WSH. Let's face it, WSH knows how to bomb. I mean 8 hasn't been puling weight lately. But what actually surprises me here is that ANA is not really a road team at all. WSH on the other hand are HUGE at home. I wouldn't doubt if WSH was comfortable with the win before they even got started.

I think ANA got a taste early on of blood in the water and they realized straight away that if they put in a fair 3 hours, they'd have every chance at the win.

Sure enough, they had just enough with the OT win.

OK. Now you do CHI cuz I have a about 2 pages on where PIT was a non-starter.

**DeeVeeOSs** · 12-16-10, 07:53 PM

NJD yesterday and NYI is up 3-0 at the 1st today.

**sosoon** · 12-18-10, 08:25 PM

Hockey is about keeping momentum win after win. Don't bet on underdog if the matchup does not feel right or big injuries hurt favorite team.

**DeeVeeOSs** · 12-18-10, 10:56 PM

With proper dogs, the ones that win, the -200, it will ALWAYS feel awkward.
If you can't get past that then don't bet dogs.
Dogs that 'feel right' or 'make sense' will bankrupt you faster than me and my Winny pump.
Bookies aren't stupid.
That's the bottom line.

**bozeman** · 12-31-10, 02:24 AM

play random games, lose systematically money - that's how gambling works, only most gamblers claim they don't play random games, they think they got a system that works. Only few out of 1000s have got the system that works. Own observations

**DeeVeeOSs** · 12-31-10, 10:00 AM

Agreed.
The ONLY thing that determines a winner, is factors.
No matter what they may be.
Bad reffing, a fixed league, a dive, an excellent forward, an unbreachable goalie, coming off road games, playing @home, playing @away, rink conditions home/away, personal life, 6 games in 8 days, coming off 4 days rest, b2b, you name it. These are ALL factors, and it's solely what the final score is composed of. Lucky bounces? Can't be measured one way or another so they're non factors.

The point is simple.

If you bet randomly, then you have to be betting against the contributing factors that will cause one team to win and the other to lose.
And if you say, "fine, that's a 50/50 proposition so I should come out ahead if I'm getting paid 2.01, then I'll say 2 things:
a) to get 2.01 back is not even money. 1.91 is even odds. Even value. Meaning 1.92 SHOULD be a win but it's not because you're giving up $1 and getting back 0.92 cents. So neither is 1.93, 1.94, 1.95 etc.
You need to actually give up * 9 Percentiles * before you start breaking even.
So you're not proposing a 50/50 proposition. You're proposing a 41-59 win percentage.

b) On top of the bookie tax we just analyzed, there is also the fact that since it's 'random', you could get a return value of say 60-40% (win 6 out of 10 games) by random luck, and get your 1% profit over the long haul.
But is that worth the risk? Because all things equal, that could exactly as easily go the OTHER way and the random luck can turn it to 31-69%.

So to sum up, if we're talking about random betting, there is EXACTLY as much chance of you increasing your earnings by +1%, as there is of you taking a -19% plunge.

Remember, this entails teams priced at 2.01 and under.

So I'm lazy to math it out, but you could try with games who's value is at least above 2.11 (thereby eliminating the tax) and then also an additional 10% based on the way that random luck will decide it. (flip a penny 100 times and make heads + and the tails -) or run a random number generator for a year, study the flux, chop it in half and go with that. Or whatever. But what we find is, and what my point is, trying to assess what "random" will do is an awkward proposition.

You NEED that value to make sense of which games you should bet on.

But if you're happy that it's 'random', and that it will be 4-6 or 6-4, then your value is ANY GAMES ABOVE 2.21 or equal to 2.21.

Keep in mind, a 2.75 doesn't make sense to bet because now the risk of payback and the value of the game has become that much further from a 50/50 proposition. Frankly, 2.21 is already pushing that. I know there is a salary cap, but still.

So if you're going to 'commando', you want to find games @2.21 - 2.29. I'd say that's your honey hole.

I also think, however, that the books aren't generally 30 points out of order.
Or if we assume that random betting turns out 5-5, then 20 points out of order.
That's one hell of a deficit to overcome yeah?

No. If you gamble dogs or favorites, you're better off knowing what you're doing before you wager.

If the factors don't match the outcome? (like me)
Then bet micro-bets and take your time to understand what's going on.

No business borrowed 250,000 from the bank to open shop, and then started making profit the first day.
Let that be a model for your gambling.
With enough time, sports can be understood. This is not a roulette wheel. This is not video slots.
So the longer you're in it, the more you'll grow (with hard work).

The trick? Don't try to make money now.
If you do that, then in 2 years, when you WOULD have been starting to learn how to profit,
you'll instead be on the corner with a bottle of wine.

Betting randomly is something everyone thinks about...it's only natural after bad burns...but then of course, we quickly move on.