I heard this a few times from people but not sure if anyone have heard of this. But if there is a game and its a tough decision for you on the side or total, would you agree taking the underdog or under is a good idea?
-
-
If you were flipping a coin and its a tough decision for you on which side to take, would you agree taking tails is a good idea?Comment -
Dynamite, No i do not agree.Comment -
I have never heard this and I have no idea if this is a good idea. However, I would not be so quick to dismiss it as this may be a good start to learning something. Try it with small money at first. Chances are that you will probably wind up approx 50-50. However, you may find that when you have a tough decision, for some reason (and you may not be able to identify that reason) those games lean toward the dog or the under winning (or vice versa) which may or may not be variance.
Think of it this way, there are many people that try to select the "winner" but a lot of those people would have probably been better off betting the opposite of their selection because by making that selection along with many others has probably made the odds -EV. Of course this is only scratching the surface but I hope you get the idea. You can test this with very little money and may actually learn something very valuable toward making profitable wagers. At the very least you should learn whether what you heard is a good idea or not.
Good luck. Joe.Comment -
When in doubt, stay away: first ruleComment -
Given the book's edge, why would you do this (unless you have a gambling problem)?
Action Jacksons are doomed to die poor and abandoned.
Get help.Comment -
Being marginally more comfortable with or inclined towards dogs and unders is a good heuristic. Playing them for that reason alone is nuts.Comment -
Well stated.
I think the assumption that the value is in the Dog and in the Under is a good starting point for an analysis - you then go from there to challenge that assumption - to see if it is true or false.
If you are going to bet a Fav or an Over - you need good reasons to do so - and the bigger the Fav or the higher the Total - the better those reasons need to be.Comment -
Fundamentally, in the past the idea was actually sound with respect to a vigless situation. However from my testing you simply lose slower if you were to do this blindly across the board. (e.g. in the NFL from 1996-2007, home dogs were 51.82% (470-437-54) which is less than 52.4%; I didn't look at all dogs). Interestingly if you look from 2000-2007 it is 310-305-34 (appears to be approaching 50%). I don't feel like calculating anything further so I'll leave it up to you to determine if it is statistically signficant.
In short, you still bleed; however, you leak more slowly.
That said...
Maybe perform your model's backtesting and separate the outputs into two/four sets = namely, when the model suggests you play the dog/under or the favorite/over. See if there is any difference in the results. Really there shouldn't be any difference, but you may find some interesting things by doing this.
By the way, there really shouldn't be any "tough decisions" unless you're gambling. If you've done your homework and quantified your edge, then a play is simply a bet or not a bet. I usually place my bets and then go do something relaxing like go jogging or go to the beach. It helps me live longer
Comment -
In that case why not arb with another book and get very close to EV guaranteed?Comment
