Some thoughts about betting on tennis (or any other sport), need your opinion

zec · 03-15-14, 08:21 AM

I have thought about that in the past but concluded (correctly or not, I don't know) that their opening margins probably cover this and therefore eliminate your earnings.

tipsadontlikehim · 03-15-14, 08:37 AM

Originally posted by zec

I have thought about that in the past but concluded (correctly or not, I don't know) that their opening margins probably cover this and therefore eliminate your earnings.

thanks for your answer zec, i want to try that but betting air to start, i'll take an Excel sheet and bet air to see the results after 100 or 200 bets.
Do you know a website where you can check opening odds?

MagicDiceFlow · 03-15-14, 09:08 AM

Betting on line movements in tennis don't pay off in the long run. From my years of betting, I've tried every style of betting imaginable and the one consistent style is to due you due diligence, pick a side and roll with it. It makes more sense in the long run.

There will be the few times where you play on a line move and it's right and those times stay in your mind longer than the many of times when it's incorrect. Bookies are usually correct more on the smaller tournaments but on the large ones like a Masters 1000 or a Slam, they are normally wrong more than 50% of the times on their lines and there's value to be found in these tournaments.

Because tennis betting lines move drastically, the most successful bettors aren't always the ones that pick the right side, they're the ones that consistently grab the best numbers before the public gets to it.

BOL

beefcake · 03-15-14, 09:26 AM

Look into the challenger markets tipsa.I noticed that Pinny has posted lines for these this year.I dont know why they have started.Maybe a way to make more profit.Many more option with the smaller tourneys now with 5 dimes,bovada and now pinny.Possibly a scalp here and there with margins if you look close.I dont have the time alot to back test. But betting the home country unseeded was profitable last year on the minor circuit and sometimes the qualifer go far in these.Its easier to get a math edge on the challengers due to the fact every tourney is 32 players, which means there are always 4 wildcards and 4 qualies.no byes..

tipsadontlikehim · 03-15-14, 09:42 AM

thanks guys. By any chance is there any website where you can check past odds and how they evolved on the famous bookies?

beefcake · 03-15-14, 09:44 AM

I use this one for challenger odds..not sure on movement though...http://www.infobetting.com/tennis/home-t-1-2.htm

tipsadontlikehim · 03-15-14, 10:04 AM

thanks mate

Hardcoar · 03-15-14, 10:17 AM

I only have this to say: Extremely rarely does a bookmaker's opening line anywhere near represent the actual probabilities, despite margins. Extremely commonly, conversely, does a bookmaker's closing line anywhere near represent the actual probabilities.

Bookies are nearly always wrong. The market – which they adapt to – is nearly always right.

poet · 03-15-14, 11:13 AM

Originally posted by Hardcoar

I only have this to say: Extremely rarely does a bookmaker's opening line anywhere near represent the actual probabilities, despite margins. Extremely commonly, conversely, does a bookmaker's closing line anywhere near represent the actual probabilities.

Bookies are nearly always wrong. The market – which they adapt to – is nearly always right.

I tend to agree with this, HC. And I think it applies to other sports as well.

suicidekings · 03-15-14, 05:37 PM

When a book is setting a line for a particular matchup, they start with a number based on statistical averages of the teams/players. But from that point, they make adjustments that isolate specific advantages/disadvantages for each team/player, current form, rest, weather, homecourt advantage (highly variable), and many other factors to tweak it into a more accurate representation of the matchup. Call it the best they can do to approximate the outcome (bearing in mind many of the factors are subjective) and it's a coinflip for a bettor.

Then, sometimes, they make further adjustments based on how the market is likely to receive the price they've set, slanting it one way to account for the relative popularity of the two sides, and attempting to roughly balance the action on each side. It's their business to play the middle and force the bettor to take on the majority of the risk more often than not. This probably makes up 20-30% of games. Small value available.

Then, even less often, they make the decision that enough factors are pointing heavily to one side that they make a further adjustment to the line to make the opposite side more attractive to bettors and they're hoping to get imbalanced action on the game. This movement may or may not be in the same direction as the adjustment for public opinion. Call this 5% of games, with the greatest opportunity to profit if you recognize them for what they are.

These adjustments are where the books really make their money, and even the best handicappers won't agree on how all the available games fall into the respective categories before the matches are played. After the fact, stats can be very misleading as variance/luck will likely play their part in changing a few outcomes from expectations. I'd say opening lines are roughly correct 60% of the time across all sports, with the closing line being a bit better than this (Call it 70%), but it would vary a great deal from sport to sport.

suicidekings · 03-15-14, 05:47 PM

Also related to this, the behaviour of the online betting markets has changed over the years as bettors innovate and books adjust to close off weaknesses in their methods. The whole industry has changed with fewer large books handling the action that used to be split across dozens of smaller books. There's also a more blurred divide between smart & public money with thousands of new bettors entering the market with a more sophisticated strategy than the average fan, which means lines get bet earlier and hammered into shape faster. Betting syndicates play public sides early, sometimes only to play them back the other way later, and in general a much smaller number of bettors have more of an impact while the public has less influence.

So it's tough to make any assumptions for a general model like you're suggesting. Better to focus on a smaller subset.

Hardcoar · 03-15-14, 06:06 PM

Originally posted by poet

I tend to agree with this, HC. And I think it applies to other sports as well.

Generally speaking it absolutely applies to every betting-market there is, but obviously to some far more than others.

suicidekings · 03-15-14, 06:13 PM

Originally posted by Hardcoar

I only have this to say: Extremely rarely does a bookmaker's opening line anywhere near represent the actual probabilities, despite margins. Extremely commonly, conversely, does a bookmaker's closing line anywhere near represent the actual probabilities.

Bookies are nearly always wrong. The market – which they adapt to – is nearly always right.

In the current marketplace, bookies don't really need to be extremely accurate with the opener. They release a low limit line to start in roughly the correct range and allow it to get hammered into shape before raising limits. There's no shortage of early money trying to catch value now. Less work for them per game, allowing a broader scope of bets offered.

Hardcoar · 03-15-14, 06:42 PM

Indeed.

tipsadontlikehim · 03-16-14, 03:31 AM

i understand... so i assume the best way to make money is obviously a great knowledge but betting when the odds open
that's actually what i was doing ages ago on tennis, wait for lines to open.
never understood bettors waiting 1 hour before the match to bet (well it can still be an interesting strategy in case of a public bet on one player or one team)