| ||LinkBack||Thread Tools|
TENNIS - I think I've been using the wrong strategy
For many of my tennis selections I have taken underdogs and have come to the result of near break-even.
I have been doing some research and have realised that taking the underdogs really makes it harder for you to make a profit betting tennis.
betting underdogs blindly and you will have a negative yield of say 15%.
betting faves blindly and you will have a negative yield of say 5%.
I don't think anyone in their right might bets the underdog in every single match, so that stat isn't really that relative.
Also, what are you basing your numbers on?
I think tennis is one of the easiest sports to make money on. Tennis bettors have a huge advantage over other sports bettors in that we can get virtually juice free wagering on every match if you are selective and have enough outs. I agree that if I used only one book for all my tennis bets, that there would be a huge negative return betting blindly, but I think every serious tennis bettor uses a mimimum of 5 books. Furthermore, with the volume at Betfair these days, it makes line shopping even easier.
in my early tennis betting career i have found that betting dogs is best on clay bc it is an equalizer. have been betting dogs on grass and it is not the right way to go. the oddsmakers are very accurate because the matches are more predictable.
Generally,betting dogs in the slams is pretty tough.The bigger the tourney,the better the focus for the better player.Motivation is always a factor in the lesser tournaments.Just ask Kafelnikov!
You can apply a much more agressive money management if betting favourites worth betting on(ie,there always gotta be value).Given the same value-a big favourite is always the better choice because of the binomial distribution over time,which means you can afford to be much more agressive with the stakes.You just ainīt gonna be bothered with the same lenght in the losingstreaks.
Generally-betting the RIGHT favourites in Tennis is the way to go IMO.That doesnīt mean I ainīt gonna bet on Bjorkman though...
i believe the favourite-longshot bias exists in tennis as well from the sparse smattering
of studies that i have perused. Mugs generally like to play "beat the favourite",so the
bookies takes advantage without taking much downside risk by lowering the longshot
odds from true odds(what the bookie conjectures) more than he would the favourite.
I am acquainted with a few people who have passed on to me a (so far,as always)profitable
method for betting heavy Jollies of @1.25 (-400 in americanese) or greater.
there are a number of cognitive,behavioural,heuristic,egotistical reasons why
this bias crops up in a number of different sport betting markets.
a search around the web might turn up a number of these views.