Sports betting systems don’t work. That is to say, sports betting systems that are openly for sale on the internet won’t work in the long term. The problem is that if a system is successful, it will attract a lot of users. When too many people start using a system, the sportsbooks adjust their lines to compensate for the predictive effect of the system rendering it useless. For example, if a system recommends betting on the Celtics -9 over the Knicks, the line will quickly move to Celtics -10 as the users of the system start piling on their wagers, rendering the initial pick obsolete. This may be extremely obvious to some people, but based on the number of sports betting systems I see advertised regularly, it seems that the message hasn’t gotten out to everyone quite yet.

This is not to say that sports betting systems can never work. The fun part about sports betting is that, unlike casino gambling, there is no deterministic advantage for the house. Like the stock market, in sports betting smart money takes dumb money. The issue is that if you did have a successful sports betting system, you would really have very little incentive to share it with anyone else. A person could make more money off of the successful sports picks generated by their system than they would selling those picks and, eventually, killing the goose that laid the golden egg. Again, I know this seems painfully obvious to many, but it’s news to some and a message worth repeating.

This idea was nicely summed up on a recent thread over at Black Hat SEO:

Bookies change the odds (or point spread) based on the amount bet. If your system works and you sell it, and people make money on it regularly, they will bet more and more until you start shifting the odds and it will no longer work. If it really works you are much better off if you keep it a secret and use it to bet yourself.

The following video from our youtube friend parlayhelp does a great job of explaining the games played by purveyors of sports betting systems and why the potential buyer should beware:

Nice work guys!

March Madness is upon us and the time is right for office pools, buzzer beaters and cinderella stories. I’ve scoured the web for the absolute best final four betting tips and strategies on earth and summarized them below for your wagering pleasure. Good luck and enjoy!

1. If possible, buy multiple pool entries and select a different champion for each entry.

   This seems pretty basic but it may not be obvious to most people just how greatly this strategy can benefit your odds of winning. Most pools use top-heavy scoring which greatly rewards entries that pick the championship team correctly. If you don’t get this one right, you’re almost certain not to win the pool.

2. If two teams are about equally likely to win the national championship and one of them is the local favorite, then go against the local favorite.

   This is mainly for office pool betting and it makes sense intuitively. Everybody likes to root for the hometown team, especially casual gamblers who only bet once a year. The pool entries will reflect this bias. Bet against the grain and you’ll be likely to jump to the top of the leader board if the local team gets knocked out.

3. Don’t fall into the fallacy that last year’s spoilers will be able to pull an upset again this year.

   You watched last year in amazement as an underdog beat the odds to defeat a heavily favored rival early in the tournament. Since it’s a good idea to pick some first round upsets, why not pick this team to do it again this year? Unfortunately the rest of your pool particpants will also remember this thrill-ride of a game and bet according to the same logic, consequently the benefit of getting a win with this pick is greatly reduced. In addition, other teams will be better prepared for the cinderella squad this year, no longer taking them lightly and hence preventing another upset.

4. Pick your tournament winner first and work backwards.

   Most people start filling out their sheets with the first round. This is a bad idea. By starting at the top and working backwards you reduce local biases related to the different regions – for example you may be more knowledgable about teams in your region and be swayed to focus on those matchups too heavily. Again, with the top-heavy scoring system, it’s more important to be accurate on your later picks than the first rounders.

5. Check the road record – pick teams that do well on the road.

   For most teams, every tournament game they play will be a road game. Look for teams that have had a favorable road record during the regular season. In a toss-up game where teams are evenly matched in all other respects, this can be a good criteria to decide which team to pick.

6. Use some non-mainstream ratings sites to help you chose.

   Don’t immediately head over to espn.com or look at the AP Ratings to decide your picks. Instead, check out some reputable ratings sites that are slightly off the beaten path. Some good examples are Massey Ratings and Greenfield’s Ratings.

7. Don’t over analyze your picks.

   This is supposed to be fun. Spend too much time on research and number crunching and you may miss that fact, especially when Debby from accounting walks away with the big prize…

Good luck!

I stumbled across this plain looking site with a funny name and was amazed at the wealth of advice it had on betting the NCAA tournament. On top of that, the owner of the site is advising anyone who benefits from the strategies posted there make a donation to charity rather than pay it to him! From Poologic.com:

“$250,000. That is my minimum estimate for profits made by the users of this site, assuming they played the recommended multiple-entry strategy. Please donate some of your winnings to the Jimmy V Foundation for Cancer Research”

Poologic Web Page

Updated March 03, 2007 @ 12:22 AM: It turns out that the guy behind this site is a professor at Yale and an expert in probability modeling (Update: the site was actually created by Tom Adams, Kaplan joined him later). You’d think such a smart guy could come up with a better domain name (I kid – I finally figured out that he was going for the pronunciation of “pool-logic” rather than “poo-logic”). More details in this Inc. Magazine article:

Edward Kaplan, a Yale School of Management professor, is an expert in operations systems, probability modeling, and mathematics. As an academic, Kaplan models the spread of AIDS and other diseases for public policy analysis, but in his spare time, set out to find a way to win his NCAA office pool. “We used to enter these things for fun, and always for bragging rights, [but] we would always lose,” he says. “We realized we were going about it randomly and not systematically.”

So Kaplan and a colleague hired a research assistant to pull basketball data from sports gurus’ ratings, regular-season records, and the Rankings Percentage Index (RPI) to create a complex web of relationships between teams, evaluate their strengths, and find a way to optimize points for a tourney bracket. Recently, he’s also been using Las Vegas odds to incorporate late-breaking information.

Kaplan calls his system “fairly complicated,” and says that with the opening-round play-in game, there are an estimated 18,000,000,000,000,000,000 (that’s 18 billion billion, as mathematicians say) options that his calculations examine.

I always wondered how the various sportsbooks came up with the odds for the so-called “entertainment” betting lines. According to an article in today’s NYPost, it’s all very similar to how sporting lines are determined – through extensive research:

“Although there are no hard formulas . . . analysts do tend to attack each line with a similar methodology.

Take their efforts to determine the odds on the identity of Anna Nicole Smith’s baby-daddy. First, they scour the most popular entertainment Web sites, reading every fragment on the candidates’ behavior.

Next, they do a Google search to scratch up more information and to try to get a feel for whether the information on each of the potential fathers is positive or negative, plausible or implausible.”

It makes me chuckle thinking of some smoky back room filled with grizzled, cigar-chomping sports handicappers sitting next to a guy who is the world’s foremost expert on Lindsey Lohan. Must make for an interesting work environment.

For the record I pick that Birkhead dude at 5-1.

Read the rest at the NYPost

“Gamblers wagering against a point spread must win more than half their bets (about 53%) to make a profit and must be closer to 55% to make a comfortable living. This is no small feat. Experts say there may be fewer than 100 people who can sustain these rates over time. Most of them belong to professional betting syndicates that hire teams of statisticians, wager millions every week and keep their operations secret.”

Wall Street Journal Article

ABC News Story