Skip to main content

bookmaking - is there a science to it?

The latest Journal of Prediction Markets features an article looking at ' Does Sportsbook.com Set Pointspreads to Maximize Profits? Tests of the Levitt Model of Sportsbook Behavior'

Looks like an interesting read but can't see myself paying $40 for the privilege.

Amongst their findings:

Abstract:
The Levitt (2004) model of sportsbook behavior is tested using actual percentages of dollars bet on NFL games from the internet sportsbook, Sportsbook.com. Simple regression results suggest that Sportsbook.com sets pointspreads (prices) to maximize profits, as the Levitt model assumes, not to balance the betting dollars, as the traditional model of sportsbook behavior assumes. Sportsbook.com is found to accept significantly more wagering dollars on road favorites, larger favorites, and on the over for the highest totals in the over/under betting market. Bettor liquidity constraints and sportsbook betting limits may help explain this result.



All sounds pretty logical to me - if there's ever a time you want to take on a favourite, it's when they are away from home. On stronger (larger) favourites, then the risk is far less anyway and mug punters love the overs so the smarties are generally on the unders. Not rocket science, but worth learning how and where bookies try to make money from punters.

Here's the link

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

lay the field - my favourite racing strategy

Dabbling with laying the field in-running at various prices today, not just one price, but several in the same race. Got several matched in the previous race at Brighton, then this race came along at Nottingham. Such a long straight at Nottingham makes punters often over-react and think the finish line is closer than it actually is. As you can see by the number of bets matched, there was plenty of volatility in this in-play market. It's rare you'll get a complete wipe-out with one horse getting matched at all levels, but it can happen, so don't give yourself too much risk...

Racing has a Ponzi scheme - and the fallout will be enormous

When the term 'Ponzi scheme' is mentioned these days, the names Bernard Madoff and Allen Stanford instantly spring to mind. The pair of them ran multi-billion dollar frauds (US$60bn and $8bn respectively) that destroyed the lives of thousands of investors who had put their life savings into a 'wonderful' investment strategy. How so many people were sucked into the scheme is baffling to those on the outside. The lifestyle, the sales pitch, the success stories of the early investors - I suppose it all adds up.

So where does this link to racing you ask? A prominent Australian 'racing identity' this week has been reported to have lost access to a bank account with punters' club funds of $194m in it. Firstly - is there a worse term for anyone to be labelled with that 'racing identity'? It ALWAYS ends up meaning shonky crook! Secondly - who the hell has a punters' club with an active bankroll in the tens of millions? It simply can't be done.

The…

damage control when trading goals

When trades go bad, some people will say cut your losses immediately, others will recommend having a bit of patience as events tend to level out (i.e. games with two goals in the first 10 mins never end up with 18 goals in 90 minutes). This is something I like to do on certain matches.

Background:
1. You've backed Under 2.5 goals, trying to nick a few ticks at a time as the clock ticks.
2. You've been caught out by a goal.
3. The market has gone sharply against you.

On this particular match from a couple of weeks ago, there was an early goal (sixth minute) before I got involved. The period immediately after an early goal regularly shows a sharp drop in the Under price, so I was trying to capitalise on that. But Watford then scored again after 14 minutes. The Back price I took (3.95) was now out to 12 - I could close out for a big loss (not my style) or wait and wait for the price to come back to somewhere I could close out for minimal damage. But at 2-0 after 15 minutes, it w…