The previous one was just an example. I agree that targets with odds below 1.50 are generally not attractive. I haven’t kept a bet-by-bet record myself, but something in the sub-5% range would probably be similar for me with odds of 1.50 or less. Mostly my bets are between 1.75 and 2.20.
The odds themselves don’t really matter when the estimate is accurate enough and it’s an overlay. Of course, that low percentage can be explained in many ways, but often those small odds are underlays / overplayed favorites. I doubt there’s a very large percentage of odds below 1.50 in my own Excel sheets either.
Then, of course, there are the legendary Mayweather cases.
1 Like
should the title be changed or should a completely new thread be created when there is only Trump Biden (and mainly Biden) available here…
I would gladly hear views and justifications from those who have put their money on Trump. There seem to be unfortunately few of these (at least those who are willing to offer other justifications than a feeling or fandom). I myself have tried to research this perspective a bit, but unfortunately, there are very few data-based views or facts that would manage to convince about shortcomings exceeding the margin of error of the polls, which would turn the situation for Trump.
In my opinion, there is no need to change the title. 44 messages, of which 10% probably discuss Formula 1, 5% Mayweather, and 30% generally what overproduction is about, and whether gambling can be carried out profitably.
I myself do not actively bet, nor do I care for gambling, but certain considered exceptions are interesting. Therefore, regarding the thread, I am interested in these targets mentioned by booop:
I don’t see why one couldn’t justifiably throw out good odds and overprofits from ice hockey to tennis and Oscar winners, but especially for sports betting, there are probably more active forums (and more knowledgeable people) than here.
1 Like
Really good answer, Tiksu!
Totally agree. Of course, the most current topic is the US presidential election, and that naturally increases the willingness to discuss the subject. I believe that more and more people who normally avoid betting may have become interested during the autumn, for example, in Biden’s relatively high odds compared to the probability – a so-called “over-odds”.
The absolute odds are quite small in the end (about 1.4 currently), which in principle also tells us fairly well that there isn’t “too much” risk, even in terms of odds.
The less risky a betting object is, the more willing players can bet on it. And the more money is at stake – the more active the discussion and research often is 
If you see that Biden loses more often than once in 2.5, then of course, you shouldn’t bet with 1.4 odds. However, Biden’s probabilities of winning are significantly better than that.
Betting, in general, is quite an exciting concept. I don’t really engage in it much myself, because I don’t feel I have an informational advantage in, for example, sports – unless there’s some bigger over-odds available due to individual variables.
Let’s consider the previous bet in a slightly different light, meaning we don’t emphasize the odds obtained alongside the probability of something happening.
Option 1: Portfolio full, no interesting stocks on the market. Cash is available. You somewhat reluctantly look for some boring value stock that might yield 10% p.a., and in the review period, a possible worst-case of about 25% down is seen, e.g., from multiples deteriorating.
Option 2: 40% profit with Biden. Here, you can certainly lose 100%, but the same absolute return as in Option 1 is achieved by betting 4x smaller sum. This way, you have cash “for something else too” 
This is just a fun example, but that’s roughly how it goes.
P.S. A very small-scale, maybe not so high-quality (sorry guys for that), Trump/Biden debate can be found in Sijoitustieto’s flirtation, where Pauli ‘fiilismies’ Äyräs is Pyysing’s guest
4 Likes
That’s something that often gets overemphasized, by the way, an individual variable, especially in team sports. You see it almost every time a star player drops out of the lineup.
1 Like
I, for one, can only wonder how people still have the courage to short Tesla, which has already shown countless times that a) Musk can tweet according to his mood at any given moment, moving the stock price in his desired direction, and b) Tesla’s movements don’t seem to have much correlation with the real world and news. Overvaluation, in my opinion, is a poor argument for a gamble in a game where valuation figures don’t seem to matter.
Anyway, Biden’s odds have significantly increased over the weekend. Now, the popular vote is offered at 1.18 and a win at 1.67. Someone might see an opportunity for an overbet, especially in the first one – in the last election, even the widely disliked and scandal-ridden Clinton won the popular vote with 48.2% to 46.1%.
Based on public movements, polls, and record donations, one could expect this bet to be quite likely. Additionally, Trump’s disapproval has slightly increased over the past 4 years, while his approval rating has decreased. It’s therefore difficult to see that Trump would have managed to increase his popularity during his term (at least, polls don’t support this). Instead, it’s expected that Democrats will be more active than in the last election. As a worrying point, I just read a report from a polling firm that conducts weekly surveys, and in last week’s report, Trump supporters’ voting enthusiasm had remained unchanged, while Biden supporters’ enthusiasm (“I will definitely go vote”) had dropped by 10 percentage points from just over 70% to just over 60%. This is, of course, a single poll and a weekly result, but perhaps corona, long queues, etc., have reduced enthusiasm – however, Biden has such a significant lead that it could easily turn out like 2016, and laziness could set in.
2 Likes
{“content”:“The US presidential election continues with its absurdity. Betfair has a market: Trump exit day 2021 with odds of 1.04. The election is over, the winner is clear, and the change is happening on the 20th? Still, 4% profit (minus commission) is on offer.”,“target_locale”:“en”}
1 Like
In the Georgia Senate election, there’s again a difference of opinion between polls and betting markets. Betfair’s odds for Republicans are over 60%, while 538 gives a marginal advantage to Democrats. That’s still a difference of over 10 percentage points.
I won’t comment on whether either of those is unreasonable.
I myself don’t see unreasonable odds in the Senate elections. There are two Senate elections in Georgia. On Betfair, one has a 60% Democratic favorite and the other a narrow Republican favorite. Democrats would have to win both elections to get 50 representatives, in which case the Vice President’s vote would be decisive.
I played the Trump exit date 2021 heavily already last year. If any odds are absurd, it’s the 1.04 you can still get.
1 Like
You should look into matched betting and arbitrage betting. You can relatively easily earn 500-3000 euros per month, even for years. Furthermore, betting winnings are tax-free within the EU.
Matched betting means utilizing betting bonuses risk-free with opposing bets, so that about 70-95% of the bonus remains in your pocket. Roughly estimated, there are 50-100 betting companies in the EU. These companies compete for customers by offering various betting bonuses (=free play money). When you pick up these bonuses from many different betting firms, small streams turn into a big river. Especially in the beginning, you earn really fast when you can utilize the welcome bonuses of betting firms, which are usually 100-150 euros. You can google those betting bonuses; I don’t dare to link them here. You shouldn’t deposit your money to all sites, but most of them are completely reliable (e.g., Unibet, Betsson/Betsafe/Nordicbet, Paf, Rizk, Guts, Bethard, MR Green, William Hill, Coolbet, Bet365, Casumo, Leovegas, etc.). All these sites have an MGA gaming license. The opposing bets are placed on Betfair Exchange, where you can place “reverse” lay bets (opposing bet), which ensures the risk-free nature of the whole thing and allows you to easily clear the bonuses (=convert bonus money into real money).
Arbitrage betting is a slightly different matter, as it does not exploit betting bonuses, but rather the differing views/odds of betting companies on a particular event. Since there are dozens and dozens of betting companies, it means that differing odds are often found. When suitable odds are found, maximum stakes are placed to get the largest possible return. This is also risk-free, although small risks are always associated with cancellations of matches/bets, but fortunately, this happens rarely, and bets can always be checked 30 minutes before the start of the match.
I have made about 35k with these methods in just over a year and a half. Of course, this takes time, but the hourly wage is excellent 
The process slows down/becomes more difficult gradually due to stake limits and bonus bans, but on the other hand, new betting firms (=bonuses) are constantly emerging. I have a website on the topic where I have explained the process openly. I don’t know if I’m allowed to link it here, but I can send it by private message to those interested. I also recommend checking out the “Bookmakers & Money Movement” section of the Ylikerroin forum, where you can find information about bookmakers and bonuses.
21 Likes
In the world of boxing, another “sure-bet” exhibition match is coming up. Some may still remember the McGregor-Mayweather fight, from which smart money sought good profits with almost no risk. Now, a new opportunity is emerging as Logan Paul, known from YouTube, will fight Mayweather, and the odds for this match are currently as high as 1.08 (the “experts’” claimed annual return for the stock market, though the actual figure is closer to 50%). I recommend doing your own analysis of the match, and based on the last fight, the risk for betting companies and professional gamblers was largely on Mayweather’s side.
2 Likes
This is not directly related to the topic, but an 8% annual return is a statistical fact. The fact that anyone can make 50% annual returns in this bull market doesn’t mean they would do the same over time.
Feel free to flag this.
9 Likes
Let’s bring this extremely interesting discussion back up. Unless there’s a more recent thread somewhere?
I myself have been betting profitably for 10 years. Mostly snooker and football. Now that the markets are what they are, I’ve started betting more again.
I only bet on sports I understand, utilizing the Kelly criterion (Kelly’s formula).
7 Likes
Do you only place single bets, or how do you utilize Kelly’s formula for slips with multiple selections?
2 Likes
I mostly place single bets, and I often use Asian handicaps for those. In snooker, I might place doubles on markets like over/under X frames in a match. (They’ve hit surprisingly well!)
I have my own bet limits based on the Kelly Criterion (Kellyn kaava). Let’s say it’s more of a guiding principle in use. And of course, I recommend a betting bankroll for anyone aiming for profitable betting.
In betting, it’s also good to find a suitable strategy for yourself, just as it is in long-term investing.
6 Likes
For me, betting also serves as a form of investment. And that “portfolio” is the only one with a positive YTD . Mainly football and ice hockey. Betting combines many things that interest me. I’m a big armchair sports fan, I like math, and I like collecting data and statistics from matches. When you combine these, you can already get probability estimates for match events and outcomes.
I only play single bets. And I also heavily favor Asian handicap bets. Additionally, goal totals, or totals bets. I calculate stakes using Kelly’s formula, and the maximum stake is 2.5% of the bankroll.
I skipped the current FIFA World Cup partly for rest and partly due to the timing and location of the tournament. Things will resume in January when the major European leagues restart.
9 Likes
I have to say that this forum opened my eyes. As an athlete and a sports fan, I sometimes bet for fun. Jussi, when you mentioned “in the form of an investment,” I started looking at this whole thing in a completely different way. Why should one bet recklessly if 10% annual returns are acceptable in investing?
I started playing with only small portions of my bankroll, using my Excel sheet to find “sensible” bets. I mostly bet on football, but sometimes on ice hockey, basketball, and e-sports. Handicap and totals bets are what I mainly place. Significant returns have already accumulated in a couple of days, now that I see betting as “investing.” I don’t play with big money, but it’s still enjoyable.
8 Likes
For those interested in betting, I recommend the “Positio” and “Vedonlyönti” (Betting) podcasts.
This particular episode from the “Vedonlyönti” podcast gave me some good ideas (but don’t expect any direct solutions).
8 Likes
Yes, absolutely, betting should be approached with an investment mindset. And in that, too, you play the long game. There’s a place for fun bets, but making a profit with them in the long run is highly unlikely. How did Taleb put it in his book Fooled by Randomness: “If you are only in the stock market for a short time, you will probably only encounter variance.” Something like that, I don’t remember exactly as it’s been a while since I read the book.
And indeed, if you compare the betting process and stock picking, you’ll find many similarities. If in stock picking you calculate a suitable price for a stock at which you could buy it, in betting you calculate strict limit odds at which you play each target. Both require thorough research. And in neither is the number of targets/companies the point, but quality. When you comb through with a fine-tooth comb, you’ll still find something to play/buy.
And a big recommendation for both of those podcasts. Especially in the Positiossa podcast, there’s an episode that goes through the mental side of betting. It works even in the turmoil of the stock market. And at the end, there are book recommendations for mind control and decision making. At least Taleb and Daniel Kahneman were mentioned.
3 Likes