For those sports bettors that are readers, I highly recommend Michael Konik's book: The Smart Money, How the World's Best Sports Bettors Beat the Bookies Out of Millions....I got mine off of Amazon, which details the real-life story (with the names changed) of Billy Walters and how he operated a betting ring to bet and win millions of dollars. You'll notice in the news recently that he recently was convicted of insider trading and was sentenced to prison.
Michael Konik is a writer who connects with Walters when wanting to write about sports gambling and gamblers. Walters take a liking to him and becomes a "runner" for Walters, which means he was placing bets with Walter's money. Billy Walters, like most winners in sports betting, was not welcome to place the amount of money that he wanted to, to make the kind of money he wanted with sportsbook management. His strategy was to hire people who would act like they knew nothing of betting to place his wagers for him. Called "whales" in Las Vegas casinos, people with a lot of money who think they know what they're doing who are actually ignorant are highly desired by Las Vegas casinos,....they are given the best rooms, often for free, they are assigned hosts to make sure they are happy and taken care of, with the idea that they will be contributing to the casino's bottom line.
Konik becomes a (fake) whale and then goes through the facade of acting like an arrogant, know-it-all imbecile to the sports betting managers, who ultimately will decide to accept his wagers, or not. If I remember correctly, this went on for around 3 years, where he successfully cons the sportsbook personnel and he makes his boss Walters, a truck load of cash.
Towards the end of his relationship with Walters, he contacts a high school acquaintance who has an doctorate mathematical degree from Harvard to research whether using advanced statistics can be used to predict the outcome of sporting events, to obviously make money from what they discover. This is child's play for a computer nerd/math guy and he sets out to plug in data into a computer program. It takes him close to a year to correlate data that is significant to make predictions reliable and profitable. In the ongoing conversations that Konik and the Math Guy have, one thing stood out that made all the difference for Konik.....Math Guy said that results were becoming more and more adverse to wild swings in the market, that the standard deviation of results were becoming narrower. It struck Konik in a flash of insight, that THIS information would mean that teasers would possibly become an advantage to them. So, instead of assuming, they ran their data and found this to be true based on past results. Toward the end of his run with Walters, Konik became his own bettor with his own stake and was hitting a higher percentage of bets than Walters, with smaller stakes. After doing this for a year, he chucked it all in and gave the betting life away.
Teasers, for those who don't knowm are when the book gives us 6 extra points (for a two team teaser) on two different games, whether they be totals or side bets. Both bets MUST win for you to have a winning wager...teaser rules vary according to the sportsbook used, but the best ones a tie on either leg of the teaser mean the bet is voided. If either leg loses, you lose your wager.
Teasers had never been on my radar until I read this book. For those of you with advanced math ability, feel free to chime in, but if we are going to use data and historical information as a basis of making plays as I do, the minimum success rate for a two team teaser for each leg of our teaser will have to be at least 72%, because if we multiply .72 x .72, it gives us around a 51% success rate...that is assuming that our bookmaker is not robbing us and charging us juice on a two team teaser...we expect to be laying 100 to win 100....otherwise our math will be different and our expected success rate will have to be higher for each leg.
An example of this kind of thinking will be in the Calgary/Saskatchewan game.
An away divisional dog with a worse record than their opponent has been 81-59 ATS (57.9%) and 62-80 O/U 43.7% in the history of my CFL database.
So, we should only be interested in taking the dog and the UNDER based on data and we should only want to see at least a 72% success rate for a teaser to be viable.
So? Would it be a good idea to tease these two?
We find that teasing the Riders and getting 6 more points to the away dog has given a 69% success rate....98-44 ATS.
We find that teasing the UNDER which adds 6 points to the total would have given us a 99-43 success rate....69.7%.
Teasing those two would be a losing strategy because if multiply the two success rates together....... .69 x .697 =.48
We win 48% of the time, which means we lose 52% of the time...... a long-term losing strategy.
Betting this way is like pot odds in poker, we look, not at the immediate result, but over 100 or 1000 bets, would we make money?....OR NOT? In this particular scenario unless we find some more data that brings the success percentage up, it is a sucker's play.
However, playing the away underdog (the Riders) or the UNDER has shown in the past that those would be viable, plays with a good success rate for individual wagers.