Psychology of Sports Betting

I am not an expert in the field of psychology nor an established author on the topic of sports betting, but I have been betting sports for a long time. The things I have learned and experienced are invaluable to how I approach handicapping games. I am just going to focus on baseball since this is a MLB forum.

1) Being on the "right" side

Is there such a thing as a right side prior to first pitch? Many would like to think so. They think a pitcher who is -170 or more is an automatic winner and it feels comfortable and right to make that pick. While that particular pitcher may have better stats, history, talent than the opposing pitcher, it does not translate into an automatic winner by any means. In baseball, great pitchers generally loses 1/3 of their decisions and are still considered great. But does it make sense to lay $200 on a pitcher who may lose 1/3 of their games? Unless the pitcher goes the full nine innings, you would still have to factor in the bullpen who may possibly blow it for that starter.

2) Objective view

I try to look at every game objectively and even put myself in the shoes of the underdog bettor more times than not. Why would I bet on this rookie? Why would I bet on this pitcher who has lost his last 6 out of 7 games? Is it wise to pull the trigger against a -$200 favorite? If I don't see a clear reason otherwise, I avoid. But many times I do find a reason to bet the dog. It can be that the favorite has had 2 CG in a row and due for a bad outing or a rookie that the opposing team has never faced before but possesses a 95 MPH fastball with a devastating slider. Bottom line is that no game is a slam dunk and should be treated as such.

3) Going with the hoard

Basic needs of humans identified by Freud include security and comfort. Betting baseball is no different. Bettors feel safe when the next guy bets it and/or feel comfort in knowing that last year's Cy Young winner is on the mound. No one likes the edgy feeling of placing a bet on that rookie or riding the pitcher who has lost 3 in a row. No comfort and security but who said gambling was ever easy? Books are not in the business to fork out money and if everyone feels that betting favorites gives them a better chance at winning, sadly, they are wrong.

I love betting dogs and scan the lines for the dog that I perceive to give me the best shot at winning. I like to look for reasons prior to the game to take that dog, whether gut feeling or some hidden stat that may come into play. Just something for everyone to think about the next time you decide on taking Verlander in the middle of May at -$218.

Quote Originally Posted by Pai_Gow_Player:

great point of view from the other side of the fense...  like u stated when betting favs it gives us a false sense that its a safer bet with a higher probability to win hence why u pay a premium. 

In regards to paying the premium, you are only paying that under the assumption that the pitcher goes deep into the game. As with many things in life, baseball no less, you cannot just factor one element but many elements that play a significant role in the game.

As an example, your pitcher throws a great game and goes 7 strong. What about the last two innings? The bullpen would surely pick up where he left off? I doubt it. That is why they are in the pen and not starting. With that noted, I would be hard pressed to be assured that my premium can be considered "insurance". Therefore, I find that with all the variables in baseball, it is gratifying not to pay premiums but rather get value (plus money) on games that can be won despite lesser talent/records/history. Anyhow, just trying to provide another way to objectively view how bets can be made. GL