If you do 5k wager u would only net 100

1/50 with bet365 so your 5k wager would indeed only make 100 profit. That's why bookies are rich, they make what they think are sure things very unattractive to bet on. I wouldn't risk 5k just to make100. They will hope people put money on round betting that's where the bookies will make their money.

 

Boxing odds are dog****, probably because a fair % of them get put on when the punters are drunk.

 

Bet on Golovkin by stoppage. That's almost guaranteed.

 

These are the type of fights where the usual 9.5 suddenly turns into 7.5 or something like that. Which in turn has a more appealing return(not that it's any better in reality), but carries even more risk.

 

On betfair you can get 1000 from a 5000 bet for ko, tko or dq for ggg

 

Bookies make money by balancing the book and living off a tiny risk-free spread. Much like a bank which charges you for an international transfer and foreign exchange.

Bookies don't take directional bets, at least they don't if they are in it for the long run. Bookies who take big bets - even if "very" sure - don't survive over a longer time line.

 

But you guys all seem to forget that Steve is the Rolls under the boxers.
Put your money on Rolls by KO and straddle it with Golovkin by KO... (Dwyer voice)

 

What many betters don't really understand it's who they're playing against. All these "that's why bookies are rich" talks are bull****. As @madballster already said, bookies get rich (if they even do) because of high commissions. And you (as a better) are playing against... Other betters. And if they are drunk, you should be only glad about it. Just make a correct bet (against all those drunks).

 

I have a grasp of how the betting industry works and what you say above is absolutely correct, that's why you never see two evenly matched opponents whether it be boxing, tennis, snooker whatever where both opponents are even money, no matter how closely matched they are. In simple terms they will make both slightly odds on and pay out roughly the same regardless of the outcome, guaranteeing a profit in the long run. Then there's things to factor in like fans favourites, betting patterns depending on venues, odds compiling is a complex job with many variables to consider.

Those rules don't fully apply to the fight were talking about though. One fighter is a massive favourite (no AJ comments please) They're making GGG almost unbackable at the odds and people will look for round betting and that will make the bookies jump with glee.

 

Bookies don't care much if opponents evenly matched or not (they earn their commisions regardless). And it happens that the opponents are evenly matched, I'm sure.

Again, bookies set odds only initially and then they just balance the incoming bets. Like if a lot of people bet on one side, they make those odds slightly worse.
The rules always apply. So, again, GGG is made almost unbackable not by "evil bookies" but by betters who bet on him (and there's a ton of those people).

 

Um yeah, that is pretty much how prohibitive favorites work. You're not supposed to get much ROI on guys that are very clearly supposed to win, otherwise everybody would bet on the fighter in GGG's position in fights like this. Gambling isn't supposed to be free money.

 

Just make bets with boxing casual fans. Odds never even enter the equation. Hey, I'll bet you 50 bucks Gennady wins. Yeah for me and my friends it would be 50, but I'm sure in some circles a 5k bet would be no prob. That's why it's called gambling, you gotta take a risk for a decent payoff. I'd take the under if it's 9.5.

 

It's like the stock market. Your potential upside is much much smaller when betting on some big, long-established company like Johnson & Johnson your upside is more limited than investing in some brand new 'growth story' stock. Same applies to risk.