Boxing Betting

Actually you haven't mentioned the relationship between the real probability and the odds at all.

If you do accept the idea that a value bet is one where the odds are better than the real probability, then I don't see why it matters to you what the actual odds are. A value bet can equally be one at 1/10 or at 10/1. Backing a series of value 1/10 bets will ensure a profit, as will backing a big enough sequence of value 10/1 bets. The first scenario will lead to having more 'winners', but if you're only interested in profit why does that matter?

 

sleaze is a lost cause, that was establised quite a while ago.

 

If you believe a 10/1 bet is more likely to happen than not to the point where you're placing the bet expecting to win I can understand it.

However, If you think a fighters chances are better than the odds given - but you favour his opponent to win. Then you're betting on something you believe will lose.

As a boxing fan I like my opinion good enough to believe I'll pick a fight correctly, so I wouldn't bet against what I think will happen.

 

Sleaze, you don't seem to grasp the fundamental concepts that will enable you to make long term profit from gambling. That's fair enough as long as you never take the gambling too seriously. Stick to small stakes and you'll be fine.

 

But you must know that you don't always predict the outcome correctly! The chances that you've predicted the outcome incorrectly are the same as the chances of the other guy winning so what you've predicted doesn't matter.

Look back at my mini lottery example, 9 blue balls and one red. You've predicted a blue ball will come out so you wouldn't bet on red even at 100/1. The 10% of times your prediction is wrong you'll win more than the 90% of times your prediction is right.

 

Backing short odds doesn't mean you have to win every single one. If you back things around 1/2 you can afford to lose 1 in 3 (But if you are losing 1 in 3 you should give up btw).

Lottery is not an example, your theory is fine for a lottery.
I'm talking about betting on boxing when you know the sport and pick your bets carefully when the odds are good.

 

Actually it's exactly the same thing which is what you don't seem to get. The only difference is that, in a lottery, we can know the real probabilities exactly whereas for a sports bet we can only estimate them to the best of our abilities.

You say you already do that. But, having done so, you then exclude a whole raft of value bets that you could be making money for a completely arbitrary and illogical reason.

 

But once you've assessed the probabilities you're in the same situation as you are with the lottery. You know your predictions are not right all the time. You know there is a chance you could be wrong and Lazcano wins. It's less than 1 and more than 0. So there is some probability you assign to Lazcano winning. Say it's 1%. Now it's just a matter of wherther you can find favourable odds. You'd take 1000/1 right? Well it turns out that any odds ABOVE 99/1 are favourable to you in this situation.

 

They're not value bets, they're bets you think will lose.

Your logic is fine, it's the same one I have. Except I only back ones that I think are going to win.

 

I'm out, I'm fight watching...

 

I'm just hoping that in the almost certain event that Hatton wins, Sleaze doesn't use it as proof that he is right and we are wrong!

 

You're betting on fighters you think will lose, the proof is already there.

 

:bart

 

Haha sucker you lost...

I made £00.06 on a Hatton win!!!

 

7/4 Hatton decision.

Told ya that's where the money should go.