Bitcoin Forum

So if you keep choosing odds of 1.90 or lower with a 50% chance of winning, do you think you can win in the long run? This is like giving the house an edge of 10%, and that's too much to give, yet we are too confident in winning. Are we being realistic here, or are we just too confident in our skills that we believe we can win 60% of the time?

Are there any gamblers here which are betting with those kinds of odds that has already achieve a long term success?

This is not accurate. The 1.90 is given to you by the house when it calculates that there is a 50% probability that you will win. Those calculations are not exact. It is not like in roulette that if you play red or black you have a 47.37% chance of winning (in American roulette). That's exact.

If you are able to beat the house in the odds calculation is how you win money in the long term, which is becoming increasingly difficult especially in major sports.

Probability in sports betting is not like in roulette, where the odds are based on fixed probabilities. In sports betting, the odds are merely predictions set by bookmakers, which means they can sometimes be over- or undervalued. Sticking with 1.90 odds gives you a disadvantage of 10% every time you bet, so your winning chance should be 60% or more to make a profit, assuming you manage your bankroll effectively.

With 2 odds, the chance of winning is not even 50%. Just like you posted, there is house edge. So with 50% chance of winning a game, the casino are still more likely to win the gambler because the house edge makes the winning probability to be less than 50% for the gambler.

quote author=freedomgo link=topic=5505716.msg64410240#msg64410240 date=1723270074]
Are there any gamblers here which are betting with those kinds of odds that has already achieve a long term success?
[/quote]
Most gamblers wants to win, but it is in the casino terms of service that gambling should be for fun. The casinos know that gamblers are losing regardless of the odds they are using to bet.

They would say that so you'll always come back, but I don't think it's part of the terms, LOL.

Anyway, let's talk about the real probability of winning. Yes, 1.90 odds don’t really give us a good chance to get ahead unless we can consistently win 6 out of 10 bets, which is really hard to achieve. By the numbers, it looks possible, but in actual experience, most of us would fail. One reason why we fail to achieve that success is because of the phrase "having fun." When you’re having fun, you’re not too serious about improving your strategy; you’re only focused on gambling within your limits to ensure you don’t get addicted, so you can continue to have fun. This is different from gamblers with a serious mindset, who believe, backed by their analysis, that they can win in sports betting—not necessarily beating the house, as we aren't gambling against the house here.

Everyone has different targets and strategies in sports betting ,some people aim to get 2 odds or probably lower than that on a weekly or daily basis, the lower the odds the chances of it playing out is quite high but this doesn't guarantee a hundred percent successful outcome. I have played single games lower than 1.50 odds that turned out to be unsuccessful. Following this kind of strategy can be quite helpful but you can't always have winning streaks

If you are playing a single game you have a good chance to be fairly even over the long run in wins and losses, could swing on the side of wins if you are lucky. If you are playing a multi ticket the chances of winning is much lower over the long run.

- Jay -

Nah, I tried that last year with the EuroBasket and it doesn't work. You will just lose if you really have no idea who is going to win the game.
I tried betting for x1.60 to x1.85 odds without any knowledge about the other team except for my favorites. But because I want to keep on betting, I forced myself to try and just place a bet for the unknown.
It's a losing strategy even if you take handicaps like +5 to +8 with odds of x1.60 to x1.90, there are unpredictable things that could happen and you might end up having a losing streak rather than a winning streak.
x1.90 is actually a high-risk bet, I'd rather take odds lower than it but not to the extent of x1.20 downwards.

I think no one will stick to betting with these odds, but the experience of betting on those odds always results in different outcomes. For me, it can be a good outcome, but for some of you, it may not be. For sure, all of us gamblers have tried to bet on these odds. And speaking in the long run, the house (casino) always wins.

Not necessarily odds of 1.90 being a 50% chance for you can be different results, several times trying to bet with odds of 1.90 or below there are still some losing bets I would not say this is a long-term success because it depends on the match chosen too.

If it's a favorite team 1X2 bet then have confidence will be won, but if in other matches are not sure even though always choose odds below that.

I saw it on Stake terms of service. Go to Stake terms of service. You will see it under prohibited uses.

You understand that everything depends on the player, if he is able to win more often than lose, then he will have a profit.

But I would like to ask, why exactly the coefficient of 1.9 was taken, why not 2, or 3? )

In fact, you can substitute different odds, but what is more important is not odds (although this also matters), but your statistics of winning bets in the long term. Every player who wants to earn money in gambling should keep statistics of each bet to see how much he managed to win. Let's say how much he managed to win from 100 bets? This is a good enough number to understand how successful you are as a player and, accordingly, you can calculate your success with different odds. And then only calculations, if you can win 60 bets out of 100, then there is a chance to be with a profit, if more than half of the bets are losing, then either you need to increase the odds, and try again, or it will not be easy for you to earn money on bets.

That's why I don't really looking to bet at exact odds over and over, instead I choose to bet on underdog and only bet on the team that which I think has high chance to pull upsets. Betting 1.90 odds in the long run will make you loss since the risk and reward isn't 50/50.

While betting on underdog, I'm not looking for the money in long run, but whenever I win, I'm happy and the reward is big.

Actually it will not guarantee victory because the odd given to the team with a lower number indicates that the team has an advantage such as being the host or bigger team.
Basically the results in sports match cannot be determined with certainty who will be the winner, especially if only look at the chances then it is very ridiculous.

So far I have never seen gambler who does all that by achieving long-term success, moreover achieving success from gambling is impossible even though it is overall from sports betting.
Gamblers who bet only by relying on the chances or odds given by the bookie are gamblers who are quite stupid because they will only lose money periodically.

That seems like a solid strategy because underdogs do offer great odds, and even if you win 50% of the time, you can still guarantee a profit. However, not all underdogs will win, so it’s important to be careful when choosing your bets. The key is to focus on quality rather than the quantity of bets. Bookies won’t offer 2.00 odds for a 50% probability because they need to stay profitable as well. They facilitate the betting, so they deserve to take a cut to continue their operations. That’s the concept behind 1.90 odds, where 10% goes to the juice.

May I know why you are quoting me? In the first part you repeat what I said, and in the second part you seem to want to dispute what I said by stating something false.


It definitely does not give you a 10% disadvantage in each bet. Surely you are one of those who write here but you have never bet in your life, let alone made a serious calculation. It definitely does not give you a 10% disadvantage in each bet. Surely you are one of those who write here but you have never bet in your life, let alone made a serious calculation. If you are getting $1.90 for every $1, you only need a 53% long term hit rate to make it profitable.

When it comes to gambling you can really estimate the exact winning percentage Because nothing is actually safe, I came across a tweet about a guy that placed a bet of 10 million naira on 1.10 odds , and that was just one game he ended up losing that money
Sometimes it's good to have a strategy in betting but always remember that luck is a major factor, if a little odd like 1.10 could go sideways how much more 1.90.. gambling is always 50/50 odds doesn't really matter

A 1.90 odds in gambling long term would lead you to lose 5% of total amount you have bet. That's math and probability. No one is winning even with 1.99 in long run.
But for something different like a sports bet or a game of poker against real people, You can make have your skill work to make you win. Games like Poker favors the experienced and skilled ones. It's not always the cards that makes you win in Poker.
Similarly in sports bet, the general opinion and head to head stats might decide the odds but you can have special talent to determine the things that other people can't notice which would effect the result of the game. Your analysis might be better than others and in that case, you can easily turn a 1.9 odds to a winning strategy.

There is a hidden ToS rule that every casino has: You are not allowed to beat the house.

As long as you accept this reality and still play, everybody will be happy. If you can’t take that and try to win either by cheating or fooling their algo; sooner or later they will lock your account.

No it is not certain that with the range of odd one can win constantly because I've also came across a post we have someone bet 1.4 million on a 1.08 odds and still lose the bet. This is to show that even the lowest odd does not guarantee winning but what matters is if your prediction is right most time or does not count to your winning but people would say that lesser odds guarantee's winning.

If judging by that post which that user made, a bet of 1.008 odd and stake 1.4 million dollars this could have shown that even the least odd can't guarantee winning for long run, but when a prediction is exacted to what you bet then there is every chances of winning, and of course you can win that continuously but we should also know about how matches are played most times and it would go against our bet.

What I think is that the gambling site will look for a way to make sure the gamblers still lose without blocking his account. Gambling sites learn from people. If they see that people are winning more with one of their selections, they make amendment in a way that gamblers will later be losing. That is just how they operate. To look for ways most gamblers will lose. If gamblers are making money, gambling business will collapse.

What kind of amendments will they make? This isn’t a casino where they control the game; it’s sports betting where games are broadcast live, and everyone can see. The odds offered are also similar to those offered by other sportsbook, so I’m curious how they’ll amend things to make it in their favor?

Where in that part are you referring to as "something false"? You don't agree that odds can sometimes be overvalued or undervalued?


What I understood is that when spreads are presented like Team A +5 vs. Team B -5 and both have odds of 1.90, you're effectively losing 10% because you'll only get 90% in return. Assuming this is a 50-50 chance, like a heads-or-tails game, where you're only paid 90% every time you win, there's no way you can come out ahead in the long run.

You're right in specifying that a 53% win rate is needed for 1.90 odds to be profitable, but I was just referencing the 60% mentioned in the OP for the sake of discussion.

Smaller odds indicate that your chances of winning are also stronger. Can using this method make you successful in the long term? of course, if luck is always on your side, the problem with gambling is about being lucky and not, look at how Argentina got such small odds when they faced Saudi Arabia in WC 2022, what was the result of the match? Argentina lost 1 - 2 to Saudi Arabia in that match.

One thing we should all know about gambling is that winning is never a permanent assurance, as it is what comes by luck, because for the fact that you were able to win with a odd of 1.90 or less, it doesn't mean you will always win, because I have seen many scenarios whereby people lose bet of odds 1.30 and even 1.10, and likewise I have also seen the reverse of people also winning games of high odds such as 5 to 10 odds as a result of luck and an addiction of skills. Hence, while gambling with odds of 1.9 or below, we should always bear in mind that we have 60% of chance to win and also 40% of chance to also lose our bet, which is a more reason why we all need to gamble responsibly.

even though sometimes we are very sure to win with smaller Odds, but indeed sports betting is not always predictable. gamblers who are very sure of their bets sometimes forget something their bets on small Odds will make a small return. so they hastily increase the bet which also increases the risk.
you are right, the strategy of betting on smaller Odds may increase the chances of winning. but not always and rarely will get a winning streak.

Even if we suppose that the chances of winning is exactly 50%, which aren't, if you take into account the house edge, it will still not mean that if you place 20 bets, 10 will be victorious and the other 10 will be losses. That's not how probabilities work, and you'll eventually run out of money if you're placing bets with that mindset. Even if you lower the odds, thus, increase your winning percentage, you still won't be able to replicate what statistically may sound possible, in real life.

Definitely not gonna be profitable in the long run since 10% house edge is too huge to beat in long term. It’s better to play slot games rather than play with consistent 10% house edge since most of the slot games offer 4% or lower house edge if we are just talking about long term betting.

But ofc this varies on the skills of the gamblers on sports betting but assuming your hypothetical scenario which is just betting with 50/50 chance bet then I doubt this will be good in the long run.

Gambling is based on luck if you are lucky you can win regularly but if your luck is bad you can lose at 1.1 odds. no one can guarantee gambling winnings. Many people use odds of 1.1 or less as a sure bet, but even here there is risk.  So I don't think anyone can have long term success with 1.9 Odd.  When you bet on gambling you must be able to afford to lose that amount of bet money and accept it freely. no one can give you a guaranteed winning tip on this. so you have to decide on your own responsibility. But one thing I can say is that the less odds you use, the more chances you have of winning

That means the house have a 10% house edge, that's a huge Fee to place a bet and a terrible idea. Casinos give the rules but are the gamblers who decide if betting or not.

Win in the long run betting on those odds isn't easy because sports are weird, there are too many factors that can change the game result, and if the odds are close to x2 that means the 2 teams have almost the same chance, and that way your chance to win is the same than flip a coin and win.

My recommendation has always been to bet on the underdog, that way if you win you will walk away with some nice profit bigger than x2.

It’s different if we talk about sports betting since there’s a sports analysis which you can compare to technical analysis on trading that improved the winning rate of bets depending on your skills.

Luck is indeed a huge factor on sports betting but skills can improve your winning rate without relying that much on luck. There’s some successful sports bettor that manage to have a high win rate with their bets through their analysis skills.

There are no guarantees, but the hope of opportunity is there, it all comes back to the game on the field, luck, in general bid A is 3.10 and for bid B 1.90 the possibility of winning is there, but make no mistake these factors can turn around in a matter of seconds, because of field factors and sports games, it can change instantly. A can go down to A 1.10 if it leads to victory and vice versa, B 1.90 can go up to 4.50 or even higher.

For this reason, if you bet in the sports arena, don't focus on Odds 3.10 x 1.90, focus on certain sports teams or clubs, look at the odds during their bets and also the players, and also other analysis that ensures you can win.

My maximum tolerance when it comes to the odds on which i would really be that interested or making up some considerations for me to make bet would really be having that 1.50x and going lower with that
isnt something that i couldnt bare up with the risks involved or simply its not really just that worth on the money that you are betting on in towards the amount that you would really be able to obtain or earn
on the moment that you do win.

We've seen recently this thread too.
Gambler Loses 1.4 million USD in a bet with lower than 1.01 odds!
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5435885.0

So who would really be the ones will really be that liking on taking up such bet on a 1.01? It might really that sound absurd but there are really those
people or bettors who would really be actually considering out such bet as if they are really that so sure that they could be able to hit it up. Also, we do really indeed have that 50% of winning
chance yet results could really be just that two and you would really be that only choosing up the match winner not unless if you do bet up for some other lines then it would really be
that dividing up on the risks on which it would really be depending into your own choice.

Any deductions or edge's then it would really be just that normal yet they are running up a business so it would really be that just that a common approach.
If you cant be able to bare up with those deductions then you do have the choice whether you would really be that proceeding or skipping out.
Confidence would really be that totally depending into someones level which would really vary into each individual.

There is no guarantee that choosing 1.90 or lower will increase your chances of winning to 50%,  gambling is a game of probability, and your confidence should be built on the strategy you are deploying not on the odds, because odds are like straps set up to cut you out, if you decide to follow it entirely without proper vetting. However in a long run, you can by chance win with those odds, but you shouldn't be settling down on them, as winning odds are not always constant.

This is not sustainable on the long run since the chances of succes and failure are equal. It will be a matter of time before you get drained. To be profitable, you need at least odds of at least 3. This will make it possible to remain profitable even with the 50% win rate. I know some people are arguing that 2.0 odds is the right number, unfortunately, that will be like moving round the same cycle. For instance, you place ten $50 bets of 2 odds each and at the end you win five bets, this will give a total bet amount of $500, and total winning of $500 which is what I mean by turning round the same circle.
 

Win win win, yes. 1.90 gives you a little edge you may think, but in sports betting, that odd is already a good multiplier when joined with other games and staked, but I've my reservations on staking such odds alone because you'll have to increase your staking power in order to see some kind of a tangible profit, and what happens when you loose, you lose big.

I think there's more impact in losing than winning with such low odds in a single stake, if we go down to our calculations, possibly I stake $1000 on a 1.90 odds with a possibility of winning $900 and also at the same time a possibility of losing the $1000. So you see, the loss is greater than the amount tho be gained and that's why I love combining more games to get a good figure to go with a lower stake.

Winning is never assured, so you don't throw it all in at once.

I would say a 50 percent chance of winning with such odds is difficult. Moreover, if one bets on the same odds for a long period of time, there is doubt as to whether he will be able to increase his winnings there. I have doubts about whether the bet will be 50 percent in 50-50 positions. We have even seen many instances where even with odds of 1.10 cents the bet is not guaranteed to win and having 1.90 odds means there is a 50 percent chance that I will never be able to secure my bet. The lower the odds in gambling, the higher the chance of winning, but there is no guarantee. The outcome may change at any time.

No, you're wrong 1.90 in decimal odds for 50% winning chances doesn't give a 10% edge to the house (or to the bookmaker here). That's what Freebitcoin is offering for its dice game for example, it's only 5% HE actually.
And since there are 2 outcomes (one for winning, the other for losing), you only need to overcome half of this house edge to not lose money.  

EV = 1.90 x 50% - 1= -0.05 = -5%

https://i.ibb.co/YNzvRzB/image.png

In order to not lose money you need to have an EV >= 0

EV = 1.90 x WC - 1 >= 0
=> WC >= 1 / 1.90
   WC >= 0.526 = 52.6%

It means you will make profits if you win more than 52.6% of times bets with 1.90 odds.

Winning always remains a thing of luck mostly when it's gambling, if it's casino games, forget it, you can almost never out weigh the house but to hope you get a better chance some day but literally the house has got almost 70% edge most of the times and they give you a chance and not you giving them na edge, I know talking certain risk at times may look like giving them the edge but mostly they have got the edge most times.

No odds guarantees a win or a loss, they are just luck based most of the times, this is what I always keep in mind before placing a bet and for me it's been the reality. Even with top skill you still loose some times. The reason some persons take certain risk with so much confidence on their side believing they will win is mainly because of history.

it's definitely gonna cut it most of the times as smaller odds are likely to win against bigger odds... But all the same, when the selections are more than 1, the probability of winning decreases from 85% to atleast 67% ... That's just enough to cut most of tickets and trash them!
Technically, yes! It depends on what you call success... Personally, I don't see success to be an everyday meal game - I don't even wanna win 50% of the times I gamble... As long as it's always a heavy return for each time.

Well, I guess you are correct with your computation, but winning 52.6% to be profitable is still not easy. If we can bet on odds like 1.95 every time, do you have a computation for that? How many percent should I achieve to win in the long run, or might as well make sure to bet on odds 2.00 just to ensure that on our wins, we won't be paying the vig anymore.

If we are considering the sportsbetting, there is high chance because low odds are deemed to be the potential winner of that match. It means, they are strong contenders in that game. However, do remember, upset can always happen in any sports. But to say, most of the time, low odds has good chance of happening, then I can agree in that opinion. But you still have to keep up yourself with the game as there will be hints of injury or coaching technique that can influence the results of the game.

It's possible to win while maintaining a 50% win rate if you adjust your units per bet instead of betting a fixed amount. Then again it'll be challenging to have an average odds of 1.90 because they tend to shift a lot of the time based on certain factors, but that doesn't always mean your chances of winning goes up or down. For example, the public and sharp bettors can move the odds from the opening until kickoff and adjust the underdog odds from 2.10 to 1.90 throughout the day.

That does not align with my bankroll management principles. I would rather stick with a certain percentage of the wager, as it will increase the amount once my bankroll grows. I just want to make a simple strategy that works, and odds like 1.90 and lower don’t seem to work for me based on my experience. Experts mention that we just need to achieve 53%, and while that's right, which is easier: lowering the winning percentage and increasing the odds, or the opposite?

This gives the bookie you're playing at 10% wiggle room to keep a head over you. Even if you're above average, chances are that in the long run you won't be able to keep up with winning over 50% of bets. Let alone the fact that 1.9 odds aren't common in sports where there's only 2 possible outcomes as win/loss for a team. 1.9 is common in soccer where there can also be a draw in normal time but you shouldn't consider the odds of winning 50% because the chance of a draw is always there.

So in a game like basketball or tennis where either of the two has to win and a draw isn't a possibility odds of 1.9 don't actually mean 50%.
Let me give an example:

https://talkimg.com/images/2024/08/11/5peno.png

This is a table tennis match that is upcoming. The players aren't internationally famous and the league is just the Czech liga. It's hard to make predictions for such a sport and league because not many people are very knowledgeable in it so bookies employ some very rudimentary statistics to give initial odds before the match starts.

You can see one player has odds slightly above 1.9 while the other has odds closer to 1.7. You see now. It's safe to assume the casino considers the second player having better win chances than 50%, yet they give odds much lower than 2 or even 1.9. So for you to be afforded odds of 1.9 in an outcome that's either a loss/win scenario, you aren't betting on the likely winner. Just consider this when making decisions. You'd have to be really good and selective at making picks in such sports to keep winning with 1.9 odds.

Your example is about moneyline bets. Naturally, you can't get the odds you're looking for if you only bet on moneyline bets. You can only get a 50-50 chance from bookies if you're betting on the point spread and its total, but this doesn't apply to every market. As in your example, if the moneyline odds for one side are already 1.90, you can't get 1.90 on the other side anymore since that's what the bookies are offering.

You need to choose the games you bet on carefully, making sure the teams aren't equally matched. For instance, if Team A is the heavy favorite with a moneyline of 1.50, you might get -4.5 at 1.90 odds and +4.5 on the other side with the same odds when betting on the point spread.

Most of the successful sports bettor usually pick a lower odds since most of the pick that most likely win are those below 1.9 odds. We are considering the long term probability here so I’m skeptical if someone can manage to win long term with consistently taking 1.9 odds since it’s already more on luck based game due to pick involved are nearly close to each either when it comes to win rate.

Successful bettor in long run frequently choose a pick that has higher winning rate and just use the parlay or combo bets to increase the odds instead of consistently taking 1.9 odds or an almost even match.

For 1.95 decimal/european odds it's the same computation.
You need to have an Expected Value of 0 at least, to not lose money, and above 0 to make profits (in the long run).
EV = 1.95 x WC - 1 = 0
WC = 1 / 1.95
WC = 0.513 = 51.3%
You would need to win more than 51.3% of the time

Betting on odds of 2.00 won't change the vig if the real winning chances are below 50%.
You can see it on the Multiply BTC game of Freebitcoin for example.
If you put 2.00 odds your winning chances will fall to 47.5%
https://i.ibb.co/nnJRbLZ/image.png
So for example, if the real winning chances are 30%, you will double your stake when you win with 2.00 odds, but you will lose 70% of the time.
When you only have 2 outcomes, and the two are of 2.00, you are at least sure that if one is a bad value bet the other is a good one. So randomly, you won't lose money in the long run.

You don't bet on just one type of probability, in fact you can't bet the same on a probability of 1.5 as on a probability of 1.9, that is, it's a combination of both, so at the end of the month what you're interested in is seeing a positive result.

There are many combinations that can be made in terms of bet size vs. estimated probability, so that when one fails it compensates with the gain of the other. That improves your chances of winning better than thinking of just one type of probability like the one you mention.

In games where it's uncertain who will win, bookies are unlikely to give 1.9 to both parties. I think it would be more realistic to see 1.75 or something. The reality is that bookies don't want to take any risks. Plus it's easy that with a bit of intuition some people might be good at picking the right result more than 50% of the time.

So for any match with two possible outcomes, it's very often to see both parties at odds under 1.9. bookies actually have a higher edge than most gambling games if you calculate it. At 0% edge both ends should have 2.0 odds.

I think you are right but an average odd of 1.9 is still achievable but the danger is that in trying to get it, one might add more combinations that will increase the risk of the game. I have been in a situation whereby I was chasing 2 odds per bet which I planned to compound until I achieve a target. Some days I will have some reliable games but not up to the odds I want so I will have to add other games that end up spoiling my bet. There is indeed a big burden in playing a fixed odds because some flexibility is really needed some times to be able to win.

As a gambler, I will not just fully rely on this kind of odds, if this is only your basis to place your bet, I don't think it will make you profitable, you need to consider a lot of things, for example in the NBA games, like the players line up, injury reports, home court advantage, etc.

I highly agree!  I believe the chance of winning on the 1.90 odds is not dependent on the odds alone.  Even if it has more than 50% chance of winning theoretically, there are other factors that affect the result of the match like the condition of the team or athlete on the day of the fight, the unknown factor that can affect the result of the game and more.

At the end of the day, the actual chance of winning is dependent on how a bettor assesses the possible outcome of the game and not the given odds by the bookmaker.  So it is still not sure whether betting on these odds will be profitable in the long run unless we can precisely predict the outcome of the game.

No odd regularly played in thesame perttern can continue winning in a long run. Even if you chose to play 1.50, 1.60 to 1.90 odd which is almost like %90 chance preferably over your %50 as you said, you may not be able to win continuously because odd will remain thesame but game changes. This still implies that it's all about luck.

Let me talk for myself, I have tried playing 2odd single games in 5 different tickets instead of multiple, and I was able to almost win %80 of my ticket which is 4 tickets out of 5. So I continued but it was not regularly. sometimes I lose 3 tickets and win 2, and the win amount is just small compared to multiple stake. So looking at it, you will see how difficult it's is. In summary no strategy is a perfect strategy in the long run hence gambling is for fun not a business that generates a steady income. Even the casino didn't built it for business porpos but as a "try your luck method " which is either keep trying for fun and have hope to win big someday than not trying atol.

Those rules are okay too, but from my perspective, it's more challenging if you limit yourself to an exact percentage because there are weeks when matches are unreadable and good teams suddenly whittle down in predictable matches.

Out of those two choices, i'd pick the former because i've tried it with a bit of success, the biggest downside with it is that you need a lot of discipline and patience knowing when good underdogs appear at a good price.

As for myself, I haven't achieved success in my years of gambling. As always for me, gambling has been an expense rather than a source of money.

We are confident of a win sometimes not because of the odds but because of how we see the upcoming game or match. The odds of course would reflect this oftentimes, but it doesn't work that way all the time. So the same confidence that you may find in a bet with 1.90 odds could also be found in bets with odds as high as 2.80.

To those who place bets coming from a high level of familiarity and analysis, their bets must be realistic. They aren't betting while summoning luck.

I have the same experience; it has been an expense, but what's important is that I'm having fun with it. That's the difference when you treat gambling as a fun activity as you don't see your losses as a challenge but rather consider them as an expense for the entertainment.

I think the mindset differs among gamblers, but what’s important is that they are responsible for what they’re doing. Some may believe they have the skills to turn gambling into a way to make a living, which is quite exceptional. Most of us don't have that talent, so we should know our limits to stay safe.

The house edge is usually in favor of the casino and no matter how high or low the odds are, the casino are still people that benefits the more. Success in betting doesn't come by playing the 1.90 odd repeatedly but you can combine different small odds and stake on it with the amount you can afford to lose. Even small odds doesn't guarantee a huge win. If you take gambling as a business, be ready to lose unexpected times and also to win in unexpected times.

I would rather bet on higher odds than combine two bets into a parlay. Based on what I've read, parlays are often money traps designed to entice us with the potential for bigger winnings. The more legs we add to a parlay, the lower our chances of winning, which is why sportsbooks favor bettors who enjoy parlays. The allure of a big payout might be tempting, but the reality is that the odds of hitting a large parlay are slim.

Most gamblers wants to win, but it is in the casino terms of service that gambling should be for fun. The casinos know that gamblers are losing regardless of the odds they are using to bet.
[/quote]

Its pretty wild that casinos have got it down to a science. That alone should definitely tell anyone that you are up against a professional opponent. I've talked about professional gamblers and all that and there have been threads and all this but i've finally come to the conclusion that the best professional gamblers are the casino operators because the house always wins lol.

Parlay is more tempting I often do this because the odds are increasing even though choosing small odds but still that's what the bookies want, if we take one wrong bet that is entered into parlay then the entire bet will be lost even though this opportunity is small but I still do it.
Several times winning luckily, on the other hand, I have lost consecutively in parlay betting.

I know how slim the chances of hitting a huge win in a parlay can be but some time, a wise gambler always cash out some percentage of the potential winning which could still be a significant profit depending on what the potential winning amount was. Sometimes, I just prefer to add lots of leg in the parlay so that if there's a cash-out offer, it will be a big manageable for me to take it.

Parlay betting is more interesting, more tense and you have to think harder to choose the team that will get a win in the match or draw, this does provide a small chance of winning, no wonder the winnings offered are very large if we can predict the match correctly in all the matches entered.

It is natural that you often lose in parlay betting because it is difficult, but it is not impossible if you are used to and know the conditions of the matches you take to bet, your big wins make up for your losing streak.

If I want to bet on a single match, I can use $10 to bet it if it is having a odd of 1.5 or higher. If it is parley that consist of 3 matches, I can use $3.3 to bet it if the matches are 1.5 odds each. What I would win is still $15 for both bets. The matches can not be of the same odds but I just use it to explain it. I am not expecting huge winning and I will not cashout. I do not go more than 3 matches in parley. Parley is more of a way to lose in betting if the matches selected are getting more.

Not that you are wrong. Some poeple can select many matches and winning huge amount of money when some of the matches are not yet played. That is what you are talking about. Some people are tempted to cashout and cashout instead of waiting for the other matches to begin and end.

No matter how you know that league or the clubs that are playing, when a bookie see his customers going for parley, they are happy because they know that more than 95% or more of the bet would be lost by the bettors.

I agree just like the others have said that in the long run, it makes it difficult to get an advantage, even when you are winning more often than the 50% chance might suggest. You will need to win at a higher rate than expected for winning against house edges if you need to bet consistently in such a challenge. While some of us and other gamblers can win in the long run at least with confidence that most of the time requires more sophisticated strategies or detailed research picking next option outcome is okay, math magic and outside the house edge is critical to realistic expectations. For starters, always know the edge of the house, and try to bid where you have a good advantage and also being well informed with discipline will help you make good decisions and enhance your chances for long-term success.

That's the reality; I'm not sure about the percentage, but our chance of winning a parlay bet is very slim. Just a quick spelling correction: it's "parlay," not "parley." Anyway, back to the topic, I think we should consider betting on parlays only if we aren't too serious because it's the kind of small bet with a huge reward, so that alone tells us that our chances are very slim. I think a 2-legged parlay is only equivalent to about 30% in terms of chances, so imagine how much slimmer it gets with more legs.

Some gamblers are doing well in gambling activities with even lower odds than 1.90, it's their plans that matter. The 1.90 is near to doubling your wagering amount (2.00), so what is the stress in that? Haven't you seen the gamblers betting on 1.40 odds and lower, it is all about your risk affinity, chance of winning and the management style you use to cover up for lapses. Just like in trading, I apply a good risk-to-reward ratio to my gambling. I prefer 2.00 odds to make it more convenient, often time, lower odds are welcome but can't be less than 1.80. The plan is that, with my high level of winning of about 75% in sports betting, I still have about a 25% chance to override the little 0.1 and 0.2 shortage of 2.00 in those bets. This is even as I often bet 2.00 and above to further help my calculations and override the shortage in those odds.

Super slim. We have to be wise with our parlays. If there's a chance for a cash-out, go for it, take advantage of that feature as much as possible. A win is still a win, even if the whole parlay wins in the final results, don't regret it.

I think this is why many sports bettors are failing on their first 10 tickets because they are getting greedy just after a single win. Afterward, they will make parlays which they think is easy because they won the first one but God knows how freaking difficult it is to complete a parlay and win as a result.
Well, experience will make a gambler wiser, I guess they will need to walk that path for them to know the reality.

In the long run, it differs per match and odds. 1.90 is a good one if I think that the team that I'll bet on has a bigger chance to win but it doesn't mean that I'll bet with the same odds or close to it for the same team.

50% of chance winning for that odd, I don't think it's worth taking. But if you are up to gamble and you want to have more wins as with that potential, then settle the odds and still make sure that you do your own research before placing a bet.

Your own strategy is good and I actually do stake up $10 or at least $5 if it's on a single game with a small odd, but sometimes too, in a parlay I can risk up to $10 and the games selected could be more than ten with different odds. I know that gambling is a game of luck but before I stake in such accumulator, I usually take my time to do the prediction and I only add the game that I feel so sure that it's supposed to be successful if the team doesn't fuck up. I use such strategy so that the cashout can be a bit meaningful amount  ;D.

I also like the strategy in which I choose the most confident matches for me. For example, I would prefer to bet on 1 match out of 10 that I chose, but if I am completely confident in it, and in the rest I had a borderline decision. Of course, I get a cold shower after it ends not in my favor, but who said that if we believe in something, it will come true?

In general, I have never liked odds below 1 and I prefer to take more risk. But at the same time, I see how even more players bet on small odds to win at least something, but with a higher probability. But sometimes later I see threads in which a player complains that he lost with odds of 1.1  ;D

They may enjoy more wins with lower odds due to the high probability of winning, but if they look at the big picture, they'll see that it's not profitable. I would rather go for the 50-50 market offered by the bookies, avoid parlays, and limit the number of bets so I can maintain my focus.

Sports betting doesn't need to take up much of our time. If we aim to win, we need to focus, and since we're only human and don't have an extreme ability to multitask, we should prioritize the quality of our bets.

That's not the right way of portraying it because even if it the bet is having lower odds then it doesn't guarantee a win.
The probability will still be 50-50 for the game. I have myself did this experiment once and placed all my bets on the ones with lower odds.
I lost almost 8/10 bets which shows that it's not the lower odds that always wins.
Also, luck is an important factor and we need to win our bets whether it be the one with lower odds or higher odds.

We need to carefully analyze our bets and not fully rely on the odds. If we automatically assume that odds of 1.50 mean a sure win, we’re likely to lose easily. In popular events or games that attract a lot of bettors, bookies might offer lower odds that seem attractive, but sometimes it turns out to be just a trap. I believe these ideas aren't often discussed with beginners, but once you consistently gamble on sports and join various forums, you’ll come across theories that might make you think they have some truth to them. This can help you become more cautious with your decisions, so you don't easily fall into traps when you see odds that are too attractive or hard to resist.

To some extent the 1.9 odds does stand to be at 50% probability of coming to happen, especially that these odds are dynamic in the sense that one second it can be 1.9 odds the next could be either 10 odds or 1.01 odds depending on whether your selection is winning or losing!

Am pretty sure OP is trying to say these odds have a 50% chance of happening...say thing as 1.01 odds ...it's these odds were sure bets people would have been taking them all day, everyday to download free money!! But for anybody trying to grow their bankroll faster or break even I think these are healthy odds imo.

It's hard to bet on those odds because it can also be the other way around. I think it's too risky for me to bet unless I know what I'm betting on and it feels like it's going to be a good match or outcome.

Realistically, it's not always going to be a long-term win. It's hard when I see it mathematically.

It’s really hard to win in long term with this odds while the match is graded as even. You are losing 10% of your potential profit which is supposed to be x2 on an even match. It’s better to bet on matches that has a side with clear advantage or an underdog that has potential to reverse the result for a much better higher profitability.

I’d rather bet on Blackjack with a chance to get a x2.5 payout when Blackjack with same 50% chance of winning compared to a match that is considered as 50 chance winning while the payout is below 2.0.

Its a numbers game, and if you dont understand the numbers, you're playing right into the bookmakers' hands.

Offering you 1.90 chances, they are not indicating a 50/50 chance. Your actual chances aresometimes reduced as they are building in a profit for themselves. You really ought to be smarter than that.

Thinking you can win 60% of the time when the odds are stacked against you is delusional. That is ignorance instead of confidence. You must have a plan and thorough knowledge of how the market operates if you are to challenge the system. And let me say, most people simply lack that.

This is about intelligence not about chance. Moreover, you would be better off saving your money in your pocket if you are not ready to commit the effort. The house always wins unless you are wiser than it is. And that is a hefty order as well.

Blackjack is indeed the best when you will play it properly by the standard strategy. It has the lowest house edge while the payout on Blackjack is over x2 while you have the chance to double down your bet once the dealer has low card for a much higher profit.

Other games doesn’t offer this payout structure and just stick to the ratio and proportion of risk to payout with less payout due to house edge.

I am with you here. It's everybody's choice to make a bet like that, with a twist to it that it may not go through. Analysis is key, as well as the cool head being on your shoulders while doing it.

I also prefer quality in betting instead of quantity, because if you chase quantity, you can lose concentration and we will spend a lot of time on a quality analysis of the event. And what is most important is that this time and effort spent may not bring profit, it is not like a regular job where we will definitely get money for our actions. You can bet for years, but no one guarantees profit here, although many players come here specifically for profit and think that they will always have it as income, but this is a misconception.

50/50 looks like an excellent solution, you just need to determine some subtle points. I do not place express bets, because I also believe that they should be avoided.

My strategy is very simple: I focus on a limited number of games. For example, when betting on NBA games, there might be 8 to 10 games in a day, but I only choose a maximum of 4 games to carefully study and analyze. I would be happy getting 3 wins out of 4 because that's already a good percentage if I can maintain that consistently. Of course, bankroll management cannot be neglected because all the effort we put in from the very beginning will be wasted if we start chasing losses due to a lack of self-control.

Um? Didn't you just answer your own question? We obviously CAN win but in long term it's very unlikely. Even with 2.0 odds and 50% change of winning, there's 50% change of being in loss, and by removing 10% outcome should be pretty clear. It's not complex statistics.

Infact it's so unlikely to make long term profit that casinos don't need other then way smaller house edge to make profit. This is why i find it funny when some people are blaming fixed games for losing. Admitting that they can't do math is just too embarassing for them.

Short answer to your question is no, but why else would we be gambling, if we wouldn't like to believe in luck? If we would just look at probablility and math behind the house edge, we  most likely wouldn't play, as that's not profitable in a long run. But that's a boring way to look at things and gambling is all about excitement.

Such a brilliant strategy, if most gamblers can keep greed aside and try to follow a model such as this, their chances of stay profitable is definitely going to be high and consistently making profit more often than they loss. This strategy you have spoken about entails a whole lot of greed management because for a greedy fellow this may look too small as the odds too may not look appealing to them either but for a very disciplined and calculative gambler, this model is a great one as the probability with this model is high and even while suffering loss you can still be profitable if you had made some profit before the losses.

Sounds like a great plan, I agree. A dream for people who can control themselves while they bet or gamble, for sure ;D

It is good to have the opportunity to choose from such a number of games in one game day and your tactics will hopefully bring you a good percentage of victories on the long path of betting in the NBA. In general, in almost every sport there comes a time when major tournaments take place and the number of games per day allows us to choose between those in which we are very confident. Of course, if we have arguments to bet more on other matches, then we can even increase this number, the main thing is that it does not interfere with our win rate. Of course, in addition to this, we need to monitor the bankroll as you mentioned, well, and other things. If in general everything is done very thoughtfully and carefully, even if we often do not have luck, our percentage of losses should be less than that of other players who play these rules.

Yes ofcourse, I have come to know that the lower odds are not always more fruitful.
Sometimes it's better to bet on the one with higher odds because you might just end up winning it easily.
You're right that more analysis is needed when we are betting on sports. We can't take it for granted.
Talking about traps, have you encountered such traps earlier ?

Stick into the sports on which you do really know that you do have that sufficient knowledge or really having that kind of awareness on what it is rather than on testing or betting out on sports on which you dont really even know. If its for the sake of diversifying your bankroll bets then its something that will bring out that huge devastation into your overall bankroll on which means that its not really that recommendable at all.
It will really be that bringing out that huge loses or will blown up your capital. Speaking about odds then 1.90 doesnt give out that fix 50% chance. Even if we do say 2x or more then it will really be not something
definite or fixed. Chances of winning will really be that affected by different factors on which it could really be happening along the way. So it would really be that on your personal preference and choices.

The key on here is that you should really be playing on sports on which you are knowledgeable, not only just that giving out that good chance on winning but also you would really be finding this to be that
interesting or something that gives out thrill because you do know the sports in compared into those things on which you dont know on what it is, then it will really be giving out that
kind of no emotion or no excitement because this isnt really that your line.

The lower the odds the higher the chance of winning but the tricky part to this is that nothing is safe or guaranteed in sports betting, we have seen odds as low as 1.01 ending up badly. Gamblers play odds of less than 2 odds and try to rollover for a month or more than that, everyone into sports betting has thought of this but 90 percent of us have failed because there's no way to always be in profit and have a winning streak for up to 30 days no matter how small the odds are. I actually prefer not to go below or above 2 odds I find it reasonable to aim for 100 percent return of my stake and if it doesn't work out as planned I know it's all risky

I don't think we can have a clear percentage on how much successful a certain odd can be in a sport betting. That is very easy to proof as normally an odd as low as 1.20 should be able to be a winner in 5 out of 6 bets and we know this not to be the case as we can see in tennis,basketball and soccer to name a few. So we cannot really make calculations in percentages regarding sport betting. It is difficult to win nowadays as injuries and referees can make your sport bet go the wrongest way possible.

Your explanation is good but you should also admit that it's based on assumptions, if it were to be real, then it is a foolproof plan that will surely help you earn every time. But as we know gambling, regardless of what you are betting, you can never be making the 3 out of 4 games win, that's the reality.

For this, there is no way it will not affect the management which is why I would have considered it better in terms of having the factor of safety. If I were you, I would base my risk management on the premise that out of a whole 4 games, I would win just 1.5, this alone has covered enough for you in terms of risk management and mind preparation and if you are good and win more, it will be an added advantage because the risk management will even be better rather than preparing less for it.

Probability of winning a bet has nothing to do with the streaks of bets cause the probability resets for every new bet so anything happened before that bet become irrelevant to the scenario.

I don't know how you did the math and concluded that 1.90 odd means 50% of winning but in sports betting probability is not even a thing it's just for measuring the odds nothing else.

If you're going to gamble on sports, you might as well aim to at least double up every go, it's a bit boring doing things like 1.1x where you have to win 10 times just to make 100% extra on your money. That is ten times that the bet could go the wrong way, because even the bookmaker is admitting that there is room for that bet not to win your money - if it was guaranteed then they would give you 0% odds. You also have to remember that the bookmaker will be adding in an extra buffer to every bet, so you're looking at a 1.9x bet, but the reality is the bookmaker thinks it is really worth 1.8x and have stuck an extra 0.1 safety margin on top that you'll never see - it's a hidden cost of doing business with them.

Winning 10 times at x1.1 is not as easy as many people think. On the contrary, I avoid such odds because I know what it leads to - a mandatory loss if you do it too often. Of course, you can do it without a break, but one day your luck will run out. The bookmaker will never lose, this is the main rule of betting, so I can never be sure that my winning streak will continue. And even if we win and leave, we can come back and leave all the winnings back, because rarely does anyone quit gambling completely.

I am quite sure that your question lacks logic and coherence. When you win 50% of the time while either losing 100% or winning 90%, how the hell would you make it into profits long term? It's simple maths here if you assume that these outcomes are a given at odds 1.9. The point is to find odds that you think are not accurately calculated by the bookmaker (to your advantage of course). When the bookmaker gives you 2.0, which basically means you can double your money, and your assessment is that winning has a chance of >50%, then in the very long term you would be profitable. If, as I said above, the chance for losing 100% is the same as winning 90% of your stakes, it's a path that guarantees you to lose money in the long run.

There has always been a saying and argument about this, not just on 1.9 odds, but odds that are below 2 always have a higher chance of winning compared to when someone goes for higher odds.

It works most times, but not all the time; it's just a probability, which is why I believe the Op gave it a rating of 50/50 chances of winning. There are also times where those 1.9 odds will definitely be against the bettor, and the option with higher odds will play most times.

Actually it works but we don't have to trust the odds unless the games has been played according to how you predicted it.
Most times 2 odds plays more than odds below two, although it's just luck that can make the whole things work for the gambler. Sometimes the players in the game made the gamblers to win, because when the players are not performing well and they have lower odds they will probably lose their match and the gambler that bet on the club that the players are playing for will lose his or her bets. This is why gamblers have a 50% chance of winning on sport games than casino games, but the gambler still need luck to win on sport, and luck starts the moment the gambler is predicting the bets.

In fact, with odds of 1.9, the probability of winning is not 50% in sports betting, but 52.63%. This is the exact probability of winning with this odds. The probability of winning is calculated using the formula 100/odds. That is, if we divide 100 by 1.9, we get the figure 52.6315…%
At first glance, it may seem that this figure is close to the probability of 50%. But the difference is 2%. This is a fairly large difference in probabilities, which can be summed up in your strategy or subtracted from it in the long term, which can lead to very large wins or losses over the long term.
This difference must be taken into account in any case.

I don't think it's accurate.

You can try to calculate with the moneyline odds, there's a match I calculate both of the teams, when I sum both of the winning percentage, it doesn't reach 100% and sometime it bigger than 100%.

It should be odds 1/(odds 1+odds 2) or vice versa.

I think people shouldn't bet based on probability like team one has 52% win chance, another one is 48%, both of them are pretty much same, but their history, popularity and recent performance are different, so bettors can use this analysis to make a bet.

If you're playing single odds, the probability of winning is slightly higher quite alright, but don't you for once think you're being overly optimistic? Thereby neglecting that the chances of losing big money is enormous compared to the scenario when games are combined. Most times the surest games disappoint, and the kind of funds used to straighten these single games takes away the fun when they are lost.

It's easier to handle with amounts you can afford to loose when you combine few games, the accumulated odds makes more sense and you're more comfortable staking with lower funds since the multipliers have made the potential winnings feasible and you can have your fun without pressure.

I do not believe this. If a club is given 1.9 odd to win, the club it is playing with can be given up to 2.5 or more odds but the club is not also a small club at all. There is a chance that the higher odd club can win, that is around 50% chance. Also the club may draw. That draws the chance to win lower to around 30 to 35%. If the chance for the low odds club to win is more than 35%, it can not be more than 40%.

This is actually a good idea but a lot of people would disagree with it because they feel like a single game is very risky whereas multiple games are more riskier compared to single games, instead combining more than two games and having one game to ruin your bet slip just carefully analyze and pick out a single game, this actually has more chances of playing out well than multiple selections. But in sports betting everyone has their preference and strategies that works for them, the game also has some percentage of luck involved

This is how sports betting works. Obviously the house has to have an edge. There’s always a built in fee for using a service otherwise how would service providers stay in business. This is what makes gambling a pay for entertainment service. If the casino was operated not for profit, maybe gambling could be considered a job.

Actually, these days, in the age of crypto bookies, 1.9 is a fairly good number for a 50/50 bet. At many sites I often see odds as low as 1.75-1.8 for 50/50 bets like this. Most common odds are 1.83 or 1.85 actually. If sites I play at had 1.9 I would be more than happy actually.

The only place you get these odds atm are places like pinnacle or betting exchanges like betfair for example. Bet365 also if you are lucky but anywhere else it's definitely below.
Sure sports books have to make money, no question about that, but a vig of like 15% and more is way too much if you ask me and definitely not good in the long run for every bettor.

Totally depends on you when it comes to your preference about on the odds.Of course bookies are running up a business on which its understandable that they would be setting out those deductions
according into their liking. I do even able to test out on betting with 1.5x odds but going lesser is never been that something that i could be able to handle out. 1.90+ is indeed that a good odds
on which you could really be able to have that good profits in 50% chance on winning up but of course just like been said that it will really be that a matter of choice on how you would be able to
accept out those odds. If you do find yourself not that contented or convinced on the potential win then you could always skip out.

On the moment that i do see some other betting lines which i could be able to bet on or having that knowledge at least then this is the time i do consider out on making up some parlays
to make more the winnings to be more that appealing or something which is really that worth.

No Iif people could consistently give up odds to the casino and win regularly they would be pit of business quickly.  Not saying that someone can't go on a good run but in the long run the more you bet the more chance you are giving the casino a chance to win.  The best way to bet if you are looking for wins is big bets and not that often.  And definately don't Chace losses.

that is what I completely believe , luck based games are far different from Sports betting games where we are dealing with our knowledge of the team, game and timing comparing to luck based that we are only having chances away from our capacity to believe .

though I have not dealing with what is OPs asking because I randomly bet in luck games and I have my permanent teams in sports games .

Yes, it's true that there are not many opportunities for those who are consistent in betting to win, in fact the more small opportunities that we give to the casino in the near future will result in big losses. Everyone has played well in the short term or long term, there is still a chance for the casino to win our money.
One of the best ways is to play with large capital in the long term and you have to be prepared to lose, dare to take your own way without resetting, other people keep trying and analyzing The good ones who are too hasty in placing bets, let's take it slowly, the important thing is to be sure, losing when betting is normal, you have to keep your spirits up.

Having a long term success rate with this has a little possibility but it's very difficult, I'm on different sites that post daily rollovers of less than 1.50 odds for days and it doesn't always turn out well. The lower the odds the higher the chances of winning but overtime I have figured out the odds doesn't really matter. A played a single game of 13 odds and I had a successful outcome and another time a single of  7 odds which also went well, these odds arrangements are ways the bookmakers confuse or trick the gamblers, sometimes These odds don't matter

The most problems gamblers face is following the favourite odds of the bookmakers and if it involves the stronger teams they just conclude that it will be the possible outcome. Gambling on a particular odds cannot guarantee winning even when you win from using such strategies in the past, gambling between two teams has a 50:50 chance of which among them will win even though the sides with the least odds are mostly considered the favourite.

If we do peak literally about winning odds or condition then it would be only 2 possible choice on whose gonna win on which simply having that 50-50 chance on which its understandable but in the real sense i must say that % of winning will really be that still affected on different factors as we do all know if we do tend to dig further or simply in talks about those factors then you could be able to picture out about those chance of winning, but literally talking about choice then it will really be in half in between the odds on winning. Its never been an assurance on winning up even if we do speak about half chances of winning but it wouldnt be wise or ideal on making yourself having this kind of positivity that no matter what the odds is then you will really be assuming about on winning up. 1.90 or even lower then it will really be just that depending on you
whether you do choose or pursue out. For those mentions above on having that odds of 1.5 lower then its not idea. We've seen in the past that there are people who do deal up with 1.01 on which i dont
see the reason on why they would really be choosing up on betting with these odds? Its not really that worth if you do ask me but surprisingly there are really those who do loves to dive in with these odds.

Strong teams is no guarantee for success in gambling, sometimes what we call weak teams comes very prepared for the big teams thereby making it difficult for the strong teams to win, other times the stronger team underestimates the weaker team and underperform in the game leading to ticket loss.

I always love staking when two weaker teams are playing and stake on BTS or when a stronger team is playing from away and is a team that has good scoring abilities. Soccer generally has a 50 - 50 chance of playing out and there should be no need to depend on just odds or stronger team to give us a win

In sports betting the odds are really not a factor because even an odd of 1.01 can end up going sideways. Few months ago I placed a bet of 50 odds with 5 thousand naira, I combined about 20 games to accumulate up to that odds amount , I remember quite well that there was a game I added that was 1.03 odds, the option I picked was over 1.5 goals but that game ended up as 0-0 I was quite disappointed because that was unexpected considering the fact that the odd was very small. Odds are just numbers nothing more

That is correct, I could remembered about few days or Last week sometime similar where Man City and Brentford, and Liverpool vs Nottingham were about 10 odds was give Nottingham, and people didn't bet much due to the high odds. Instead much priority was given to Liverpool and lot of people bet on liverpool to win but at least Nottingham won about 0-1 against Liverpool.

The reason I brought this up was, odds doesn't really matter though but the thing is, if you are that precisely with your selection it would be very easier for you to win than losing the bet. Yes we know it's luck based game but the tendency of losing is very slim if one knows how the games would play out. Okay, just take a look at those who stake on Nottingham with about 10 odds, if they bet without $1k which is about 10k I return including bonuses.

In my long betting experience I have seen that such betting odds never guarantee any win. Even though the odds are low, I have to consider the betting conditions well. There are many examples in betting where a gambler has lost a bet of even 1.10 cents. Rather, those who believe in such bets lose all their profits and deposits at a rate, even if the winnings are high. I never bet depending on odds only.

When it comes to sports betting I focus on my analysis and then look at the betting odds. Although it is very easy to get an idea about the condition of the team by looking at the betting odds, the odds can change at any time. A team may be lucky to perform well or the results may be unexpected. So in addition to the odds in betting, the gambler must also analyze it. A gambler may win once or twice with such bets, but if bet on such odds for a long period of time will definitely lose.

Where you telling about 50% winning chance then how you expect long run winning by using 1.90 Odd ? gambling is about lock if your lock is good then you can win long run but if your luck is not good then you will not able to win long run even you bet for 1.1 Odd. no one can give you financial advice on gambling .you must have to take the responsibility for your loss and gamble for fun purpose. if you use gambling for earning then You will always want to win so you will panic if you lose and keep increasing the bet amount so you will lose more amount. When you forget about responsibility

I am willing to give this a try if it will actually work out, 1.90 seems promising to turn out well. But in sports betting even small odds are not a guarantee that you are going to win the bet. There are no strategies In gambling that can always be profitable if we are to be completely honest with ourselves. The odds can be misleading, it's not always as it seems so you have to be careful before making your selection. A quick, are you sure of hitting this odd once or twice a week?? If you can then you might actually make some profit from this

You are actually right.
Even the small odds are not a guarantee to win. Why? Because the odds are not meant to predict what is going to happen but they are also guessing who will win. They are not accurate so even the x1.60 below could be defeated. Is that a 50/50 chance? I don't think so.
If someone watched the UFC Noche just recently, I bet a lot of people have lost their bets since both champions in the main and co-main event lost their titles and that was not expected to happen. Both are favorites too, although not a heavy one. Still, the confidence of a champion can ruin the confidence of a challenger so that part must also be taken into consideration.
It's not even x1.90 and most of us lost our bets.
Odds are something that we must still think twice because it doesn't mean our chances are as high as 50 percent. It could be very low than that.

I don't think the Op expected this response. That's not what he wanted to discuss.

Odds of 1.90 or lower give us the option to bet on the favorite to win. The odds are pretty good but it still won't provide a profitable long-term win. Especially in multi-betting, even losing one bet at lower odds will wipe out all bets on other games.
I don't know if such a betting strategy would work on single bets. Betting on several games at 1.90 or lower odds each week and consistently might increase the success. But I haven't tried anything like that.

Betting on 1.90 odds in parallel will not make a good strategy because the long the games the more risky your bet becomes. However, the OP type of strategy can only work on a single bet but most times it doesn't end well for the gambler because sometime the stronger team end up losing while the weaker team wins. So sometimes this kind of strategies work but not everytime.

Just like you have explained, strategy differs and their are people that will prefer to take 2 ofdd matches and stake close to $100 or more on them so that they have win 2X without bothering themselves about choosing more matches for a bigger win.
We all know what works for us and it is good we follow the strategy that best work for us in sport betting.
Having a bigger odds games do not mean that we have higher probability of winning since most sport bets are based on luck and strategies that are used.

That's right, I think odds of 1.90 also don't necessarily determine a bigger win, I also often bet with low odds, but the results are also not in accordance with predictions and often miss, besides that it also depends on the situation and condition of the club, each bettor in sports must analyze first before placing a bet, even though with low odds they don't immediately believe it, apart from observing how the club will play, if I myself bet less than 2, the profit is not much and the risk is not comparable to us betting with more than 2 if we win we will feel satisfied because we get more profit.

The odds in sports betting are tricky because aren't decided by the team skills, odds in sports is decided by the markets, if you see a team with low odds that only means most of the users will bet on them, in other words, that team is the favorite and that's why they have low odds.

And for that reason, we see a lot of underdogs winning in sports, because they are not the favorites, they don't have a big fandom, but they have the right skills to win the game/match. And that's why i bet on underdogs most of the times in sports.

That's true, having a well precise prediction can give you a little leverage over the market it makes your chances of winning higher than just making random selections but the thing is analysis sometimes doesn't guarantee that the bet would be successful, look at the Nottingham game you talked about, logically you wouldn't just stake high on 10 odds to win but they ended up winning, if someone asked you to pick that option you wouldn't think of doing that. At the end of the day it's about luck

Yes, you are right that the odds are determined based on the market and the bookie, but often the bookie gives kind of trap by giving unreasonable odds, the favorite team does have lower odds because it is favored but often we find equal odds and that can make gamblers confused.
I personally don't really see odds as the main benchmark in betting because the most important thing is to see how each team performs, even though if you only look at the odds it seems impossible to win.

For things like this, I think it natural thing to happen in sports matches, especially football, considering that there will always be surprises that make the lower team beat the top team, but not many matches can end like this.
If just keep betting on team that are not favored we do get big odds but there will always be much greater percentage chance of losing.

Your attitude towards sports betting keeps me surprised, how can you use the odds as the basis to bet regardless of whether or not they are allocated the big or low odds?

Fine, the low odds indicate a better side and the high odds indicate the weaker side but notwithstanding, this can't still help anyone to conclude that a better team or underdog would win, what is thorough here is your analysis and you must do it with a neutral mind. This can be done with the right information at your disposal about the teams coming together which will help you select the preferred ones. Now, after careful analysis, you discovered that a team is better favoured to win, you mean you will still go for the opposite? That's awkward my friend. The reason is that, in my experience in sports betting, the better side wins more than the underdogs, so how do you quantify that if you win 2 out of 10 matches, for instance?

As much as I realise the risk of betting on the better side to win due to the low odds attached to them, the risk of betting on the weaker side is higher, this is why I ensure that the better side I opt for often has close to 2.0 odds to avoid temptation and enhance my risk management. I don't like going for 1.5 odds, even as 1.7 and above are still okay.

The lower the odds doesnt really mean that it does have that higher chances of winning on which this is something that needs up to be realized into those people who had believing that
this is something which is really that having connection. Although making up some bets into those highly favorite teams will really be showing up that higher chance of winning on which there
are really sports bettors who do really loves on betting on favorites just because they do really believe that it is really that something that could make them win. We do know that
highly favorite will really be understandable that they are most likely to win. So it will really be just that depending on you on how you would really be dealing up with things accordingly
which always stick into your analysis for you to win up and if ever it would lose then there's no regret that you would be able to feel out.

As always, not all lower odds guarantee a win, and the same goes for higher odds. In the end, odds shouldn’t be our sole basis for betting. Because if odds can determine every outcome, then every gambler would only bet on the same odds. But we have given some options, and that is the reason why some win and some lose.

The great thing about sports betting is that we actually have a better chance of winning compared to other games. It’s not just about luck; we have plenty of sources to analyze, giving us an edge over the competition.

You forgot to say the most important thing - what results did your strategy lead to?
Everyone understands that cashflow affects the odds of teams, but this is not the only factor based on which bookmakers list events. I would say that it is a great success to find a game where bookmakers, based on cashflow, quote teams incorrectly and there is an opportunity to make a value bet.

It doesn't matter how safe you try to be, you can actually still end up loosing the game at some point, there a re times when a ten odd game will play while a 1.03 of game will be lost but they are games that are considered one to be very risky and the other to be safer meanwhile its supposed to be just gambling where we hope to stay lucky and not think too much that we are going to win or loose because of our skills. Thought it will help us a while but it can never be the ultimate.

There's no assurance when it comes to betting on which same as you mentioned that there's no such thing about safe bet or lets say a sure bet on which you could be able to make sure that you could make
some profits or winning. It will really be just that making you desperate if you are really that making yourself having those kind of expectations. The key on here is that you should really be that making yourself stick in the general essence when it comes to gambling on where you should really be having that fun. Thinking off the odds and possible winning condition and thinking about on the profits will really be removing out
that kind of essence on which this shouldnt be supposedly be your main priority. Have fun and thrill on which this is the main purpose on why you do gamble but well we do know that reality that these things
only just come in second priority.   ;)

When I see odds of 1.9 and think that there is 50% that this team will win this match, I immediately see that the bookmaker puts 10% in his pocket and I do not want to bet on this. Of course, the bookmaker does this in other matches, but here it is simply clearly visible. I still prefer to spend time and choose the best odds from all those offered, although I start searching from those in which I have been used to playing for a long time. Nevertheless, I do not bet on such odds, my strategy requires betting on riskier odds, although extremely rare, because I will choose the match in which I will be confident, the more matches with doubts.

A friend of mine combined more than 20 games to get just 5 odds his idea was to make sure the games were as safe as possible so he picked odds less than 1.10 only which was really ridiculous to me..it doesn't matter how little the odds are it doesn't guarantee Profit, to cut the long story short he ended up losing the bet that he thought was hundred percent safe, there's nothing safe about gambling anything can happen.. don't get enticed by little odds they might be very tricky