betting against the Public, is this strategy working?

[ethereumhunter]

I heard this strategy working but I like to know based on your experience if this is working.

For those who don't know about this strategy, you can read here to educate yourself.
https://www.wsn.com/betting-guide/betting-against-public/

Also, this website is providing details about public bets, I'm not sure how accurate it is, but we can use this as a reference since I haven't found another one. You can also comment if you some reliable sites.

https://www.actionnetwork.com/nba/public-betting

I don't think this is a good strategy.
Because in sports games the result is usually predictable in most cases, and most bettors win.

The big issue is that the most predictable bets (which is where the public bets) usually pay very little if you don't have the timing to bet at the exact moment.
So, betting against the public can even be a good strategy, but only if you have good reason to believe that your bet actually has a chance of winning. Never make it a rule.

Analyze each game, don't be influenced only by this "strategy".

Only in-depth analysis can yield results whether we have to bet against the public or follow the public because without doing that, we will only be confused about what to choose. And people who don't have the time and ability to analyze matches will usually choose to follow the public because they think that's the easiest thing to do and don't need to analyze. And that strategy will only work if many people say the match will go as they predicted so that the public follows suit.

[1715461025]

1715461025

[1715461025]

1715461025

[xSkylarx]

It's just  we need that gut feeling to do that. There are people who always bet against the majority and hope that even if they lose most of the time the payout will be higher than always betting at high odds. For this reason I tend to stay away from sure bets where 80% of people bet on one team. The payout is so small I don't want to take that risk. I prefer to bet when it's more like 50:50. .

This is mostly based on the game and the club that are playing, sometimes we do see that team with high odds do end up winning the match because they are always considered as the weak team that would lose the game. I don't based on predictions on odd but rather on what I think the two team could play and the numbers of goals that would comes out.

Since many if the casinos I do use do have plenty option for gamblers to choose from without bothering on which team could win a particular match.

Most people that do bet on the team to win a match usually end up losing severely because of the random output that could surface at the end of the match.

But you will win a small profit on it if you bet not against the public unless you bet on a weaker team and you won that is more profit. That is really how it works and also what I've noticed in sports betting not sure of others but unless you are betting with your friends then you can easily double your money. Whether you win or lose and even if how you are confident in a game you bet on the winning team there is really time that you will lose as this is gambling and it has a huge chance of losing.

[LogitechMouse]

I don't know if "betting on a team with a higher odds" in sports betting can be considered as "betting against the public" because I tried betting against what the others are thinking to win in a basketball game (NBA in particular).

Tried it many times, and I don't recommend doing it even though the odds are very attractive. There are times that you will win sure, but most of the time, I end up losing my money because of betting against what others are thinking to win. I will change my strategy when I'm betting in sports games and I will not recommend using this "betting against the public" strategy.

[samcoin]

This strategy could work in basketball more than football as there are only two probabilities in the money line, while in Football there are three, Once you bet on the underdog team to win, you should consider that a draw could happen. it might work in football for the (draw no bet) market, but I didn't try it. In competitive leagues like the EPL, possibilities of unexpected results are always available, every round we watch one or two of them, but the odds couldn't help if one decided to take the underdog side in all matches, as they would end up as a loser. I think in basketball odds could be much higher as there are only two results.

[Fredomago]

I don't know if "betting on a team with a higher odds" in sports betting can be considered as "betting against the public" because I tried betting against what the others are thinking to win in a basketball game (NBA in particular).

Tried it many times, and I don't recommend doing it even though the odds are very attractive. There are times that you will win sure, but most of the time, I end up losing my money because of betting against what others are thinking to win. I will change my strategy when I'm betting in sports games and I will not recommend using this "betting against the public" strategy.

Timing is important and like you most of us here manage to try betting against the public then win but most of the time it ends up losing, this kind of strategy is not for those who are not ready losing their money, if you are just playing to try your luck and you are okay in moving on whatever the outcome of your bet, this might work for you.

Win or lose, you can move forward and forget about the money you lose, but if you don't have that attitude, it can trigger aggressions and
might push you to lose more while trying to find that luck to give you a huge win.

[Bushdark]

Only in-depth analysis can yield results whether we have to bet against the public or follow the public because without doing that, we will only be confused about what to choose. And people who don't have the time and ability to analyze matches will usually choose to follow the public because they think that's the easiest thing to do and don't need to analyze. And that strategy will only work if many people say the match will go as they predicted so that the public follows suit.

I don't think our analysis hhas anything to do with whether we are betting against the house or not.
 Many gambling platforms knows how to set there system to analyze our bets or our possible in a way that they are going to make profits even though the numbers of winners is high.

 If you take a look at sport bets especially for football, many gamblers always bet on a particular team to win or lose which can incur a huge profits for the casino even though there are gamblers that made some huge winnings. That alone will not stop the casino from making profits from our bets.

 It is crystal clear for casinos to keep making profits from us the gamblers

[btc_angela]

Only in-depth analysis can yield results whether we have to bet against the public or follow the public because without doing that, we will only be confused about what to choose. And people who don't have the time and ability to analyze matches will usually choose to follow the public because they think that's the easiest thing to do and don't need to analyze. And that strategy will only work if many people say the match will go as they predicted so that the public follows suit.

I don't think our analysis hhas anything to do with whether we are betting against the house or not.
 Many gambling platforms knows how to set there system to analyze our bets or our possible in a way that they are going to make profits even though the numbers of winners is high.

Of course, that's there job and most of the time the odds are so accurate that it's either to will have to win or others will lose big amounts on them. And maybe this strategy takes into shape because the casino knows how to set the odds majority of the time that some of us thinks it's better to go against them and bet against the public.

If you take a look at sport bets especially for football, many gamblers always bet on a particular team to win or lose which can incur a huge profits for the casino even though there are gamblers that made some huge winnings. That alone will not stop the casino from making profits from our bets.

 It is crystal clear for casinos to keep making profits from us the gamblers

Again, it boils down to business, they have the house edge and eventually they will make money out of us in the long run. That is math and they will remain like that, keep making money out of us heavy gamblers.

[Peanutswar]

They said most of us lose in sports betting, and since most of us would usually pick the public play, then I guess that strategy is working. The question now is how to determine the public play, and you also need to have a high discipline because not all public play will lose, it's just most of the public play will fail, so slowly but surely, you might be profitable.

I checked the website, not sure how they got that percentage of public bets since you need to subscribe if you will click that "lock" sign.

People on sports betting always checking the odds before making a bet some of them make a last-minute position with their bets just to get easily know if there's a manipulation with the odds and tons of people doing this base on my experience in actively betting in sports, and of course this is sports anything can happen by just a single mistake that can make a table turns.

[Solosanz]

People on sports betting always checking the odds before making a bet some of them make a last-minute position with their bets just to get easily know if there's a manipulation with the odds and tons of people doing this base on my experience in actively betting in sports, and of course this is sports anything can happen by just a single mistake that can make a table turns.

I don't think odds manipulation is possible in trusted and popular casino, odds swing is usually happen and it's legal as long as there's huge bettors bet on the underdog. I've seen few case where the casino voided everyone bets because there's an error with the odds calculation, because it's exceed from the normal. It's higher than 100%, so it make the bookie will lose since the gamblers will make more money. However it's legal because the casino already stated in their terms of service.

[AbuBhakar]

This strategy could work in basketball more than football as there are only two probabilities in the money line, while in Football there are three, Once you bet on the underdog team to win, you should consider that a draw could happen. it might work in football for the (draw no bet) market, but I didn't try it. In competitive leagues like the EPL, possibilities of unexpected results are always available, every round we watch one or two of them, but the odds couldn't help if one decided to take the underdog side in all matches, as they would end up as a loser. I think in basketball odds could be much higher as there are only two results.

As already stated in the description of this strategy in the attached link. This betting against the public only works on bet options that have 2 outcomes like Moneyline, points spread and so on. Even so, it's very hard to win on this strategy since you are always relying on an underdog to win or on the lowest possible outcome. Doing this bet will surely put you at a lot of risk and it will be dangerous if you didn't know how to handle risk properly.

Betting on 1.8 to 1.9 odds is much better since it's a fair odds for a close match. Anything unusual odds such as above or lower is not good for me as a normal bettor on sportsbook.

[Plaguedeath]

Betting on 1.8 to 1.9 odds is much better since it's a fair odds for a close match. Anything unusual odds such as above or lower is not good for me as a normal bettor on sportsbook.

I prefer to bet on higher odds like 2.00-4.00 odds in my familiar sport, usually when the both team or fighter have same odds 1.8 or 1.9, it's really 50/50 and risky to bet since we can't speculate which one will win. The reward isn't really high too, so I wouldn't really that happy even my bet is correct. While betting on underdog you're only need to bet for small amount and you have a chance to win higher amount.

[rahmad2nd]

~snip~

I don't think this is a good strategy.
Because in sports games the result is usually predictable in most cases, and most bettors win.

The big issue is that the most predictable bets (which is where the public bets) usually pay very little if you don't have the timing to bet at the exact moment.
So, betting against the public can even be a good strategy, but only if you have good reason to believe that your bet actually has a chance of winning. Never make it a rule.

Analyze each game, don't be influenced only by this "strategy".

Only in-depth analysis can yield results whether we have to bet against the public or follow the public because without doing that, we will only be confused about what to choose. And people who don't have the time and ability to analyze matches will usually choose to follow the public because they think that's the easiest thing to do and don't need to analyze. And that strategy will only work if many people say the match will go as they predicted so that the public follows suit.

Even then, in the end the result will be determined after the bet is over.

However, as you said. and I totally agree with what you said. to determine a sports bet, in-depth analysis is needed to minimize the chances of losing. I think, whether it's a bet against the public or any strategy and method it all depends on who is going to fight and who is the opponent and what are we going to bet. after all, bookies provide many betting options.

Even so as you say, it will really need in-depth analysis to determine which one to choose. in fact, every analysis or prediction that we do often results are not what we expect. in certain cases, especially football. based on statistics, stronger teams will be in demand by the betting public. but regarding the result, we will find out when the fight is over. In conclusion, whatever the strategy is, everything is aimed at getting a win from the betting session.

[Casdinyard]

As the cornerstone of this betting strategy lies within the notion that most superfans tend to be uninformed and are therefore betting only for the sake of supporting their teams, I think this will work. Especially for national games wherein little to no amount of research between players and teams are involved, thus ensuring that indeed little to no reliable information is being passed around amongst these fans. However, I don't see this working internationally, for sports that involve multiple countries pitting against each other like the World Cup, because the teams are made up of the best players, and there's no singular crowd that really defines who's the veteran and who's the underdog team.

[Sanitough]

Betting against the majority? Gauge what you are trying to do. If it is just pride with the idea of not following the majority, then that would be a bad thing. Stick with the objective which is to win even if it would mean you have to follow the majority in some instances. So I think it does depend on the situation; if you are having no assurance of what path or bet to take, then you may follow the majority but if you have your own stand backed with your own reason, then go for it. Gambling is complicated; not because majority bet on first team you'd be required to do also. Always have time to think as much as possible whether following them would yield to a better outcome than following your own intuition.

There’s no wrong actually if you bet by following the majority especially if you have the same analysis with them, so you have to go along with them. However, if you think that betting against the public will be more profitable because there are better odds and you see higher chances of winning, then why not? After all, we don’t gamble to follow the norms, but definitely to entertain us and that will be a bonus already if we get lucky and won some bets.

[Finestream]

I heard this strategy working but I like to know based on your experience if this is working.

Betting against the favorite or against the crowd is likely a luck base scenario but for me I rarely win in this kind of bets. I think the author covers a lot of information in this article and it's worth a read on how betting against the public will work but I think proper risk management could be a back up in here and not go all in most of the time.

It’s always certain that gambling in general is luck based, and so we need to be lucky first and win some bets, even in sports betting as luck is still needed aside from skills. However, when it comes to betting against the public, maybe it will be a working strategy if you have high skills and good analytical thinking on the team you are betting. But you should know that it also comes with high risk, as going against the crowd is likely to be more of losses than wins, that’s just based on my personal experience especially in times that I feel I should go on a different way.

[Accardo]

Gamblers constantly try to follow new ‍stretegy for batting to win. Not all the strategies will work. Many strategies work once or twice, but later it does not work. However, no matter how good the strategy, it will not work too long. The strategy that the OP has talked about can be effective. But not for all the time. In applying this technique, it is necessary to keep the risk of taking a threat. You have to think adversely when the team is in good condition. On the other hand, it is very difficult to support the opposite team in a match that is adversely but you have to obey. Strategy and luck both are needed to win in any betting.

The worst aspect of gambling is thinking that people know what they are doing and trusting that casino writers know much about gambling. These strategies keep people away from becoming better gamblers and most gamblers would stick to such strategy till they get old in gambling without figuring out what actually works in gambling. The moment one starts seeing gambling differently other than a means of making money they'll advance quickly in the niche and stay away from strategies that won't work.

[Johnyz]

There’s no wrong actually if you bet by following the majority especially if you have the same analysis with them, so you have to go along with them. However, if you think that betting against the public will be more profitable because there are better odds and you see higher chances of winning, then why not? After all, we don’t gamble to follow the norms, but definitely to entertain us and that will be a bonus already if we get lucky and won some bets.

That’s true, we should not always follow the crowd in betting we should have our own analysis and be more confident about it, there are gamblers who loves to bet against the odds simply because it is the result of their analysis. Going against the public might be a risk though since we all know they are the majority, so when it doubt try to analyze again and see if there will be changes, make no pressure on your betting activities.