What about low odds in sports betting?

[l3pox]

For sure that’s a risky strategy that may result in losing but I can see someone beating the house with a strategy like that too
It can happen even though it’s not the most likely outcome
Managing your bankroll well will be a must

[gabbie2010]

Personally I believe low odd bet has a brighter chances of winning due to the fact that a strong team is assigned with low odd because they have a high probability, however to earn decent profits with atleast 2.0 odds that means the gambler has to accumulate many of those low odds games, however the higher the games the higher the risk because one of the games might cut the ticket probably due to an upset by a weaker team, though I adopted that type of low odd betting and is one of the easiest method of earning some decent profits with through picking of likely games that are sure bets.

[rahmad2nd]

To be honest, I don't like low odds at all. For me, the money at stake is not worth the money won. On the other hand, it is not uncommon for a strong team that has low odds to eventually be defeated by a team that is not superior. in the end, we lose quite a lot of money only to get smaller results. For example, your five single bets win at low odds, but at the same time you lose one match. the result could be a loss, or a return to initial capital. However, whatever strategy someone uses is entirely their right and choice. I can't give an assessment, because everyone has their own way of betting.

OK, now we're talking about my side of the betting. usually, before I bet. I will first look for several more matches, then try to research them by digging up the latest information. if it's not ideal, I'll look for another match. Another example, my favorite team will play a match with a mediocre team. then, betting exchanges only provide very low odds. But in reality, there are many options that I can choose from without having to bet on a team. If so, the handicap option could be an alternative choice. After observing and looking closely based on research and analysis, the conclusion is that I will look for the most suitable option. it can be on the team, handicap, Under/Over, both teams scored and everything available.  with odds, which is of course ideal for me. single bet, it is more profitable. Even if I do a multibet, I only choose a few matches on the list. the point is the same, I always look for the most ideal and safest option. So far, the bets I've made haven't been as bad as I predicted. there are times when I lose, or sometimes I can win consecutive bets with several games. Well, that's my betting method.

[Julien_Olynpic]

If we are talking about bets such as 1.2 or 1.3, then such bets can be profitable, but, of course, you cannot focus on only one parameter - the size of the bets. Any bookmaker can make mistakes. But the fact is that if the bet is relatively low, then this indicates a high statistical probability of victory for that team or player. You should carefully study the future match and find out why there are such bets on this game. But imagine that we have recruited highly likely candidates to win, for whom bookmakers offer low bets. In this case, the bet of each team is approximately 1.33. If out of 8 bets 2 lose and 6 win, you will be left with your money (that is, you will receive zero profit). And for you to receive a loss, you must lose more than 2 teams out of 8. Is this a lot or a little for such bets? Everyone answers this question in their own way.

[DaNNy001]

I recently came across a discussion about low odds in sports betting. I never believed that using low odds in sports betting could lead to success. And I believed that the reason for this state of affairs was that one loss can cancel out many victories. For me, this seemed like something that did not require proof, until a man began to argue with me, who, according to him, had achieved success in sports betting and had been taking profits from bookmakers for a long period.
 His strategy is:
1. He selects matches with relatively low odds, the outcome of which is more or less clear. For example, when an experienced team plays with outsiders.
2. You should choose many such matches for diversification purposes, so that one random loss does not wipe out all your winnings.
3. It follows from this that in most cases, low odds work out, and random losses are offset by a large number of wins.
 I would like to ask you, what do you think about such strategies? What do you think are the disadvantages of this strategy?

The fact that he might have won from low odds doesn't necessarily mean that they are safe to play with. Low odds can be frustrating at times as they could even lead to loss, stances like this has occurred on multiple occasions and it's very annoying. That's why gambling is based on luck, you shouldn't think of it as though it's a good strategy to guarantee a won ticket. While using low odds, you'll have to make more selections to arrive at a reasonable amount of profit, which in turn increases the risk of winning the bet. However most persons tend to use a huge amount of money to bet on only one selection, though the chance of winning still depends on luck but this can be more preferred when you have faith in the team you are betting on. One fact about odds is that, they are given based on the performance of teams last set of matches and also the players that would be available for the match.

[Wapfika]

If we are talking about bets such as 1.2 or 1.3, then such bets can be profitable, but, of course, you cannot focus on only one parameter - the size of the bets. Any bookmaker can make mistakes. But the fact is that if the bet is relatively low, then this indicates a high statistical probability of victory for that team or player.

If this odds was assigned prematch then it’s not really high chance victory since prematch low odds often varies depending on the situation of the actual game. Odds provider usually assign odds in prematch using statistical record of previous match that’s why it often adjust during the actual match.

I’m more confident for high winning chance rate bet with odds of 1.2 to 1.3 when this odds offer during the live match with few remaining time on the game since this odds is based on the actual condition of the game rather than the stats basis on odds given during prematch.

[swogerino]

I recently came across a discussion about low odds in sports betting. I never believed that using low odds in sports betting could lead to success. And I believed that the reason for this state of affairs was that one loss can cancel out many victories. For me, this seemed like something that did not require proof, until a man began to argue with me, who, according to him, had achieved success in sports betting and had been taking profits from bookmakers for a long period.
 His strategy is:
1. He selects matches with relatively low odds, the outcome of which is more or less clear. For example, when an experienced team plays with outsiders.
2. You should choose many such matches for diversification purposes, so that one random loss does not wipe out all your winnings.
3. It follows from this that in most cases, low odds work out, and random losses are offset by a large number of wins.
 I would like to ask you, what do you think about such strategies? What do you think are the disadvantages of this strategy?

I think this man is lying or is living completely in a distorted reality of his own.The reason is simple and that is that such low odds never fail to surprise a lot of us seasoned gamblers.Let me remind you that you are right to believe that one lost such bet cancel out many victories and let me remind you of some happenings a couple of months ago which is some heavy favorite in NBA with odd 1.04 lost against the biggest underdog,same shit happened in tennis in that same time frame.This is a clear example that having success in sport betting does not rely on low odds but in being able to analyze games correctly.

[Altryist]

 Perhaps there are people for whom this can work, as there is an exception to any rule, but it’s easier to test this from your own experience in order to understand that such a strategy does not have much potential. I determined for myself that the average odds of my bet should be about 2, or higher if possible. I think that any player can analyze his results in gambling, even if it is enough to make 100 bets, if you win more than half of the bets, then you will have a profit. With small odds, the number of winning bets should be significant, but this is more difficult to achieve, outsiders do not always lose.

[Cityhunter34]

Personally I believe low odd bet has a brighter chances of winning due to the fact that a strong team is assigned with low odd because they have a high probability, however to earn decent profits with atleast 2.0 odds that means the gambler has to accumulate many of those low odds games, however the higher the games the higher the risk because one of the games might cut the ticket probably due to an upset by a weaker team, though I adopted that type of low odd betting and is one of the easiest method of earning some decent profits with through picking of likely games that are sure bets.

You are very correct because low odd always gave someone hope of wining a bet when you have a trust with those teams that you have selected, just like me I always like a team that have low odd  but sometimes the bookmarks always give the weaker team small odd them give the stronger team big odd why because they have check their head to head and noticed that anytime the both teams meant together that is always difficult for the big team to win the smaller one.

[seoincorporation]

I would like to ask you, what do you think about such strategies? What do you think are the disadvantages of this strategy?

I like that strategy, betting in low odds is the best way to make a good profit in sports. Personally, i do that in UFC and NBA, in the past NBA season the underdogs were winning a lot, and i made some profit from that, and when i apply that strategy to UFC i choose the underdog but the winning method too, and that way i have to win huge multipliers on a single fight, multipliers like x20 or x15 in those fights.

And i like to bet that way in sports because is really common to see the favorite losing a match, it happens a lot, and when they win the profit is lower than x2.

[Casdinyard]

I recently came across a discussion about low odds in sports betting. I never believed that using low odds in sports betting could lead to success. And I believed that the reason for this state of affairs was that one loss can cancel out many victories. For me, this seemed like something that did not require proof, until a man began to argue with me, who, according to him, had achieved success in sports betting and had been taking profits from bookmakers for a long period.
 His strategy is:
1. He selects matches with relatively low odds, the outcome of which is more or less clear. For example, when an experienced team plays with outsiders.
2. You should choose many such matches for diversification purposes, so that one random loss does not wipe out all your winnings.
3. It follows from this that in most cases, low odds work out, and random losses are offset by a large number of wins.
 I would like to ask you, what do you think about such strategies? What do you think are the disadvantages of this strategy?

I mean since sportsbetting is pragmatically easier to win with against other conventional gambling ventures there is a case to be made about low odds betting and why you could win more with those than if you made it on games like, dice or hi-lo per se. In essence even though odds are at play every sports game you see are essentially 50/50, with the odds really just giving the players some sense of idea of how the game will pan out to sway them on a side or another way easily.

But then again, always betting on low odds is not a reliable way to win or whatnot. As said, these games are inherently 50/50, and even though you bet on the skills of the teams/players involved in the match, there's still some level of luck at play here that would be highly deterministic of how the game and your bet will pan out.

So yeah, there's nuances in the concept of betting for low odds, but it's not necessarily a bad thing or a good thing.

[Rruchi man]

What do you think are the disadvantages of this strategy?

Your reward may not be worth the risk.

But then again, always betting on low odds is not a reliable way to win or whatnot. As said, these games are inherently 50/50, and even though you bet on the skills of the teams/players involved in the match, there's still some level of luck at play here that would be highly deterministic of how the game and your bet will pan out.

In some football games, based on the teams playing and how they have been playing, the winner is always so straight-forward that you are like 97% sure of the outcome of the game. If you are okay with just winning, not minding the amount you win, then you can adopt this strategy of low odds as a way to bet. 

It is important to still endorse what have been said,

This is a clear example that having success in sport betting does not rely on low odds but in being able to analyze games correctly.

LOW ODDS DO NOT GUARANTEE WINNING.

[klidex]

Low odds are indeed one of the strategies of gamblers who try to win their bets with low odds. Usually gamblers rarely lose, but the weakness is that they only get smaller profits and this also avoids the risk of losing because sometimes gamblers also want big odds in order to get bigger profits. which is of course in accordance with the risks faced. I have lost many times when choosing big odds even though I was not betting on a club that was not my favorite but rather on how many goals both clubs would score and I combined it with my multi bet but with big odds I often experienced defeat.

So I just chose 3 or 4 with odds that weren't too big and that made me win even though the profit wasn't that big at least I didn't lose my money and actually I prefer that strategy rather than having to choose big odds because according to my observations we will It is difficult to win if the odds are too big and the house chances are always bigger than what we predicted from the start. Choosing low odds is the right strategy to avoid the risk of losing more often.

[stompix]

I never believed that using low odds in sports betting could lead to success.

You were right!

 I would like to ask you, what do you think about such strategies? What do you think are the disadvantages of this strategy?

Pretty simple math, with low ods at 1.10/1.15 you need 8 matches to make 1$ with a bet of 1$, but you need only one to go wrong and you lose a 1$.
You're not inventing the wheel here!

Also, just as an example last summer I got a consecutive 4 loss of horse racing at lower than 1.20 odds for the favorite, yeah 4 races one after other and all horses despite being favorites, and the next runner-up having over 5:1 odds all lost, 4 one after others.
So basically I lost 4$ so I had to nail down at 1.10 odds the next 40 winners and not a single one could lose just to recoup the sum!

[Gozie51]

 His strategy is:
1. He selects matches with relatively low odds, the outcome of which is more or less clear. For example, when an experienced team plays with outsiders.

If an experienced team is away, x2 is usually a bet option but some gamblers want to take the full risk of option 2. Always away team is good for away goal or 1.5

2. You should choose many such matches for diversification purposes, so that one random loss does not wipe out all your winnings.

Choosing many matches because of low odds isn't professional gambling. You have to look at the potential of winning from the odds selected despite low odds.

3. It follows from this that in most cases, low odds work out, and random losses are offset by a large number of wins.

Low odds are best for winning bets but if gathered in multiple, then a failing result will be the aftermath. Multiple bet is good for large profit but not always possible. So it is better playing with single games and low odds and reasonable stake.

[Finestream]

Just blindly doing that does not work at all. I've tried different strategies based on odds alone and I didn't find long-term success. I even tried the Martingale strategy on low odds, but it still didn't work for me. This game is about finding value and having the discipline to manage your bankroll. Without that mindset, you'll end up making the same mistakes over and over again. I tell you, it's better to learn from the experience of other sports bettors like us who have tried that method, as I'm 100% certain the outcome is still a loss.

[bluebit25]

(...)
 I would like to ask you, what do you think about such strategies? What do you think are the disadvantages of this strategy?

That's the strategy that person shared with you and has had profitable results so I think it's feasible to research and apply. But for me, every situation will have unwanted risks, so there is no need to impose too much on who is right/wrong in this story. It's just that you're willing to accept any outcome with the choice you make, but the reality is that everyone wants to win so they can profit and that's what "own" doesn't like. I've also heard about statistics from betting platforms that can research user behavior to change rules, as well as remove betting odds to limit winners. We should accept the fact that the "own" side always dominates in every game, so don't impose too much on any perfect strategy.

[Maslate]

It does not mean that if it works for a certain person, it will also work for you. There's more to it than just spotting low odds and taking them. You need to be familiar with the game or league you are gambling on so you'll not end up making mistakes like thinking you have the value, but in fact, it doesn't. Would you believe that sometimes bookmakers overvalue or undervalue certain odds? If so, then you need to be aware of what they are doing so you can choose the odds that you believe are the real ones.

Think of it this way: if you are just betting on low odds, let's say 1.30, your three consecutive wins, which would result in 0.90, could easily be lost by just one mistake.

[iv4n]

...
 I would like to ask you, what do you think about such strategies? What do you think are the disadvantages of this strategy?

I don't think there is a gambler who hasn't tried this at least once in their life... I am sure that many have tried it more than once. For many of us, it was not profitable, after a series of successes, bad days come and we lose much more than we gained. But I am sure that in the sea of ​​bad experiences, there are also some positive and profitable stories.

Of course, there are pros and cons, but I wouldn't write about it at all. There is a lot of information available on the internet, if you put a little effort into it you will learn everything you want. When you do that, you'll decide whether you want to try it or not, and that's all that matters, what you want. There are many good and bad stories, but it is up to you to try and write your own story. The odds are against you for sure, but until we try something we can't know what will happen.

So, if you decide to give it a try I wish you luck, you will definitely need it.

[danherbias07]

I guess you already told us the disadvantages of it. One unlucky line that goes south will take everything from your parlay.

I think we should just be aware of trap lines. It's not 100 percent that a low odds team or player will win the game. I think I had that one mistake before when I was making a parlay in table tennis. The odds given to the certain player that was also added in my parlay was 1.15 if I remember it right and I was definitely sure he could win that game.
But sometimes we also have to be aware of the condition of a team or a player. If they are off night, they will probably lose even though they are the heavy favorite.
It will be better to test this kind of strategy in small amounts. Just for trial and error.