Predicting and setting odds are not the same thing.

[Julien_Olynpic]

And can we equate the two phrases "predicting the outcome of a game" and "setting the odds correctly"? But setting bookmaker odds "correctly" for an upcoming game doesn't mean predicting the outcome correctly. You, as a bookmaker, can set the odds "correctly," that is, rationally, in accordance with the available statistics, but the actual outcome of the match will contradict the advantage you set in the odds.
Why is this so? Because the actual outcome of a match is influenced not only by the statistics that have been collected, but also by:
1. Statistics that weren't collected for some reason, but were important for the outcome of the match (some minor factors that influenced the outcome of the match, which we consider "chance" or "luck").
2. Factors for which statistics are not yet collected or for which few people know. For example, hormonal changes in players' bodies that affect their performance. This especially affects women, for example, in tennis.
3. Factors that haven't even been formalized yet and are poorly understood. I can't give specific examples here for obvious reasons.

[Russlenat]

I believe bookmakers don’t actually predict who will win. Their job is to set the odds in a way that keeps things balanced, so they make a profit no matter who wins. We, the public or bettors, are the ones making predictions. We look at the odds, then decide which side to take based on our own analysis and whatever stats or info we have.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

I believe bookmakers don’t actually predict who will win. Their job is to set the odds in a way that keeps things balanced, so they make a profit no matter who wins. We, the public or bettors, are the ones making predictions. We look at the odds, then decide which side to take based on our own analysis and whatever stats or info we have.

Yeah, I believe you are right as it makes no sense for a bookmaker to start predicting who will like to win a match, what then happens if they set the odds based on who they think or believe will win the match and that one ended up not winning? What this simply mean is that the bookmaker have lost their bet and may likely lose money to those who betted on the opposite side.

So yeah, i believe what you said that bookmakers simply set the odds in a manner which, it doesn't matter who wins the match at the end of the game, they are simply in profit even without risking a dime, and from that money they made, they are able to pay or settle all the winning tickets and keep the rest of the money for their personal use.

[Darker45]

I agree. They're not the same. But they're closely intertwined. When bookmakers release odds, the odds are practically saying who or which team is probably winning and who or which team is probably losing. That's what the odds are essentially saying. So, depending on how they interpret the numbers, some might consider them a kind of prediction. If team A has -4900 odds, some could easily say they're going to win.

Also, I believe bookmakers take into considerations factors outside statistics.

[Mahanton]

I believe bookmakers don’t actually predict who will win. Their job is to set the odds in a way that keeps things balanced, so they make a profit no matter who wins. We, the public or bettors, are the ones making predictions. We look at the odds, then decide which side to take based on our own analysis and whatever stats or info we have.

Yeah, I believe you are right as it makes no sense for a bookmaker to start predicting who will like to win a match, what then happens if they set the odds based on who they think or believe will win the match and that one ended up not winning? What this simply mean is that the bookmaker have lost their bet and may likely lose money to those who betted on the opposite side.

So yeah, i believe what you said that bookmakers simply set the odds in a manner which, it doesn't matter who wins the match at the end of the game, they are simply in profit even without risking a dime, and from that money they made, they are able to pay or settle all the winning tickets and keep the rest of the money for their personal use.

Bookmakers are not in the business of guessing outcomes their role is risk management they set odds in a way that balances the flow of bets on both sides the goal is to make sure that no matter which team wins the house takes a commission from the losing side and keeps a profit. If they were truly predicting winners they would be gambling against the bettors and that would put their entire business at risk instead they build odds based on data probabilities and more importantly public perception because what matters most is not just who is likely to win but how people are likely to place their money.

This is why odds sometimes look skewed or don’t perfectly reflect actual probabilities they are adjusted to make sure there’s enough betting action on both sides so the bookmaker doesn’t end up overexposed when bettors see odds and place their wagers they are the ones making the predictions while the bookmaker is simply ensuring that the system pays out winners while still leaving them with guaranteed profit. In short the bettor is taking the risk while the bookmaker is managing risk and securing the edge built into every line that’s why the house always wins in the long run.

[danherbias07]

They may be setting the odds correctly according to their view, but you are right on your points.

There are circumstances where a player will suddenly not play. Then there are the changes in weather that could affect the body of a player. These changes are not written in stats, although I believe that if none of those happen, they will be almost to the point that they got it right.

What I am amazed mostly is how they can set the right total score for each game. It's rare that they will get it dramatically incorrect. Most of the time, either they are right to the point or they are very near it.

It's not predicting if that's the case. They may have some inside stuff that only they know.

[Charles-Tim]

The betting sites set odds in a way that almost all bettors will be losing. What they do is that they analyses the recent past performance of the teams that are playing and they set the odd in a way that no matter how perfect people can bet on the match, they will lose, or they would win an amount of money that is lower than the amount that they are staking. Winning higher amounts is possible but the chance to win it is far more reduce. At the end, bettors are losing.

[eisen33]

And can we equate the two phrases "predicting the outcome of a game" and "setting the odds correctly"? But setting bookmaker odds "correctly" for an upcoming game doesn't mean predicting the outcome correctly. You, as a bookmaker, can set the odds "correctly," that is, rationally, in accordance with the available statistics, but the actual outcome of the match will contradict the advantage you set in the odds.
Why is this so? Because the actual outcome of a match is influenced not only by the statistics that have been collected, but also by:
1. Statistics that weren't collected for some reason, but were important for the outcome of the match (some minor factors that influenced the outcome of the match, which we consider "chance" or "luck").
2. Factors for which statistics are not yet collected or for which few people know. For example, hormonal changes in players' bodies that affect their performance. This especially affects women, for example, in tennis.
3. Factors that haven't even been formalized yet and are poorly understood. I can't give specific examples here for obvious reasons.

Bookmakers calculate odds based on statistics and current conditions, but it's clear this doesn't guarantee anything otherwise, you could simply choose bets based on these odds and win. In reality, things are much more complicated, favorites can lose, underdogs can score and then hold on to that score while defending, and other unexpected events can occur in other games. So, you can't bet solely on odds; you need to consider the news, team motivations, and much more.

[cryptoaddictchie]

I tend to agree. Exactly whats the setting odds correctly means pricing probabilities as rationally as possible given known information, whereas predicting the single true outcome would require accounting for hidden, unmeasurable, and sometimes unknowable factors that statistics can never fully capture. But if you think about it? They gonna set it over losing streak for customers as always since how come a gambling site can be profitable if they leeway for more losses than winning over users.

[Dave1]

It's the obvious, book makers based everything on the numbers itself, they might have to crunch some data to come out with the "right" odds according to the statistics. But it doesn't mean that it will always be right.

I'm not sure though what you mean by statistics that are not collected, they are just to collect numbers and data. There could be unforseen circumstances like players getting injured, but it's beyond their control.

So it we talk about number or statistics, they are all can be measured. But again, things that are out of control and that could be the basic definition of "luck".

[Lucius]

Odds can often be very confusing and people somehow decide on a favorite based on them, although as already said there are many different factors that can affect the final outcome. In the past, I often lost bets because I didn't take the weather into account when it came to outdoor sports, and rain or wind can often steer games in a completely different direction than they would have gone if the weather had been stable.

However, we should always remember that none of us are prophets who can predict the outcome of any sporting event with certainty (unless it is rigged), and even if we could predict such a thing, sports betting would no longer be interesting at all, would it?

[swogerino]

I believe bookmakers don’t actually predict who will win. Their job is to set the odds in a way that keeps things balanced, so they make a profit no matter who wins. We, the public or bettors, are the ones making predictions. We look at the odds, then decide which side to take based on our own analysis and whatever stats or info we have.

The only advantage the bookies have is that they have a lot of odds provided to bettors and they rely on such odds to have as many surprise results as they can so there is all the catch and there is also all the profit for the bookies. They do not deceive us in odds as if you check all the casinos the odds don't change a lot from one to another so they rely as I said to the odds and the games to have surprise results. How we see that there are always such surprise results, this is a whole new discussion but for me it is some dark force who can buy referees and other mechanisms to change the end result of the game. That is why I think it is best not to bet on sports knowing all these events take place.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

I believe bookmakers don’t actually predict who will win. Their job is to set the odds in a way that keeps things balanced, so they make a profit no matter who wins. We, the public or bettors, are the ones making predictions. We look at the odds, then decide which side to take based on our own analysis and whatever stats or info we have.

Bookmakers do collect statistics to make predictions but I believe they have special tool in doing so unlike bettors that just have the normal ways of making analysis to come up with possible prediction. If bookmakers don't make predictions before setting odds, they would not be giving big odds to teams that is assumed not to win the match. For example, if the book maker knows that there's a 90% possibility for a team to win the match, they will give that team a very small odd while the losing team will be given a higher odd, because the bookmakers knows that many bettors also knows the team that has a high chance to win and will bet on them.

[Eternad]

It true that it’s not the same since bookie considered other factor but most of the time odds reflect on the approximate winning percentage for the outcome of the game.

Bookies carefully analyze each game so that they will not pay over odds on game with high percentage same with game with low winning percentage they typically increase the odds so that player will tempted to still choose that pick and take risk for the sake of high return.

Because we are being logical, no one will pick a losing team if the odds will always be 50:50

[bubilas]

I believe bookmakers don’t actually predict who will win. Their job is to set the odds in a way that keeps things balanced, so they make a profit no matter who wins. We, the public or bettors, are the ones making predictions. We look at the odds, then decide which side to take based on our own analysis and whatever stats or info we have.

Wait, but the bookmaker sets the odds initially, and then changes them when those odds are filled with bettors' bets? But then it's obvious that for those who started betting first, the odds will remain the same, as they were initially, since they entered into the deal under those very terms. But for other bettors, the odds will change depending on the number of bettors? But that means the odds INITIALLY must have been well calculated by the bookmaker, as Julien_Olynpic write in this topic.

And can we equate the two phrases "predicting the outcome of a game" and "setting the odds correctly"? But setting bookmaker odds "correctly" for an upcoming game doesn't mean predicting the outcome correctly. You, as a bookmaker, can set the odds "correctly," that is, rationally, in accordance with the available statistics, but the actual outcome of the match will contradict the advantage you set in the odds.
Why is this so? Because the actual outcome of a match is influenced not only by the statistics that have been collected, but also by:
1. Statistics that weren't collected for some reason, but were important for the outcome of the match (some minor factors that influenced the outcome of the match, which we consider "chance" or "luck").
2. Factors for which statistics are not yet collected or for which few people know. For example, hormonal changes in players' bodies that affect their performance. This especially affects women, for example, in tennis.
3. Factors that haven't even been formalized yet and are poorly understood. I can't give specific examples here for obvious reasons.

[cryptomaniac_xxx]

Odds can often be very confusing and people somehow decide on a favorite based on them, although as already said there are many different factors that can affect the final outcome. In the past, I often lost bets because I didn't take the weather into account when it came to outdoor sports, and rain or wind can often steer games in a completely different direction than they would have gone if the weather had been stable.

It wouldn't say it's confusing, on the contrary, it's very easy to read it, as it will just be based on who is the favorite and who is the underdog. It's just for outdoor sports though, but yeah, that could be one factor. But for most indoor games like the second favorite sports in the world like basketball it's non factor. And usually sports like football are being scheduled to be played in good condition or at least chances of weather affecting the game is put into consideration. But in any case, they are going to continue like in American football wherein even if there are snows and temperature going below 0, they are going to play the game no matter what.

However, we should always remember that none of us are prophets who can predict the outcome of any sporting event with certainty (unless it is rigged), and even if we could predict such a thing, sports betting would no longer be interesting at all, would it?

Very hard to predict the outcome, I might be speculating that the best sports bettor could be around 80% successful. There is one that is becoming famous right now as betting in the US football as his tips are really that good and his followers exploding to like from hundreds to 20,000 right now.

[Slow death]

I believe bookmakers don’t actually predict who will win. Their job is to set the odds in a way that keeps things balanced, so they make a profit no matter who wins. We, the public or bettors, are the ones making predictions. We look at the odds, then decide which side to take based on our own analysis and whatever stats or info we have.

But if bookmakers didn't set the odds, they could go bankrupt. This is because if a team like Real Madrid plays against a team like Girona, which is in last place in the table, and people place odds of @2.50 for Real Madrid to win, @3.00 for a draw, or @2.50 for Girona to win.

In this scenario, hundreds of people will bet on Real Madrid to win, and the bookmaker could go bankrupt because it will result in a profit of more than double for winners who bet on Real Madrid and Real Madrid to win. Therefore, it's bad business for bookmakers. In my opinion, bookmakers set the odds based on their analysis of each team.

[Woodie]

"Predicting and setting odds are not the same" that I agree!
Afaik Setting odds is easy because it's more like a double chance option of which bookies get to do, then the predictions are done by the punters or gamblers themselves which is the heavy lifting because when you look at the odds they can be confusing and has a high chance of ruin..

Otherwise as a punter, people need to know that bookies do get things wrong and shouldn't play the odds, rather play the fixture guided by form and all that.

[Botnake]

As regular bettors, our perception is that once a team is favored, they’re more likely to win. But what we often fail to realize is that it’s just a percentage, it doesn’t mean it’s a sure win. For moneyline odds, it’s easier to understand, but when it comes to point spreads, that’s where it gets tricky. You just need the team you’re betting on to cover the spread, whether they’re the favorite or the underdog.

The problem is, sometimes we take the favorites without realizing they’re giving up too many points, and they can’t cover it anymore. That’s what makes it tricky - and the bookies know this. That’s why they set the lines to make sure there’s action on both sides, so they can generate consistent profit.

[purple_sparkles]

"Predicting and setting odds are not the same" that I agree!
Afaik Setting odds is easy because it's more like a double chance option of which bookies get to do, then the predictions are done by the punters or gamblers themselves which is the heavy lifting because when you look at the odds they can be confusing and has a high chance of ruin..

Otherwise as a punter, people need to know that bookies do get things wrong and shouldn't play the odds, rather play the fixture guided by form and all that.

Bookmakers also take into account various factors, including players’ form and team lineups. These two aspects are usually interconnected, and clients can build their predictions based on the odds provided by the bookmaker. It’s also worth noting that nowadays all bookmaker odds are calculated by computer programs, essentially mathematical probability algorithms, while people make their predictions relying on their own knowledge and intuition.