Why you shouldn’t rely too much on AI in betting

[Crypto Library]

Predictions from AI based on what AI found so that will almost similar as we do. If we relying on AI in betting, we will be difficult improving our skills. But those who wants to make money will not cares with that and only seeing AI can gives more chances to win. I am not experienced as you because I analyze by myself and whether that is win or lose, that is no problem for me because that is just entertainment for me.

I will only agree with Artificial Intelligence that we are getting data from here before placing a bet, I actually mean that we will only use AI as a data gathering tool. Because a single artificial intelligence can never predict the future.

So I think those who think that they can win their betting with artificial intelligence are actually  in a misconception. So it should never happen here that we are relying on artificial intelligence to bet or bet beyond our ability for to lose. I myself have found practical proof that AI betting is just a mirage.

[Hypnosis00]

Gambling is not how smart you are with AI, but gambling is how lucky and skillful you are in a certain game. However, although AI can be helpful in increasing prediction accuracy, but gambling isn't all about predictions, random or not.

Too much relying from AI will not increase your potentials to win from your bets, but it will only make you blind on what's the real trend when betting. As long as you know your game well, and you have reliable experiences on that, that will give you more chances to win, not on what AI can do for you.

[|MINER|]

Even in underdog games, I don't think there is any special need to use artificial intelligence to bet because underdog games can be found by just googling.
I will simply think of artificial intelligence here as something like various prediction platforms that will make predictions correctly, but there is never an ultimate guarantee of that. Because naturally, artificial intelligence will predict that team as the loser in a betting group where there is an underdog team, but there are many cases where the underdog team has defeated the stronger team.

[gunhell16]

Last night, I bet on the match between Alexandra Eala and Sorana Cîrstea. Cîrstea was the favorite, Eala was the underdog. I asked AI for a prediction and, as expected, it picked Cîrstea because of ranking and experience.

But I didn’t agree.

I watched Eala’s previous game where she beat a Top 10 player, and she looked confident. So I trusted my own analysis and bet on Eala with high odds (around 5). No screenshot, but the bet won.

This made me realize something.

AI usually thinks like the public. It follows stats, rankings, and odds. Same logic as most casual bettors. It doesn’t really watch games, it doesn’t see momentum or confidence.

Anyone else experienced this?

I have not experienced such a thing, but I believe that it is still better for us to do our own analysis on this matter. Then you are the one who said, How can you trust an AI that does
not watch matches like that but gives an answer that is not really good? 

That's why it seems like there is no difference between those who use trading bots or AI trading, because no one has been profitable here since then until now. Whether you hit
or win is obviously just luck; it's that simple to understand, right?

[nelson4lov]

By default, that's how AI are designed to work— they search for the happy path and just go with it. Maybe if you had challenge the AI to go deep into recent stats between the two of them and try to differential that would be different from what everyone else is backing. This takes more times and require more structured prompting which is why almost no one (including me) does it. For the most part, I think AI is just garbage in, garbage. Output is heavily depended on the prompt.

[leonair]

Last night, I bet on the match between Alexandra Eala and Sorana Cîrstea. Cîrstea was the favorite, Eala was the underdog. I asked AI for a prediction and, as expected, it picked Cîrstea because of ranking and experience.

But I didn’t agree.

I watched Eala’s previous game where she beat a Top 10 player, and she looked confident. So I trusted my own analysis and bet on Eala with high odds (around 5). No screenshot, but the bet won.

As soon as a question is asked, Ai searches the internet and collects information from various sources and repeats an answer. So when a prediction is asked for gambling or betting, Ai sees which team people are most interested in and considers it as potential. Ai is a tool that helps collect information very well but can never do something that is impossible for humans to do. No matter how updated AI is, it will never be able to think like a human.

[ShowOff]

-

As soon as a question is asked, Ai searches the internet and collects information from various sources and repeats an answer. So when a prediction is asked for gambling or betting, Ai sees which team people are most interested in and considers it as potential. Ai is a tool that helps collect information very well but can never do something that is impossible for humans to do. No matter how updated AI is, it will never be able to think like a human.

That’s true, AI works according to the instructions it is given, but in my opinion AI answers, especially those related to gambling, cannot be fully trusted. Even humans, who have intuition and emotions and are capable of processing more complex questions, can make mistakes in their decisions, so I think it is only natural that AI cannot be completely reliable. Using AI simply to broaden one knowledge and gather additional information is fine, but relying entirely on AI is a mistake. At first glance, AI may seem impressive because of its speed in processing information, but exactly as you said that is actually the result of automated data collection from various sources on the Internet.

[Akbarkoe]

By default, that's how AI are designed to work— they search for the happy path and just go with it. Maybe if you had challenge the AI to go deep into recent stats between the two of them and try to differential that would be different from what everyone else is backing. This takes more times and require more structured prompting which is why almost no one (including me) does it. For the most part, I think AI is just garbage in, garbage. Output is heavily depended on the prompt.

In addition to directives / commands we also have to provide the data we have for him to study it will be much better in the output that AI gives us, not just questions from people in general, about victory, which one is superior and other short questions, it will not produce good results, but if you provide more data such as statistics, player composition and other situations that affect the match to AI he is usually much better.
I have tried it, AI can give a very good explanation and also a better view even though it is different from people in general but if it is intended for betting, gambling is not like that, a match is very difficult to predict in any form, so even good conclusions from good commands and complete data are no guarantee of getting a win.

[Hispo]

By default, that's how AI are designed to work— they search for the happy path and just go with it. Maybe if you had challenge the AI to go deep into recent stats between the two of them and try to differential that would be different from what everyone else is backing. This takes more times and require more structured prompting which is why almost no one (including me) does it. For the most part, I think AI is just garbage in, garbage. Output is heavily depended on the prompt.

In general, it takes some human intuition in order to successfully get money out of betting in sports. That human intuition is something which Artificial intelligence completely lacks, and it is only guided by cold statistics.

Also, when comes to the quality of prompts: Artificial intelligences are still code and projections of a machine, they will do whatever they are asked to do, if one asked them to do something which is garbage, they will not refuse and suggest something better, in the most cases those algorithms will blindly obey and deliver what they were asked to do.

Assuming there are actually well structured AIs which are good to provide high quality tips, those would not be openly available for anyone to download and profit from.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

AI usually thinks like the public. It follows stats, rankings, and odds. Same logic as most casual bettors. It doesn’t really watch games, it doesn’t see momentum or confidence.

Anyone else experienced this?

No but I don't rely on AI too much for anything, even though I regularly use it.

Houses also use AI nowadays, and surely more advanced, paid versions than the ones you can use. But even if you used the same version, the house's tendency will be to beat you by the juice. It's a sort of house edge but for sports betting that ensures the house's advantage.

[L E G E N D A R Y]

No but I don't rely on AI too much for anything, even though I regularly use it.

Houses also use AI nowadays, and surely more advanced, paid versions than the ones you can use. But even if you used the same version, the house's tendency will be to beat you by the juice. It's a sort of house edge but for sports betting that ensures the house's advantage.

Actually AI is good but its not in everything, he will take care of as they might disappoint someone sometimes, which is why its important for one to take care of somethings by themselves and do the necessary things or do things in the right way, which will also help them to prevent falling off and causing problems, if they neglect in doing the right thing.

[Questat]

AI usually thinks like the public. It follows stats, rankings, and odds. Same logic as most casual bettors. It doesn’t really watch games, it doesn’t see momentum or confidence.

Anyone else experienced this?

No but I don't rely on AI too much for anything, even though I regularly use it.

Houses also use AI nowadays, and surely more advanced, paid versions than the ones you can use. But even if you used the same version, the house's tendency will be to beat you by the juice. It's a sort of house edge but for sports betting that ensures the house's advantage.

That’s the reality, we can’t really avoid that. Sooner or later, we’ll have to take odds lower than 2.00 if we want to get good value. Even if bookies don’t openly say they have an edge, it’s already embedded in the lines they offer.

And since in sports betting you’re not directly playing against the house like in casino games, it’s still possible to be profitable in the long run. A few people have already proven that.

Based on some research, if you can hit around 53% with average odds of 1.90, you’re already in a profitable range. That’s not easy, but it shows it’s possible.

[junder]

AI information is even limited and could be misleading if not properly used and accessed, AI have been around for sometime now and we can't actually point to it success when it comes to be used as a tool for football games prediction, the success recorded so far us nothing to write home about and sport bettor should rely more on their own personal efforts in game's speculation and predictions this way they have an edge based on their knowledge not the predictions of a random sampling from AI.

That's why I conclude that the information from ai should not be used as the main reference, it is better to be taken into consideration with the analysis we do, I don't have friends who like to bet by relying on or looking for information from ai, they are the same as me, namely making bets based on what they believe themselves. The superiority and sophistication of ai is true, but it should not be the main benchmark in many things, one of which is betting predictions.

[Mr_Brilliant$]

Infact, I will say we should not be relying on Ai at all in the first place..
Betting is not a fixed math equation or sort of where you will have to put in numbers and get a guaranteed answer..  It involves humans, and anything that has to do with humans involve emotions, pressure, last minute injuries, referee decisions, even weather conditions self.. 
So I feel no system can fully predict that..  AI can analyze past data, sure, but it cannot predict the unexpected moment that happen in a game..

[Royal Cap]

Gambling is not how smart you are with AI, but gambling is how lucky and skillful you are in a certain game. However, although AI can be helpful in increasing prediction accuracy, but gambling isn't all about predictions, random or not.

Too much relying from AI will not increase your potentials to win from your bets, but it will only make you blind on what's the real trend when betting. As long as you know your game well, and you have reliable experiences on that, that will give you more chances to win, not on what AI can do for you.

Honestly, I don't see it as AI vs luck. It's a bit different for me. Suppose you've been following a league for a long time, the teams' playing style, the coach's mindset, etc. are all in your head. Then the decision you make is not just based on data, but also on a feeling. In this case, AI can't really beat you because it doesn't have any match watching experience, AI only depends on data. So I think if you can't make decisions yourself, AI is useless.

[Antotena]

I watched Eala’s previous game where she beat a Top 10 player, and she looked confident. So I trusted my own analysis and bet on Eala with high odds (around 5). No screenshot, but the bet won.

This made me realize something.

AI usually thinks like the public. It follows stats, rankings, and odds. Same logic as most casual bettors. It doesn’t really watch games, it doesn’t see momentum or confidence.

Anyone else experienced this?

I have searched for AI prompt that will give a proper recommendation on Premier league games and the result I saw were disappointing. I have even look around for AI apps that will be strickly based on betting and predictions and guess what? I didn't see anyone and that made me concluded that AI can do many things but can't make accurate prediction when it come down to gambling, use your head or lose your money if you can't decide for yourself.

This is why I always laugh anytime people say AI will make people do this and that. There is no doubt that AI are useful in some aspects but they are very limited when it comes to many applications. They are still far behind, maybe in the future they will get better I can't say but I believe in expansion and rebranding, we may wake up one day and see that AI has developed into another thing but it's far from achieving gambling and making bet for gamblers.

[Johnlomape]

Gambling is not how smart you are with AI, but gambling is how lucky and skillful you are in a certain game. However, although AI can be helpful in increasing prediction accuracy, but gambling isn't all about predictions, random or not.

Too much relying from AI will not increase your potentials to win from your bets, but it will only make you blind on what's the real trend when betting. As long as you know your game well, and you have reliable experiences on that, that will give you more chances to win, not on what AI can do for you.

Honestly, I don't see it as AI vs luck. It's a bit different for me. Suppose you've been following a league for a long time, the teams' playing style, the coach's mindset, etc. are all in your head. Then the decision you make is not just based on data, but also on a feeling. In this case, AI can't really beat you because it doesn't have any match watching experience, AI only depends on data. So I think if you can't make decisions yourself, AI is useless.

There are bets that you don't even have to depend on AI for you to make money for yourself. People can see using this tools as effective especially when they are able to make money through AI at randomness. If the use of AI is working for you, that is fine because you will want to talk the good side of it since you are part of the people that are benefiting from using it. For those that have not been fortunate about using AI, they will have to talk about their experience and how they have been unlucky to use it without a good result that would have motivated them to talk good about it.