This.
I should also add that if we're talking about low/extremely low odds, the number of games should be large. 30 games isn't enough to evaluate a bettor and their strategy. If the odds are below 1.1, it's quite possible to achieve a streak of 30-50 wins without a single loss; there's nothing special about that. However, a couple of losses could follow, which would wipe out all previous winnings.
Well, that's the point. Even a bettor with average skills would be able to achieve such a high winning streak if they bet on such low odds, I believe this is true even without conducting a rigorous analysis. It's like continuously betting on the Goliath teams against the Daud teams, but when you suffer one or two losses, that's when it becomes evident that the streak of wins becomes meaningless. What's truly important isn't the win percentage but the ROI. A 70% win rate can be outperformed by a 55% win rate if the odds selection is precise.
And honestly, a
25–5–1 record still doesn't prove anything.
By the way, don't forget the tricks some wannabe influencers use: they create 40 accounts and pair them up in two different directions. Then they do the same on the remaining 20, then on 10, and so on. Ultimately, they have one or more accounts with impressive numbers. Therefore, yes, in order to draw any conclusions, it is necessary to see a much larger number of bets than just a few dozen. And never forget that with the help of various tricks even such series can be falsified.
