do you think every bet must have an “opposite”?

[blomen]

when browsing a gambling site, you will see some special bets for every popular match. for example, there may be bets on a player scoring a goal, receiving a card, or being sent off. there may be some bets on what the referee or players will do.

my question is this: do you think gambling sites that give odds on the likelihood of an event occurring should also offer the option to bet on the opposite outcome? of course, there's no obligation to do so, but if there are odds given on a player scoring a goal, i think gamblers should also be able to bet on the possibility of that player not scoring.

there can be special bets with very low odds, and i think it wouldn't be a bad idea for their opposite bets to be available as well. this could be a recommendation for gambling sites.

[Sim_card]

I understand your point mate and it will be a good option to bet on and not only one sided bet. However, I think it might not be that profitable to the casino since only few gamblers bet on these other features apart from moneyline. I do this once in a while, though.

[iv4n]

my question is this: do you think gambling sites that give odds on the likelihood of an event occurring should also offer the option to bet on the opposite outcome

Well, if you check markets from 20 years ago and compare them with those we have now, you will realize how much progress there has been. So adding a new market is just a question of time, but whether you like the odds given is another question.

There are many bets that have the opposite bet, there are bets that can overlap, when you check some sports book, there are so many markets, and sometimes it can be hard to find the right one... with good odds.

[OgNasty]

I think a lot of what you’re asking is dependent on the type of game you are playing, but for the most part the casino wins either way, so you can bet that the odds are adjusted as more players bet on one side or the other. You’d have to be more specific about the game to get a good answer I think.

[goldkingcoiner]

when browsing a gambling site, you will see some special bets for every popular match. for example, there may be bets on a player scoring a goal, receiving a card, or being sent off. there may be some bets on what the referee or players will do.

my question is this: do you think gambling sites that give odds on the likelihood of an event occurring should also offer the option to bet on the opposite outcome? of course, there's no obligation to do so, but if there are odds given on a player scoring a goal, i think gamblers should also be able to bet on the possibility of that player not scoring.

there can be special bets with very low odds, and i think it wouldn't be a bad idea for their opposite bets to be available as well. this could be a recommendation for gambling sites.

It is mathematically correct for every bet to have an opposite, I would think.

You are betting on a probability event happening and there must be at least 2 different possible events that can happen. Either some event happens or it does not happen. That is pretty much the minimum requirement for gambling.

You are talking about hedging your bets (literally). And yes, you could probably bet on the opposite event but not when the casino is involved. Because the casinos make money by having a house edge. Aka: a higher probability to win than you (built into the games). And the casino does not want to lose money so they would not allow you to state your own odds. The odds would be on their terms, and of course in their favor.

[CryptSafe]

I understand your point mate and it will be a good option to bet on and not only one sided bet. However, I think it might not be that profitable to the casino since only few gamblers bet on these other features apart from moneyline. I do this once in a while, though.

It definitely would not benefit the casinos if they did it two-sided, so they could make good money from it. Casinos always want opportunities in their favour because they are always on the cost aspect of the business, and they know not many gamblers fancy that type of betting, hence it is done one-sided so that the odds would be less.

[aylabadia05]

there can be special bets with very low odds, and i think it wouldn't be a bad idea for their opposite bets to be available as well. this could be a recommendation for gambling sites.

I rarely focus on such bets because I only focus on my analysis even though the odds are very low.
Today, for example, there will be several soccer matches, such as La Liga, Serie A, and Saudi Pro League matches.
Celta Vigo vs Real Madrid in 1x2 betting with different odds. The same goes for a number of other matches in different leagues that will be played in the next few hours, if that's what you mean.

[stompix]

It's mainly a process to keep cheating away
- it's hard for the player to score on his own just because his dad bet on it, it's easier for him not to take it seriously and fake the bad kicks every time
- with red cards it poses a risk for the player to take one to win a bet, it's also pretty easy not to get one, you just avoid doing anything

It's a way to guarantee players won't get drawn into fixing bets without risks.

[Upgrade00]

The bookies want you to have as much options as possible or the illusion of options. If there was a way to do the opposite of a bet they would, you see it with almost all available bets in sports. In situations they don't is where it will not be that popular among bettors or the odds for it will be too low. For example you can bet on the on a keeper to score, but a reverse bet of the keeper not to score doesn't make much sense based on the probabilities.

If you check well enough, there may be other variants of the bet you're looking for in a different pick.

[Nwada001]

there can be special bets with very low odds, and i think it wouldn't be a bad idea for their opposite bets to be available as well. this could be a recommendation for gambling sites.

In terms of making provision for bets on players not to score, I doubt bookmakers will even think of enabling that. It's easier for someone not to score till the end of the entire 90 minutes than for the person scoring. Casinos provide options that they believe will favor them more and not just options that the players are imagining. That option will make sense, but as stompix said, it might create room for cheating.

[Grace333]

when browsing a gambling site, you will see some special bets for every popular match. for example, there may be bets on a player scoring a goal, receiving a card, or being sent off. there may be some bets on what the referee or players will do.

my question is this: do you think gambling sites that give odds on the likelihood of an event occurring should also offer the option to bet on the opposite outcome? of course, there's no obligation to do so, but if there are odds given on a player scoring a goal, i think gamblers should also be able to bet on the possibility of that player not scoring.

there can be special bets with very low odds, and i think it wouldn't be a bad idea for their opposite bets to be available as well. this could be a recommendation for gambling sites.

Gamble is either betting on something or against it, even your point of betting on players to score goal, from what I have seen is either yes or no you can bet on and betting on No means you're betting against that player. Even on the regular goal option is either you bet over or under and one is the opposite of the other.
opposite betting exists in gamble except i don't understand what you mean by opposite option betting, or maybe you're not used to betting platform interface.

[serjent05]

there can be special bets with very low odds, and i think it wouldn't be a bad idea for their opposite bets to be available as well. this could be a recommendation for gambling sites.

Is it not normal for sports betting to have opposite odds?  If there is no "opposite", it won't be called betting.  If we look at the odds, there is a bet for each participants and to be able for the other participant to win, the other must lose.  Is this not an example of opposite bet?

Anyway, I agree with you that it is not a bad idea to have more options for betting.  After all, people like a variety of options to have a chance of winning.

[Charles-Tim]

there can be special bets with very low odds, and i think it wouldn't be a bad idea for their opposite bets to be available as well. this could be a recommendation for gambling sites.

There is something you are not getting right at all. I hope you are betting at all. Or are you truly betting? I asked this question because there are numerous bet options that gamblers can go for, and many of them are opposites or indirectly opposites. Or maybe I do not get what you mean. Almost all odds are available on gambling sites. But there is nothing bad to make suggestions through the customer care if there is any need.

[Mia Chloe]

when browsing a gambling site, you will see some special bets for every popular match. for example, there may be bets on a player scoring a goal, receiving a card, or being sent off. there may be some bets on what the referee or players will do.

In most cases to every existing bet there is always a counter for example just like you have a bet option for goals scored in the game you also have one for no goals at all there are a lot betting outcomes and the bigger the site the more they can accommodate what really differs is the odds.

The odd or multiplier size is just a function of how mathematically possible that bet is so the higher the possibility the lower the odds and vice versa.

[Agbe]

there can be special bets with very low odds, and i think it wouldn't be a bad idea for their opposite bets to be available as well. this could be a recommendation for gambling sites.

Op you can bet on any of the site as you like. If the options are not given, how will the casino make profit from the bet? They have to create the options so the gambler choose the best for him. The low odds are always going to the event that would likely to happen and gamblers would like to bet on that odd so the casino made them lower odds.

[BitMaxz]

It looks like you're talking about bets and shouldn't have another opposite option, like the one guy from the basketball team will not get a foul in the 3rd quarter, and then the opposite is that guy will get a foul.
I don't think the casino will remove those options since we are betting against other bettors, and more options mean we have less chance to win.
On the past there were not many option to bet but right now they added many options; it is likely a prediction market right now compared before.

[yahoo62278]

Player props are something that I think need removed from sports betting period. Players have too much control over how a situation could play out. Let's say you're family is struggling and needs $50k to save their house. You are the top scorer on a NBA team and there's a prop bet for you to score o24 points in tomorrows game. The player finds someone not connected to the family to make a semi large bet on him to not cover and cheat the bookies.

That is a shit scenario but it was off the top of my head and shows you how players can control outcomes and in the long run screw bettors. It's bad for the sport.

[KTChampions]

when browsing a gambling site, you will see some special bets for every popular match. for example, there may be bets on a player scoring a goal, receiving a card, or being sent off. there may be some bets on what the referee or players will do.

my question is this: do you think gambling sites that give odds on the likelihood of an event occurring should also offer the option to bet on the opposite outcome? of course, there's no obligation to do so, but if there are odds given on a player scoring a goal, i think gamblers should also be able to bet on the possibility of that player not scoring.

there can be special bets with very low odds, and i think it wouldn't be a bad idea for their opposite bets to be available as well. this could be a recommendation for gambling sites.

But the most important outcomes already have these options: BTTS, Total, Team Win or Lose (double chance for the opponent), etc. For narrower markets, bookmakers will offer unfavorable odds (if forced to offer such an option). If you're interested in exotic markets, you should go to the prediction market, as every outcome there is quoted as both Yes and No and you can choose what to bet on. In general, it would be interesting to know what bets you would make if you had all the opportunities, it seems to me that such options are already available (in prediction markets).

[dimonstration]

my question is this: do you think gambling sites that give odds on the likelihood of an event occurring should also offer the option to bet on the opposite outcome? of course, there's no obligation to do so, but if there are odds given on a player scoring a goal, i think gamblers should also be able to bet on the possibility of that player not scoring.

there can be special bets with very low odds, and i think it wouldn't be a bad idea for their opposite bets to be available as well. this could be a recommendation for gambling sites.

Yes they do.

Usually, sportsbook offer “yes/no” or “under/over” over on conditional bet they are offering. Their offer go like this, do specific player will score certain points? Yes or No is the option and the initial odds is proportional to the theoretical odds minus the house edge.

Bets like this is very common and the very foundation of sportsbetting since they rely only to the house edge which means they offer is always have the counter offer to pay the winner with losers money.

[Obim34]

there can be special bets with very low odds, and i think it wouldn't be a bad idea for their opposite bets to be available as well. this could be a recommendation for gambling sites.

A casino is supposed to be smart, if you think they are not giving options which you expect them to have, that means they are protecting their business, knowing fully well that such option will give them more losses. For example, a goal keeper scoring in a game, you don't expect them to have a NO with a good odd, if YES the odds will be huge, for a NO can have very tiny odds that won't add any significant multiplier to your whole bet, including the NO option with the cheap odd is the same as not having that particular option.