Is expected value more important than win rate in sports betting?

[cryptoaddictchie]

What do you guys think about this, is win rate really the best way to judge a sports bettor?

Its not a competition or show off but being honest? The win rate of a person on sports betting judges his skills on how to bet properly. Yes I think. Its the only basis where you can judge if someone is good or bad when it comes to that.

For me, this is where sports betting becomes tricky. A winning bet does not always mean it was a good bet, and a losing bet does not always mean it was a bad one.

Do you agree with that? Or in the end, win rate still matters more for you?

Yes partly agreed. We cant judge someone who lose in a good bet ( analyzed properly). A sports bet who focus on gambling dont have biases when it comes to money matter and will only bet what he thinks potentially can win with high rate.

[Questat]

I think what is important is that you end up with profit. There are a lot of terminologies we can use with our analysis, speculation, or whatever, but if you are a gambler who does not profit in the end, you still belong to the losers.

Your goal is different from those who are just playing for fun because you are already talking about value and everything. So you treat gambling, or sports betting to be specific, like an investment where your goal is long-term profit.

[SquallLeonhart]

Winning rate would always be more important to me than the value, as long as the wins are consistent I would likely increase my stake to make more profits. This is way more better than losing out on big odds every single time because it is never assured with gambling but it is near possible with small odds.

I've learned not to be too greedy with my winnings and that has being my drive for more successful betting career. Betting is close to 100% predictable when you size down your risk to the barest minimum no matter the profits you make. A small consistent winnings streak is more reliable than consistent losses with a valued win over time.

Here, things have never been on level because mostly people love to have good profit they never go for having a better ratio because this has never been in their strategy while they are having a return on their investment with profit always works they feel comfortable and enjoy it, but few have a strategy where the ratio also counts.

Gambling for fun never has anything what is the outcome, and how things will work, but people who are always having profit in mind count many things while the ratio is also important for a few because this brings some good for them. Here they can also do their bets big and small, while people who always go for profit also have a strategy; without a ratio, it always has changes for every person.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

In my opinion, win rate matters. I understand the two kinds of gamblers that you are describing here but as long as these two types of gamblee remain profitable at the end of the day, then it's a good record. Since I started betting till date, I have come to understand different gamblers with different strategies, as long as their win rate is good, that's what really matters to them.

[Royal Cap]

Well, just chasing high odds can cause the win rate to drop so low that if you lose a few matches in a row, you risk losing your entire capital. That can't be called smart betting, it becomes a kind of blind gamble. I would say that a good bettor should have a balance between his win rate and the odds.  Suppose someone can maintain a win rate of roughly 50-60 percent between 1.80 and 2.00 odds, only then can he survive in the long run. It is difficult to make a profit at the end of the day if you leave one out and rely only on the other. So while it is important to maintain a win rate to reduce risk, it is equally important to select the right odds so that that win rate does not cause losses.

[Akbarkoe]

[...]
Do you agree with that? Or in the end, win rate still matters more for you?

The win rate is important but if you always rely on the favorite team I think anyone can, but a person who is good at analyzing even if he doesn't bet on the favorite team he can win more matches that means he is great, I think it needs to be considered in his judgment, meaning the victory in his bet is very meaningful.

We can be objective depending on how the bettor wins the bet because it may not be in accordance with our views even if someone gets a good win, but I agree that losing streaks are a very bad thing.x

[Churchillvv]

Do you agree with that? Or in the end, win rate still matters more for you?

For me there is nothing that beats more wins, basically gambling is structured in a way that losing is very much unavoidable so if you win more regardless of how little it is then compound interest should be your primary concern and how to accumulate more profit through the little profits and that alone beats all big wins and consistently losses for me, infact if I know someone who wins but with minimal profit I will rather stick to their gambling tickets and then take bigger risk with my own capital but still love the fact they have more wins. Nothing beats a consistent win in my diary.

[Bitcoin Smith]

What do you guys think about this, is win rate really the best way to judge a sports bettor?

Because I see a lot of bettors flexing their record, like 7 wins out of 10 bets, 8 wins out of 12, something like that. But sometimes when you look at the odds, most of those bets are very low odds, so the profit is not really that big. One bad losing streak and it can wipe out everything. On the other side, some bettors lose more tickets but still make profit because they take better odds and better value. So maybe it’s not really about how many bets you win, but if the odds you are taking are worth the risk.

For me, this is where sports betting becomes tricky. A winning bet does not always mean it was a good bet, and a losing bet does not always mean it was a bad one.

Do you agree with that? Or in the end, win rate still matters more for you?

I am not a math expert, but I am sure that one can have less win rate and win more rewards than someone who got better win rate and end up less rewards. The odds are real important in sports betting and how can someone win more rewards by going against the favorite, by going against the most players that is how the odd works, and we all know higher risk brings better rewards.

However one can't always go against the favorite, it should be mixed or the better term is balanced, this makes the sport betting a skill from strategical perspective.

[sunsilk]

For me, this is where sports betting becomes tricky. A winning bet does not always mean it was a good bet, and a losing bet does not always mean it was a bad one.

It is really tricky, why we're betting for some sports? it's because we want to win. But losing it also means bad.

I think that there's no further explanation to that, we all want to win and want to avoid losses. There's no value that can return when we lose.

And that's why winning matters. I may not get the whole idea but that's what I think it is with sports betting.

Do you agree with that? Or in the end, win rate still matters more for you?

It's still win rate that matters for me.

[Orpichukwu]

For me, this is where sports betting becomes tricky. A winning bet does not always mean it was a good bet, and a losing bet does not always mean it was a bad one.

Do you agree with that? Or in the end, win rate still matters more for you?

I did not completely agree with you; you describe what's a good bet based on the value of the bet and not how good the game was predicted.

In terms of winning, anyone who really wants to celebrate their winning streak should be able to value it based on the amount lost and the amount won in the number of tickets they are marking as wins and the ones lost if they are still in profit or if the numbers are just a small bounce back not enough to call it a total win.

[SamReomo]

A winning bet does not always mean it was a good bet, and a losing bet does not always mean it was a bad one.

Do you agree with that? Or in the end, win rate still matters more for you?

I agree with you, those who win a few bets with high odds can make better profit in long term than those winning many bets. Let's say if someone who wins 5 bets of 1.1 or 1.2 odds in row and still losses a single bet then such a person didn't made any profit from those bets, and similarly if someone placed a bet with good odds like 2.40 or 5.00 and win a single bet can still be profitable than the one who won 5 bets in row. So it's somehow important to see the odds as well because winning 3-4 matches consistently with low odds is not going to make someone profitable.

[sotelorene]

Firstly, we should and understanding that betting is a  game of luck therefore, most or all of the games we pick or select to play on doesn't really matter because at the end luck we always prevail and sometimes it can not prevail and since it is a game of luck It is very advisable and okay to accept whatever that happens be it loss or win. I gamble mostly when the season is really active but not country games because I find it hard to predict sometimes

[Free Market Capitalist]

What do you guys think about this, is win rate really the best way to judge a sports bettor?

...

Do you agree with that? Or in the end, win rate still matters more for you?

I doubt that most of the people who responded—starting with you—fully understand these two concepts and the difference between them.

Expected Value is the actual expected result over such a large sample size that variance has no effect. In casino games, this applies perfectly: if the HE is 3% (and therefore the RTP is 97%), the expected value of a $1 bet is $0.97. Win rate is what you actually win on that bet or the series of bets you’re tracking.

In poker, it applies because you can calculate the odds when going all-in before the river and the difference from the expected result. In other words, if you go all-in preflop with AA against your opponent with KK and there is $100 in the pot (after rake has been deducted), the expected value is $82. If you win, your WR is $18 above the expected value, and if you lose, it is -$82, or $82 below the expected value line.

But I doubt it can be applied to sports betting, and if it is, I suppose it will be by analogy, but you can't apply the same mathematical certainty to future outcomes based on large samples as you can in a casino or in poker. At the end of the 1990s, based on the team’s performance during that decade, you might have expected the Chicago Bulls to win more NBA championships in the future, even though they haven’t won a single one since 1998. Sports results can vary in the future—and in fact, they do—so I don’t think the concept of expected value can be taken seriously for sports betting.

[eisen33]

A winning bet does not always mean it was a good bet, and a losing bet does not always mean it was a bad one.

Do you agree with that? Or in the end, win rate still matters more for you?

I agree with you, those who win a few bets with high odds can make better profit in long term than those winning many bets. Let's say if someone who wins 5 bets of 1.1 or 1.2 odds in row and still losses a single bet then such a person didn't made any profit from those bets, and similarly if someone placed a bet with good odds like 2.40 or 5.00 and win a single bet can still be profitable than the one who won 5 bets in row. So it's somehow important to see the odds as well because winning 3-4 matches consistently with low odds is not going to make someone profitable.

You are absolutely right, betting on low odds is generally a poor strategy because losses will still happen, even with such small odds. The problem is that after a loss, you need a large number of winning bets just to recover what you lost. That's why it is often better to focus on bets with odds from 2.00 or higher, as they can offer a better risk to reward ratio. However this approach will only work if you are genuinely skilled at betting and can maintain a good win rate over the long term.

[Darker45]

~snip~

But the question is, are many people really aware of what they are doing?

I mean, some are just running a business and putting in capital without even looking at the financial statement.

Many gamblers think like that too, and their way to justify it is, why would I check? I am just doing it for fun.

Business means being serious.
Gambling means fun.

That should (is) be their mindset.

Well, to each his own. From the point of view of some gamblers, this might be how it should be done. I don't agree, of course, but perhaps there's no right and wrong here.

My experiences with bettors vary. There are those who are kind of proud of the level of accuracy of their picks, despite being net negative. For me, on the contrary, what matters is that I've made money. While gambling is fun, it's also about making money. There's real money at stake, after all. They're supposed to give you yield in the end.

[Cointxz]

Do you agree with that? Or in the end, win rate still matters more for you?

Win rate doesn’t matter if your PnL is on negative. I will take 1% winning rate if I can win a bet with 200+ odds or more because it only means that I’m in profit in the end.

Win rate is just for show off and we know that you can increase your winning percentage by frequently choosing a low risk bet with tiny odds.

Most gambler knew that PnL what matter most.

[Nrcewker]

Snip

I have a gambling budget and I don't care if I lose it all because it's an amount that I can afford to lose. For that reason, I go for small odds because winning is a good feeling irrespective of the amount of money won.

I get you, mate, but what’s the point of gambling and risking money if the amount doesn’t matter to you? It doesn’t matter whether the odds are high or low—once you put money at stake, there’s always a possibility that you might lose it.

Yes, low odds reduce the chances of losing, but there’s still a possibility that you will lose your money. So instead of risking your money multiple times, why not go for decent odds and place a single bet? That’s what I was trying to explain.

[danherbias07]

Winning rate is cool in paper, but the truth behind it will depend on the sports bettor.

You said it right. There could be a sports bettor who won 4 of 5 but is still at a loss when it comes to his whole budget. If he lost 1 of those 5 bets with the same odds as x1.20, then he is still missing a little piece of his initial deposit.
Now, some gamblers don't go as low as x1.30 to avoid that. I have seen bettors who will just go slightly above x1.40, and their winning rate is high. For me, that has more value because even if you lose 1 of 4 bets, you are still in profit, or maybe 1 of 3 bets if you go x1.50+.
This is the reason why I don't go betting for the heavy favorites unless the spreads are decent.

[rachael9385]

You are absolutely right, betting on low odds is generally a poor strategy because losses will still happen, even with such small odds. The problem is that after a loss, you need a large number of winning bets just to recover what you lost. That's why it is often better to focus on bets with odds from 2.00 or higher, as they can offer a better risk to reward ratio. However this approach will only work if you are genuinely skilled at betting and can maintain a good win rate over the long term.

It might be a poor strategy to you but others don't see it that way, the only reason why i don't like betting on small odds is because it requires a huge amount to make something substantial from them. For a lot of people their strategy is to bet on small odds and stake huge amounts, this isn't really a smart decision to make but if you can afford to lose those amounts then it's not a problem.

[Agbe]

Op you supposed know the joy of a gambler. The joy of a gambler is not a big win but a win. Whether small or big and once it is call a win, they are excited. Win rate matters because if you have a streaks lose even it is a small amount of losing, it will be a very painful. As for me, betting with low stake is an economic or gambling management strategy and even you lose the bet, it will not pain you the way it would have been done with big amount.