Are “safe bets” really safe, or just overpriced?

[libert19]

...

For those who do sports betting, do you still trust favorites when the odds are low, or do you avoid them once the price looks too expensive?

No, I don't bet on favorites when odds are too low, I prefer to make bets with odds above 2 when team is having good winning chance (trust me, it often does even with such odds), but I'd bet on favorites with odds upwards of 1.7 when team looks certain of winning, as I like to think risk-reward is justified with such bets.

[Lida93]

Safe bets are not determined by favorite team, as an experience bettor, a safe bet is the pick that you chose because your analysis has determined that such pick is what has the better chance to give you a win, whether overpriced or not. You have to confirm the level of chance that game have before you actually say you are going to bet on it, unless you are just a newbie who has no strategy in making analysis. If I choose to bet on a game that I believe to be safe simply because it looks safe without doing a verification, I might not actually win.

Gambling responsibly should be our focus as gamblers and the only way we can gamble safe is when we are betting with amount that we know we can afford to lose. Picking a good game that will result in profit can be hard to know if it involves two big team that are good on the pitch and a big rival. Football analysis does not only determine a safe bet, there are other factors we need to consider when gambling.

There are no other factors to consider that can make a bet be a safe bet other than that one team appears to be a better team by stats and current performance over the other team. That's just the yardstick that is used by sports bettors to refer to a bet as safe bet. But there's really no such thing as a safe bet because football does favour the most in form team but the team that is able to utilise their chances on the field. The idea of safe bet has really made bettors waste a huge amount of funds because they had much confidence about how safe the games are and they went all in.

[SOKO-DEKE]

For those who do sports betting, do you still trust favorites when the odds are low, or do you avoid them once the price looks too expensive?

I don't trust a favorite team blindly just because the odds are low. I always do my own analysis, find out the facts for myself, and then make my picks based on the results of that analysis. Because of that, I sometimes do better with low-odds bets when I believe they are actually worth betting on.The reason I started doing my own analysis instead of always following favorite teams with low odds is because there was a period when I thought I was smart enough to win simply by picking favorite teams. I would select about 10 games with low odds to build a higher combined odd, even if the total was only two or three odds, and then place my stake.At that time, I was betting blindly without doing any research to determine whether those favorite teams with low odds were actually worth betting on. In the end, I usually failed.That experience made me start doing my own analysis before placing bets. Now, I choose teams based on my research, whether they are favorites with low odds or not. What I rely on today is my own analysis, not a team's status as a favorite or the fact that it has low odds

[knuckey]

Many bettors like to pick the favorite because it feels safer. Strong team, better players, better record, so it looks like the obvious side to take.

But that is where the trap can start.

Sportsbooks already know most people will run to the favorite, so the odds or spread can become too expensive. The team may still win, but the bet itself might not be good anymore because the value is gone. This is why I’m starting to think that a safe-looking bet can still be a bad bet. Maybe the question should not be “will this team win?” but “am I paying too much for this pick?”

For those who do sports betting, do you still trust favorites when the odds are low, or do you avoid them once the price looks too expensive?

I realize that's true. But strangely, there are still people who remain loyal to their favorite team. But sometimes, despite that, they still win, although this rarely happens. I usually prefer to play it safe by supporting the opposing team with a large following, although when my favorite team is playing, it's hard not to place a bet on it.

[GiftedMAN]

...

For those who do sports betting, do you still trust favorites when the odds are low, or do you avoid them once the price looks too expensive?

No, I don't bet on favorites when odds are too low, I prefer to make bets with odds above 2 when team is having good winning chance (trust me, it often does even with such odds), but I'd bet on favorites with odds upwards of 1.7 when team looks certain of winning, as I like to think risk-reward is justified with such bets.

For some favourite with low odds but good performance all round regardless of the odds given I still make bets with them for either direct win or over 2.5 goals if they are facing a team that scores goals. But any favorite team with over 1.7 odd has the probability of winning either half so the best option will be to for them to win either or the half so if they win in the first or second half your bet will still go through. Remember the term favourite doesn't mean they will always win.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

...

For those who do sports betting, do you still trust favorites when the odds are low, or do you avoid them once the price looks too expensive?

No, I don't bet on favorites when odds are too low, I prefer to make bets with odds above 2 when team is having good winning chance (trust me, it often does even with such odds), but I'd bet on favorites with odds upwards of 1.7 when team looks certain of winning, as I like to think risk-reward is justified with such bets.

Exactly, one mistake I've personally noticed that alot of gamblers or sports bettors rather don't check what is the risk-reward of the game they placed bet on.
Risk - reward is simply a means through which we get to know if the reward of what ever game we are placing our bet on is worth the risk, so that is, the reward for the match must be worth the risk being taken for the reward.

For example, it is foolishness to place a bet where the stake is $100,000 and the odd of match is 1.2 or maybe even lesser, now imagine that the gambler lost that stake of $100,000 all for the chance to win a mere $1,200, this is a very bad way to gamble or bets, those who pay real attention to betting will always understand that there are several betting opportunities in the market that are worth not staking any money on because the potential winning amount is to small compared to the risk involved in the game.

[Wakate]

For some favourite with low odds but good performance all round regardless of the odds given I still make bets with them for either direct win or over 2.5 goals if they are facing a team that scores goals. But any favorite team with over 1.7 odd has the probability of winning either half so the best option will be to for them to win either or the half so if they win in the first or second half your bet will still go through. Remember the term favourite doesn't mean they will always win.

I know their are gamblers that like looking to add games with big odds to their bet slip and that can be a serious problem for anyone. Those big odd games often end up in a draw or lose if you carry them as a direct winning.
I like reducing the risk of my bets even if the odd will be reduce, it is better and I am okay with games with small odds than losing to big odds. Gambling should be balanced, some games should come with less risk while others can be high risk.

[yhiaali3]

Exactly, one mistake I've personally noticed that alot of gamblers or sports bettors rather don't check what is the risk-reward of the game they placed bet on.
Risk - reward is simply a means through which we get to know if the reward of what ever game we are placing our bet on is worth the risk, so that is, the reward for the match must be worth the risk being taken for the reward.

For example, it is foolishness to place a bet where the stake is $100,000 and the odd of match is 1.2 or maybe even lesser, now imagine that the gambler lost that stake of $100,000 all for the chance to win a mere $1,200, this is a very bad way to gamble or bets, those who pay real attention to betting will always understand that there are several betting opportunities in the market that are worth not staking any money on because the potential winning amount is to small compared to the risk involved in the game.

Yes, I completely agree with you. The return from the match must be appropriate to the risk taken otherwise the gambler may suffer a huge loss because he believes his bet is safe. He must calculate the worst-case scenario: what if he loses the bet?

This has already happened, and some have lost more than $50,000 for a chance to win only $1,000 because they thought their bet was 100% safe. This is a huge mistake that caused them to incur a very large loss so I always prefer safety first.

[Accardo]

For some favorite with low odds but good performance all round regardless of the odds given I still make bets with them for either direct win or over 2.5 goals if they are facing a team that scores goals. But any favorite team with over 1.7 odd has the probability of winning either half so the best option will be to for them to win either or the half so if they win in the first or second half your bet will still go through. Remember the term favorite doesn't mean they will always win.

Betting strategically on the favorites is more preferable than hopping on a winning prediction alone, over 2.5 is a better way to be on the safe side, because it'll be hard not to get more than 2 goals in games involving favorites and underdog teams, which ever side wins, you're on the verge of getting rewards.

[Nrcewker]

For those who do sports betting, do you still trust favorites when the odds are low, or do you avoid them once the price looks too expensive?

I would like to say a few things here. It’s always better to win something than nothing. I have seen many people place bets on the favorites despite the low odds. However, people often forget that, in order to win a small amount of money, they are risking their entire bankroll.

My suggestion is to completely ignore terms like “fan favorites” or “easy money.” Instead, focus on the game itself and place your bets midway through it. Observe which team has a better chance of winning and then choose that team. Whatever amount you win, you are more likely to end up with a positive return rather than losing the bet and losing all your money.

[BRINIRHA]

I would like to say a few things here. It’s always better to win something than nothing. I have seen many people place bets on the favorites despite the low odds. However, people often forget that, in order to win a small amount of money, they are risking their entire bankroll.

But not all bets that are in the favorite will get a win even though the probability is high but that does not mean it can be a certainty because in some moments it can actually lead us to defeat.  Being in the favorite is not a certainty and guarantee that we will win but it only makes our probability of winning will be much greater than against the flow. But on the one hand we also have to pay attention to several other aspects even though the club is a favorite but when their statistics from the last few matches are not going well or the condition of the players is not okay like when there is an injury or a match ban of course we should not always choose to be in the favorite because it could be a trap in betting.

[Shinpako09]

You are on the wrong path if you pick based solely on the odds or on who the favorite is. Odds don't guarantee a win. Even if the odds are extremely low, nothing is guaranteed.

If I'm not mistaken, I made a parlay before where I picked all the favorites because they had stunningly low odds. Well, all of them won except for one, and that one ruined my parlay. There are a lot of stories about people betting heavily on favorites only to lose in the end.

Just like the guy who bet on Jannik Sinner. He thought it was a sure win since Sinner had a 30 match winning streak, so he bet $50k just to win $997. Well, he almost got his payout. At one point, Sinner had a 99.8% win probability but still lost. One reason was the heat, which triggered a sudden physical collapse.

This is just one example of a match where you never know what might happen that could completely change the outcome. Because of matches like this, I don't rely solely on who the favorite is. There is no such thing as safe.

[Showlove01]

...

For those who do sports betting, do you still trust favorites when the odds are low, or do you avoid them once the price looks too expensive?

No, I don't bet on favorites when odds are too low, I prefer to make bets with odds above 2 when team is having good winning chance (trust me, it often does even with such odds), but I'd bet on favorites with odds upwards of 1.7 when team looks certain of winning, as I like to think risk-reward is justified with such bets.

Yea, whenever a favorite team has a very low odds I don't use to add it to my bet because it won't add significant value to my potential win that is why I consider it unnecessary and again, it is not all the time my favorite team will have a big odd I will carry them, I always make sure to check the possibility of the game because sometimes when the odds are high that way it means the possibility of winning is not certain and sometimes it is always true, the favorite will go ahead and lose.

[imthegreat]

Odds on the favorite are the "lantern" that bettors are ready to "flock to like butterflies." At the same time, because of this, this coefficient will become smaller and smaller, so there is no such phenomenon as in crypto or gold, when a lot of traders and investors enter a position, the price increases more and more. And even with the trading stove, the guys come to the price, which is why it is growing like crazy. But in betting, after all, with such a rush, the opposite coefficient will increase, which equalizes both coefficients. This betting is better than trading.

[Yablee0]

There is nothing like a safe bet when it comes to betting, we can only do what we can to reduce the risks by staking low and doing a lot of research but even all of these does not guarantee profits, you still have to be on the safe side by staking an amount of money that you can afford to lose.

You have spoken well brotherly. I was even wondering if it wasn't gamble we are talking about because with the little I know about gambling stuff is that nothing is guaranteed, even when you decide picking the smallest odds among all, you're still not guaranteed of winning. However, I have seen a senero were a small team won a big team hands down without stress of which no bettor's would have believed. So it's somehow complicated when it comes to gamble, therefore in other not to fall victim of significant lost the best any gambler could do is to bet the little he can let go to avoid stories that touch.

[Alpha Marine]

No matter how much confidence I have in an option for a game, if the odds are too low, I'm not betting on it. The minimum odds I stake on are 1.2 odds, and that is when I decide to go very low. My average small odds are 1.3.

The fact that the odds are safe doesn't mean it is a certainty. If the outcome were certain, then the odds would be 1. A safe bet just means that it is the most likely outcome. We know that there is a chance it won't come. Sometimes, if you look hard, you will see safe bets with odds around 1.5.

I see people betting on 1.06 odds and 1.1 odds, and I ask why? What exactly do you aim to win from that kind of odd? That is just like getting your money back. Worst part is, you can have that kind of bet and still lose your money.