Which Betting Odds Can Make You Profitable in the Long Run? 1.75, 1.90, or 2.10?

[Botnake]

If we were to choose one set of odds to maintain when we are betting. We have like 1.75, 1.90, or 2.10. Which of these do you think will make you profitable in the long run. Regardless of what sport you are betting on.

Share based on your experience not what you read in books, as theory is not always applicable in actual betting if you believe that.

I'm asking this question because higher odds offer better payouts but are harder to win consistently while lower odds require more wins to remain profitable.


Need some real life experience here.

[KTChampions]

If we were to choose one set of odds to maintain when we are betting. We have like 1.75, 1.90, or 2.10. Which of these do you think will make you profitable in the long run. Regardless of what sport you are betting on.

Share based on your experience not what you read in books, as theory is not always applicable in actual betting if you believe that.

I'm asking this question because higher odds offer better payouts but are harder to win consistently while lower odds require more wins to remain profitable.


Need some real life experience here.

First of all, the odds you cited are practically indistinguishable, real differences exist between odds in the 1.1-1.3 range and those at 7.0+, but these differences are dynamic. At one point, odds of 7.0+ offered value, but that’s no longer the case. Nowadays, bookmakers have significantly trimmed the odds at the long end of the spectrum, even when you bet on a price of 7.0 or higher, a large margin is being taken from you (in other words, the "fair" odds might be 9.0 or even higher, but you’re only offered 7.0).
As for your range, it makes no difference, on average, you will lose 4–8% on every bet.

[free-bit.co.in]

TBH, for me, odds 1.90 or thereabouts such as in spreads or over/unders, represent biggest trap sometime, though same time it could also call safe zone.

Actually in reality bookmaker set these odds very carefully. To be profitable here in long term, you need to consistently win more than 53% of your match. Is maintaining consistent 53% win rate in real life any small feat? LOL, bookies set odds in such a way that, after any winning streak, you'll end up losing everything in one fell swoop.

However if you have discipline and can identify value bet then you can play it safe even within 1.90 odds range. I don't know, it might seem boring to many people.

[Botnake]

First of all, the odds you cited are practically indistinguishable,,,

Try to look at the big picture and you will understand. I'm talking about real experience here and trying to hear from bettors who are consistently betting, and you point about 7.00 odds, no bettor would consistently bet on that kind of odds as it's just suicidal.

Just look at the reality, long-term bettors know that.

| Decimal odds | Break-even win rate |
| ------------ | ------------------- |
| 1.75          | 57.14%              |
| 1.90          | 52.63%              |
| 2.10          | 47.62%              |

@free-bit.co.in, thanks for your input, I see you can relate.

[Sim_card]

One thing you should understand is that the odds that you pick is not what will make you profitable in the long run because it's rare to see someone that will be profitable in the long run with gambling because it's a game of luck and not a game of odds.

Those odds are there to tell you how much you profit you will make if you choose that club and to also let you know who is the favourite to win the game but not all the time. Some odds are best to be left alone instead, of betting on a team which such low odds like 1.1 or 1.2 because your profit will be very small. I make my game analysis before betting on a particular team.

[stadus]

One thing you should understand is that the odds that you pick is not what will make you profitable in the long run because it's rare to see someone that will be profitable in the long run with gambling because it's a game of luck and not a game of odds.

That's what you think if you don't believe its possible in the long run.
It was already stated that you need to have a 52.63%  win rate just to break even, so at 53% you are already in profit,
Take note, that is considering you have followed the right bankroll management.

So assuming you are following that, for 1000 games, you need to win 530 of it to be profitable, You still don't believe its possible?

[Pandu Geddon]

To be honest, I am not used to betting by considering the amount of Odds that I use. After looking at the matches that will take place, I will look at the markets offered. For single bets, I will consider Odds above 1.7. Meanwhile, Odds lower than 1.5 can be accumulated in parlay bets. Although I do not think about continuously winning in the long term, that is often what I use when making bets.

[Perfectbaby]

For someone who is gambling for fun going with 1.75 odds is the safest, but if the person is gambling to make profits then such person can for the higher odds. But there, the game will be extremely volatile because there is no signs of assurance that you would win, even though it was at the lowest the chances of winning so quickly could be around 4/10.
Again, for long term duration the smaller odds could do more better there for you, but there is no guarantee.

[AmaGold70]

I do gamble on both high and low odds depending on the statistics of the games I want to play. Many times I have have been disappointed by even smaller odds because I thought gambling on small odds will give me more wins than higher odds. Sometimes we are being tricked by the bookmakers by the odds they issue. Both small, and big odds wins match, and as a gambler your decision should not be based on the odds given to a team. Sometimes smaller odds are given for certain reasons, maybe a team is playing from home or a major player is not on the pitch , this reason can change odds assigned to a team, and not necessarily that the team having lower odds is weaker.

[Iranus]

Honestly, in beginning, seeing lower odds like anything below 1.75 I felt like incredible bet. And when winning at lower odds, it felt like, yes, easy money!

But when I looked at my long term historical data, it was enough to drive me out of my mind. I did the math and realized that at odds of 1.75, I might have just been lucky in short term, managing to win 10 time in a row. But in long run, one major upset wiped out my entire bankroll.

Gambler who claim 1.75 is safe are actually trying to cover up their own foolishness. If you are regular bettor you could realise favorites chosen by bookmaker don’t always win, that’s just a myth.

[giammangiato]

First of all, the odds you cited are practically indistinguishable,,,

Try to look at the big picture and you will understand. I'm talking about real experience here and trying to hear from bettors who are consistently betting, and you point about 7.00 odds, no bettor would consistently bet on that kind of odds as it's just suicidal.

Just look at the reality, long-term bettors know that.

| Decimal odds | Break-even win rate |
| ------------ | ------------------- |
| 1.75          | 57.14%              |
| 1.90          | 52.63%              |
| 2.10          | 47.62%              |

@free-bit.co.in, thanks for your input, I see you can relate.

In my case I often bet on intuition, it happens that I also bet on low odds, as I have already said in the past I closed 2025 with a profit of 400$ (one year) is really not enough.
The strong point of my random way of betting is randomness, low spending and maximum yield, with the winnings I get (unfortunately not that often) I continue to play by reloading the account very few times.
I can't classify myself as a long-term bettor, as an example I can take the 2025 that brought me profit, but in 2026 (which still has to end) my profit is only $55, but I have played my bets often (always keeping my rules).
I don't consider myself a professional bettor, but I can say I enjoy it.

[Yamifoud]

In my experience, I mostly prefer 1.90 odds.
I've tried long-term betting, and I'm still not profitable and eventually I lose control when I'm on a losing streak which results in breaking my discipline in bankroll management.

I think long-term betting is only fun if you have a decent bankroll for me I would consider $10k a decent bankroll, and then 1% per stake ($100) gives some thrill, but what happened to me was I only had $200 at max, so 1% of that feels like I'm not taking any risk and I don't feel the thrill that's why I end up losing along the way.

[BALIK]

Actually, I prefer betting on underdog. Actually there's a distinct thrill to higher odds.

I find it much easier to secure profit at odds of 2.10. Even if you lose half your match, you can still head home with profit in your pocket! If you are truly capable of reading sport then identifying value at odds of 2.10 or higher is far more logical, imo. For this, you must need to have good understanding of team's form, injury, tactic etc. But keep in mind that to experience this thrill you must have strong bankroll management.

[Sanitough]

Actually, I prefer betting on underdog. Actually there's a distinct thrill to higher odds.

I find it much easier to secure profit at odds of 2.10. Even if you lose half your match, you can still head home with profit in your pocket! If you are truly capable of reading sport then identifying value at odds of 2.10 or higher is far more logical, imo. For this, you must need to have good understanding of team's form, injury, tactic etc. But keep in mind that to experience this thrill you must have strong bankroll management.

Then you just need to hit 47.62% to break even.

So at 50%, you are already making a profit on that. I think the biggest problem for bettors is not odds selection but bankroll management. because if we don't have that, it's like we are gambling without a direction, you bet $10 now, when you lose you bet $50. That's hard to measure if you are successful or not as even if your win rate is above 50%, but you lack discipline, you win 9 times, and you go all in on the next bet and lose everything.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

To maintain profitability in betting targeting only a specific odd, one has to win more instead of losing more, so assuming I decided to target just 1.90, is there a certainty that I could win 60/100?  Luck can happen and I might achieve it at times but if reverse is the case, that means I am losing more but assuming I am not just maintaining a specific odd but I bet both on 2.10, 2.5, 1.90 and 1.75 depending on a bet I find value in, chances are there that even when I lose more of the 1.75 odds bets and win some bet of 2.50, I could still be profitable. Based on my experience, my short answer to your question is that maintaining only one of those listed odds does not really guarantee a long term profitability, unless luck makes it possible for the person but successful outcome is not near to certainty.

[Japinat]

To maintain profitability in betting targeting only a specific odd, one has to win more instead of losing more, so assuming I decided to target just 1.90, is there a certainty that I could win 60/100?  Luck can happen and I might achieve it at times but if reverse is the case, that means I am losing more but assuming I am not just maintaining a specific odd but I bet both on 2.10, 2.5, 1.90 and 1.75 depending on a bet I find value in, chances are there that even when I lose more of the 1.75 odds bets and win some bet of 2.50, I could still be profitable. Based on my experience, my short answer to your question is that maintaining only one of those listed odds does not really guarantee a long term profitability, unless luck makes it possible for the person but successful outcome is not near to certainty.

That value is necessary that's why you don't just bet on every game you see , you need to carefully analyze it and hope that bookmakers made a mistake in setting the odds or you spot an obvious trap where the public will likely take the bet easily. The odds we are seeing only show the implied probability, now we need to find the real probability. However, hitting 60/100, that's kind of hard in reality, but it's not impossible.

[Gozie51]

If we were to choose one set of odds to maintain when we are betting. We have like 1.75, 1.90, or 2.10. Which of these do you think will make you profitable in the long run. Regardless of what sport you are betting on.


Need some real life experience here.

What I usually look at is what odd that is set for the other team especially in football and for option of 1/2 that's home win or away. For example, if the home team is given 1.75 odd and away team has 2.10 to win, I will know that the possibility is on home team to win. But if they are given closer odds like 2.10 and 2.25, I will consider there strength to be the same and I might avoid picking the game. So what I do is to look at lower odd games for home win against away win and that has worked for me most times but with very low potential profit. Like 1.35 against 2.75+. However, I don't usually go for direct home win or away win. I double chance or go for goals and if the odd comes to around 1.35, I can go on the game.

So basically, lower odds has more chances of profiting on the long run.

I'm asking this question because higher odds offer better payouts but are harder to win consistently while lower odds require more wins to remain profitable.

It is true and the simple truth is that sportsbooks know the strength of the teams and they use AI to work the odds to give a very tight odd margins.

[mirakal]

It is true and the simple truth is that sportsbooks know the strength of the teams and they use AI to work the odds to give a very tight odd margins.

Even we know that, and it's easy to predict if all we do is pick the winner. However, it's not always like that all the time, especially in sports like basketball so that's why point handicaps are introduced to even out the action, we see + and - points, and it's quite different to choose from those even if they offer odds of 1.90 or higher. However, you don't have to win all the time to profit, it's unrealistic, but you can just aim to win most of the time, reach the required winning percentage to be profitable and you will succeed.

[yhiaali3]

The direct answer for your question is that: mathematically speaking it is not possible to determine which probabilities are better in the long run based solely on their numerical value. I think this depends on the expected value and the actual probability of an event occurring, compared to the implied odds set by bookmakers.

Long term profit has nothing to do with choosing a fixed number but rather with discovering bets where the actual percentage of winning is actually higher than the percentage specified by the betting site.

[sunsilk]

It varies and not wholly reliant on the odds. Because there are times that the bookies have just based it on the market's sentiment for that actual match.

Where in, that the underdog can have the better chance of winning. Whatever factor they use in determining the odds, there are times that I'm going against the favorites and it's worth to risk some money in it.

So, there's no actual pattern of which odds to follow for the long run and sometimes it's spontaneous that I get to bet for both.