Is it possible to just live off sports betting?

[onondaga]

All u need is plan how it must look like, choose the sport which u like and understand most of all and ofcourse the main is bankroll management, like everywhere. Dont forget about trustworthy bookmaker!

 

[Ahoy]

Well I would say it is possible... IF you know how to and when to bet, it may work. But as someone above mentioned, you gotta know your limit and never cross the line. I think this is the biggest problem. gambling is a serious, lets say, illness... I love it, but I must take care not to get overwhelmed... Its easy in poker, and even easier in sports betting I think...
Some of my friends bet a lot. However they only bet a low amount of money and accumulate many matches, so If they win they can win some nice amount cash. Youre right if you think they miss like 95% of the time

 

[OzExorcist]

think it would be extremely difficult, if you look at something like mma fighting its probably impossible to be a longterm winner after vig

Actually it's probably a little easier with something like MMA if you're really good at handicapping it because it's lower volume and much less "solved" than other sports - as opposed to something like say baseball, where you've got people with powerful and sophisticated computer modelling that can get down big sums quickly and take the value out of the market in the process.

Of course it's an unpredictable sport and you're right, if often does have higher vig than the major sports. For example the vig at Pinnacle on this weeks Thursday Night Football moneyline is 2.3%, while the vig on this weekend's Pettis v Holloway moneyline is 2.84%. But higher vig doesn't have to be the end of the world IMO, as long as it's not bigger than your edge and there's still value to be had (I'm a lot more confident that Holloway will win that fight than I am that the Cheifs will beat the Raiders, for example).

 

[TeUnit]

Actually it's probably a little easier with something like MMA if you're really good at handicapping it because it's lower volume and much less "solved" than other sports - as opposed to something like say baseball, where you've got people with powerful and sophisticated computer modelling that can get down big sums quickly and take the value out of the market in the process.

Of course it's an unpredictable sport and you're right, if often does have higher vig than the major sports. For example the vig at Pinnacle on this weeks Thursday Night Football moneyline is 2.3%, while the vig on this weekend's Pettis v Holloway moneyline is 2.84%. But higher vig doesn't have to be the end of the world IMO, as long as it's not bigger than your edge and there's still value to be had (I'm a lot more confident that Holloway will win that fight than I am that the Cheifs will beat the Raiders, for example).

while it is less "solved" the sportsbooks often make up for it by making odds with "leaks" if connor is favored -500 parity would be achieved if his opponent is +500(football if the Cowboys are -7 the Giants are +7) but in the connor fight his opponent may only be at +180

so over the course of many many fights the casino is picking up all the "leaks"'

the guy who wrote fightnomics claims he has an edge, he should hes one of the biggest experts, but he didnt look at the vig and the leaks(and his edge was small before those considerations)

 

[OzExorcist]

while it is less "solved" the sportsbooks often make up for it by making odds with "leaks" if connor is favored -500 parity would be achieved if his opponent is +500(football if the Cowboys are -7 the Giants are +7) but in the connor fight his opponent may only be at +180

so over the course of many many fights the casino is picking up all the "leaks"'

That's... exactly what I said, yeah.

Higher vig doesn't mean you'll automatically be a loser, just like if you play in a poker game with higher rake you won't automatically be a loser - but you do need to be better in order to profit.

On a side note American-style +550 / -110 odds are so stupid. Decimal makes way more sense

 

[BART777]

you can, if you have a collection of sports results for the next 50 years, as in the movie "Back to the Future".)))

 

[antonis32123]

Here in Greece we have some guys/managers that set up some football matches , go and bet on foreign bookmakers or sometimes here on our local biggest betting agency , if I say it correctly , and collect profits thanks to these rigged games . So yes , some people can live from sport betting for sure .

 

[rdwr33]

For those who have undergraduate, postgraduate, technical courses, or in any way is an expert in some profession, there is already a great difficulty in getting a good job. Sports betting is democratic because it does not require you to have much study, extensive experience in previous jobs, or have a large network of contacts in your area. If you take the bets seriously, your past will not matter! But it's worth reinforcing that there is no easy money. The watchword is dedication and care!

 

[Two6JJ]

As long as you have the bankroll and mind set to deal with huge variance it can be done. Also be prepared to work harder than you first believed necessary to succeed.

 

[vitja0101]

Well, yes, I put in twice and did not like

 

[zam220]

I think it's possible,you need to analyze the events and not to put more than 5% of bankroll

 

[cheeeer]

Maybe - but if you bet on live events. Prior to events - it will be non profitable on long run. Also prepare that if you win much they can not to pay or don't let u bet anymore if you win often.

 

[GRANDPAPA929]

Possible. Bet in the sport bring in a good income. I'm doing football weekly summary games in European and Russian leagues with my colleagues. And it helps me a lot. But the main work (favorite) I'm not leaving.

 

[Edvardas]

In theory, with decent knowledge of the sports you are betting on - YES.If your betting randomly or following some abstract rule like "always betting on second favourites" etc - NO.

 

[Marmot66]

hope I will someday

 

[OzExorcist]

Maybe - but if you bet on live events. Prior to events - it will be non profitable on long run. Also prepare that if you win much they can not to pay or don't let u bet anymore if you win often.

I'm genuinely interested in the angle here: why do you think pre-match betting isn't profitable, but live betting is?

 

[alexandro]

besides my poker i think i am going to give sport betting a chance in life.

 

[cheeeer]

I'm genuinely interested in the angle here: why do you think pre-match betting isn't profitable, but live betting is?

Cause I did it? On pre-match you usually bet on strong team vs weak team(all others - higher risk). Even here can be defeat or draw. Ratios for strong team are too low: 1.5-1.8(sometimes 1.2 or 2.1). You win usually in 40-60% cases.
Ratio 1.5 means 1.5 buy in. So you will win only 0.5 buy in, but lose 1. Let's see:
you win 0.5
you lose 1
you win 0.8
you lose 1
Summary: slowly lost 0.7 buy in. And you need to win 2 matches straight just to be around 0.
On live events ratios even after 5 mins of game are becoming 3.5-6. Or those moments when weak team is wining but you see strong team can easily beat them. Ratios can be up to 100-120. Not sure they will pay you though
And even with my lowest bets and 50% winnings they started asking for my identity card.

 

[OzExorcist]

I'm... simultaneously confused and feeling like I've heard everything I need to hear. Well played

 

[cheeeer]

That's why I just wrote here - you can win, here - I doubt.

 

[LCool888]

It is possible but I think is very very hard...

 

[GRANDPAPA929]

You don't make a small bet.
If you understand, then and play a big...