It is obvious that there are two possible outcomes for any sporting event: either expectations are met or not. The expectations of bookmaker clients are expressed in the monetary equivalent of their bets on a specific event. Bookmakers take advantage of this by adjusting the odds initially set. In this way, a certain collective opinion is formed regarding the outcome of the event, which is expressed in the final odds on its outcome. However, this opinion is far from always objective and does not reflect the true state of affairs.

It follows that the more popular the betting market, the higher the probability of a more accurate collective assessment of the event. That is why the bookmaker's margin is lower in the odds for matches, say, of the leading European championships, than for games of any of the Asian or African leagues (with all due respect to them).

Bookmakers Customer Reviews

The audit revealed the accuracy of Bookmakers's odds on the 1-X-2 moneyline market for football matches, confirming the validity of our bookmaker's clients' opinions. The probabilities of expected results expressed in odds were compared with the actual percentages of results during the audit; on average, the figures were close to each other.

Let's clarify: teams with odds of 2.0 (excluding Bookmakers's bookmaker margin) win in about 50% of cases, teams with odds of 3.0 - in about 33%, and so on. This, of course, is not the most important proof of the market's efficiency, but it still has a right to exist.

Different bookmakers offer different odds for a team to win, draw or lose in a given match, although they are relatively close to each other. For example, in one of the recent English Premier League matches, a home win for Manchester United over Chelsea was estimated at 2.22 at Bookmakers, while other leading bookmakers had odds ranging from 2.15 to 2.33. Whose odds were the most accurate?

How accurate are Bookmakers's odds compared to other bookmakers?

To find out how accurate the Bookmakers odds are, you need to:

• assume that our odds, without taking into account the margin, provide an accurate indication of the true probabilities of outcomes;
• then the ratio of the other bookmaker's odds to our odds represents the expected value or expected return;
• Next, the actual profit should be analyzed against various expected values.

So, without taking into account the margin, the estimated odds for Bookmakers on a Manchester United win over Chelsea were 2.25 – this gives a probability of about 44% of the result. Then, given that the best offer on the market was 2.33, the expected return would be 3.5% (2.33/2.25 = 1.035).

Conversely, betting at odds below 2.15 would result in an expected return of 0.956 or a loss of 4.4% (2.15/2.25). If it turns out that the expected return of 3.5% (or a loss of 4.4%) is confirmed by an actual return of 3.5% (or a loss of 4.4%), then it can be concluded that Bookmakers's odds are efficient, accurate and correctly predicted.

To find out how accurate Bookmakers's soccer betting odds are, the chart below compares a sample of approximately 35,000 league matches played over the last few seasons in Europe, with a corresponding 105,000 possible moneyline (win-draw-lose) outcomes:

As we can see, the correlation between expected and actual betting returns is very high, essentially 1:1. In other words, if the expected betting return for a sample of matches is 90%, then the actual return is approximately 90% (or a loss of 10%). If the expected return is 105%, then the actual return will be around 105% (5% profit).

What do other bookmakers have?

At the same time, if we assume that other bookmakers have suggested odds close to the true probability of results, then in this case there is no correlation at all between expected and actual results. Thus, it is the odds of the bookmaker Bookmakers that are the most accurate.

There are two explanations for other bookmakers setting odds that are relatively different from the actual expected values. The first is that they simply do not know how to set the correct values, however, given that we have been comparing long-standing and recognizable bookmaker brands, this assumption sounds fantastic.

It seems much more plausible to assume that they are deliberately biasing the odds against market efficiency, thus promoting some of their own business models.

If experienced professional players are the ones who participate in forming the collective opinion at the Bookmakers bookmaker, then most other bookmakers rely on the gross opinion of amateurs, that is, they actually bet on quantity rather than quality. Accordingly, the odds they offer offer ample opportunities for fans of so-called arbitrage bets, or, simply put, "arbitrageurs".

Of course, these bookmakers like 1xbetapp.run do not like it when individual players, using their own shortcomings when setting odds on matches, regularly make a profit through “forks”, and they are “cut”, and most often their gaming accounts are simply closed.

Moreover, sometimes such bookmakers do not disdain to block accounts of simply skilled and experienced players who do not use "arbs", but regularly catch such offices on mistakes. Of course, Bookmakers BC clients can be absolutely sure that in neither the first nor the second case their accounts and betting limits will be limited or even blocked in any way.

Add This Entry To Your CureZone Favorites!