Betting on sports 'futures' is an enjoyable and potentially profitable way to wager, but there are several potential risks that can lead to losses. Here's a rundown of things to avoid:
You gotta shop around: More specifically, you have to 'shop points' just as you would with a straight bet. This is crucial in all forms of sports betting but particularly key with futures wagers. There are often greater variances in the prices from book to book on future plays than any other type of wagering proposition. The reason for this is simple--most books are less concern with what the 'other guys' are doing as they are with keeping their own position 'in balance'. All in all, the sports betting marketplace just doesn't react as quickly to changing futures prices as it does to individual game lines.
In a competitive field, don't obsess with picking the winner: This may sound like a strange concept, but once you understand the theory behind it it makes perfect sense. In a large field--the NCAA basketball tournament is a perfect example--the top few favorites are invariably priced at odds that are less than the 'true odds' of them winning. On the other hand, there are always teams that fly 'under the radar' available at higher prices that present a betting overlay.
To put this in more theoretical terms, the "true odds" of Duke winning the NCAA Championship are almost certainly higher than the price we're getting. Obviously, determining the "true odds", or actual probability of a future event is an inexact science but think of it this way: if the NCAA tournament was played 100 times would Duke wind up winning 50 of those? Given the number of other good teams and the propensity for upsets along the way, its doubtful. For the sake of argument, lets say that Duke has a 33% chance to win the tournament. That means that I wouldn't consider a bet on Duke to be a good value unless I was getting a price that a) accurately reflected the true probability of their winning and b) gave me some compensation for assuming the "risk of the unknown" inherent in taking the position so far in advance. At +500 I might be interested, but at +200 the value just isn't there.
In a less competitive field, there can be instances where even a big favorite is a good value. For example, lets say a book was to take action on a bikini contest between a Victoria's Secret supermodel and three members of the Pittsburgh Penguins. The model would essentially be a 100% probability to win the contest, meaning that even a high chalk price would be a good value. Risking a lot of money to win a little is a tough thing to justify, however, even if the math makes sense.
Don't get seduced by big underdogs: Sports betting is not a place to make the "big killing". It may happen occasionally, but more often it doesn't. While a sports book might offer a huge price on a cellar dwelling team to win the World Series, the big payback does not mean its a good value. On a practical level, there's probably nothing wrong with throwing a few bucks on a wager like this with a huge payback if the impossible occurs. My only problem with this is that making too many bets like this just perpetuates bad sports betting habits. If you're strictly a recreational player, no big deal. If you aspire to bet professionally, or at least want to pursue it with some degree of seriousness I've always maintained that you need to develop discipline that's not situational. In other words, if you want to be a serious sports bettor you need to approach it with a consistent level of seriousness at all times. If you want to chase a huge, life altering jackpot go to Las Vegas and play the Megabucks slots or buy a Powerball ticket.
On a more theoretical level, a big price alone is no way to justify a wager. The concept of value works the same at the bottom of the barrel as it does at the top: make sure the price you're getting on an underdog accurately reflects their "true odds" of winning.
Don't bet one-sided futures or propositions: Though many of these are not futures per se, a lot of sportsbooks offer silly propositions on nonsport events as a way to get publicity, or just to be funny. Its important to make a distinction between this type of silly bet and more realistic nonsport propositions which frequently present good wagering value. Im talking the really outlandish stuff here. Not too long ago, a sportsbook posted a line on Martians landing on earth and painting the White House red by the end of the year. The "YES" was +2500 or thereabouts, which is far from reflective of the "true odds" of this unlikely event. Even if you're the type that collects classic Art Bell shows on tape and believes in UFOs you wouldn't place the probability of this happening at more than a fraction of a percent. The book only offered the "YES" side of the proposition, meaning that you couldn't lay even a huge price on the more likely outcome. Another book had a futures offering for what would happen first with Ashton Kutcher, Demi Moore and Bruce Willis. All of the options were very unlikely--Ashton and Bruce fighting on PPV and my favorite--and the longest odds--Ashton, Bruce and Demi hopping in bed together and releasing a porno video documenting the event. You'd receive a sizable payback if any of the events ever transpired, but I'm not exactly sure how to compute the "true odds" on "when pigs fly.
You gotta shop around: More specifically, you have to 'shop points' just as you would with a straight bet. This is crucial in all forms of sports betting but particularly key with futures wagers. There are often greater variances in the prices from book to book on future plays than any other type of wagering proposition. The reason for this is simple--most books are less concern with what the 'other guys' are doing as they are with keeping their own position 'in balance'. All in all, the sports betting marketplace just doesn't react as quickly to changing futures prices as it does to individual game lines.
In a competitive field, don't obsess with picking the winner: This may sound like a strange concept, but once you understand the theory behind it it makes perfect sense. In a large field--the NCAA basketball tournament is a perfect example--the top few favorites are invariably priced at odds that are less than the 'true odds' of them winning. On the other hand, there are always teams that fly 'under the radar' available at higher prices that present a betting overlay.
To put this in more theoretical terms, the "true odds" of Duke winning the NCAA Championship are almost certainly higher than the price we're getting. Obviously, determining the "true odds", or actual probability of a future event is an inexact science but think of it this way: if the NCAA tournament was played 100 times would Duke wind up winning 50 of those? Given the number of other good teams and the propensity for upsets along the way, its doubtful. For the sake of argument, lets say that Duke has a 33% chance to win the tournament. That means that I wouldn't consider a bet on Duke to be a good value unless I was getting a price that a) accurately reflected the true probability of their winning and b) gave me some compensation for assuming the "risk of the unknown" inherent in taking the position so far in advance. At +500 I might be interested, but at +200 the value just isn't there.
In a less competitive field, there can be instances where even a big favorite is a good value. For example, lets say a book was to take action on a bikini contest between a Victoria's Secret supermodel and three members of the Pittsburgh Penguins. The model would essentially be a 100% probability to win the contest, meaning that even a high chalk price would be a good value. Risking a lot of money to win a little is a tough thing to justify, however, even if the math makes sense.
Don't get seduced by big underdogs: Sports betting is not a place to make the "big killing". It may happen occasionally, but more often it doesn't. While a sports book might offer a huge price on a cellar dwelling team to win the World Series, the big payback does not mean its a good value. On a practical level, there's probably nothing wrong with throwing a few bucks on a wager like this with a huge payback if the impossible occurs. My only problem with this is that making too many bets like this just perpetuates bad sports betting habits. If you're strictly a recreational player, no big deal. If you aspire to bet professionally, or at least want to pursue it with some degree of seriousness I've always maintained that you need to develop discipline that's not situational. In other words, if you want to be a serious sports bettor you need to approach it with a consistent level of seriousness at all times. If you want to chase a huge, life altering jackpot go to Las Vegas and play the Megabucks slots or buy a Powerball ticket.
On a more theoretical level, a big price alone is no way to justify a wager. The concept of value works the same at the bottom of the barrel as it does at the top: make sure the price you're getting on an underdog accurately reflects their "true odds" of winning.
Don't bet one-sided futures or propositions: Though many of these are not futures per se, a lot of sportsbooks offer silly propositions on nonsport events as a way to get publicity, or just to be funny. Its important to make a distinction between this type of silly bet and more realistic nonsport propositions which frequently present good wagering value. Im talking the really outlandish stuff here. Not too long ago, a sportsbook posted a line on Martians landing on earth and painting the White House red by the end of the year. The "YES" was +2500 or thereabouts, which is far from reflective of the "true odds" of this unlikely event. Even if you're the type that collects classic Art Bell shows on tape and believes in UFOs you wouldn't place the probability of this happening at more than a fraction of a percent. The book only offered the "YES" side of the proposition, meaning that you couldn't lay even a huge price on the more likely outcome. Another book had a futures offering for what would happen first with Ashton Kutcher, Demi Moore and Bruce Willis. All of the options were very unlikely--Ashton and Bruce fighting on PPV and my favorite--and the longest odds--Ashton, Bruce and Demi hopping in bed together and releasing a porno video documenting the event. You'd receive a sizable payback if any of the events ever transpired, but I'm not exactly sure how to compute the "true odds" on "when pigs fly.
About the Author:
Ross Everett is a freelance sports writer and respected authority on sports betting odds comparison. He writing has appeared on a variety of sports sites including sportsbooks and betting odds portal sites. He lives in Northern Nevada with three Jack Russell Terriers and a kangaroo. He is currently working on an autobiography of former energy secretary Donald Hodell.
