[h=1]Best NCAA tournament contrarian system bets[/h]David Solar
Special to ESPN.com
ESPN INSIDER
3/14/17
Anyone familiar with Sports Insights knows we advocate a contrarian approach to sports betting. Like contrarian investing, this strategy is characterized by holding opinions in contrast to the prevailing sentiment. By capitalizing on overreactions and the predictable actions of casual bettors, a contrarian can exploit mispriced or artificially inflated lines. In other words, whenever the public zigs, we zag.
To understand why the contrarian approach works, it's important to first understand the inner workings of a sportsbook. The point spread isn't the predicted margin of victory, nor are oddsmakers attempting to balance their book by attracting equal action on each side. The truth is that books shade their opening lines to capitalize on public perception -- and allow their most-respected clients to shape the line. Sportsbooks don't look to minimize risk, but to maximize profits.
<offer style="box-sizing: border-box;"></offer>
Of the many contrarian strategies used to extract value each week, betting against the public is one of our cornerstone philosophies. Sports Insights tracks public betting percentages from seven major offshore sportsbooks: 5Dimes, BetDSI, BetUs, Carib, GTBets, SIA and Sportsbook.com. These trends reflect real bets placed by real bettors, as opposed to other websites that use "consensus" numbers. By including both sharp and square sportsbooks, our percentages accurately reflect which teams the public is backing across the marketplace.
Most oddsmakers can anticipate which games will take one-sided public betting, so they shade their opening lines to account for the predictable flood of public money. If the liability becomes too great, they occasionally adjust their number to encourage action on the other side in order to mitigate some of their risk. That's where the contrarian bettor enters.
Betting against the public is only an effective strategy in heavily bet games. If there's limited liability, sportsbooks won't adjust their number based on public money. That's what makes March Madness such an incredible opportunity for contrarian bettors. The popularity of college basketball increases substantially after football season ends, and the NCAA tournament sees an even more incredible outpouring of casual bettors.
According to Scott Cooley, a spokesman for the market-setting Bookmaker.eu, "[Public betting] does have a greater impact because of the sheer volume of public wagers we take for the NCAA tournament. The volume for the NCAA tournament increases greatly. We'll do almost double the action this Saturday than we do a normal college basketball Saturday, despite the fewer amount of games."
Sportsbooks adjust their point spreads based on public money only in games with extreme levels of one-sided betting and limited sharp involvement, but the NCAA tournament represents a unique opportunity for bettors. With higher-quality matchups and more attention paid to every game, sportsbooks experience much larger handles, particularly from casual bettors desperate for action. This influx of public money creates value for bettors looking to fade the public.
In tracking the number of bets placed on every game since 2005, my research has shown that betting against the public is a significantly better strategy in heavily bet games. Over that span, teams receiving less than 25 percent of spread bets have gone 1,713-1,775 ATS (49.1 percent) in regular-season games where the number of bets was below the daily average. As the number of bets increases, the winning percentage and return on investment increases in kind.
<aside class="inline inline-table" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: BentonSans, -apple-system, Roboto, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; border: 1px solid rgb(220, 221, 223); clear: both; margin: 6px 0px 18px; padding: 15px; width: 565px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px;">
<caption style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; color: rgb(43, 44, 45); font-weight: 600; height: auto; line-height: normal; position: relative; text-align: left; text-transform: capitalize; z-index: 1000020; padding-bottom: 12px;">Less Than 25 Percent Of Spread Bets During Regular Season</caption><thead style="box-sizing: border-box;">
</thead><tbody style="box-sizing: border-box;">
</tbody><tfoot style="box-sizing: border-box;">
</tfoot></aside>Betting against the public is only an effective strategy in heavily bet regular-season games, and bettors should target games with extreme levels of one-sided public betting. Our research found the average NCAA tournament game receives roughly six times more action than the average regular season game, and has historically created excellent value for contrarian bettors.
Since 2005, teams receiving less than 50 percent of spread bets have gone 394-364 ATS (52.0 percent) during the NCAA tournament. That includes a record of 288-282 ATS for contrarian underdogs and 105-82 ATS (56.1 percent) for contrarian favorites. Casual bettors have historically taken the favorite in nearly 80 percent of college basketball games, but they're far more apt to take the points and hope for a competitive game during the NCAA tournament.
"Over the last decade, as the 'average Joe' bettor has become more knowledgeable, we have seen more underdog plays from that side of the betting spectrum," Cooley said. "The trend actually works out well because we don't have to create as much dog value, which keeps the sharps at bay."
Fading trendy Cinderella teams has been a lucrative strategy during the tournament, but the most profitable strategy has been targeting games with extreme one-sided public betting -- regardless of whether it's on the favorite or the underdog. As sportsbooks shade their lines to account for public perception. the influx of public money can cause these lines to balloon. If there's limited sharp action on the other side, contrarian bettors can often get free points just by taking an unpopular viewpoint.
<aside class="inline inline-table" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: BentonSans, -apple-system, Roboto, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; border: 1px solid rgb(220, 221, 223); clear: both; margin: 6px 0px 18px; padding: 15px; width: 565px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px;">
<caption style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; color: rgb(43, 44, 45); font-weight: 600; height: auto; line-height: normal; position: relative; text-align: left; text-transform: capitalize; z-index: 1000020; padding-bottom: 12px;">NCAA Tournament - Betting Against The Public</caption><thead style="box-sizing: border-box;">
</thead><tbody style="box-sizing: border-box;">
</tbody><tfoot style="box-sizing: border-box;">
</tfoot></aside>It's still early in the week and many bettors will wait until right before tipoff to place their wagers, which is why we recommend bettors wait until closer to game time to ensure these games still fit the aforementioned criteria. However, based on the current betting trends, there are five schools offering contrarian value in the Round of 64.
For anybody unfamiliar with the metric, pace is measured by the number of possessions per 40 minutes. The higher the number, the faster the team's tempo. Since 2005, underdogs with a pace of 70 or less have gone 108-75 ATS (59 percent) in tournament games, while underdogs with a pace of greater than 70 have gone just 125-147 ATS (46 percent). By slowing down the tempo, these underdogs are able to stay competitive and cover the spread.
In the Round of 64, there are three underdogs with an average pace of less than 70, and all of them are being widely ignored by public bettors.
Special to ESPN.com
ESPN INSIDER
3/14/17
Anyone familiar with Sports Insights knows we advocate a contrarian approach to sports betting. Like contrarian investing, this strategy is characterized by holding opinions in contrast to the prevailing sentiment. By capitalizing on overreactions and the predictable actions of casual bettors, a contrarian can exploit mispriced or artificially inflated lines. In other words, whenever the public zigs, we zag.
To understand why the contrarian approach works, it's important to first understand the inner workings of a sportsbook. The point spread isn't the predicted margin of victory, nor are oddsmakers attempting to balance their book by attracting equal action on each side. The truth is that books shade their opening lines to capitalize on public perception -- and allow their most-respected clients to shape the line. Sportsbooks don't look to minimize risk, but to maximize profits.
<offer style="box-sizing: border-box;"></offer>
Of the many contrarian strategies used to extract value each week, betting against the public is one of our cornerstone philosophies. Sports Insights tracks public betting percentages from seven major offshore sportsbooks: 5Dimes, BetDSI, BetUs, Carib, GTBets, SIA and Sportsbook.com. These trends reflect real bets placed by real bettors, as opposed to other websites that use "consensus" numbers. By including both sharp and square sportsbooks, our percentages accurately reflect which teams the public is backing across the marketplace.
Most oddsmakers can anticipate which games will take one-sided public betting, so they shade their opening lines to account for the predictable flood of public money. If the liability becomes too great, they occasionally adjust their number to encourage action on the other side in order to mitigate some of their risk. That's where the contrarian bettor enters.
Betting against the public is only an effective strategy in heavily bet games. If there's limited liability, sportsbooks won't adjust their number based on public money. That's what makes March Madness such an incredible opportunity for contrarian bettors. The popularity of college basketball increases substantially after football season ends, and the NCAA tournament sees an even more incredible outpouring of casual bettors.
According to Scott Cooley, a spokesman for the market-setting Bookmaker.eu, "[Public betting] does have a greater impact because of the sheer volume of public wagers we take for the NCAA tournament. The volume for the NCAA tournament increases greatly. We'll do almost double the action this Saturday than we do a normal college basketball Saturday, despite the fewer amount of games."
Sportsbooks adjust their point spreads based on public money only in games with extreme levels of one-sided betting and limited sharp involvement, but the NCAA tournament represents a unique opportunity for bettors. With higher-quality matchups and more attention paid to every game, sportsbooks experience much larger handles, particularly from casual bettors desperate for action. This influx of public money creates value for bettors looking to fade the public.
In tracking the number of bets placed on every game since 2005, my research has shown that betting against the public is a significantly better strategy in heavily bet games. Over that span, teams receiving less than 25 percent of spread bets have gone 1,713-1,775 ATS (49.1 percent) in regular-season games where the number of bets was below the daily average. As the number of bets increases, the winning percentage and return on investment increases in kind.
<aside class="inline inline-table" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: BentonSans, -apple-system, Roboto, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; border: 1px solid rgb(220, 221, 223); clear: both; margin: 6px 0px 18px; padding: 15px; width: 565px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px;">
| BETS COMPARED TO DAILY AVERAGE | REGULAR SEASON ATS | UNITS WON (ROI) |
|---|---|---|
| Less than daily average | 1,713-1,775 (49.1%) | -139.90 (-4.0%) |
| At least daily average | 1413-1303 (52.0%) | +45.02 (+1.7%) |
| At least 2x daily average | 401-349 (53.5%) | +32.40 (+4.3%) |
| At least 3x daily average | 117-99 (54.2%) | +12.03 (+5.6%) |
| *Closing lines from Pinnacle were used to determine records |
<caption style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; color: rgb(43, 44, 45); font-weight: 600; height: auto; line-height: normal; position: relative; text-align: left; text-transform: capitalize; z-index: 1000020; padding-bottom: 12px;">Less Than 25 Percent Of Spread Bets During Regular Season</caption><thead style="box-sizing: border-box;">
</thead><tbody style="box-sizing: border-box;">
</tbody><tfoot style="box-sizing: border-box;">
</tfoot>
Since 2005, teams receiving less than 50 percent of spread bets have gone 394-364 ATS (52.0 percent) during the NCAA tournament. That includes a record of 288-282 ATS for contrarian underdogs and 105-82 ATS (56.1 percent) for contrarian favorites. Casual bettors have historically taken the favorite in nearly 80 percent of college basketball games, but they're far more apt to take the points and hope for a competitive game during the NCAA tournament.
"Over the last decade, as the 'average Joe' bettor has become more knowledgeable, we have seen more underdog plays from that side of the betting spectrum," Cooley said. "The trend actually works out well because we don't have to create as much dog value, which keeps the sharps at bay."
Fading trendy Cinderella teams has been a lucrative strategy during the tournament, but the most profitable strategy has been targeting games with extreme one-sided public betting -- regardless of whether it's on the favorite or the underdog. As sportsbooks shade their lines to account for public perception. the influx of public money can cause these lines to balloon. If there's limited sharp action on the other side, contrarian bettors can often get free points just by taking an unpopular viewpoint.
<aside class="inline inline-table" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: BentonSans, -apple-system, Roboto, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; border: 1px solid rgb(220, 221, 223); clear: both; margin: 6px 0px 18px; padding: 15px; width: 565px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px;">
| PUBLIC BETTING | NCAA TOURNAMENT ATS | UNITS WON (ROI) |
|---|---|---|
| Less than 50% of spread tickets | 394-364 (52.0%) | +9.57 (+1.3%) |
| Less than 30% of spread tickets | 61-54 (53.0%) | +3.66 (+3.2%) |
| Less than 25% of spread tickets | 33-19 (63.5%) | +12.04 (23.2%) |
| Less than 20% of spread tickets | 11-1 (91.7%) | +9.40 (+78.3%) |
| *Closing lines from Pinnacle were used to determine records |
<caption style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; color: rgb(43, 44, 45); font-weight: 600; height: auto; line-height: normal; position: relative; text-align: left; text-transform: capitalize; z-index: 1000020; padding-bottom: 12px;">NCAA Tournament - Betting Against The Public</caption><thead style="box-sizing: border-box;">
</thead><tbody style="box-sizing: border-box;">
</tbody><tfoot style="box-sizing: border-box;">
</tfoot>
- Florida Gators (-9.5), 24 percent of spread bets vs. East Tennessee State Buccaneers
- Florida State Seminoles (-12), 18 percent of spread tickets vs. Florida Gulf Coast Eagles
- Creighton Bluejays (-1), 18 percent of spread tickets vs. Rhode Island Rams
- North Dakota Fighting Hawks (+17), 24 percent of spread bets vs. Arizona Wildcats
- Kent State Golden Flashes (+17.5), 20 percent of spread tickets vs. UCLA Bruins
For anybody unfamiliar with the metric, pace is measured by the number of possessions per 40 minutes. The higher the number, the faster the team's tempo. Since 2005, underdogs with a pace of 70 or less have gone 108-75 ATS (59 percent) in tournament games, while underdogs with a pace of greater than 70 have gone just 125-147 ATS (46 percent). By slowing down the tempo, these underdogs are able to stay competitive and cover the spread.
In the Round of 64, there are three underdogs with an average pace of less than 70, and all of them are being widely ignored by public bettors.
- Vermont Catamounts (+8.5 vs. Purdue Boilermakers) has a pace average of 67.1
- Princeton Tigers (+6.5 vs. Notre Dame Fighting Irish) has a pace average of 68.0
- Jacksonville State Gamecocks (+20 vs. Louisville Cardinals) has a pace average of 69.2
