College Football: Home Dogs and
Betting Against the Public (2003-2008)
The "Dog Days of August"
mean that it's almost time for College Football! SportsInsights.com
is pleased to present this year's update on the College Football
marketplace. Like last year, we'll look at how college football dogs
-- and home dogs, in particular -- fared over the recent past. We
also updated our charts to show how Betting
Against the Public can be used to improve "Home Dog"
performance. Our research has been updated to include the
2008 season. SportsInsights' exclusive betting percentages for
college football include five seasons' worth of data -- and about 7,000
college football games.
The information on this
site is for entertainment and educational purposes only. Use of this
information in violation of any federal, state, or local laws is
prohibited.
College Football Dogs and Home Dogs
Bettors often talk about underdogs. How have dogs done
over the past few years in college football? And what about "home
dogs?" Table 1 shows the results contained in our database since
1998. We purposely show results over individual years to highlight
how performance can jump around -- even over entire seasons.
Table 1 – College Football Dogs and Home Dogs
| Period |
Dogs |
Home Dogs |
| 1998-2008 |
50.4% |
51.7% |
| 2001 |
52.4% |
49.3% |
| 2002 |
50.2% |
50.0% |
| 2003 |
48.3% |
51.4% |
| 2004 |
52.1% |
60.2% |
| 2005 |
51.4% |
50.7% |
| 2006 |
51.0% |
48.7% |
| 2007 |
50.6% |
51.3% |
| 2008 |
48.8% |
48.0% |
- Since SIs Betting Percentages Available
- Last 6 Years (2003-2008)
|
50.3% |
51.7% |
Here are some key "takeaways" from the chart:
- The results continue to validate previous
academic research -- that there is a bias towards underdogs, and in
particular, home dogs.
- The results show that although there is a bias, the sports
marketplace is relatively efficient, so that the vig is difficult to
overcome.
- Performance can fluctuate dramatically. Similar to the
investment world, past performance is not necessarily an indication of
future results.
- In this article, we highlighted all 2003-2008 periods in yellow
to make comparison amongst the various approaches and tables easier to
read. SportsInsights' betting percentages are available starting
in 2003.
Home Dogs Getting Points
Table 2 shows the performance of Home Dogs receiving a given amount of
points.
Table 2: College Football Home Dogs Receiving X
Points
| Period |
0.5 or More Pts |
3 or More |
7 or More |
14 or More |
| 2003-2008 |
51.7% |
51.5% |
52.4% |
52.1% |
| 2003 |
51.4% |
52.7% |
52.8% |
51.0% |
| 2004 |
60.2% |
58.0% |
61.2% |
57.4% |
| 2005 |
50.7% |
49.1% |
45.9% |
46.2% |
| 2006 |
48.7% |
50.0% |
49.6% |
56.8% |
| 2007 |
51.3% |
51.6% |
54.3% |
53.8% |
| 2008 |
48.8% |
50.2% |
48.4% |
46.0% |
Betting Against the Public -- on Home Dogs
Last
year, we saw that combining "Betting Against the Public" with betting on
"Home Dogs" -- was a profitable betting strategy. We updated
this information to include the 2008 season and present the results in
Table 2's format for comparison purposes. As you can see, 2008 was a
bad year for "Betting Against the Public." Betting on Home Dogs
Against the Public (at the 30% level) resulted in just a 42% winning
percentage at various point spreads in 2008. This means that the
Betting Public won at a rate of about 58% betting on Visiting
Favorites! This dragged down the cumulative average for Betting
Against the Public to an underperformer (green row in the chart
below). Note that prior to 2008, Betting Against the Public
consistently added value to betting on Home Dogs (rows highlighted yellow
in the charts).
Thus, 2008 was a bad year for "Betting Against the Public" in college
football. We have seen this happen in other sports before. The
biggest example is the 2005 NFL Season, which the sports betting industry
labeled "The Year of the Favorites." The following NFL Season
(2006) was a great year for SportsInsights' contrarian sports investing
methods. Will "Betting Against the Public" have a banner year
for the 2009 College Football Season? Only time will tell, but we
like our chances, based on tens of thousands of games over six years worth
of data -- across all major US sports.
Table 3: College Football Home Dogs and Betting Against
the Public (30% Level)
| Period |
0.5 or More Pts |
3 or More |
7 or More |
14 or More |
| 2003-2007 |
54.6% |
53.6% |
53.7% |
53.8% |
| 2003-2008 |
50.9% |
50.5% |
50.3% |
52.0% |
| 2003 |
60.0% |
58.7% |
58.5% |
53.1% |
| 2004 |
60.6% |
58.8% |
59.3% |
56.8% |
| 2005 |
51.0% |
48.3% |
47.6% |
53.1% |
| 2006 |
50.0% |
50.0% |
50.6% |
56.8% |
| 2007 |
54.3% |
54.5% |
54.9% |
50.0% |
| 2008 |
42.0% |
43.6% |
42.1% |
41.9% |
Number of Bets and Big Games
In 2008, College
Football Square Plays did reasonably well compared to the "Bet
Against" results shown above. Our industry contacts and analytical
tools allowed us to focus on "bigger games" with national focus -- leading
to more contrarian value. One indicator that our SportsInsights
researchers use as a proxy for "bigger games" is the Number of
Bets that we compile for every game. If the game is
one of the more heavily-bet games of the day, you know that the Public is
betting that game big. The games
with the larger Number of Bets tend to have more contrarian value as we
mentioned in this previous article.
SportsInsights.com's Square Plays and Other Tools
Using SportsInsight's "betting percentages" in conjunction with other
indicators to obtain value can be a powerful addition to your sports
handicapping. Although 2008 was an "off year" for plain vanilla
"betting against the Public" -- SportsInsight's Square Plays enjoyed
its sixth consecutive profitable year in College Football.
In addition to Square
Plays, Premium Pro
Members have access to SportsInsight's innovative sports investing
tools such our Best
Bet summary, our Smart Money
Analysis by sportsbook, and Steam Play
triggers.
Disclaimer
We do not guarantee that the trends and
biases we’ve found will continue to exist. It is impossible to predict the
future. Any serious academic research in the field of “market
efficiencies” recognizes that inefficiencies may disappear over time. Once
inefficiencies are discovered, it is only a matter of time before the
market corrects itself. We do not guarantee our data is error-free.
However, we’ve tried our best to make sure every score and percentage is
correct.