|
SportsInsights.com Article
Article #6 NCAA Football Betting
Statistics and Results for 2003 and 2004
Seasons
INTRODUCTION
In previous articles, we emphasized some of the themes and
premises that SportsInsights is built upon (Betting
Statistics). We showed that
sports bettors could gain an edge by “Betting Against the
Public.” SportsInsights has shown this to be true in the
major US sports markets, ranging from college and pro
basketball – to baseball – and more recently, pro football.
Several weeks into the 2005 football season – we have seen
that Betting Against the Public is yielding profitable
results yet again – both in the NFL and NCAA Football.
In the past, we ALSO highlighted other trends that bettors
could use to help them get an edge. For example, we have
shown that betting underdogs and “unders” (for “Totals”) –
on average – is the way to lean in your handicapping. In
this article, we apply some of these tools to show that we
can improve results by combining methods and ideas. 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 Betting Statistics Results for Betting Against the Public
Table 1 shows the results for Betting Against the Public
over the past two college football seasons. As with other
sports, we can see that results are favorable. At the 25%
level, going against the public yields a 55% winning
percentage. This is similar to what we achieve in other
major sports.
On the other hand, the results are not as “robust” as we
have seen for other sports. We would be happier to see
higher winning percentages at more extreme Public
percentages. We would also be happier to see winning
percentages more consistently in the 55% (and higher) range.
In previous articles, as well as our forums (and indeed, in
some literature) – there have been discussions about how
sportsbooks work. In general, sportsbooks seek to balance
their business in games to some degree. However, their
profit margin can be improved by leaning the lines to
exploit the “general public’s” tendencies. By “Betting
Against the Public,” we are taking advantage of the
“crowd/herd mentality” to help our bottom line. In some
ways, college sports are an interesting, and slightly
different, animal. Many games, from many towns, are played
in a relatively small amount of time (Saturdays for college
football). This factor could influence our results, so we
decided to take a look at “Betting Against the Public” –
combined with another factor on our side.
Table 1: NCAAF Betting Against the Public
|
Public Bet % |
# of Games |
Record (W-L-P) |
Winning % |
|
50% |
1155 |
584-552-19 |
51.4% |
|
45% |
998 |
507-474-17 |
51.7% |
|
40% |
798 |
406-377-15 |
51.9% |
|
35% |
620 |
317-290-13 |
52.2% |
|
30% |
472 |
249-214-9 |
53.8% |
|
25% |
312 |
170-139-3 |
55.0% |
|
23% |
247 |
131-113-3 |
53.7% |
|
20% |
183 |
94-87-2 |
51.9% |
|
15% |
76 |
36-40-0 |
47.4% |
|
10% |
23 |
12-11-0 |
52.2% |
COMBINING HOME DOGS and BETTING AGAINST THE PUBLIC
Over the years, “Home Dogs” have proven to be a good way to
go. However, trends and inefficiencies have a way of
dissipating over time. In fact, our NFL Article showed that
Home Dogs haven’t done as well over the recent years as they
have in the past. Here, we take “home dogs” a step further
and show that using “home dogs” – combined with SportsInsight’s public betting percentages – can improve
results significantly.
For example, Table 2 shows that betting on an NCAAF Home Dog
of 3 points – AND – at the 50% Public Bet % threshold (Bet
Against the Public) resulted in a 58.2% winning percentage.
For games that were at the 25% Public Bet % threshold (most
people liking the favorite), the winning percentage climbs
to 62.9%. That’s a very nice result!
Table 2:
Home Dogs and Public Betting Percentages
|
Dog Spread |
Public Bet % |
# of Games |
Record (W-L-P) |
Winning % |
|
3 |
50% |
354 |
203-146-5 |
58.2% |
|
45% |
318 |
185-129-4 |
58.9% |
|
40% |
280 |
164-112-4 |
59.4% |
|
35% |
232 |
135-93-4 |
59.2% |
|
30% |
183 |
112-69-2 |
61.9% |
|
25% |
116 |
73-43-0 |
62.9% |
|
23% |
92 |
60-32-0 |
65.2% |
|
20% |
69 |
44-25-0 |
63.8% |
|
15% |
28 |
18-10-0 |
64.3% |
|
10% |
8 |
5-3-0 |
62.5% |
|
Dog Spread |
Public Bet % |
# of Games |
Record (W-L-P) |
Winning % |
|
5 |
50% |
285 |
165-118-2 |
58.3% |
|
45% |
258 |
151-106-1 |
58.8% |
|
40% |
235 |
139-95-1 |
59.4% |
|
35% |
201 |
120-80-1 |
60.0% |
|
30% |
158 |
100-58-0 |
63.3% |
|
25% |
99 |
66-33-0 |
66.7% |
|
23% |
80 |
55-25-0 |
68.8% |
|
20% |
61 |
41-20-0 |
67.2% |
|
15% |
25 |
17-8-0 |
68.0% |
|
10% |
8 |
5-3-0 |
62.5% |
|
Dog Spread |
Public Bet % |
# of Games |
Record (W-L-P) |
Winning % |
|
7 |
50% |
252 |
144-106-2 |
57.6% |
|
45% |
228 |
132-95-1 |
58.1% |
|
40% |
209 |
122-86-1 |
58.7% |
|
35% |
180 |
105-74-1 |
58.7% |
|
30% |
143 |
87-56-0 |
60.8% |
|
25% |
90 |
59-31-0 |
65.6% |
|
23% |
73 |
49-24-0 |
67.1% |
|
20% |
57 |
38-19-0 |
66.7% |
|
15% |
24 |
16-8-0 |
66.7% |
|
10% |
7 |
4-3-0 |
57.1% |
|
Dog Spread |
Public Bet % |
# of Games |
Record (W-L-P) |
Winning % |
|
9 |
50% |
192 |
108-84-0 |
56.3% |
|
45% |
172 |
98-74-0 |
57.0% |
|
40% |
155 |
89-66-0 |
57.4% |
|
35% |
133 |
76-57-0 |
57.1% |
|
30% |
109 |
65-44-0 |
59.6% |
|
25% |
70 |
44-26-0 |
62.9% |
|
23% |
58 |
38-20-0 |
65.5% |
|
20% |
45 |
30-15-0 |
66.7% |
|
15% |
17 |
10-7-0 |
58.8% |
|
10% |
5 |
2-3-0 |
40.0% |
Table 2 shows similar results at other Home Dog point
spreads. On average, home dogs at the 50% Public Fade
threshold average 57-58% winning percentages. However, at
the 25% Public Bet threshold, the winning percentages jump
to 63-65%. Not bad for data that our members can access at
SportsInsights.com.
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
or fade 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.
|