The impact of the element of surprise in sports betting

New Betting Tips » Betting Guides » The impact of the element of surprise in sports betting

Whoever follows the betting scene in forums and social networks generally encounters this term a lot: Surprise!
Be it to justify a bad day or a loss at the end of week, or simply failed predictions, generally the “surprises” are to blame.

The impact of the element of SURPRISE in sports betting

We read very often that yesterday was a day of surprises in the matches, I had a loss because there were a lot of upsets. Day of losses on a day of a lot of surprises in a certain league and so on.

It seems to be a simple explanation. But there are a lot of components involved on this kind of justification. Firstly, the arrogance of tipsters and bettors.

If there is a category of individuals that have a lot of difficulty to acknowledge their mistakes, it is definitely the bettors.

It’s not my fault, it is because of the surprises…

On the case of professional tipsters that sell and commercialize their predictions and services, it is more a question of market. They are not willing to admit mistakes and they need to justify the losses to their clients in order to maintain a winning persona.

Therefore, nothing better than blaming it on the element of surprise, and not their analytical method for a poor day or weekend. It was a poor result because of those upsets.

In the case of common bettors, which means, those that don’t sell their predictions, it is more of a question of ego.

In order not to admit things, it is easier to blame “the world” through the surprises than to blame themselves for lost bets.

But besides this question of the impression, there is a methodology problem that I identify on this explanation.Every dictionary will bring this kind of explanation for the word surprise:

What causes astonishment; thing or situation that causes admiration; what is capable of surprising, amaze. Unforeseen; Unexpected circumstance, sudden, unpredictable; what is unscheduled.

Basically, it is something unexpected, unforeseen. On the case of sports betting, it means that your bet was lost due to unexpected reasons, surprising. That escape normality.

The problem is that there isn’t the element of normality in sports betting.

If the betting method utilized by the bettor is banking on what is expected, predictable, there is a structural problem within it.

Otherwise, we would just need to bet on favourites or selections with low odds, basically, in what is expected, and we would have ensured profit. And we know that isn’t the case. Therefore, inserting the normality component in sports betting is problematic.

The problem is that there isn’t the element of normality in sports betting.

The most important concept in sports betting is value. And value has nothing to do with what is normal, expected or predictable. It is a cold mechanism to identify odds where the returns compensate the expected risk.

Risk needs to be quantified, but the event doesn’t. Finding value on a bet has nothing to do with the fact it is a winner or not.

It has to do with the value of the odds offered compared to the identified probability of that outcome.
Betting is part of the unknown territory

The constant task of the bettor is finding value.

The methods that each bettor develops for that are diverse. But the process is always finding value.

When a bettor turns the activity of betting on the quest for “normality”, he starts going down the path of failure in sports betting.

And I’m not talking about self-help here, something that actually has been becoming more common amongst bettors. But I’m talking about an inversion of the most respectable method of identifying value.

The constant task of the bettor is finding value.

Therefore, when someone uses excuses like: “Ahh this weekend we have had a lot of surprises”, it is opportunism and an attempt to deceive others about the real flaw on their method.

The outcome of the event can’t be blamed.

The responsibility of the failure on the evaluation of reality is due to your method. Transferring responsibilities is awful because besides being a lie, it harms your own progress as a bettor.

Think, if the problem is on the surprises and not on your method, there is nothing you can improve on. Matches don’t need to be reviewed, analyses remade, methods rebuilt, etc. It is the fault of the world and not yours.

This kind of rhetorical artifice is harmful on several aspects.

Therefore, don’t blame the element of surprise when you lose a bet.

Instead, develop a method that is immune to surprises. There aren’t enough surprises in the betting world that justify consistent losses.

That’s just another excuse of people who don’t want to take on the responsibility.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *