I think as bettors we tend to overcomplicate things. In maintaining it as straightforward as possible, sometimes theres merit. That said, I took a very straightforward strategy and tried to ascertain what would happen if we were to bet on every underdog of every tournament. I looked at close to 1200 games and I did not bet on games were the chances were where there wasn’t a underdog with positive odds. Out of 15 Women’s tournaments should you bet 10 dollars on each underdog you would be up 1288 following those tournaments. Out of 35 men’s tournaments you’d wind up 3730. I want to go back over the mens outcomes because I wrote a lot of them on notecards and some are chicken scratch. So some amounts are off but I often consider at max its a -10% gross. In any event, the piece of research I did reasoned that betting on all underdogs in every tournament would yield %. While most bettors arent satisfied with this type of yield I would be satisfied with a guaranteed way to make money. This system isn’t perfect and ill need to go over again and analyze more tourneys and then put each of the men’s games in a spreadsheet like I did to the women but I believe strict adherence to my belief will yield positive results in the long run. What are your guys thoughts? Anyone have any experience with this or similar plans? Additionally, for what its worth I tracked 4 weeks of Nfl out of 2014 and you would also be positive if you went with the all underdog strat. Certainly 4 weeks does not mean anything but I think its worth looking at. Thank you for looking.
Edit: ok so I calculated 30 more tourneys. I took the results from 2012 and 2013 and chose 15 tourneys. You’d wind up 1125 Should you bet during 2012 on each underdog in those tourneys. If you bet 10 on each underdog in 2013 you’ll wind up 995.3 during this interval.