I believe as bettors we tend to overcomplicate things. Theres merit in maintaining it as straightforward as possible. That said, I took a very simple strategy and attempted to determine what would happen if we were to wager on each underdog of every tournament. I looked at near 1200 games and I didn’t bet on matches were the chances were even or where there was not a underdog with favorable odds. Out of 15 Women’s tournaments should you bet 10 bucks on each underdog you’d be up 1288 following those tournaments. Out of about 35 men’s tournaments you would be up 3730. I want to go back over the mens outcomes because I wrote a lot of these and there are some chicken scratch. So some amounts are away but I often consider at maximum its a -10percent gross. In any event, the piece of research I did concluded that % would be yielded by gambling on all underdogs in each tournament. When most bettors arent satisfied with this type of yield I personally would be content with a guaranteed way to make money. This system isn’t ideal and sick need to go over again and analyze more tourneys and then put each of the men’s games in a dictionary such as I did to the women but I think stringent adherence to my belief will yield positive effects in the long term. What are your guys thoughts? Anyone have any experience with this or similar plans? Additionally, for what its worth I tracked 4 months of Nfl from 2014 and you would also be convinced if you went with the all underdog strat. 4 weeks doesn’t imply anything but I think its worth looking at. Thank you for looking.
Edit: okay I calculated 30 more tourneys. 15 distinct tourneys were chose by me and required the outcomes from 2012 and 2013. You would be up 1125, if you bet during 2012 on each underdog in these tourneys. If you wager 10 on every underdog in 2013 you’ll be up 995.3 throughout this period.