Underwhelmed

Wednesday night's football saw my 'Value' Under selection of Internazionale v Palermo at 2.2 finish 4-4, which was a little embarrassing, but fortunately I redeemed myself with a 'perfect' draw for the XX Draw Selections as Bolton Wanderers and Arsenal played out a goal-less match. With the Under 2.5 at a generous 2.4, I'll take that combination.

The other XX Draw Selection was Lazio v AC Milan which finished 2-0.

I need to correct my previous post where I said that Swansea City were Football Elite's selection on Tuesday. Indeed they were, but I omitted to mention that Swansea were a Draw No Bet selection, so there was no loss.

Back to the 'embarrassing' Value Under selection, and Sports Trading Life had a good post on this very topic. He actually identified two problems with betting value, one being that it's boring, and the other that you risk looking stupid. Well, yes and yes, except that when it comes to betting as an investment, it's not something that should be exciting. If you are betting for excitement, and there's nothing wrong with spicing up a match with a small financial interest, you're not going to make money from it long term. You know you are starting to get somewhere when a win that would have, at one time, seen you dancing around the room punching the air, is now met with a distinctly ho-hum feeling that is quite underwhelming.

We go to casinos for our gambling excitement, fully expecting to lose, but that's the price of the entertainment. Trading seriously is not about gambling. It's about finding opportunities, staking sensibly, and watching the bank increase slowly but steadily.

As for looking stupid, certainly this can be true if one selection is singled out, but you certainly don't look so stupid if, over time, you are coming out ahead. Keep records, and keep quiet when it comes to discussing your 'investment' bets, or at least only tell people who are aware of the need to bet with value.

On the 'boring' topic, STL writes (curiously, without a single apostrophe):

Taking value isnt the most thrilling way to punt and hence why the average punter doesnt want to take it.

If we take last nights football for example. It was indicated that Under 2.5 Goals in the Spurs-Wigan match was a good value bet @ 2.60 based on recent stats. However, the match ended 3-1 and obviously the bet didnt win. Then considering there was 4 goals in total you would probably feel a bit silly having bet there was only going to be 2 goals or less. However, when you are only taking value you have to develop a thick skin to this type of thing. Every man and his dog was going after Over 2.5 goals in this match which really killed the value and so the sensible move was to go with the Unders line.

Betting on a match to finish Under 2.5 goals is actually pretty boring, especially if you are watching it. Who would want to watch a football match and cheer for neither team to score?
However, the fact is that there is much more likely to be value in Under 2.5 goals then in Over 2.5 goals as every casual punter loves to bet on there being goals as opposed to there not being goals.

Average / casual punters don't care about value. They also lose consistently. I'm not sure I agree that betting on Under 2.5 is boring though. I am almost always start watching games these days hoping for no goals, and I can't say that boring is the word to describe my feelings. Every possession looks like it will result in a goal, quite the opposite of how it appears when you want a goal! If there's an early goal in an XX Draw game, I want the equalizer; I just don't want it too soon!