Backing big favorites is a very popular strategy among soccer bettors. It’s incredibly straightforward, and it’s likely to return plenty of winners. These are two big advantages that bettors typically focus on. But is this strategy TOO straightforward? Can we really expect to make money from such an obvious approach? If it was that easy, wouldn’t everyone be doing it?
Just betting the favourites to win. I then worked out what would happen if you used the same stakes per race, (a £1 stake per runner less one) and placed that on the favourite in each race.
Like most simple betting strategies, backing big favorites does have its flaws: it is based on some sound logic though. After all, big favorites are definitely expected to win more often than not. That’s precisely WHY they’re big favorites. It’s hardly unreasonable to assume that backing them will therefore be profitable in the long run.
- Backing big favorites is a very popular strategy among soccer bettors. It’s incredibly straightforward, and it’s likely to return plenty of winners. These are two big advantages that bettors typically focus on. But is this strategy TOO straightforward?
- A different angle might be to only bet on the races with 10, 11 or 12 runners. Doing this brings the number of races to 269 with 2,967 runners and the outcome is interesting. The first favourites won 66, second favourites 56, third favs 32, fourth favs 34, fifth favs 30 and sixth favs 10.
- The answer is yes and no. You can make money betting on favorites but only if you are selective. Let's take a look at what that means. Even if you add in a rebate, and you play every favorite in every race, you are going to lose money in the long run.
- The latest 2024 presidential election odds show Vice President Kamala Harris as the front-runner over President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump at most European sportsbooks.For instance, Harris is +350 to win in 2024 at Bet365, with Biden at +400 and Trump at +600. The thinking is that Biden may opt to let Harris take the reigns in the next Presidential election cycle, due to the.
The main flaw in this strategy is that the odds for big favorites to win are typically very low. This means you don’t stand to win much relative to your stake. This wouldn’t be a problem if you could rely on the favorites to win all the time, but we all know that upsets are common in soccer. A team could be destined to win but somehow end up either drawing or losing altogether.
That’s why the real question is this; do the big favorites win often enough to make this strategy profitable? This is an extremely difficult question to answer, partially because the term big favorite is too vague.
This highlights another flaw in the strategy. What exactly constitutes a big favorite? Different people will have different views on this. This means that the strategy is entirely open to interpretation, which is actually a good thing. Strategies that are based on following a precise system with no room for individual interpretation are usually doomed to failure. The best strategies are those that lay out some specific guidelines, but also involve making informed decisions in any given situation.
In this article we’re going to look at the backing big favorites strategy in detail. We start by analyzing the win rates of teams that are heavily favored to win, to see how often they meet expectations. Then we analyze the odds, to gain some real insight into how effective this strategy can be. With that information all in hand, we then provide our honest assessment of this strategy. Finally, we offer some advice for how it can be implemented most effectively through optimization.
Analyzing Win Rates of Big Favorites
The fundamental basis of this strategy is that big favorites do, in fact, win quite often. That’s also what makes it so appealing, as most bettors obviously like to win as many of their wagers as they can. HOW frequently do they win though? That’s something we really need to establish if we’re going to properly assess this strategy.
Let’s use some real data to try to answer this question. The English Premier League is widely considered the best soccer league in the world, and also attracts a lot of betting interest, so we’ll focus our attention here.
2019 worlds strongest man events. The following table shows the win percentage of each of the top three placed teams in this league over three consecutive season. As they ended up proving to be best teams in the league, it’s reasonable to assume that they would have been heavy favorites in most of the games they played.
|Finishing Position||Win Percentages|
|Overall Win Percentage for Top 3 Teams – 67%|
We can see from this data that, collectively, the top three teams won 67% of the time across the three seasons. Had we backed each of these teams to win in every one of their games during this period, we would therefore have won 67% of our wagers. Or, to put it another way, we would have won roughly twice as many wagers as we’d have lost.
Don’t rush to start placing your wagers just yet though. Although this data does serve to back up the point that the big favorites win more often than they lose, it’s also far from being conclusive. It’s a very small sample size, and it reflects only one league. Also, we’re looking at results retrospectively. Prior to each season we couldn’t have actually known which teams were going to finish in the top three places.
Nevertheless, this data does go some way to proving that an advantage of backing big favorites is that you’re likely to win a high percentage of your wagers. For the majority of recreational bettors, this alone is a good enough reason to implement the strategy. When combined with the simplicity of the strategy, the case is even more compelling. Because this is exactly what most recreational bettors want: a simple strategy that will help them to win often.
Those serious about making money from betting soccer want just a little more though. They understand that a strategy is only beneficial if it helps to identify value in the betting markets. Win rates alone tell us nothing about value, so we also need to look at the odds.
Analyzing the Odds of Big Favorites
We’ve already mentioned that low odds of big favorites represent a flaw in this strategy. Because you’ll only win small amounts relative to your stake, even just a small number of losing wagers can easily wipe out the profits from the winning wagers. We’ll demonstrate this point by again using past data from the English Premier League
We’ve already established that those top three teams recorded a collective 67% win rate across the season. If we know the win rate, and we know the average odds, we should be able to estimate what our returns would have been from backing those teams. Let’s work it out. Here’s what we know for sure.
- The top three teams won 67% of their matches between them.
- Excluding matches against each other, each team played 34 matches.
- Backing each of the top three teams in every game, except against each other, would have meant a total of 102 wagers (3 teams x 34 matches).
- At a 67% win rate, we’d have won 68 of those wagers.
OK, so we’d have made 102 wagers and won 68 of them. That seems pretty good. Let’s see what this would have meant in real financial terms if we were betting $100 each time.
- 102 wagers at $100 each is a total of $10,200.
- A $100 wager at 1.64 returns $164.
- 68 successful wagers at those odds returns $11,152
- The total return minus the total staked is $952.
According to these figures we’d have made a profit of $952. Not too bad, or so it seems. The signs are pointing towards this strategy working well. However, the calculation we’ve used here are still not quite accurate enough. Combining the average odds across the season with average win rates might seem like a good way to calculate expected return, but it actually skews the real data somewhat.
Consider this. The teams did lose some of their games, and it’s likely that those losses came mostly against reasonably strong opponents. When they were up against strong opponents, the odds for them to win would have been higher than their average odds to win across the whole season. So we need to look at the numbers more closely. If these teams were losing games when their odds were higher, that means the average odds when they did win were probably lower than the average odds for the whole season.
To confirm this either way, let’s look at the data for the 2013/2014 season in a little more detail. The top three teams were Manchester City, Liverpool and Chelsea. The following table shows their average odds to win across the whole season, along with their average odds to win in games that they did win. It also shows the total averages across all three teams.
|Team||Odds to Win(Season Average)||Odds to Win(Average in Games Won)|
|Total Average (All 3 Teams)||1.64||1.52|
This confirms our suspicions. We can see from this table that the average odds across the whole season were indeed higher than the average odds in matches won. For all three of the teams collectively, the average odds when they did win come out at 1.52. This is noticeably lower than then 1.64 we used in our previous calculations. So we need to redo these calculations, and get a more accurate picture of our expected returns.
- A $100 wager at 1.52 returns $152.
- 68 successful wagers at those odds returns $10,336
- The total return minus the total staked is $136.
These figures show that we’d have actually done little better than break even. Suddenly this strategy doesn’t look quite so attractive. We still need to bear in mind that these are small sample. Some fluctuations either way are perfectly reasonable. So, at this stage, it’s not really possible to state categorically whether or not this would be a profitable strategy in the long run.
There’s also another problem with the data we’ve used so far. The top three teams that we’ve used for calculating these average odds were not always big favorites in every match. For example, Liverpool were 2.84 to beat Manchester United at Old Trafford during the season in question. They did win, but if we were only backing big favorites then we wouldn’t have placed the bet at those odds. The necessary criteria wasn’t met.
So we need to fine tune the data even further. We need to exclude the odds from any matches where the relevant teams were not big favorites. First we need to decide what constitutes a big favorite, as this isn’t a precise term. For now, we’ll assume that the strategy is to place a wager any time the odds are at less than 2.00
The following table shows the average odds based on these new parameters.
|Teams||Average Odds in Games Won(Only Odds Below 2.0 Included)|
|Total Average (All 3 Teams)||1.41|
We can see that the average odds have dropped even further now. How do the expected returns look now, using this new adjusted average?
- A $100 wager at 1.41 returns $141.
- 68 successful wagers at those odds returns $9,588
- The total return minus the total staked is -$612.
These figures paint a totally different picture. Despite the attractive looking win rate of 67%, we’d have actually LOST money with this strategy. Not an insignificant amount either. We’d have lost around 6% of our total money staked.
The obvious conclusion now is that this strategy doesn’t work in its current form. But, again, let’s not be too hasty. Before we draw our own conclusions, we’d like to highlight a key point that you should take away from what we’ve learned so far.
This whole process has shown that it would be very easy to present past soccer betting data in a way that would lead us to believe this strategy could offer a positive expected return. It has also shown us that the expected return became very different once we adjusted the relevant data to more appropriate parameters.
This is a VERY important lesson to learn if you have aspirations of betting on soccer (or any sport) successfully. Statistical analysis can be very useful, but it has to be done correctly. There’s no point in using real data if you don’t use it in the right way. The conclusions you end up drawing are likely to be more damaging than valuable.
With this point made, it’s time to provide a full assessment of this strategy.
Assessing this Strategy
The purpose of the exercise we’ve just carried out was to determine whether or not backing big favorites is a good soccer betting strategy. The analysis we’ve done suggests that it isn’t, as it probably would lose us money over time. However, have we done enough to prove that it DEFINITELY doesn’t work? No, not at all. We simple haven’t analyzed enough data. We’d need a much bigger sample size if we wanted to categorically prove anything.
However, what we have done is properly highlight both the primary advantage and the primary disadvantage of this strategy. We’ve shown that you can achieve a high win rate with it. That’s a good thing, in isolation of other factors. We’ve also shown that the low odds mean that the returns from winning wagers are unlikely to make up for the losses on losing wagers. That’s obviously a bad thing.
What we really wanted to achieve here was a demonstration of how such a simple betting strategy is bound to be flawed. It’s important to understand that successful sports betting is rarely so straightforward. If making money from soccer betting was as easy as betting on every team that’s a big favorite, there’d be a lot of bookmakers out of work. The same principle applies to any strategy based on such a simple premise.
However, that’s not to say that simple strategies can’t be effective. They absolutely can be, if they’re interpreted correctly. We’ll expand on this point further shortly. Before that, here’s our rating for this strategy.
Now, you may be wondering why we’ve given this strategy a better than neutral rating when we’ve shown that it doesn’t really work. It’s because we don’t think it’s entirely without merit. As we’ve just said, even the simplest of strategies CAN be profitable. That includes this one. It needs some fine-tuning though. Blindly betting on all the big favorites all of the time isn’t effective enough. You need to put more thought than that into this strategy if it’s going to be effective.
Optimizing this Strategy
We’ve established that the biggest advantage of this strategy is the potential for a high win rate. We’ve also established that the biggest disadvantage are the low odds. So there are two pretty obvious things to focus on if we want to improve it.
- Increate the Win Rate
- Increate the Average Odds
This is entirely logical, right? If we can increase the win rate enough, we can perhaps overcome the negative effect of the low odds and make an overall profit. Alternatively, we could place our wagers at higher odds so that our returns are greater when we do win. This also may lead to an overall profit. If we can increase the win rate AND increase the odds, we should be in good shape.
There are some options we could try here. For example, we could try only backing big favorites when they’re playing at home. This should increase our win rate. The downside, though, is that the average odds are likely to drop with this approach. We try only backing favorites when the odds are above a certain level, but this could reduce our win rate.
Another option is to do some further analysis of past data, to see if there are any specific criteria we could apply that would sufficiently increase the win rate and/or increase the odds. It’s possible that we might find a winning formula. For example, only backing big favorites when they are playing away at teams with poor home records might be profitable.
There’s a problem with this whole approach though. We’re looking to develop a system that’s based entirely on set criteria. That really isn’t the way to go. We’ve never found a single system like that, that works consistently for any length of time. There are simply too many factors that affect the outcome of soccer games, and too many unexpected results. We can’t expect something so rigid to be effective.
The fundamental logic of backing favorites is sound, because they do win frequently. But there are no shortcuts if you want to make regular profits from this strategy. You can’t just decide upon some fixed parameters and then bet on every team that falls within those parameters. You’ve got to be smarter than that. You can set some basic parameters as a guideline, but you still need to look at each team individually before deciding where to put your money. Don’t back a team solely because they’re a big favorite. Assess them, assess their opponents and assess the circumstances surrounding the game. Then, if you feel that the odds on offer represent good value, that’s when you go ahead and back them.Recommended Reading
An alternative strategy for backing big favorites is to include multiple selections in an accumulator. Please read our article on strategy for soccer accumulators for more detail.
The latest 2024 presidential election odds show Vice President Kamala Harris as the front-runner over President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump at most European sportsbooks. For instance, Harris is +350 to win in 2024 at Bet365, with Biden at +400 and Trump at +600.
The thinking is that Biden may opt to let Harris take the reigns in the next Presidential election cycle, due to the fact that Biden will be 81-years-old three years from now.
The first deciding events are the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary, which usually take place in February. Although the winners of these party-specific races aren’t necessarily shoe-ins for their party’s nominations, the results of these events can impact the odds greatly.
By the time Iowans and New Hampshirites gather to make their decisions, bettors in the United Kingdom and around Europe should have a good idea of who is in the running for the nominations of both parties. Despite all the historic precedent of renominating an incumbent, that isn’t a foregone conclusion for the Democrats in 2024.
Here’s a look at the current US Presidential Election odds at two UK books:
Presidential election odds 2024
Given the recent historic turnout in Black communities in major cities around the country, Harris makes sense as the front-runner right now. It’s reasonable to assume the leaders in those communities could fire that machine back up in 2024 to get behind her.
The Democrats may want to maximize that momentum by nominating Harris instead of pushing for a second term for Biden. If they do so, that would be a first. So far in US history, no major party has ever opted not to renominate an incumbent when he’s been eligible for reelection.
That’s partially because ousting an incumbent president has proven very difficult in US history. Prior to 2020, it hadn’t happened in nearly 30 years. Here’s the full list of one-term presidents and their tenures in office:
- Donald Trump, 2017-2021
- George H.W. Bush, 1989-1993
- Jimmy Carter, 1977-1981
- Gerald Ford, 1974-77
- Herbert Hoover, 1929-33
- William Howard Taft, 1909-13
- Benjamin Harrison, 1889-93
- Martin Van Buren, 1837-41
- John Quincy Adams, 1825-29
- John Adams, 1797-1801
If the Democrats do nominate Harris in 2024, it will be historic for other reasons, however. No major party has ever nominated an African-American woman for president, for example.
Harris’ nomination could come in the same year as a historic nomination by the other party. The possible scenario has only played out one other time in US history.
Can Donald Trump run again in 2024?
The short answer is yes.
Only Grover Cleveland has served two non-consecutive terms as president in US history, serving his first from 1885-1889 and his second from 1893-1897. Despite the fact that Trump just got the second-most votes for a presidential candidate in US history, there is one big reason why he may have an uphill climb to secure a third nomination from the Republican Party.
In June of 2024, Trump will turn 78 years old. That would make him the oldest major-party presidential candidate in US history, setting him up to be pushing 83 when his potential second term would end.
By a similar measure, Trump also had more people vote for his opponent than any other incumbent in US history. That’s another reason why the GOP may look elsewhere in 2024.
UK books currently favor Mike Pence, Nikki Haley, and Ivanka Trump to be the GOP nominee in 2024. Either Haley or Ivanka Trump would be the first female presidential nominee in the history of the Republican Party. Ivanka Trump would also be the first daughter of a president to receive such a nomination.
Election betting explained
Often times, books will refer to markets on these contests as “futures.” That’s because they will settle the bets months or years into the future.
The lines on this event are called moneylines or straight bets. That means you’re simply picking a winner of the contest, with the margin of victory and other elements irrelevant for these purposes.
Using the 2020 presidential election as an example, UK books liked Trump as a strong contender. They started him out at +100 or “even money” then moved him to -150 throughout the cycle. His odds rounded out at +150.
That means if you put $100 down at first opportunity, you would have doubled your money exactly had he won. When his odds moved to -150, you would have had to wager $150 to make $100 in profit. At +150, you’d get a $150 payout on a wager of $100.
What to monitor: polling data
Polling data is fluid and changes over the course of an election period. In the early stages like now (May 2019), candidates with the most name recognition tend to poll the strongest. That’s why on the Democratic side former VP Joe Biden and 2016 candidate Bernie Sanders were early polling front-runners.
As lower tier candidates who have difficulty fund-raising drop out of the race, and TV debates start crystallizing (or galvanizing) voter opinion, the numbers begin to consolidate around one-to-two front-runners heading into the primaries.
For simplicity purposes, monitor two well-respected polling aggregators:
- Real Clear Politics: Consolidates and links to the most respected polls.
- FiveThirtyEight Polls: Does the same but presents the information in a different way.
Top 2024 US Presidential Contenders
In US history, no major party has ever failed to renominate an incumbent for reelection when he’s been eligible for another term. UK books feel that the Democrats will break that tradition in 2024, however, nominating Vice President-Elect Kamala Harris instead. Other frontrunners at these books include NY Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and former South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg.
While Donald Trump is the frontrunner at UK books right now, current Vice President Mike Pence is the next top contender. After that, the field contains former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley and Trump’s daughter Ivanka.
2024 Presidential betting tips
In terms of presidential elections, the candidates who most represent the opposite end of the spectrum ideologically often fare the best. For example, Barack Obama and Donald Trump were about as different as could be.
That’s usually following a two-term president, however. As 2024 will come at the tail end of Joe Biden’s first term and he may run for reelection as the incumbent, that typical wisdom may prove unreliable.
Watch candidates’ fundraising and polling as the cycle nears. That will be an indicator into which candidates to back at the books.
Betting On Favorites In Horse Racing
Can you bet in the US?
Place Betting On Favourites For A Living
So far, no states have allowed sportsbooks within their borders to take action on the results of any US elections. If that changes to any degree, TheLines will keep you updated on the progress of that movement.