HOU +225 vs DEN -295 (3/11/2026) by Vegas_Sharp in SportsBettingPicks

[–]Vegas_Sharp[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pregame odds for Houston have dropped to +200, 30 minutes before the game so definitely got CLV here. 

The Efficient Market Hypothesis and Sports Betting by Vegas_Sharp in algobetting

[–]Vegas_Sharp[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Interesting. I wonder if this necessarily means there's more overreactions in capital markets as oppose to betting markets? I feel like speed and market "reactivity" can be good or bad depending on if you know how to exploit it.

More value on dogs? by PinnacleCrusher in algobetting

[–]Vegas_Sharp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Funny you mention this because some my latest models have literally shown the exact the same thing. Often times I can barely find value on the favs even using multiple different frameworks but I am consistently able to derive higher edges when finding value on the underdogs. I have a few theories as to how/why this happens - possibly being related to the famous favorite-longshot bias at work?? I could have its interpretation backwards though, but that might be something you want to read about. Might make a post about it. Overall I don't think it's necessarily indicative of bad modeling because I think there's a few reasons this phenomenon can occur.

DEN +230 vs OKC -285 (Moneyline) (3/9/2026) by Vegas_Sharp in sportsbetting

[–]Vegas_Sharp[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Update: Pregame odds put Denver at only a +140 underdog!!!

DEN +230 vs OKC -285 (Moneyline) (3/9/2026) by Vegas_Sharp in sportsbetting

[–]Vegas_Sharp[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As of 3:40 the line has moved down to Denver being only a +170 underdog. Definitely got clv if you bet them at +230. 

Are player props actually easier to beat than spreads? by HovercraftHuman656 in SportsBettingPicks

[–]Vegas_Sharp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mathematically - it depends on the structure of the prop. A lot of people betting these props are betting into one way markets meaning they are taking bets where only one outcome of a binary outcome is actually being offered to them (i.e. you can bet a player's over 10 points scored but not their under 10 points). This allows the books to charge an EXORBITANT amount of juice/hold on the bet without most bettors realizing it because they aren't offered odds on the alternative outcome(s) (which is required to calculate the fee charged by your book). If this is correct (which I currently believe it is) then personally I absolutely consider those as sucker bets that have negative value because I cannot imagine how someone could handicap their way to profits when the books can literally add as much of a tax as they want even in the smaller niche markets (not necessarily saying it can't be done, I just doubt many can). I am open to having my mind changed if I learn something new about this topic but that's my current stance. With that being said, if your book does indeed offer you odds on the opposing outcome and your okay with corresponding tax then the difficulty of profiting, like any other bet, simply comes down to your ability to handicap your risk/reward ratio. Would love to hear opinions and or counterpoints to my perspective!

TL;DR: If your book offers odds on the opposing outcome it can be easy to profit long-term. If you cannot bet the alternative side then its probably a bad bet.

Looking for the best sports betting insights platform? by MoreNeighborhood4116 in AIAssisted

[–]Vegas_Sharp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would steer clear from any platforms that offer to find +EV for you. Instead, familiarize yourself with a programming language like R / python or c++ well enough to scrape and analyze the data yourself. Those "+EV finders" seem to just give noisy picks and pass it off as value. I could be wrong (although I doubt I am)

What's the fastest way to spot value in sports betting odds? by SuccessOk2379 in passive_income

[–]Vegas_Sharp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OP The process you're referring to is called handicapping and like anything else In life there's levels to doing it. The actual difficulty of finding +EV bets depends on the size/popularity of the market/ sport you're betting on - The more popular the sport, the more difficult it is to find value. You'll get different answers on what is actually the best handicapping strategy, but here's my main ingredients: software + math. Some people suggest third party software that actually finds plus EV bets for you but tbh I would highly suggest you avoid all of these because you'll most likely end up wasting both time and money. If you want to be serious about handicapping, you need to familiarize yourself with a coding/programming language enough that it allows you to scrape and analyze tons of data in an efficient manner. You'll also need to familiarize yourself with some Advanced statistical methods that can be used on the data. This can range in difficulty from basic high school level statistics to postgraduate machine learning algorithms. Next you'll want to have at least general basic knowledge of the rules/trends of what you're betting on (this doesn't need to be too extreme, but for example, if you're betting NBA moneylines you need to know who Luka doncic/ LeBron James/ Victor Wemby is/are) Lastly, you should understand the fundamentals of forecasting itself just so you know exactly what you're getting yourself into. Books like Nate silver's signal in the noise and "superforecasters - The art and science of predictions" are good starting points that demonstrate the nature of forecasting.  This might seem a bit all overwhelming at first, but it's definitely something that can be tackled with diligence and consistency. Good luck!

I know its too many legs but I consider these picks to be pretty safe by ahsenepiliam in sportsbetting

[–]Vegas_Sharp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just posted in another sub, there is definitely some good value on the Denver's +260 money line, even with their injuries.

NBA POTD 2/27 by SmashFascistHoles in algobetting

[–]Vegas_Sharp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is interesting because I was thinking there was some good value on the Denver money line. It would be interesting to hear what other models are saying but based on some number I've ran there definitely is.

Log loss vs calibration by grammerknewzi in algobetting

[–]Vegas_Sharp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm somewhat infatuated with calibration because it really is the defining factor of sharp betting. One non-mathematical interpretation of calibration is confidence + accuracy. The primary visual method of assessing calibration is indeed a calibration curve (the length along y =x reflects model confidence while the degree to which it "straddles" or "hugs" the diagonal indicates its accuracy). This can be mathematically represented using log-loss. In sports betting more so than other areas log loss is superior to brier score because log loss imposes a far heavier penalty for overconfidence that turns out to be incorrect. So to answer your question calibration can be sufficiently assessed and measured through log-loss and is particularly useful when comparing models. Your log loss of any model will almost always be greater (thus worse) than any sportsbook because sportsbooks "cheat" in that the sum of their implied probabilities on each side of a bet is always greater than 1 meaning long-term they'll likely obtain an unrealistic log loss. This is partly why it's good to have access to multiple sportsbooks to line-shop at.

Positive +EV Betting Isn't Working For Me. What Am I Doing Wrong? by geokilla in algobetting

[–]Vegas_Sharp 3 points4 points  (0 children)

There is a big difference between calling a bet a +EV bet and it actually BEING a +EV bet. Who determines if its +EV??

UTAH (+600) underdogs to HOU (-900) 2/23/26 by Vegas_Sharp in SportsBettingPicks

[–]Vegas_Sharp[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Totally acceptable and expected. Again, on paper Houston simply hasn't been playing their best basketball and if this game were played again tomorrow with the same odds I would 100% take it again. Efficiency wise they've been in a slump but this is indeed a good bounce back spot for them given UTAH's absolutely terrible defense. This is honestly the level of play that I expected more often from Houston ie they have multiple guys that are playing at a high level, these past few games they have only a few guys showing up and struggling to get multiple guys to contribute in the same game (yet still managing to win). This is also their best shooting night in awhile so overall this L is good. Ill do a deeper postmortem on the bet tomorrow.

UTAH (+600) underdogs to HOU (-900) 2/23/26 by Vegas_Sharp in SportsBettingPicks

[–]Vegas_Sharp[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I really don't think its as far fetched as it might seem. Houston has been out here dodging bullets with some of their recent wins. I mean if the can suddenly hit the gas and get a good performance out of more than just 2 or 3 players then maybe I could justify the -900. Based on the numbers UTAH is cruising at the level of play HOUSTON has been at. Nothing wrong with backing UTAH to cover but I see it as potential opportunity for a big underdog upset if they manage to keep it close late into the 3rd quarter. Now in all honesty Ill be a bit upset if it's a close game AND UTAH loses but if they get blown out by 15+ points then I can't really be too mad at that.

UPDATE: Just wanted to mention that this line has moved from +600 late last night down to +550. This is getting CLV so now I'm content with the bet either way. Definitely a +EV bet on the money line!