Pinnaclesports has lately published a very curious article on cognitive biases. The essence of this rather complicated notion is the following: you’ve placed a wager and now you’re watching the match you’ve bet on. Let it be Goffin vs Edmund. As the match is finished you realize that your -6.5 bet for Goffin has won by a narrow margin. At that point you are likely to start analyzing why your “near win” was financially successful.
You justify it to yourself that Goffin failed to tune it at the beginning of the event and Edmund was doing actually playing his best tennis. As for David Goffin, he was making fun of his opponent in order to put off his guard. Anyway, your betting decision was correct. And you would have never changed it. (In our case we would interpret it as our success and would place the same bet over and over again.)
But as soon as you do your best to be impartial you would admit that what really made a difference in that match were a couple of rallies played in the very first game. And shall Goffin made a break then, Edmund would have got in a deep trouble.
But what would happen if your bet lost and Goffin won the fifth set 3:6, 1:6, 6:2, 6:1, 6:3. Your handicap would have lost under this scenario and most probably you would have tried to explain and contemplate it: of course, Edmund is much stronger and he used to be a clay challenger champion and it was evident that Goffin was a bit undercooked and he couldn’t pull himself together.
The point is that it is the same match with the same players and only a few rallies decided the final outcome. But we are not willing to accept it and prefer to interpret it as our own merits.
What is more important here is that it’s next to IMPOSSIBLE to predict a definite final result. It’s more real to think of a number of most probable scenarios of the given match. If they differ from those offered by the bookies, feel free to place your wager.
1. Don’t try to predict the result on the scoreboard.
2. It’s not enough to consider the match results to tell whether the bet was a good one.
3. The sooner you’ll learn to accept your failures, the sooner you’ll become a good punter with good chances for success.
Relevant news:ATP Chengdu Final preview: Fabio Fognini v Bernard Tomic
ATP Montpellier QF Preview and Betting Prediction: Andrey Rublev v Jo-Wilfried Tsonga
ATP Sofia R2 Preview and Betting Prediction: Mirza Basic v Philipp Kohlschreiber
Davis Cup Preview and Betting Prediction: Borna Ćorić v Denis Shapovalov.
Australian Open R3 Preview and Betting Prediction: Jo-Wilfried Tsonga v Nick Kyrgios
Tournament yet folds up for us quite well in the market of flat bets and live bets. 6 won bets in a row perfectly enhances the mood, but we are not going to lose concentrtion and relax ...
Everything in this match counts in favor of the Spaniard. Nadal, as a real locomotive, took long to get into stride. But having accelerated he becomes unstoppable. Rafa performed well in Madrid
Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray. Who will replace these guys in the near future. Today we chose tennis players who made the biggest step in his development this season. So Thiem Dominic, Batista-Agut and ...
Such evaluation of Gasquet from the bookmakers is understandable. The Frenchman lost his two previous encounters in a row to Monaco and Nadal, which is a sign of a bad form from Richard.
From the moment he appeared on courts, Kei Nishikori has always been one of 5 or 6 super talented promising players. Within the last 3-4 years Kei showed nothing special which reflected on his modest results: he sustained a good tennis level, won several ATP 250 titles, performed well on majors – but...
The more I watch the matches with the American players the stronger is my feeling that they all resemble one another. It all looks like a plant cranking out products of the same quality and with the same spoilage. And this trend holds true for the last 4-5 years...
The week before a Grand Slam tournament is one of the most difficult to analyze because the motivation of most tennis players is poor or not subject to any reasonable estimate of the ...
HerbertMot18 Jun 16:42
DavidWeisp18 Jun 08:23
HerbertMot18 Jun 08:20
DavidWeisp18 Jun 00:20
Michaellet17 Jun 13:11