ANZ Championships – Rd 4 Picks

It could never be said that Making The Nut lacks for ambition when it comes to changing small facets of the world – be it the prevention of online poker cheating, the greater acknowledgement of player of the year awards by rugby league clubs or the matchmaking of eligible Tasmanian bachelors with Danish princesses. To the ever-expanding list we can add the following: an attempt to get women’s sports advocates and degenerate gamblers breaking bread and joining together for a common cause. Sounds like an unholy union, right? What possible vehicle could you use to do such a thing anyway? I’m glad you asked……

Making The Nut are very pleased to announce the addition of Ms Netball to our advisory team – she will bring you the lowdown on the ANZ Championship fixtures each week and her predictions for each match, as we unveil a weekly netball gambling column. Those four words appearing together is not a misprint. It’s a weekly netball gambling column. As Kiwi rapper Scribe might rhetorically ask, “How many sites you know roll like this? How many sites you know flow like this? Not many, if any….”

For those who are less than familiar with all things gambling and how this column might fit in, let’s start with a quick explanation of how 'line' betting (also referred to as ‘handicap’ betting or ‘betting against the spread’ in some parts) on netball works.

Because many games have a clear-cut favourite, to attract more interest bookmakers offer a 'line' which is essentially a head-start for the underdog team. For example, in Round 2 the following line was offered for the Thunderbirds v Vixens match.

Line betting: Adelaide Thunderbirds $1.90 (+13.5) v Melbourne Vixens $1.90 (-13.5)

For all intents and purposes, the bookmakers were tipping the Vixens by 13.5 (they almost always put a .5 at the end apart from rare cases, for a reason I'll come to in a minute). Suppose for a moment that you thought the Vixens would win by 18 goals – you would think that the Vixens were underrated in only being tipped to win by 13.5, and since there was a decent gap between the two figures you’d be well within your rights to bet on the Vixens -13.5. If the Vixens win by 14 or more (as proved to be the case with an 18 goal victory), that bet would have won. But if the Vixens had only won by 13 goals or less, or indeed if the Thunderbirds had spring an upset, the Thunderbirds +13.5 would have been the winning option. As a side note, this is why bookmakers tend to stick a .5 at the end of the ‘line’, to avoid cases where it's a tie between the two options.

In setting the line (i.e. head-start for the underdog), the bookmaker is trying to attract as much money on the Vixens -13.5 as they attract for the Thunderbirds +13.5. This is why there will be different lines/ head-starts assigned for each match: the more lopsided the match appears, the bigger the line will be in order to try and attract bets on the underdog. Sure, you like the Swifts to belt the Tactix in Sydney…. but what if I offered you 22.5 goals head-start for the Tactix (which would be shown as Swifts -22.5 and Tactix + 22.5)? Now it’s a tougher decision.

Back to the Thunderbirds v Vixens example – let’s suppose the 13.5 goal line does its job and the bookmaker attracts a total of $10,000 worth of bets on the Vixens -13.5 and $10,000 worth of bets on the Thunderbirds +13.5, or $20,000 of bets in total. As noted above, only one group of people can win, and therefore the bookmaker would have to pay out 10,000 x 1.90 = $19,000 in winnings, with the $1,000 leftover to be used for covering their costs and making a profit.

In practice of course, it never quite works out as neatly as that. But the illustration highlights that bookmakers set the odds with a slight edge in their favour, and therefore for us as punters to win, we have to be patient and disciplined, choosing our battles wisely and waiting until we think the bookmaker has gotten it wrong before betting.

For the purposes of this weekly column, we will only recommend a bet where the opinion of bookmakers and the opinion of Ms Netball differ by at least 3.5 goals. That’s a purely subjective point to draw the line, albeit informed by some distributional analysis that is discussed a little later. Nonetheless, you could choose to bet any game where the opinions differ by at least 2.5 goals, or at least 5.5 goals, or whatever takes your fancy. Recommended bets (and results for these bets) for this column will be based on games where the relevant opinions differ by at least 3.5 goals. As a consequence, there will be some games each week where the opinions of bookmakers and Ms Netball are too close to each other and no bet is recommended. This is a good thing. As highlighted above, you don’t want to blindly hand over the edge in the odds to the bookmaker. Pick your battles carefully.

To illustrate how much more difficult betting against the line is than simply tipping the winner of each game, we’ll be keeping results for this column both in terms of overall correct winner tips (much as you would for a standard tipping competition) and the results for recommended bets. To demonstrate an average, good and excellent record of betting against the line, consider the following three cases:

Average case: 100 bets, 50 winning bets at $1.90 each, total return = $95 (or a $5 loss), Profit on Turnover (POT) = -5% (which is essentially the bookmaker’s edge).

Good case: 100 bets, 55 winning bets at $1.90 each, total return = $104.50 (or a $4.50 profit), Profit on Turnover (POT) = 4.5%

Excellent case: 100 bets, 60 winning bets at $1.90 each, total return = $114 (or a $14 profit), Profit on Turnover (POT) = 14%

Those figures for the ‘good’ and ‘excellent’ cases don’t sound glamorous, but trust me, to make any level of profit on betting is a good outcome, and to make a profit of more than 10 per cent (relative to the amount you’ve outlaid) is terrific. If Ms Netball were able to achieve a strike rate of greater than 60 per cent when betting against the line, deciding to try a find a tipster for a netball gambling column would become one of the best decisions I’ve made in years.

Now that we’ve established a few key ideas about betting against the line*, what other information can be used to help our decision making? Two quite important considerations when trying to tip both the winner and the margin of victory (and by extension, come to a view as to the validity of the bookmakers’ lines) are the distribution of winning margins and the value attached to home court advantage.

For the 2010 season (including finals), 34 of the 69 matches had a winning margin of nine goals or less, with the other 35 games having a winning margin of ten goals or more. Given the disparity in talent between the best and worst teams in the competition, the frequency of big wins shouldn’t come as any great surprise. Breaking this down a little further, we get the following:

13 games (18.8%) decided by 1-3 goals;

9 games (13.0%) decided by 4-6 goals;

12 games (17.4%) decided by 7-9 goals;

11 games (15.9%) decided by 10-12 goals;

8 games (11.6%) decided by 13-15 goals;

8 games (11.6%) decided by 16-18 goals; and

8 games (11.6%) decided by 19 or more goals.

The moral of the story: be careful about rushing out and betting on a side to win by more than say 15 or 16 goals unless there is an extremely large gap between the teams in quality.

Analysis of home court advantage throws up a couple of surprising trends. Over the three full seasons of the ANZ Championship to date, there have been a total of 207 matches including finals, with the following overall trends observed with respect to the success of home teams:

Australian team at home to another Australian team: 34 wins, 29 losses (54 per cent win rate);

New Zealand team at home to another New Zealand team: 33 wins, 28 losses (54 per cent win rate);

Australian team at home to a New Zealand team: 40 wins, two losses (95 per cent win rate);

New Zealand team at home to an Australian team: 21 wins, 20 losses (51 per cent win rate).

When evaluating a ‘domestic’ match-up, the home team only has a very slight advantage, perhaps worth no more than two or three goals. For example, supposing that you think the Swifts should be favoured by nine goals against the Fever at a neutral venue, you might suggest that the line should be Swifts -11 if the game were played in Sydney and Swifts -7 if the game were played in Perth. However, when evaluating an ‘international’ match-up, the home team has a substantial advantage, perhaps worth as much as six or seven goals. For example, supposing that you think the Vixens should be favoured by four goals against the Mystics at a neutral venue, you might suggest that the line should be Vixens -10 if the game were played in Melbourne but Mystics -2 if the game were played in Auckland.

That’s more than enough of my ramblings for one week – time to hand it over to Ms Netball for the inside word on Round Four of the ANZ Championships:

Round Four Tips (please note: all times are the local time for the home side)

Saturday March 5, 1:50 PM Adelaide Thunderbirds v Central Pulse 

Thunderbirds:1-3 (eighth on ladder), 0-1 home

Pulse:0-3 (tenth on ladder), 0-0 away

Bookmakers’ line**:TBC

Ms Netball says:The introduction of Caitlin Thwaites for Central Pulse has given them more reliability in the goal circle and the team looks more connected this year.  Coming off two very close loses the Pulse will be desperate for a win to avoid a 0-4 start to the season.  However, the Pulse have never won a match in Australia and while the Thunderbirds lack some experience they still have the expertise of Natalie Von Bertouch and the shooting power of Borrego, both of which will make the Thunderbirds at home hard to beat. Thunderbirds by 12.

Recommended bet:TBC. Back the Thunderbirds if -8.5 or less,  back the Pulse if +15.5 or more.

 

Sunday March 6, 1:20 PM Queensland Firebirds v Southern Steel

Firebirds:3-0 (first on ladder), 2-0 at home

Steel:1-2 (sixth on ladder), 1-2 away

Bookmakers’ line**:TBC

Ms Netball says:If the evidence of the last three weeks is anything to go by the Firebirds look like Grand Final contenders.  Strong all over the court, the Firebirds are on a roll and the Steel seem to have lost some of the edge that saw them make the top four last year. Throw in the poor record of New Zealand teams in Australia and the Firebirds should cruise home here. Firebirds by 22.

Recommended bet:TBC. Back the Firebirds if -18.5 or less,  back the Steel if +25.5 or more.

 

Sunday March 6, 6:20 PM Northern Mystics v Melbourne Vixens 

Mystics:2-1 (fourth on ladder), 1-1 at home

Vixens:2-0 (third on ladder), 2-0 away

Bookmakers’ line**:TBC

Ms Netball says:While the Mystics will be looking to make up for their loss at home to the Magic I don’t think they can do it against the Vixens. This will be the Vixens third straight away game whereas the Mystics will be well rested following a nine day break after their last game against the Tactix was cancelled.  As a consequence of this I expect a fairly close match but with Julie Corletto possibly returning to the court this week, the biggest problem for the Vixens may be who to sit on the bench. Vixens by 5.

Recommended bet:TBC. Back the Vixen if -1.5 or less,  back the Mystics if +8.5 or more.

 

Monday March 7, 7:40 PM Canterbury Tactix v Waikato/BOP Magic

Tactix:0-1 (ninth on ladder), 0-1 at home (note: match has been transferred to Rotorua)

Magic:3-0 (second on ladder), 2-0 away

Bookmakers’ line**:TBC

Ms Netball says:After the events in Christchurch last week just about everyone (aside from Magic fans) will be hoping for a Tactix win. While a win against the strong Magic line-up is unlikely, new players Kasey Evering and Donna Wilkins bring increased depth to the Tactix, and the Magic’s game against the Pulse was below their normal standard with a lot of turnover ball. The Magic will need to improve against the Tactix but I expect that their experience and their strong defensive line up will allow them to do so. Magic by 10.

Recommended bet:TBC. Back the Magic if -6.5 or less,  back the Tactix if +13.5 or more.

 

Monday March 7, 7:40 PM NSW Swifts v West Coast Fever

Swifts:1-2 (fifth on ladder), 1-1 at home

Fever:1-2 (seventh on ladder), 1-0 away

Bookmakers’ line**:TBC

Ms Netball says:An important match with each team coming off two losses – both will be looking to arrest the slide quickly. Swifts coach Julie Fitzgerald still seems to be working out her line up.  While the Swifts have quality players on the bench perhaps this has added a degree of uncertainty for the players, who have previously been part of the most unchanged line up since the inception of the ANZ competition back in 2008.  The Fever’s youth and determination can take their opponents by surprise but so far this season they have yet to play four solid quarters of netball and I expect the experience of the Swifts will show. Swifts by 15.

Recommended bet:TBC. Back the Swifts if -11.5 or less,  back the Fever if +18.5 or more.

Thanks to Phil Walter/Getty Images AsiaPac for use of the photo

*For those who have little to no gambling experience, there’s a lot of information to digest in one go here – potentially too much. With that in mind, feel free to sign up to Making The Nut and leave a comment to this article with any questions that you have and I’ll try to provide a clear and concise response to any issue(s) that you’re a bit unsure about.

** Bookmakers had not yet published lines for these games at the time of publication of this article (pansies). Anyway, we will endeavour to add these lines (and note any consequential recommended bets) as they become available via the comments section each week.