"There were 376 games in the last six seasons (approximately 62 per season or approximately 4.5 per week) that had spreads of between 20.0 and 25.0. Of those 376 games, 94.95 percent of the favorites won the game outright. Investing equal amounts on all 376 contests produces six straight years of profitable returns with an average annual (non-compounded and non-annualized) return of 12.24 percent."
"Seeking a 5-15 percent return over the course of 15 weeks betting college football is hard," he wrote in an email, "especially when it is risking tens of thousands of dollars to potentially win seven or eight hundred dollars."
For a more specific breakdown of his math, here is an example I cribbed from his paper:
"This asset class would start with $100,000 of capital and would experience 376 wagers of $10,000 a piece over six years. 357 would be winning investments and 19 would be complete losses. The following table summarizes each year's activity."
I know using a $100,000 portfolio is crazy because I doubt few people are using that much to bet on games over the course of a season but this shows that betting MLs on favorites between 20-25 pts can become profitable if you stay steady, don't chase, and grind away. This whole article is about the "Missing Asset Class" in gambling similar to investing in the stock market. Anyways, thought I would post it to see responses. Its definitely a contrarian view but I find it really interesting.
Does everyone know the games in the last 6 yrs that lost? I know for a fact I took Washington +21 vs USC in 08 when Barkley was a frosh and Aaron Corp started that game and last year I took Iowa St +21 vs Texas Tech which was one of the easiest covers of the year. Thats 2 of the 19 games where the dog won straight up. What are the other 17? I really don't feel like looking up 6 yrs worth of stats.
Anyways, thoughts on these stats?