Research by Professor Robert H. Scott III and Associate Professor Mikhail M. Sher of Monmouth University's Leon Hess Business School finds that sports bettors can improve their chances of success by better understanding odds, pricing, fees, and the risks involved in wagering.
In their upcoming book, “Beat the Sportsbook: The Theory and Practice of Successful Sports Betting,” Scott and Sher explore behavioral and quantitative strategies bettors can use to improve their wagers. We met the researchers at the 19th International Conference on Gambling & Risk Taking, hosted by the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV), where they presented their findings.
When asked if it is possible to beat the sportsbook once the vig (sportsbook fee) is accounted for, Scott told Covers, “Absolutely, Dr. Sher and I do it all the time. Every time? No. Finding good bets is less difficult than finding a good price. Many times, I’ll have strong assurance of a bet’s outcome, but because the price isn’t good, then the bet doesn’t make sense. So, you need both a good bet supported by evidence, combined with a price that makes the bet profitable.”
The stigma around sports betting
Scott and Sher argue that despite the popularity of sports betting, it carries a stronger negative stigma than other risk-bearing activities, such as investing and trading, partly because many people believe beating the sportsbook over the long run is nearly impossible.
Their research suggests bettors can improve their chances by applying some of the same behaviors, logic, and guidelines used in other potentially profitable risk-taking activities.
Enjoying Covers content? Add us as a preferred source on your Google account
Perception vs. probability
Scott and Sher's research centers on the gap between bettors' perceived skill and actual probability. Many bettors believe they are good at picking winners without fully understanding the odds behind those wagers.
The researchers aim to help bettors make more informed decisions by applying fundamental concepts from investing and other areas of risk management.
Scott was asked about the most surprising insight from their research.
“For me, it’s how bad sports bettors are at understanding their strengths/weaknesses. People bet in ways that (a) make them suckers for sportsbooks, (b) use no data or analysis, and (c) place high-vig bets like parlays too regularly. If bettors changed two things about their strategy, they’d be far more effective. First, only bet spreads and moneylines. Second, track their performance for two months, then look at the compiled data.”
Where bettors misread odds
Most bettors view sports betting odds as predictions made by the sportsbook. This isn’t necessarily correct. As the researchers explain, odds are not predictions; they are implied probabilities. In other words, they are representations of how likely an event is to occur.
For example, many bettors would know a wager with +1,000 odds is not likely to win, but they won’t understand that it actually implies an approximate 1-in-11 chance of winning. This disconnect becomes more of an issue when dealing with smaller odds.
Parlays are an even bigger example of bettors getting things wrong since people are often attracted to the prospect of turning a small stake into a larger payout. What many don’t realize is just how much the probability compounds against the bettor with every new bet.
This cognitive bias, known as the "compounding probability illusion," occurs when people struggle to accurately assess the probability of sequences or combinations of events. In sports betting, it can lead bettors to overvalue long-shot parlays and underestimate how quickly the probability of winning declines with each additional leg.
Winning can reinforce misunderstandings of the odds, making biases like the compounding probability illusion even more pronounced. A few wins can distort perceptions of long-term accuracy.
Biases behind bad bets
The effect of winning is just one example of behavioral biases that affect sports bettors. According to Scott and Sher, overconfidence in one's sports knowledge, emotional attachment to teams, and recency bias all affect how bettors behave when placing wagers.
For example, people who watch sports regularly may think they are better at predicting outcomes. In reality, their familiarity with sports creates an illusion of predictive skill that sportsbooks can take advantage of. This overconfidence is sometimes associated with the “Dunning-Kruger effect,” but it ultimately comes down to believing you know more than you actually do.
Similarly, bettors may have more faith in a team they like than others. This sort of “fan-driven” bias leads people to overbet on teams they like or follow because their emotional attachment distorts rational evaluation. Fans often overestimate how consistently their teams will perform.
“Sports fans are also superstitious, and even if someone knows their team is an underdog, they feel wrong betting against their team,” Scott said. “As a result, it’s the best policy not to bet on teams you have an emotional attachment to (good or bad).”
Changing how you bet
One question that emerges from Scott and Sher's research is whether sportsbooks exploit behavioral biases or simply reflect them in their pricing.
“Sportsbooks know bettors and betting behaviors,” Scott said. “They collect data on all their bettors. They know people’s weaknesses and mistakes. They know when to offer the best deals (e.g., teasers) and when to entice people into high-vig bets (long-shot parlays on teams with strong followings). They use many strategies to encourage betting. They want high volume, so it’s a dance between encouraging bets but not making it completely lopsided.”
The researchers recommend focusing on simpler bet types, such as moneylines and point spreads, rather than complex parlays or low-probability futures. Tracking bets, wins, and losses over time can also help bettors identify patterns and reduce the influence of recency bias.
More insights on the way
“Beat the Sportsbook: The Theory and Practice of Sports Betting” is planned to be published in early 2027.
Scott explained that the book will present sports betting fundamentals, with an emphasis on probability and the role of variance and uncertainty. It also offers insights into how several sportsbooks operate and how bettors can use that knowledge to their advantage.
“Gaining an edge or advantage is critical to profitable sports betting,” Scott told Covers. “We explain in the book how expected value and closing line value are used to evaluate bets, giving readers the information to find the best bet price.” The book will also cover the psychological aspects of sports betting, examining behavioral economics and finance and how bettors can overcome biases and avoid manipulation.
Scott and Sher also cover the hot-button topic of prediction markets, which are reshaping the traditional sports betting space. “We devote a chapter in the book to prediction markets and how they fit into the current sports betting landscape, and what role they are likely to play in the future,” Scott adds.
No guarantees
Although Scott and Sher outline many strategies sports bettors use to improve long-term results, they stressed throughout our conversations that sports betting is a fascinating form of entertainment but not a guaranteed source of income.
“The book provides sports bettors with an evidence-based study of sports betting. As academics, we have nothing to sell or promote. Our purpose is education,” Scott said. “We do not promise guaranteed success or promote a 'system.' Instead, we provide insights based on data and rigorous research.”
