Many people use a sports betting system to bet on all kinds of sports, from American football to basketball. However, there are two types of systems and which one is better is a big question that many people ask themselves. So which is better, multiple regressions or statistical anomalies?
The fact is that both systems work well under the right circumstances and appeal to different people. Let’s see the differences between the first two:
• multiple regressions use historical data collected
• historical data tends to give much more accurate types of results
• also can’t let anyone call games with 100% accuracy
• both are affected by unforeseen factors
• the better the data, the better the chances of predicting the outcome of a sport
• Multiple regressions use team changes, injuries, losing/winning streaks, last 10 game results, road/away game records, win-loss ratios, losses-wins.
• statistical anomalies focus on deviations from the common factor
• statistical anomalies offer advantages that are competitive
• Use conversions of statistical anomalies, points lost, safeties, injuries, team psyche, weather conditions, public opinion, stadium types and weather conditions in relation to their effects on team and player statistics.
Whichever sports betting system is used, it can work. However, multiple regression is definitely more accurate. In fact, as many bookies attest, winning or losing is based on so many factors that, in reality, the chances of having a successful bet are 50-50. If you want to increase your chances, using historical data, combined with team and player psyche, can do wonders if applied cautiously and without high expectations. Also, by using the data you collect yourself for your multiple regression sports betting system, you can probably further increase your ability to win.