🔎5 Historically Profitable NFL Betting Systems

[Wagerallsports]

BETMGM

NFL Betting System No. 1: Underdogs with Low Total​

This system builds off the theory that when the under does well, so does the underdog.

Over the last five NFL seasons, underdogs in games with totals less than or equal to 42 points are 148-110-5 ATS.

The system does even better when it’s a divisional matchup. Over the last five seasons, divisional underdogs with a total less than or equal to 42 are 60.2% ATS (65-43-3).

Here are the matches for the generalized system in Week 2: Falcons, Colts, Bears, Cardinals, Commanders, Panthers, Steelers.

NFL Betting System No. 2: Underdogs off Blowout Loss​

The public often overestimates how bad teams are when the last contest saw them blown out.

Historically, it’s in the bettors’ interest to bet on teams coming off an embarrassing defeat.

Since the 2003-04 season, teams that lose by 20 or more points and are underdogs in the next game are 321-232-12 ATS. For bettors, the historical return on investment is 12%.

Even if you expand the sample to include teams that lost by 14 points minimum in the previous contest, underdogs are still 54.3% ATS.

Week 2 Matches: Steelers.

Week 2 Matches (14+ point defeat): Steelers, Seahawks, Bears, Panthers.

NFL Betting System No. 3: Road Dog to Home Favorite​

For clarity, I recommend betting against teams who find themselves a home favorite a week after closing a road underdog.

The theory here is that there’s little separating the two teams if the status changes. Additionally, one criterion I added is that the home favorite should have failed to reach the postseason last year.

Teams that fit the criteria are 376-444-21 (45.9%) ATS in weeks two through 17.

Here are the bets that fit the criteria for Week 2: Colts, Seahawks.

NFL Betting System No. 4: Patrick Mahomes Favorite of -3.5 or Higher​

Although it’s a comparably small sample, bettors should fade Patrick Mahomes when he’s starting, and the Chiefs are listed at -3.5 or higher.

For his career, the Texas Tech product is 26-34-1 ATS under this criterion. Conversely, when Mahomes is listed between -3 and +10, he’s 14-4-1 ATS.

By applying this information, bettors should monitor the line for Chiefs vs. Jaguars in Week 2. The current line is Chiefs -2.5 and may be worth a bet if Travis Kelce returns.

NFL Betting System No. 5: Weeks 1-6 Home Divisional Dogs​

Unfortunately, this system expires once Week 7 arrives, but it’s profitable enough to list.

Since 2003-04, home divisional underdogs in the first six weeks of the season are 104-70-4 ATS. Over that span, the return on investment is 16.1%.

Shrink the sample down to the last five seasons, and bettors will find these sides are 25-15-0 ATS for a 21.4% ROI.

In Week 2, the teams that match this system are the Rams, Patriots, Panthers and Steelers.

 

[Wagerallsports]

Any opinions or experience on these and if true or bogus?

 

[RRsilver]

Any opinions or experience on these and if true or bogus?

I'm interested to see how they all do this week.

 

[KVB]

Any opinions or experience on these and if true or bogus?

"Underdogs with low totals" is something to be aware of and part of the constraints of football scoring. You can see this in college too.

But as usual, always cap the game, it matters.

Keep track of your bets and why you made them.

 

[quantumleap]

As someone who has followed betting systems for almost 20 years, some systems only seem to last a few years and then the books change their algorithms to account for such lopsided results.

Some systems last years and years.

 

[edawg]

How nice of MGM to give systems to beat them outta their profits.

 

[jjgold]

I would think the first one’s the best

 

[Tanko]

As someone who has followed betting systems for almost 20 years, some systems only seem to last a few years and then the books change their algorithms to account for such lopsided results.

Some systems last years and years.

QL is spot on.

I develop and track people's systems quite a bit and find that this is 100% true. When a someone tells you, "Hey this system has hit 60% since 2013", look at it closer. One year it may have went 8-1 to sway the win% while in most years it is a loser.

I have yet to find a system that wins consistently every year. Although I will say there are a few that win a little in most years and just break even in their "bad" years. But, those are rare.

 

[stormtrooper8]

Interesting reads

Like with any system, it all pretty much evens out over the long run.

The divisional dog one is a good example. 65-43 is a nice run, but if you understand numbers and sample sizes, that is not enough to make any near-definitive long term conclusions.

 

[stormtrooper8]

There is value in certain situations, no matter what kind of "trend" it is. You have to jump on value when it presents itself, because it can go away quickly.

 

[KVB]

"Keep track of your bets and why you made them."

--KVB

 

[Tanko]

I was curious so I looked at a couple of these systems over the last 4 years.....

I called them
Sys 1a - Dogs w/ < 42 totals. All games.
Sys 1b - Dogs w/ < 42 totals. Divisional games only.
Sys 2 Dogs that lost by 20+ prior week
Sys 5 Home, Divis, Dogs in weeks 1 thru 6.

I skipped sys 3 and 4. They didn't interest me.

 

[Tanko]

Here is the table of data....
1st table is W/L records.
2nd table is Win% by year.

• I added a column at the end for the average Over/Unders for closing lines for each year. Why?Because I was curous why 2022 had so many more games for Sys 1 than 2021. The avg line totals dropped 3 points. It was even lower than in 2019 which had the 2nd lowest avg total line and the 2nd most games that met system requirements.
• The most consistent and winning system is Sys 1b (Dogs < 42 total in divisional games).
• There are huge swings in Sys 5 (wks 1-6 Hm/Div/Dogs from year to year.

W/L RECORD	Sys 1a	Sys 1b	Sys2	Sys 5
	Dogs <42 Tot	Div Dogs < 42 Tot	Dogs w/ 20+ pt loss	Hm, Div, Dogs Wk 1-6	Avg O/U
2022	43-39	21-14	11-7	7-3	44
2021	14-11	4-2	11-10	2-5	47
2020	9-7	5-3	13-5	6-0	48
2019	26-20	9-7	6-8	2-4	45
WIN %	Sys 1a	Sys 1b	Sys2	Sys 5
	Dogs <42 Tot (Sys 1a)	Div Dogs < 42 Tot (Sys 1b)	Dogs w/ 20+ pt loss (Sys 2)	Hm, Div, Dogs Wk 1-6 (Sys 5)
2022	52	60	61	70
2021	56	67	52	29
2020	56	63	72	100
2019	57	56	43	33
Avg	55.3	61.5	57.0	58.0
Stdev	1.9	4.0	10.7	29.0

 

[pete0]

I would think the first one’s the best

^This

1. is well-known, underdogs and unders and usually correlated.

2 & 3 is negligible diff.

4 - inconsistent ncaaf record from past past years. applying to NFL.
5- very low sample size spread across 2 years. - not worth.


interesting to look at tho.

 

[KVB]

Tanko, you are missing a pretty important piece in that analysis.

I said above one must still cap the game, and that means they must compare their line to the market to see if there is a discrepency.

Such a focus on the Total, no focus on the actual spreads we're talking about in those results nor anything of the specific matchups.

At this point these results above just appear to be ATS (Totals) results by themselves. Broad strokes of ATS results are a dangerous capping trap to fall into and require broader market context.

Without that context, it's like marking the good fishing spot by placing a mark on the bottom of you boat.

Better to look at the shore, buoy, or some other landmark so you can find that spot again. Even so, you have to have a good mark as the water level itelf can rise and fall.

Hope that makes sense. It did to me...lmao.

 

[Tanko]

Tanko, you are missing a pretty important piece in that analysis.

I said above one must still cap the game, and that means they must compare their line to the market to see if there is a discrepency.

Such a focus on the Total, no focus on the actual spreads we're talking about in those results nor anything of the specific matchups.

At this point these results above just appear to be ATS (Totals) results by themselves. Broad strokes of ATS results are a dangerous capping trap to fall into and require broader market context.

Without that context, it's like marking the good fishing spot by placing a mark on the bottom of you boat.

Better to look at the shore, buoy, or some other landmark so you can find that spot again. Even so, you have to have a good mark as the water level itelf can rise and fall.

Hope that makes sense. It did to me...lmao.

Not enough time to go into the weeds (or the sand dunes on the beach). My goal in providing the info was to see if there were interesting trends and to provide some insight to others on the systems presented.

Obviously more development is necessary to see if there are really trends to follow here (i.e. analysis of the actual spreads).

 

[Tanko]

There's all kinds of details to dig into on these.

I used closing lines because I had them readily available. Maybe opening lines yeild different results. How did the lines moved from open to close would also be interesting to evaluate. Lots of things we could look at.

 

[KVB]

Not enough time to go into the weeds (or the sand dunes on the beach). My goal in providing the info was to see if there were interesting trends and to provide some insight to others on the systems presented.

Obviously more development is necessary to see if there are really trends to follow here (i.e. analysis of the actual spreads).

Yeah, my post was less for you and more for the bettors relying on broad ATS spreads as they really can be moving targets.

Bettors tend to use result to decide if the market has adjusted, because many bettors aren't sure if the line is "where it should be" as that ever important handicapping gets skipped.

I'm in a philosophical mood this morning, lol.

 

[stormtrooper8]

It kind of reminds me when people say taking the dog straight up is better than taking the +1.5 in hockey or baseball

The reality is there is no advantage to that system (or others). Maybe one year it is more profitable; other years it's not. If there is a market edge somewhere at a certain time, it doesn't last because people take advantage of it.

When something brings value, more people find it over time and buy it, and that drives up the price and takes away the value.

That's the beauty of markets.

 

[KVB]

It kind of reminds me when people say taking the dog straight up is better than taking the +1.5 in hockey or baseball...

Yeah, those are just a matter of conversions. What matters is if one converts to value while the other does not.

But most saying what you post here aren't looking at any of the math involved.