View Single Post
  #1  
Old 19th March 2004, 08:35 PM
sportznut sportznut is offline
Member.
 
Join Date: Jan 1970
Location: Queensland
Posts: 2,266
Default

Okay, I've been going through all the betting results for 2003 and I thought I'd share some stats with you. This is how successful each team was in 2003 when it came to Handicap / Line Betting:

(Team Wins/Losses Win%)

AFL:
Collingwood - 16/8 - 66.7%
Hawthorn - 12/8 - 60%
Adelaide - 14/10 - 58.3%
Port Adel. - 14/10 - 58.3%
Sydney - 14/10 - 58.3%
Geelong - 11/8 - 57.9%
Essendon - 11/11 - 50%
Kangaroos - 10/11 - 47.6%
Fremantle - 9/10 - 47.3%
W.Bulldogs - 9/10 - 47.3%
Richmond - 9/11 - 45%
West Coast - 9/11 - 45%
St Kilda - 8/10 - 44.4%
Brisbane - 10/15 - 40%
Carlton - 8/13 - 38.1%
Melbourne - 6/15 - 28.6%

NRL:
Penrith - 16/6 - 72.7%
Canberra - 16/8 - 66.7%
Nth Qld - 14/7 - 66.7%
Melbourne - 14/11 - 56%
St Geo/Illawarra - 10/8 - 55.5%
Sydney - 13/11 - 54%
Bulldogs - 14/12 - 53.8%
Newcastle - 12/13 - 48%
Manly - 10/11 - 47.6%
Parramatta - 10/12 - 45.4%
W.Tigers - 10/12 - 45.4%
New Zealand - 11/15 - 42.3%
Souths - 9/14 - 39%
Brisbane - 8/16 - 33.3%
Sharks - 7/16 - 30.4%

Super12:
Chiefs - 8/3 - 72.7%
Bulls - 7/3 - 70%
Blues - 9/4 - 69.2%
Sharks - 6/4 - 60%
Hurricanes - 6/5 - 54.5%
Qld Reds - 5/5 - 50%
Crusaders - 6/7 - 46.1%
ACT Brumbies - 5/6 - 45.4%
Cats - 4/6 - 40%
Highlanders - 4/7 - 36.3%
NSW Waratahs - 3/7 - 30%
Stormers - 2/8 - 20%

By the way, I'm actually a Broncos and Lions fan, but I often bet against them because I feel that the Bookies tend to rate them too highly. Despite the fact that the Lions won the Premiership last year, I successfully bet against them many times. I was even more successful backing against the Broncos. When you look at the figures, you can see why.

By the way, I used TAB Sportsbet for the starts on all of the matches, but most Bookies' starts would be pretty much the same. Anyway, I hope you got some useful info out of all those figures. Some of them make for interesting reading.

[ This Message was edited by: sportznut on 2004-03-20 23:06 ]
Reply With Quote