NFL bettor biases and price setting: further tests of the Levitt hypothesis of sportsbook behaviour

Rodney Paul and Andrew Weinbach

Applied Economics Letters, 2011, vol. 18, issue 2, 193-197

Abstract: Empirical support for the Levitt hypothesis of sportsbook behaviour, where sportsbooks set prices to maximize profits, not to clear the market, is shown using data from actual sportsbooks. Betting percentages on favourites and underdogs (pointspread market) and overs and unders (totals market) were obtained using actual dollars bet (www.sportsbook.com) and percentage of bets made (www.sportsinsights.com). Both data sets reinforce the idea that sportsbooks are not setting prices to attract even betting dollars on both sides of the proposition. Big favourites, road favourites and overs on high totals are all shown to attract a significantly higher percentage of bets in both samples. Betting against public sentiment is shown to be statistically profitable for the National Football League pointspread market, but not in the market for totals.

Date: 2011
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (20)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.informaworld.com/openurl?genre=article& ... 40C6AD35DC6213A474B5 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:apeclt:v:18:y:2011:i:2:p:193-197

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RAEL20

DOI: 10.1080/13504850903508242

Access Statistics for this article

Applied Economics Letters is currently edited by Anita Phillips

More articles in Applied Economics Letters from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().