I am pleasantly flabbergasted to see betting odds now available on an upcoming wrestling event, The Royal Rumble. Also odds available on the supporting card.
So many aspects to consider, chiefly: why don't the insiders lump on?
For those interested, here are the odds currently available with my turf accountant:
Coming back to this one, and guess what? WWE is trying to get betting on wrestling legalised.
The two favourites won.
Does this tell us that those in the know had wagered?
I'm an outsider because I don't/scarcely know the participants. But seeing such short prices for the two Royal Rumbles is quite extraordinary betting-wise. In the case of the ladies' event, the entrants were not even known until they appeared on the night, and yet there was a betting market. This could not happen in another sport.
I'm looking forward to monitoring the next wrestling betting, armed with this insight.
Reporting from across the pond, so to speak, there is a school of thought that Jey Uso might be the winner to further fester the cracks in the Bloodline faction. Some merit in the argument IMHO.
Under Starter's Orders! Latest betting:
The favourite's on the drift and there's money for Peter Maivia Jr Jr:
Interestingly they've deleted the tag betting.
Women's odds remain unchanged.
Good point, James.
This is developing. Betting now available on AEW too:
Unbackably hot favourite. Is it worth backing the underdog?
I see the WWE odds unchanged as of today which indicates very few, if any people are betting (yet...)
I agree Anglo but that only can only happen if you know/believe it is not straight.
"it was not all it seemed to be and they should not waste their money. "
This is the point I am at odds with.
The logic would be that wrestling would therefore be an ideal betting proposition. The challenge is to work out what the promoter has in mind as a story; or then again things could go wrong; or, unlikely, a double-cross. But the betting facility might prompt a participant to go off script.
I find it fascinating.
When All-In wrestling came big time to Australia in the 1920s
there was serious betting on the results. One man who did realise wrestling was a get-up was the journalist Clyde Parker who campaigned relentlessly to try to persuade punters that it was not all it seemed to be and they should not waste their money. When both financial inducements and threats failed to persuade him to give up his attacks he was punished for it. One of the men on the circuit American Ted Thye was closely allied to the promoter and general entrepreneur John Wren, whom many thought was a very bad egg. In June 1928, in a match with the Englishman Jack Winrow, when Thye was thrown out of the ring, he was said to have deliberately landed on the journalist who suffered severe facial injuries
With the colts' market in place, my bookmaker has now posted odds for the fillies' event:
Those two markets each show over 50 names, so the bookmaker is eager to clean up on non-runners, wrestlers who don't even appear. Stakes will be lost.
For serious betting:
I wish I knew who they are, to study the form.
How many punters will part with their money?
It's really fascinating because there is money to be made. And money speaks.
There are so many levels to analyse in pro wrestling: Ability clearly only plays a supporting role, albeit essential.
At a betting level, it is intriguing that one wrestler should be odds on in a field of more than 20. I imagine actual entrants have not even been established yet.
This betting market is determined by money, not by opinions. This tells us that there have already been substantial bets on the favourite. Maybe we need not look beyond the obvious. Maybe those in the know have already wagered. Their bets have created 10/11.
I look at the field and see big names like Brock Lesnar, John Cena, Peter Fanene Maivia Jr Jr, and several others who would all surely make "worthy" winners in terms of box office appeal through next Spring.
In horse racing, a similar non-handicap scenario might be betting on the Derby (June) the previous October, when some of the likely contenders have never raced, or have raced with anonymity. With all the variables, it is unthinkable to have an odds on favourite in October. Also, if you back a non-runner in October, or a non-Rumbler now, your stake is lost.
The fact that there is an odds-on favourite for the Royal Rumble is definitely highly significant at a betting level. It makes me want a part of this easy money. A bit.
Betting on a pre-arranged outcome is a punter's dream. Once again, wrestling leads the way in making this dream attainable.
In terms of "suspicious betting patterns", rest assured every bet would be accepted. Bookmakers exist to take big bets on odds-on favourites. And similarly to take all bets on outsiders.
(Example: imagine there are suddenly lots of bets on Logan Paul. The 18/1 will shrink, and he could become a new odds-on favourite. The bookmakers will be delighted, as they have already taken plenty on American Dream Jr.)
Congratulations to the bookmakers on this innovative move. They will be watching trends very carefully. It could lead to wrestling betting becoming more widespread.
I don't think Cody will win,he'll be handicapped by his head being stuck up his own backside.
Gunter wins this one, to set up a match with Brock Lesnar.
there was a bit of a scandal a few years back as someone onside WWE leaked the results to a number of people I don't know if it was found out straight away.
Older readers will recall that it was possible to bet on whether Deirdre would run off with Mike Baldwin or stay with Ken. It’s not really that different. Also, any unusual betting patterns would be detected.