Fair bets and profitability in college football gambling

  • Rodney J. Paul
  • Andrew P. Weinbach
  • J. Weinbach


Efficient markets in college football are tested over a 25-year period, 1976–2000. the market in general is found to be efficient, but betting on underdogs of more than 28 points violates a fair bet. The strategy of betting home underdogs reveals stronger results. Home underdogs of more than seven points are found to reject the null hypotheses of a fair bet over the last 10 years of the sample, 1991–2000. Home underdogs of more than 28 points are found to reject the null of no profitability during the same time frame.


Forecast Error Market Efficiency National Football League Professional Football College Football 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Dare, W. H., and S. S. McDonald. 1996. “A Generalized Model for Testing the Home and Favorite Team Advantage in Point Spread Markets.”Journal of Financial Economics, 40: 295–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Even, W. E., and N. R. Noble. 1992. “Testing Efficiency in Gambling Markets.”Applied Economics 24: 85–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Feist, J. Various years.Jim Feist's Professional Football Workbook. National Sports Services Publishing.Google Scholar
  4. Gandar, J., R. Zuber, T. O'Brien, and B. Russo. 1988. “Testing Rationality in the Point Spread Betting Market.”Journal of Finance 43: 995–1007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Golic, J., and M. Tomarkin. 1991. “The Degree of Inefficiency in the Football Betting Markets.”Journal of Financial Economics 30: 321–330.Google Scholar
  6. Hirshleifer, D. 2001. “Investor Psychology and Asset Pricing.”Journal of Finance, 56: 1533–1597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Pankoff, L. 1968. “Market Efficiency in Football Betting”.Journal of Business 41: 203–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Paul, R. J., and A. Weinbach. 2002. “Market Efficiency and a Profitable Betting Rule: Evidence from Totals on Professional Football.”Journal of Sports Economics 3: 256–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Sauer, R. D., V. Brajer, S. P. Ferris, and W. M. Marr. 1988. “Hold Your Bets: Another Look at the Efficiency of the Betting Market for NFL Games.”Journal of Political Economy 96: 206–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Tryfos, P., S. Casey, S. Cook, G. Leger, and B. Plylypiak. 1984. “The Profitability of Wagering on NFL Games.”Management Science 30: 123–132.Google Scholar
  11. Vergin, R. C., and M. Scriabin. 1978. “Winning Strategies for Wagering on National Football League Games.”Management Science 24: 809–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Woodland, L. M., and B. M. Woodland. 1994. “Market Efficiency and the Favorite-Longshot Bias: The Baseball Betting Market.”Journal of Finance 49: 269–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Woodland, L. M., and B. M. Woodland. 2001. “Market Efficiency and Profitable Wagering in the National Hockey League: Can Bettors Score on Longshots?”Southern Economic Journal 67: 983–995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Zuber, R., J. Gandar, and B. Bowers. 1985. “Beating the Spread: Testing the Efficiency of the Gambling Market for NFL Games.”Journal of Political Economy 93: 800–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of Economics and Finance 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rodney J. Paul
    • 1
  • Andrew P. Weinbach
    • 2
  • J. Weinbach
    • 3
  1. 1.St. Bonaventure UniversitySt. Bonaventure
  2. 2.Armstrong Atlantic State UniversitySavannah
  3. 3.SportometricsSix Mile

Personalised recommendations