Oscar Betting Picks 1/4/2023

Introduction

Ever wanted to convert your Oscar expertise into some serious coin but don’t know where to start? Then look no further. Red Carpet Rosters is excited to bring you the latest in Academy Awards betting coverage. Although risky, betting on the Oscars can result in a lot of money coming your way. Oscars betting lines notoriously overvalue films, cast, and industry professionals while undervaluing others. Being able to identify those undervalued assets on the betting sheet is where your bread and butter will be. I will provide in-depth analysis of the nominees, including their odds and implied probabilities, as well as breakdowns of the categories and how they might play out on Oscar night. I’ll also offer tips and strategies for placing your bets, so you can make informed decisions and potentially come out on top.

Need some assurance before putting your trust and your funds in my betting advice? I have some anecdotal evidence that should sway you. I first began betting on the Oscars in early 2017, which also happened to be the first year we did the so-called “Oscars Death Race” where we watch every single nominee. After watching every feature documentary nominee, ending with Ava Duvernay’s powerful documentary 13^th, something clicked. The Academy did a major diversity push to include more people of color in the Academy that year, and with watching every nominee, I got a sense of the hive mind of the entire Academy. This sounds like some new age mumbo jumbo, but later that evening at a poker game, I told a friend that I really thought Moonlight was going to win Best Picture even though La La Land was the overwhelming favorite. I had never bet on the Oscars before, but we checked the betting lines. Moonlight was paying close to 4 to 1 odds, which is a 20% implied probability of winning (more on implied probability later), and if Moonlight ended up getting Best Picture, the payout is FOUR times the original wager. That’s enough value to pull the trigger, so we both put money on it. Then Oscar night happened, and the winner was announced: La La Land. Oh no! What have I done? I immediately texted my friend and apologized, but…well…we all know what really happened. Moonlight did win, and I quadrupled my wager. From that point on, a monster was born where I was able to bet on the eventual Best Picture winner every single year.

The next year, The Shape of Water, was technically an underdog to Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri paying a little over 1 to 1 odds. However, the moment I really felt I was on to something was when Green Book won. Arguably, the Green Book win was the most surprising in recent years. I, myself, didn’t think it was going to win, but the Best Editing nomination raised my eyebrow. When I put money on it, it was paying about 5.5 to 1, which is an implied probability of 15%. Did I think it was going to win? No. Did I think it had over a 15% chance of winning? Absolutely. And that’s the key. Parasite the year after was also technically an underdog with 1917 being the favorite. Nomadland was the overwhelming favorite, but we’re right back to an underdog winning when CODA won last year over The Power of the Dog.

Heretofore, I’ve only talked about Best Pictures odds leading up to Oscar night. Last year, not many upsets happened on actual Oscar night except for Best Picture, but by the time Oscar night rolled around, CODA wasn’t much of an underdog. It was paying a valuable 2 to 1 odds, but that’s an implied probability of 33%, and without a directing or editing nomination? I’m not pulling the trigger on that one. “But wait a minute, you just said that you have bet on the eventual Best Picture winner every single year.” You are correct, but I put my wager on CODA not right before Oscar night, but shortly after the Oscar nominations have come out. CODA was that feel-good movie that could just be what the world needed after a tumultuous couple of years, not to mention it was paying a whopping 25 to 1 odds. You read that right. Whatever bet I made on CODA, it would get a 2500% rate of return. That’s an implied probability of less than 4%. Did I think it was going to win at that time? No. Did I think it had over a 4% chance of winning at that time? Absolutely. And that’s the key.

Also, remember how I said that last year only favorites won, except for CODA? That’s true on Oscar night, but not as soon as nominations came out. Troy Kotsur, the eventual Best Supporting Actor, was the favorite going into Oscar night. However, he was not the favorite earlier. Believe it or not, Kodi Smit-McPhee of The Power of the Dog, who got a whole bunch of awards from various critics organizations, was the odds-on favorite when the Oscar nominations came out. Troy Kotsur was paying 4 to 1. Yeah, no doubt I’m taking that bet. And don’t ask about Anthony Hopkins for his role in The Father paying close to 5 to 1 odds before Oscar night while Chadwick Boseman was the overwhelming favorite in 2021. Yeah, I hit on that one too.

Yes, I’ve hit on a lot of value picks, especially the short films that the oddsmakers really have a hard time assigning betting lines to, but I’ve also lost bets too. That’s okay. I can’t stress this enough, but betting on anything, let alone the Oscars, is all about value and not necessarily what you think is going to happen. Yes, I’ve bet on things that didn’t hit, but if I zoom out and look at everything together, I’ve always ended in the black. You might think that betting on multiple Best Picture (or any category) contenders doesn’t make sense because they are mutually exclusive, but I disagree. If I see value, I’m going to place a bet because although I did bet on The Power of the Dog when it was getting closer to 0.8 to 1 odds (paying $0.80 cents net per $1 bet), the 25 to 1 odds paid for that bet and much more. Betting on multiple contenders in the same category only makes sense that if any of them hit, you at least break even. It’s a strategy to mitigate risk. Yes, it caps earning potential, but I’m looking to all but guarantee a good mood on Oscar night, not one where I enjoyed the broadcast and lamented by my low betting balance. I want it all.

Betting on the Oscars have two crucial elements, as does most betting: value and timing. Betting early carries more risk, but it could offer more value and more reward. Case in point, CODA paying 25 to 1 instead of 2 to 1. Throughout the season, I’m making bets, periodically over multiple days before Oscar night as more information becomes available. The lack of information early is both a feature and a bug.

Do you trust my judgment in betting on the Oscars? If so, let’s keep talking. If not, still read because it’s still valuable for the simple fact you can make more informed decisions when you talk about predicting the Oscars. Also, would it sway you if I told you I was a statistician? Because I am.

I’ve talked a lot about implied probability based on the odds. This raises an important concept of implied probability vs. true probability. But first, let’s make sense of the betting lines themselves. Most American betting lines give odds with either a plus (+) or (-). If it’s a plus sign, the conversion is easy. For every $100 you bet, your net profit, if that bet hit, is whatever number is behind that plus sign. For example, when I bet on CODA, the betting line was +2500. So if I bet $100 on CODA winning best picture, I get back $2,500 plus my original $100 bet. If the betting line is a minus sign, that simply means that I would have to bet that amount to receive back a profit of $100. For example, if Troy Kotsur had a betting line of -325 going into Oscar night, I would have to bet $325 to receive $100 plus my original $325 bet. I rarely bet on favorites, but if there is value even in a favorite, I usually will. However, I will never bet on any betting line that is over -200. If something has a betting line of -300, I’m steering clear. The payoff isn’t worth the risk of a fluke. Ask anyone who bet on Chadwick Boseman two years ago.

I won’t bore you with the algebra of converting betting lines into implied probabilities. Plenty of online calculators will do that for you, and any future posts I make will provide the implied probabilities. The important thing is to compare the implied probabilities with the true probabilities. The notion of true probabilities is a much trickier conversion. Professional sports bettors have sophisticated models, as do the oddsmakers themselves, derived from ample amounts of sports data to calculate true probabilities. Depending on the model, these true probabilities can change, but whatever outputs these models spit out, the professional sports gambler compares that true probability with the implied probability from the betting lines. If the true probability is greater than the implied probability, then that’s a good value bet. That means that the “expected value” of the winnings is greater than the expected value of the payout from the betting line. The term “expected value” is a statistical term, often interchangeable with the concept of mean or average. Over time, if you pursue expected values that are greater than the implied expected values, than your wins outnumber your losses, and you end up making a profit.

There’s a catch, though. To my knowledge, there is only one comprehensive and trusted statistical model for predicting the Oscars, the model developed by Ben Zauzmer, writer of the wonderful book Oscarmetrics. Each year, he publishes probabilities of each nominee winning. Yes, I do use these when they are published, but they are often published too late for my liking. By the time all his inputs are done, the betting lines have moved significantly, and I have already lost out on some great values (remember CODA paying 25 to 1?) With a lack of models, all we must go on is our own judgment, and that’s okay. So, I rely on tracking all the awards as part of maintaining film awards fantasy leagues at Red Carpet Rosters in addition to reading articles and, most importantly, watching the films themselves. Then it becomes a binary judgment call. I look at the implied probability, and I ask myself, “Does this contender have a better chance of winning than what the oddsmaker is implying?” If the answer is “yes,” I usually make the bet.

I say “usually” because there is another element of betting that is also important: the concept of “units.” Units mean different things to different people. A betting unit can mean 1% of your betting funds, so if you have $1000, one betting unit is $10. Others prefer a static amount, like $20 is a unit. Because Oscar bets are either won or lost and no in-between, the implied probability will usually inform me how many units I should bet with, and these can include fractional units. If I think something has a 2% chance of happening, and the implied probability is 1%, I’m pulling the trigger, but I’m not putting even a whole unit bet on it, or I might bypass it altogether.

Now that you’re familiar with betting lines, implied probability vs. true probability, and betting units, now you can keep up with my own personal picks. Before we get into that, there are just a few more housekeeping items to keep in mind. Although I have strong faith in my ability to make money on betting on the Oscars, any kind of betting carries risk. There is no guarantee, implied or stated, that following my advice will result in you making money. Having said that, I am not putting any advice on here that I won’t, myself, follow. However, I cannot stress enough that this only advice and any financial decisions you make are yours alone.

Also, I will probably put my money on multiple contenders in the same category. Like I’ve said before, this limits risk while also limiting upside. And these aren’t my predictions, these are simply where I think the value can be. Remember Green Book?

Also also, a critical aspect of betting is a platform to place your bets. There are several states that offer Oscars betting odds, but I’m based in the District of Columbia, which, as far as I can tell, don’t offer such betting lines. If they do, I’ll be sure to include our local sportsbooks too. Instead, I rely on three European-based betting sites that have been doing Oscar betting lines for years. They also may differ in betting lines greatly, so if the betting line on your preferred sportsbook is a lot different than what you see here, tread lightly. Of course, if I’m pulling the trigger on a betting line of +500, and you can find it at +600 near the same time as publication, well that’s a fairly easy decision. Anyway, the three betting sites I’ll be using for various reasons are Bovada, MyBookie, and BetUS.

And lastly, this is gambling, pure and simple. If you believe that you have a gambling or sports betting addiction, or if you believe someone you know has a gambling or sports betting addiction, please visit the National Council on Problem Gaming’s website for help and for additional information about responsible gaming, problem gaming prevention, and treatment.

Don’t miss out on this exciting opportunity to enhance your Oscar viewing experience and potentially win big! Follow me for the best in Academy Awards betting coverage.

After all that, itchy to pull your bet trigger?

John’s Betting Picks

The Academy Awards announce their nominations on Tuesday, January 24, but Bovada already has some betting lines for Best Actor and Best Actress. The early favorites are Brendan Fraser at -150 and Cate Blanchett at -130. These two will almost certainly be nominated, and I can nearly guarantee that these lines will move into more negative territory shortly thereafter (pending what happens at Golden Globes, SAG nominations, and, to some degree, BAFTA nominations.) They seemed to be the favorites all the way back in October, and precursor regional critics organizations do little to move betting lines.

For Best Actor, I’m not too crazy at Brendan Fraser’s line of -150, which is an implied probability of 60%. This feels too much like Kristen Stewart in Spencer last year. She was the early favorite, but missed out on a SAG nomination, all but sealing her fate as a nominee only. The Fraser comeback story is a good one, but 60% is too steep. I’m waiting on this. Plus, I don’t like betting on favorites anyway. However, Colin Farrell has been making lots of noise at critics organizations. Of course critics don’t vote on the Oscars, but at +330 with an implied probability of 23% is intriguing. If he gets a nomination, I expect that line to move down, so I’m at least intrigued. I’m putting half a unit on Colin Farrell.

More intriguing, though, is Austin Butler’s betting line at +500. Let’s be honest, this is a three-horse race between Butler, Farrell, and Fraser. Any other lines right now shouldn’t even be considered, even though Tom Hanks might be tempting at +5000 just because A Man Called Otto is a likeable film. (Okay, I changed my mind, put 0.1 unit on Tom Hanks.) Anyway, a biopic is hard to ignore, even though Austin Butler might be viewed as too much of a newcomer for Oscar voters. Austin Butler at +500 is an implied probability of a dice throw (17%). Do you think Austin Butler has a better chance at winning an Oscar than rolling a six on a standard die? Me too. I’m putting half a unit on him to win too.

Now for Best Actress, it’s also a three-horse race between Cate Blanchett (-130), Michelle Yeoh (+200), and Danielle Deadwyler (+1000). Although I normally don’t like to bet on favorites, a line of -130 is hardly a favorite. That’s only an implied probability of 57%. She’s outstanding in a film that will undoubtedly hit home with many Oscar voters. I’m putting one unit already for that, because if she keeps this momentum going, that line will move, and we might be kicking ourselves for not getting it at such a low price.

If I think Cate Blanchett has better than a 57% chance, then the field has worse than a 43% chance. Michelle Yeoh makes up most of that percentage, with an implied probability of 33%. It’s a three-horse race. It’s going to be one of these three women, or I’ll eat my hat. Danielle Deadwyler has a betting line of +1000, which is insane value right now with implied probability 9%. So, the probability of either Yeoh OR Deadwyler winning is sitting at 42%. That’s not very much wiggle room, not enough to justify betting on both Yeoh and Deadwyler at this point. Both Michelle Yeoh and Danielle Deadwyler have some good arguments working in their favor. I tend to be more conservative in betting, so right now I just don’t have enough information on putting any money on Danielle Deadwyler right now. Michelle Yeoh, though, is “due,” if there is such a thing. Michelle Yeoh would become the first woman of Asian descent to win a Best Actress Oscar for a film that, although divisive and maybe a little too weird for some Oscar voters, is unquestionably an extremely well-acted film. Michelle Yeoh has been snubbed twice for an Oscar nomination for Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and Crazy Rich Asians, so an Oscar win is well within reach. At +200, I’ll throw half a unit on her.

In summary:

Good luck!