The Monmouth University Research Every Golf Bettor Should Know About

There’s a common idea among golf fans that knowledge gives bettors an advantage. Thus, following tournaments, understanding the players, and studying the statistics make it easier to choose who will win. This perception is shared by many bettors, but in reality, it is only partly true.

Research by Professor Robert H. Scott III and Associate Professor Mikhail M. Sher of Monmouth University's Leon Hess Business School suggests that successful betting on any sport, including golf, requires a lot more than simply being good at picking winners. Their work looks at how probability, pricing, risk and decision-making can influence the quality of a wager.

Research Generating Interest in Academia and Beyond

Scott and Sher presented their findings at the 19th International Conference on Gambling & Risk Taking, hosted by the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV). The duo is also busy writing a book that is expected to be published in early 2027, titled Beat the Sportsbook: The Theory and Practice of Successful Sports Betting.

Sports Betting’s Reputation Compared to Other Risk-Taking

While the research was not designed around golf, it tackles broader betting questions and considers how behavioural and measurable approaches can lead to better decisions. Those principles apply well to golf because of the amount of player and performance data, which sometimes makes it hard to separate useful information from the illusion of having an edge.

One of the most interesting parts of Scott and Sher's research is its study of the stigma surrounding sports betting.

Sports betting has become increasingly popular, yet there is still a common belief that overcoming the sportsbook's built-in advantage over the long term is nearly impossible. Other forms of financial risk-taking are not usually seen with the same negative certainty. Investing in growth stocks, high-yield bonds or cryptocurrencies can involve substantial uncertainty and losses, but taking those risks is often seen as investing or trading rather than gambling.

While Scott and Sher are not trying to redefine the image of sports betting, they do argue that the logic used in other forms of risk management could apply in betting. It’s not about reframing sports betting as investing or implying it’s possible to guarantee wins. The research focuses more on whether bettors can use more discipline to understand risk and probability.

The Sportsbook's Advantage Is Not Just About Picking Winners

The word “vig” can make sports betting sound as though the mathematics is automatically stacked against every bet. Scott and Sher take a different view in their research, where they point out that it is relatively easy to find a bet supported by good data, but finding a good price is the real challenge.

Applying this lesson to golf, a bettor may have genuine stats that support why a specific golfer could win a tournament or a round. The problem is, if the sportsbook has priced in the probability aggressively, the wager may have no value. It could even be that a golfer with less chance of winning becomes the better option because the odds are more generous.

Given that sports betting is often seen as a “make a prediction to win” industry, the study challenges traditional ideas and argues for a stronger link between probability and price.

What Does a Golfer's Probability Actually Look Like?

Using known information to help make a betting prediction is common, but Scott and Sher’s research highlights that this does not work on its own. If a golfer has a price of +800 to win a tournament, the probability from the odds sits at around 11.1%.

Bettors who estimate the golfer’s chances of winning as higher than the probability implied by the odds may see value in the price. Those who estimate the chances below the implied probability will not. The final result of the golfer does not change the basic calculation.

They could still win despite the bettor's lower estimate, just as they could lose despite the higher estimate. What matters is whether the prediction was reasonable when the wager was made. This is why Scott and Sher say expected value and variance are important parts of their study. They provide a way to think about the difference between picking the likely winner and choosing a bet with value.

More Information Does Not Automatically Mean More Advantage

Golf is particularly suited to bettors who think they’re winning because of their knowledge. However, knowledge of the game doesn’t always guarantee successful wagers. The sport is full of data about pro golfers, such as strokes gained, driving distance, putting percentages, course history, recent form, approach quality, and more. All of this information can be used to build profiles for players, which bettors can use to inform their decisions.

The problem is, simply having lots of information does not automatically make the betting decision correct. Scott and Sher point to bettors having a poor understanding of their own strengths and weaknesses. They argue there is a clear gap where some bettors have genuine predictive skill, and others are just knowledgeable in the sport.

A bettor who follows every tournament may know a huge amount about the players. They may understand which golfers suit particular courses, or which players are striking the ball well. This is good knowledge, but the problem is that sportsbooks also have access to this data.

The Bettor Is Part of the Process

This means that betting decisions are not always accurate or reflect rational thinking. Overconfidence is one example, where a bettor who watches golf every week can begin to believe that their knowledge gives them a special ability to predict tournament outcomes.

Recency bias can create another problem. A golfer who has just won may seem more likely to win again, but a player who has missed several cuts can appear impossible to back. Familiarity is similar, where following a specific golfer may make the bettor feel more comfortable placing a bet on that player.

These biases matter because the sportsbook does not need every bettor to make the same mistake. It only needs betting behaviour to consistently produce opportunities where the price reflects what customers are willing to wager.

That raises an interesting question: are sportsbooks simply responding to bettor behaviour, or are they actively taking advantage of it?

Sportsbooks Know What Bettors Like to Bet

It is already established in the betting industry that sportsbooks collect data about their customers and their betting behaviour. Scott and Sher say this allows operators to see where bettors make mistakes and what bets attract them.

A betting platform knows when to offer a deal or when to steer customers towards bets with a high vig, such as risky parlays. Sportsbooks want to encourage volume betting while still maintaining their built-in advantage.

The most common golf betting markets are often built around recognisable players, major tournaments and potentially enormous payouts. The research suggests bettors should avoid simply choosing lines because they are popular and instead focus on what makes a market worth betting on.

Judging Closing Line Value

Scott and Sher also examine more technical concepts, including how to assess betting ability using closing line value, or CLV. A bettor can have a short-term winning run without necessarily showing a repeatable edge. This is because results can be heavily affected by variance.

CLV provides a marker that helps bettors see whether the odds they take compare favourably with where the market closes. In golf, tournaments happen over multiple days and even pre-tournament markets can change significantly as more information becomes available.

A bettor might take a golfer at +1,000 before a tournament and see that price shorten before the event begins. That does not guarantee the golfer will win, but it provides evidence about the price the bettor obtained relative to the later market.

This shifts the focus away from the simplistic question of whether the golfer won. It instead allows the bettor to ask if they are getting prices that the market ultimately views as more favorable.

Why the Biggest Payout May Not Be the Best Option

Parlays are another area where Scott and Sher’s study can be seen through golf, but also in other sports. The researchers describe a “compounding probability illusion,” where bettors can underestimate how quickly the probability of completing a sequence of outcomes declines as more selections are added.

A tournament may offer dozens of possible selections across outright winners, finishing positions and other player markets. Combining several legs can make a relatively small stake appear capable of a substantial return.

Bettors often confuse the potential payout with good value, while forgetting that each leg of the parlay needs to win. As more legs are added, there are more ways for the wager to fail and the overall probability of winning declines. Scott and Sher are not suggesting parlays are automatically bad, but simply caution bettors to understand the probability and economics before they bet.

A Betting Record Can Influence Future Results

The research recommends that bettors properly track their betting history instead of just tapping into their memory. This is not just about recording wins and losses but offers a way to test whether betting strengths are real.

A golf bettor might believe they are good at identifying undervalued outsiders. Another might think their knowledge of courses provides their biggest advantage. Tracking a record over a long enough period could challenge those assumptions or show where a bettor is truly strong.

Tracking a betting record can also show where variance is influencing results. For example, a handful of successful long-shot bets can create enormous confidence even when the broader record does not support it.

Useful Knowledge and Not a Betting System

It’s important to know that Scott and Sher’s framework is not a betting system, nor does it claim to be. Their upcoming book does not suggest it will deliver guarantees on winning bets or making a profit from sports betting.

The researchers say the purpose is to provide an evidence-based study that focuses on education. That is important because even a bettor who understands probability, expected value and pricing cannot eliminate variance. A positive expected-value wager can lose and a poor wager can win.

Where the research can be useful is in showing how decision-making can improve and how sportsbooks operate. Golf offers a useful case study for Scott and Sher's broader ideas because the sport combines enormous amounts of information with considerable uncertainty.

A bettor can study a player's statistics, understand the course and correctly identify a golfer as one of the most likely players to win. None of that guarantees that the available price makes the wager worthwhile.

In sports betting, knowing who might win is only part of the problem. Understanding what that outcome is worth is where the real decision begins.

You’ll be able to read all of Scott and Sher’s findings when Beat the Sportsbook: The Theory and Practice of Successful Sports Betting launches in 2027.