Steve Makinen is our main numbers guy here at VSiN, and his weekly best bets are a “greatest hits” compilation of system matches, betting trends analysis, and his proprietary power ratings, which can only be found right here at VSiN.com. Follow up with Steve’s weekly content, which is linked in the explanations for his picks.
***Top College Football Betting Resources***
*Join thousands of other sports bettors and unlock access to picks, public betting splits data, & the VSiN live video broadcast by upgrading to VSiN Pro. Grab your first month for less than $10.*
- NCAAF Expert Picks
- NCAAF Betting Hub
- NCAAF 2024 Week-By-Week Schedule
- Parlay Calculator
- NCAAF Betting Splits
- NCAAF Betting Odds
College Football Odds | College Football Betting Splits | College Football Power Ratings
One of the most touted features on the VSiN.com website, and a feature that we believe to be a fantastic resource for bettors is the Betting Splits pages. These are the pages that we have built utilizing the data that DraftKings so graciously provides to us detailing the breakdowns of the money & ticket splits for point spreads, money lines, and totals. In an article published in the 2023 College Football Betting Guide, Steve Makinen outlined 13 different systematic strategies for successfully using the DK Betting Splits data that developed in the 2022 season. Here are the systems and qualifying plays for this week’s games (records are shown heading into the 2023 season). These still can AND WILL change, so continue to track and qualify the systems up until kickoff for best usage.
DK Betting Splits system #1: When 80% or more of the handle was on a particular side of an ATS wager, this majority group was just 40-47 ATS (46%). In other words, if you saw the big green lights on the VSiN betting splits handle page 80% or higher, it was best to fade it.
System Matches (FADE ALL): GEORGIA, MICHIGAN, WESTERN MICHIGAN, UMASS, WYOMING, LSU, OREGON, GA SOUTHERN, SMU, APPALACHIAN STATE, WASHINGTON, FRESNO STATE
DK Betting Splits system #2: When 75%+ of the number of bets were on a particular side of an ATS wager, this majority group was just 66-76 ATS (46.5%). Again, if you see the big green lights on the VSiN betting splits # of bets page 75% or higher, it was best to fade it.
System Matches (FADE ALL): PENN STATE, JAMES MADISON, BOSTON COLLEGE, GEORGIA, MARYLAND, MICHIGAN, TOLEDO, WESTERN MICHIGAN, MEMPHIS, MISSOURI, WYOMING, LSU, OREGON, AIR FORCE, APPALACHIAN STATE, PITTSBURGH, ALABAMA, WASHINGTON, FRESNO STATE
DK Betting Splits system #3: When the majority of the handle was on road favorites for an ATS wager, this majority group was just 58-85 ATS (40.6%). More recreational bettors love road favorites because they are usually the better team. The point spread is the great equalizer.
System Matches (FADE ALL): USC, PENN STATE, MIAMI (OH), GEORGIA, MICHIGAN, MISSOURI, LSU, OREGON, NOTRE DAME, APPALACHIAN STATE, PITTSBURGH, ALABAMA, WASHINGTON
DK Betting Splits system #4: Similarly to #3 above, when the majority number of bets was on road favorites for an ATS wager, this majority group was just 59-75 ATS (44.0%). Bet volume usually covers more public action, and again, recreational bettors love road favorites but don’t typically fare well long term.
System Matches (FADE ALL): USC, UTAH STATE, FLORIDA, PENN STATE, CLEMSON, MIAMI (OH), GEORGIA, MICHIGAN, MISSOURI, LSU, OREGON, TEXAS STATE, NOTRE DAME, APPALACHIAN STATE, PITTSBURGH, ALABAMA, WASHINGTON
DK Betting Splits system #5: When the majority of the handle was on road underdogs for an ATS wager, this majority group was 100-82 ATS (54.9%). Now, 54.9% is less than the usual systems I like to present to readers, but this is a nice advantage against the usual majority win rates and goes to show that being on the “smart” side of the majority handle can pay off. Remember, a higher handle feels less “public” than higher bet counts.
System Matches (PLAY ALL): SOUTH FLORIDA, KANSAS, HOUSTON, IOWA STaTE, EAST CAROLINA, SOUTH CAROLINA
DK Betting Splits system #6: When the majority number of bets was on road underdogs for an ATS wager, this majority group was 98-75 ATS (56.6%). This is even better than the handle numbers in #5 actually and suggests that following public bettors getting behind road dogs can be an actionable strategy.
System Matches (PLAY ALL): FLORIDA, ARIZONA STATE, SOUTH CAROLINA
DK Betting Splits system #8: When the majority of the handle backed the team with more season wins in an FBS vs. FBS contest for an ATS wager, this majority group was just 100-131 ATS (43.3%). More than not, bettors like to back the “better team” in a matchup, regardless of what the point spread indicates. Again, the point spread is the eternal equalizer.
System Matches (FADE ALL): PENN STATE, USC, TULANE, AKRON, JAMES MADISON, BOSTON COLLEGE, MIAMI (OH), CALIFORNIA, GEORGIA, MICHIGAN, MARYLAND, GEORGIA TECH, HOUSTON, UCF, MARSHALL, MISSOURI, MEMPHIS, UNLV, WYOMING, OREGON, GA SOUTHERN, GA STATE, IOWA, SMU, AIR FORCE, ALABAMA, WASHINGTON, FRESNO STATE
DK Betting Splits system #9: When the majority of the handle backed a team in an FBS vs. FBS contest for an ATS wager, but the line moved towards the opposite team, this majority group was just 38-49 ATS (43.7%). This can be a tricky one to avoid, as it can be referred to as a trap in booking circles. The theory is that the more money a team gets on it, the more likely the line moves toward that team. This is the opposite scenario, and usually, the public loses.
System Matches (FADE ALL): JAMES MADISON, USC, MIAMI (OH), MICHIGAN, GEORGIA, UCF, UNLV, IOWA ST, NOTRE DAME, AIR FORCE
DK Betting Splits system #10: The average college football total last year was 54.5. In games where the totals reached 57 or higher and oddsmakers expected them to be a little more explosive when the majority handle bettors favored the Under, they were relatively sharp, going 35-21 (62.5%). This is pretty rare, as it occurred in only 56 of 776 games.
System Matches (PLAY UNDER): BOISE STATE-MEMPHIS, HAWAII-UNLV, LSU-OLE MISS, OREGON-STANFORD, TEXAS STATE-SOUTHERN MISS, SOUTH CAROLINA-TENNESSEE, WASHINGTON-ARIZONA
DK Betting Splits system #11: On games with totals of 45 or lower, 70%+ super majority handle bettors siding with the Under were 15-8 (65.2%). Because not many public bettors embrace betting Unders, this didn’t produce a lot of plays, but the super handle majority were sharp.
System Matches (PLAY UNDER): NEW MEXICO-WYOMING
DK Betting Splits system #12: On games with totals of 45 or lower, 75%+ super majority number of bets bettors bucking the low total and siding with the Over were 22-13 (62.9%). Again, not a ton of plays here but the more public option of the number of bets was pretty good when going against the grain.
System Matches (PLAY OVER): FLORIDA-KENTUCKY, GEORGIA-AUBURN, MICHIGAN-NEBRASKA, PITT-VA TECH, SAN DIEGO STATE-AIR FORCE
DK Betting Splits system #13: On games where the handle has a majority on totals and the # of bets has the opposite majority, the majority handle plays went 112-93 (54.6%). This could be described as more sharp action being displayed by the majority handle.
System Matches:
PLAY UNDER when opposite majorities and HANDLE favors UNDER
PLAY OVER when opposite majorities and HANDLE favors OVER
