I would tend to agree with OP that many of the same Game Theory and Estimated Value concepts used by successful professional poker players would also extend to successful long-term sports betting strategy. Similar to poker, if you are placing bets and unit sizing based on your own handicapping of available contest betting odds being offered, then it stands to reason that the focus needs to be on analyzing your long-term results when applying your strategy over a significant sample size, as opposed to short-term/ individual bet outcomes/ individual hand results.
As poker is concerned (specifically Omaha, more specifically PLO), the margins are often very slim, and therefore taking advantage of +EV scenarios is very important; you need to always be ready and willing to take advantage when you feel you have +EV play. This is often also the case with sports betting, and of course requires that you maintain sound discipline, i.e understand and practice good bank roll management, do not play/ bet above your means (in poker this would typically dictate never having more than 5-10% of your bankroll in play at any given time), do not overact to bad beats on single hands/bets, look for spots that you feel you have an edge to exploit, and most importantly track and trend your overall results.
Poker wise, you cannot truly assess whether or not the strategy you are employing is a winning strategy until you have analyzed results from a minimum of 200 hours of playing time (referring to cash games, not tournaments). I'm not sure exactly how this corresponds to sports betting as I only sports bet recreationally, however I am quite sure that the OP has a sound understanding of how to assess his results over the long hall, and I know that he spends a significant amount of time researching, analyzing results, and developing/ fine tuning his sports betting strategies.
In this respect, sports betting and PLO (pot-limit omaha) have a lot in common in terms of long term strategy. In fact, they also have a lot in common in terms of short-term shot taking as well, as you can sometimes hit big by taking shots above your typical means; of course this is rarely a successful long-term strategy, but most recreational poker players and sports betters are not concerned with long-term results.
In regards to the specific bet being discussed in this thread, yes the final results were that it was a losing bet, however the OP's contention is that his bet would be considered a positive EV play in the long-term, and when you are playing using a long-term strategy, it is important that you trust your assessments of +EV plays and place your bets accordingly without getting hung up on your bad beats. Therefore, while the bet itself resulted in a loss, the OP believes that based on his past experience, research, and assessments of the odds that were being offered at the time he booked the bet, this specific situational wager would result in an overall win more often than an overall loss in the long-term.
It's important to understand that for long-term strategy to be successful the individual bet/ hand must not be seen as existing in a vacuum, but rather as one data point which is a part of a larger results sample for which proper assessments would only be useful once a large enough sample size has been achieved. In this sense, its not about the results of this one specific bet, but rather about the greater long-term results of the many bets placed over the course of time that fall into the same category of potential +EV value. It's like Papa Wallenda said, "Life is on the wire; the rest is just waiting."
