When bettors talk about “teams that made money” in Serie A 2022/23, they rarely mean the clubs that simply finished highest in the table. They usually mean those whose results, style and public perception combined to create repeatable spots where odds understated their true chances or overstated their weaknesses over a long season.
Why “Most Profitable” Does Not Equal “Most Successful”
Judging profitability by win rate alone misses the core betting question: were prices generous relative to reality. Napoli dominated the league with 90 points, 28 wins and a +49 goal difference, but pre-season outright odds had them at around 14/1 for the title behind Inter, Juventus and Milan, and by mid-season match odds had shortened drastically. By contrast, sides like Bologna and Torino finished mid-table yet often went off at underdog or pick’em prices that did not fully reflect their stability, making them more rewarding to back repeatedly in specific roles. A bettor’s experience across 2022/23 therefore splits “profitable” teams into favourites that were initially underestimated and mid-table teams whose resilience was slow to be priced in.
Napoli: Early-Season Value Favourite, Late-Season Tight Price
Napoli’s 2022/23 campaign is the clearest example of how a team can shift from value to fairly priced as markets catch up. Before a ball was kicked, they were outsiders in outright markets at around 14/1 for the title, with Inter, Juventus and Milan all shorter, which meant early-season match prices sometimes reflected cautious expectations rather than the dominant side they became. Once Luciano Spalletti’s team established clear superiority—producing long winning and unbeaten runs and leading the table comfortably—the odds on their weekly fixtures tightened to the point where backing them on the 1X2 offered limited long-term edge unless you had very specific reasons to disagree with the implied probabilities. From a bettor’s perspective, Napoli “made money” mainly for those who recognised their emerging dominance early and either took outright positions or backed them heavily before the market fully re-rated them, rather than for those who followed them blindly at short prices late in the season.
Lazio and Atalanta: Under-Rated Contenders and High-Variance Opportunities
Lazio and Atalanta illustrated two different ways a side could become profitable. Lazio were 50/1 pre-season title outsiders and around 4/1 for a top-four finish, yet ended second with 74 points and the league’s best defensive record, conceding just 30 goals. Bettors who noticed early that Maurizio Sarri’s side combined efficient attacking with very strong defensive structure could find value in double-chance, win-to-nil and cautious handicap markets before prices caught up with their top-four trajectory. Atalanta, priced around 20/1 for the title and 7/4 for a top-four finish, offered a different sort of opportunity: their high xG attacking style and willingness to accept defensive risk created frequent overs and handicap wins, especially against weaker opposition. For experienced bettors, Atalanta’s volatility meant that correctly timing when to back or oppose them could be more profitable than supporting “safer” but more tightly priced favourites in every round.
How Pre-Season Odds Framed Value Paths
The contrast in pre-season odds shows why some teams naturally lent themselves to profitable strategies. Inter and Juventus started as clear favourites in the outright market, which implied that regular match odds would seldom be generous unless those clubs hit poor form; Napoli, Atalanta and Lazio, priced longer for the title and less certain for top four, had more room for positive surprises. Bettors who treated these prices as signals about where miscalibration was most likely—rather than as predictions carved in stone—could focus their analysis on sides that markets had rated cautiously, increasing the chance of finding profitable edges as the season unfolded.
Bologna and Torino: Mid-Table Sides That Rewarded Selective Backing
Among smaller clubs, Bologna and Torino were often cited by bettors as teams that “paid the bills” across 2022/23. Bologna finished ninth with 54 points and a +4 goal difference, while Torino ended tenth with 53 points and +1, showing that both sides competed consistently without being truly overmatched by stronger opponents. Because they lacked the brand power of the Milan clubs, Juventus or Roma, their match odds in certain fixtures—particularly at home against mid-table rivals or out-of-form big teams—sometimes underestimated their ability to avoid defeat or win outright. Bettors who systematically used +handicap, double chance or carefully chosen home-win positions with these sides often found that odds overstated the gap between them and more fashionable opponents, turning them into quiet season-long contributors to profit rather than headline stories.
Roma and Udinese: Metrics vs Market Perception
Roma and Udinese illustrate how teams with strong underlying numbers but mixed results can offer value in the hands of patient bettors. Mid-season analysis showed Roma combining very good defensive xGA with poor finishing—scoring 18 goals from 27.8 xG—which made them structurally better than their goal tally implied. Udinese, on the other hand, overperformed xG in attack but retained enough underlying quality to compete well against stronger teams, particularly early in the season when they produced a notable unbeaten run. In odds terms, Roma were sometimes priced as a frustrating, inconsistent side rather than one whose process was sound, allowing bettors to find value by backing them in cautious ways (e.g. draw-no-bet, under-related combos) while waiting for finishing to normalise. Udinese, in contrast, required careful timing: early-season prices underestimated their form and attacking cohesion, but as results drew attention, later odds tightened and value shrank.
Relegation Sides: Occasional Profits, Structural Red Flags
At the bottom end, Cremonese, Sampdoria, Spezia and Verona mostly functioned as warning signs rather than long-term profit engines. Cremonese and Sampdoria were identified as major xG underperformers, creating more than their goals totals suggested but struggling badly in conversion, while Spezia and Verona paired low scoring with heavy concessions. Bettors willing to take contrarian positions occasionally found value when markets priced these teams as hopeless in matches where their chance creation was better than the narrative implied—especially in home fixtures against direct rivals—but those opportunities were rare and required disciplined price sensitivity. Overall, relegation teams tended to “make money” only for those who opposed them in high-expectation roles or backed specific, carefully chosen spots rather than treating them as regular sources of positive returns.
How an Online Betting Site Influenced Which Teams “Made Money”
From a practical standpoint, the perception of which teams were profitable was shaped heavily by how odds and fixtures appeared on screen. On a typical online betting site, matches involving Napoli, Inter, Milan and Juventus took centre stage with dense market offerings and promotions, which encouraged bettors to focus their attention and stake there even when value was tight. By contrast, games featuring Bologna, Torino or Udinese—where pricing errors were more likely—often received less prominent placement, making them easier to overlook unless you approached the coupon with a clear, pre-defined plan. Bettors who explicitly targeted those “quieter” fixtures, cross-referencing odds with form and underlying metrics, frequently reported that their most reliable profits came from these less glamorous teams rather than from the headline matches that dominated the interface.
Structuring Your Season-Long Approach Through UFABET
For bettors using a single hub across multiple leagues, the choice of how to structure Serie A action can itself determine which teams end up “making money” for you. When you log into a service such as ufa168 เครดิตฟรี, the temptation is to follow whatever is most visible or currently in-play, turning betting into a sequence of one-off decisions. A more deliberate approach, informed by 2022/23 experience, is to set rules that tie specific team profiles to specific market types—Napoli and Atalanta mainly in totals and handicap scenarios when the numbers justify it, Bologna and Torino in double chance or +handicap spots, Roma in disciplined, process-based bets—and then track performance by team across the season. By reviewing which clubs actually contributed to your balance and which were consistent drains, you create your own list of “money-making” teams based on evidence rather than on memory.
Summary
Looking back at Serie A 2022/23 from a bettor’s perspective suggests that the teams which most often “made money” were not simply the highest in the table, but those whose odds lagged behind their true performance: Napoli early in the campaign before markets re-rated them, Lazio and Atalanta as under-valued or high-variance contenders, mid-table sides like Bologna and Torino whose resilience was quietly underpriced, and structurally solid but frustrating teams like Roma whose underlying metrics were better than results alone suggested. Relegation candidates occasionally offered profitable contrarian spots, but mostly served as reminders that long-term success comes from aligning prices with genuine edge, not from chasing large numbers on chronically weak sides. For future seasons, the practical lesson is to build and update your own list of profitable teams based on how odds, performance and your actual results intersect, rather than assuming that trophies and points alone define where value lives.
