BigHans says:
You mean you don't believe in the double reverse backdoor trap???

 

Very good questions.  I find myself guilty of what you mention.  Really the only concrete thing you can go on I think is line movement, which opens up a whole other can of worms.

 

 

BigHans says:
Van, Mac,

 

Do you guys believe that the oddsmakers set bad lines on purpose sometimes?  Or, maybe better explained, in some games do you think they intentionally set bait lines.  Im not saying this happens every game but the Philly/Zona line is an example of discussion.

 

Without getting into a big conspiracy scenario, I think that line was tailor made to get people to jump on Zona.  Your average Joe Public bettor took one look at Zona getting points against a team in dissaray like Philly and unloaded.  A professional wouldve looked that it was a wounded home team, playing at night, in the cold against a desert dome team on a short week having just played the Giants.  Add in the fact they had a QB with something to prove and Philly clearly was the "sharp" play.

 

part time public bettors saw points and jumped on Zona.  I do not know the exact percentages but the line did not move, indicating more bets on Zona since pros were clearly on Philly. 

 

Just food for thought, I agree with most of what you say Van.  Great thread by the way.

AirRainman says:
My favorite is when people on this sight say that everything says bet  "Team A", therefore I'm gonna side with Vegas and bet "Team B".

vanzack says:

To answer your question plainly - NO.

I believe that the books set a line to get 50% on each side.

And for every person like you who thought AZ was "tailor made" by the books to jump on, there is a person who thought the same exact thing about Philly.

Books dont set lines, you and me and the betting public set the lines.  Think about that.  That means that everyone has a different opinion, and as said above in this thread MONEY is what determines the line - yours, mine, and everyone elses - the book just wants a commission.

BigHans says:
Adding to that line, I think even if it had been a pickem or Zona a small favorite most average bettors still wouldve taken them.  How do I know this?  because when I first started betting and had zero clue what I was doing I know I wouldve been all over Zona.

 

So, being it is likely Zona wouldve gotten action regardless, I belive they set them as a dog to get even MORE of the smaller, public bets, because Philly was set up in a perfect situational spot which would only be seen by the experienced bettor.

 

Agree, disagree?

AChigurh says:
I believe sportsinsights and vegasinsider gather their information from various low class books.

I use it as a simple tool. I like playing numbers that are inflated by the public as long as they are not the "sharps" moving them. What do i mean by sharps? I believe that if vegasinsider reports 95% on the favorite and the line is droping then sharps are moving that. Anything below about 85% i will not even take into account. The information is to inaccurate and we do not know the line the percentage represented comes from because the info is gathered from various books with different spreads. Numbers that open around 3 and 7 i will not take public percentage into account for the previous reason. the difference between 2.5 and 3.5 is huge and books will vary with the spread so that will affect who the money is on obviously. anything above 7 is OK with me because of its deviation from 0. Anything above 90% as inaccurate and imprecise the numbers are, I feel gives enough "breathing room" to considerate it usable.

After all that i find statistical and subjective research will put you on those "sharp" sides before they start moving.

vanzack says:

Agreed, but the opening line is a PREDICTION of what will draw 50% on each side.  Sometimes they are wrong, but it is still us who set the lines. 

The opener is the prediction of what we will bet, and the closing number is what we actually did bet - and the better a book is at predicting what we will bet, the more money they make.

BigHans says:

Fair enough .  Part of the point I was trying to get at was regarding action, or moreover "anticpated action."  We may disagree but I think the linesmakers know from experience which types of players play which types of teams in certain scenarios.  Since the goal is equal action, is it possible there are games where they aniticipate heavy action on one side, and set the line thusly to even it out. 

Who knows, all I know is they are smarter than I am, but Im getting better.  By the way I wont argue with you anymore on this stuff cause you are way out of my league when it comes to the ins and outs of linemaking etc. 

vanzack says:

Not arguing - its all good discussion - and I am not out of anyones league on any of this - Im willing to listen to any opposing viewpoints - but as you can see nobody so far has attempted to explain something that is mentioned in every thread at covers - and that should tell you something.

My opinion is that books have lots to gain by matching action.  Its that simple.  They dont know more than you or I about who will win or by how much.  They are a broker of money.  If they do their jobs right, there is a ton of money to be made.  The average gambler wants to get rich quick, so they look for easy answers.  There are similar things regarding the stock market - people want to get rich so they go to a free seminar and buy some program that does nothing but chart stocks and has the same success as a dartboard - but plenty of people will swear by it.  Same thing as this.

PistolPete21 says:
If you want to know who the public is on, just click on a few posts in these forums.

 

I've seen posters assume that the Covers consensus is "sharper" than JoePublic's. Sorry to inform the faithful, but Covers is JoePublic. I've said this maybe 100 times, but I guess I'll say it again:

 

Why would sportsbooks sponsor a site that is capable of producing winners?

djbrow says:
Van:

 

I don't believe in fixed games that Vegas has clear knowledge of (the SMU, Zona State and ref scandals come to mind). But let me ask you this:

 

what it be theoretically possible for a book to have knowledge as to a fixed game and set a line to induce the non-suspecting public to bet a certain way? I mean, the money coming in from those that had knowledge of the fix could not outweigh the public money, right. I already know that the quick answer is you could not keep the fix secret, but it managed to work before in those major programs.....

 

Thoughts?

vanzack says:

I do agree that you can make assumptions about money bet on a game.  Certainly, Oklahoma had more money bet on them than OK ST.  It happens.  But can you or anyone tell me what the results are historically when a line move is significant?  I would think that would be in someones hip pocket who tracks line movement, but I have a lot of trouble getting these kinds of answers.

Another thing about line movement - there is a big difference in a line move on a monday than an hour before gametime.  Limits on openers are very small, and they will move openers very fast - as opposed to limits being 20X the opener limits - and they barely move with limit bets.  This is something that nobody really considers.  A 1k bet on a monday might move the line the same as a 50K bet on Sunday.  How does that figure in to this whole percentage thing?

vanzack says:

My opinion is that if this happens, it is WAY too small of a minority to be statistically significant.  Is it possible?  Sure.

But honestly, the one thing you are overlooking - and I think most overlook - is the incredible amount of SURE NO RISK money books can make by just doing their job.  They dont need fixes.  They dont need traps.  They dont need any of that, and I think the lack of understanding about just how much money a well run book can make by just matching action is what spawns all of these conspiracy theories.

briantabitha says:

 

Its called gambling folks!!! There are way too many variables.......Just find the best value and hope that LUCK is on your side. Trends, superstitions, traps, fixes are all a part of making people overthink games...IMO

BigHans says:
I have the answer.  Forget capping, and just fade Bill Simmons.  There we go.

MaineRoad says:
At the risk of avoiding all of the actual questions posed (several of which I have oft-wondered about myself), I can only say that when I see a game like SDSU/UNLV of two weeks ago, where everybody I know seems to be on UNLV, the "percentages" are north of 70 on UNLV, and everybody with an opinion on Covers is on UNLV, and I see the line move three points in the other direction, I'm certainly not going to bet into the teeth of that.  I don't know what it's all "telling me" aside from "get the hell off of Vegas, fatso." 

Ag-e81 says:
Boxing is a good exampleof that. I dont see it anywhere else though. Its like horseracing the horse or player will react different everyday to a lot of internal and external factors. I cant get myself to think that refs fix the game because there are toooo many things that go into the game. I think the sportsbooks try to mislead and get you going into a different direction with numbers. I dont see no evidence that supports game fixing in any TEAM sport

Ag-e81 says:
Like your answers. Its all about maximizing wins and minimizing losses. You have to lose before you can win to understand sportsbetting. Its not all about numbers you have have to pay attention. Like I said before its all about out working the oddsmakers. I guarantee if you put in the work and watch sports year after year you will make money. Lazy gamblers play with their heart and emotions, good gamblers use their brain and confidence.

bird_fidrych says:
I don't have time to read all the responses to the original post, but I glanced over them and didn't see any hard statistics. I have some so I will post them. It may take a couple posts to get all the info in.

I bet NHL and MLB solely based on betting percentages, line moves and odds comparisons.

Here is data from the 2007 MLB season: (using sportsinsights bet percentage data and pinnacle line moves)

>> Games where a min. of 67% of bets were on the fav and the line moved against the fav at least 8 cents -- Record 75-76, +26.2 units

>> Games where a min. of 70% of bets were on the fav and the line stayed +/- within 5 cents of opening price -- Record 109-112, +37.4 units

XXXXXXXX

2006-07 NHL Season (only have data for Dec-Mar using Sportsbook.com bet percentage and line moves)

>> Games where a min. of 70% of bets were on the fav and the line closed at least 8 cents below the fav's opening price, or games where a min. of 75% of bets were on the fav and the line closed at the same price it opened -- Record 38-45, +22.8 units

XXXXXXX

2007-08 NHL Season (entire season, using Sportsbook.com betting percentage and line move data)

>>Games where a min. of 70% of bets were on the fav and the line closed

at least 8 cents below the fav's opening price, or games where a min.

of 75% of bets were on the fav and the line closed at the same price it

opened -- Record 83-67, +62.8 units

Last hockey season was very good, a 55% winning percentage betting solely on underdogs. I don't have my numbers all organized for last baseball season yet, but I can tell you it basically only broke even. Maybe this is a sign that the market is correcting itself to these public consensus plays. The value may be gone in these plays after a couple years of consistent profit. I can post more specific data if anyone's interested.

ILL says:
Van, very good post.  Good to see someone provoke some useful discussion around here.  Anyway..

 

Fading the public (profitably) is a huge myth, yet for some reason tons of people swear by it.  There's even people who cap games only by looking at who the public is on.  Beleive it or not, there's been highly followed "cappers" on other forums who have got thousands of people to follow him because he tells them who the "public" is betting on.  (He claims to be a bookie)

 

Anyway, I've done some pretty extensive research on fading the public, etc., and I've found that there's really no way to do it profitably.  Some seasons the public does very well, others it hits below 50%.  Sometimes 75% will be on the home team, and that home team will cover by thirty, and vice versa.  It means nothing.

 

Here's my thinking:

 

The public likes favorites.

 

Vegas is very good at setting lines, historically yielding about a 50/50  favorite/dog cover ratio.

 

However, dogs seem to cover a little bit more often.  Why?  Because the public will generally pound favorites and the line will move and the dog will end up catching a hook or sometimes an extra couple of points, and in those instances they will cover a little more often.

 

 

So it looks like this:

 

Vegas makes a tight line --> public usually plays the favorite --> dogs might catch a few more points ---> dogs will find a few more covers = fading the public is profitable (not)

 

brooklyn1 says:
JUST see the line movement and thats who people bet on, most of the time.   you open a line and move to your money or move to WHO is betting..  say a sucker lays -5  you do nothing

                                a wise guy -5  you move to -6   

pjrez says:
Van or someone could probably answer this better than I can, but is it agreed that all casinos and online books move their lines the same way as some of the industry giants such as Pinny?  Regardless of their action? Within seconds of Pinny moving a line, many others follow suit.

 

If this is the case, there is no way that each and every one of these books is looking for "balanced" action. Line shoppers aren't hitting soft lines at each and every one of these books to get them in line with the Pinnys of the world. The software/casino manager is making that change.

WendysRox says:
I am in a hurry to get out of the office, but I wanted to post a short note about some of the issues I see being raised because I love the subject matter:

1)  Van, you raise an excellent point which I haven't seen addressed yet which is: let's assume the info is correct regarding betting percentages, then let's assume that since 80% is on one side, but the line is moving in that teams favor, that large money must be on the other side... assuming all that, what evidence do you have that $5000 bettors hit at a higher % than $25 bettors?

2) As for companies like sportsinsights getting this info from sportsbooks - who's to say they don't pay a heavy price for this info?  Hell, I think that if I were booking and some guy offered me enough money, I'd give him legitimate figures for a legitimate fee.

OK, I could be here for hours - I love this topic.  I better leave this for later tonight or tomorrow...

I will say, for what it's worth, I have faded the "public" when the percentages get over 90% in TOTALS plays on sportsbookspy with better than 50% success.  I have no exact numbers (I'll get something concrete for you later, since I know this is supposed to be supported by facts), however, I want to say I've done this maybe 7 or 8 times this season and if I've lost at all, it's only been 1 or 2 times.

vanzack says:
Stepped away for a couple of hours, going to try to get to everything....

First off is a couple of posts on the books that sportsinsights uses:

SIA.com
Wagerweb
Skybook
Betus
Carib
Sportbet
Sportsbook.com

Do I need to go any further?  Does one single pro in the world use any of those sportsbooks?  Lets assume for a minute that the numbers actually do come from these books as advertised - these books dont represent anything but the casual gambler.

Am I missing something here?

vanzack says:


Yes, you are correct.  Pinnacle moves a line, and the rest "move on air".

But that is anticipation of not getting one sided.  They know if they leave their line where it is, they will get blasted on one side.  If they move it, they will likely attract more balanced action. 

SuckerBet77 says:
The only true way to gauge where the money is going (not the # of picks, but the money) is to watch the line movement and make of it what you will. As has been stated here already, a professional gambler can wipe out thousands of "public" bets with one wager, so 80% on one side has no relativity.  I look at line movement and generally interpret early line movement as meaningful and late line movement as Joe Public throwing down last minute $20 bets.  Also, where the line lands around key numbers is generally pretty indicative, again with more credence given to early movement than late movement.
I share your doubt in the validity of the betting percentages because I firmly believe that books use these numbers to bait bettors into putting money where the book wants it.  In a sports book's perfect world the money would be perfectly split and they would reap the juice with no risk.  If they are laying 80% on one side of an event and they have an enormous risk, why would they broadcast that information?  In reality, they adjust the line to draw more wagers on the short side.  But I think of lot of uninformed bettors blindly look at a number like 80% and think everyone knows something they don't. 
Long story short, I wouldn't put any stock into betting percentages because, 1) They are controlled by the book, who wants your money, 2) Even if they are correct, who the hell knows what they mean?  Did 80% of the bettors put 25% of the money on a side with 20% of the bettors putting 75% of the money on the other?  If you don't know this then the numbers are not relative, and 3) As you said, I've never once seen a solid model for betting the percentages with any metrics for success.

vanzack says:
MRAT 

I am very impressed.  Sounds like you are someone we could all learn a lot from.  I like your perspective, especially this:

They mean nothing at all. They are just like the stats on this page.

They are one of many things that suck people into betting with the

thought of making money off it. Its just another stat. And at

transforming stats into winners, bookies are unbeatable... There is no

number that you can come up with that no bookie knows.

That really struck me and made me think about it a little bit differently, but also proved my point a little bit more.  I never thought of it as just another stat - but that makes sense to me.

I think where people go wrong is in their interpretation of these numbers.  It is so widespread here.  And to further your point, you see one person who sees 75% on one side saying "fade the public" and someone else who says "Im following the steam" but neither of them have any backing for what they are talking about - they simply are guessing.  Its the lazy gambler get rich quick mentality of not taking the time to actually analyze the data to see if what they are assuming is actually correct.

The rest of what you say I also agree with 100%.  I agree that people who bet more dont necessarily win more, and your breakdown of gamblers in general is something I have also stated here many times with some minor differences.

I hope you post here more.  This place needs more grey matter.

pjrez says:

To play devils advocate, they would only "get blasted" until their action was equal (ultimately their goal) then move the line appropriately to get even money and wouldn't have a care in the world what the competition was doing down the street.

PistolPete21 says:
mrat,

 

I have heard that those who make money do so by "making a stand" on a given game. They accept the fact they'll be around 50% in picking games. What makes them pros, though, is their ability to single out those big winners and just go large on them.

 

This seems to depart from what you have stated above--that is, that pros make their profits by middling numbers. That would seem to suggest that pro's don't even need to know the teams, that they would just need to be good at anticipating line moves?

vanzack says:


But because down the street does indeed exist - if you didnt move with them - you open yourself up to the worst possible scenario - the middle or arbitrage.  If pinnacle is at -4, and you are at -3, you are going to get maxed out all day until you go up and match them, and then there is no guarantee that +4 is going to get you enough to match your action, and even then you have opened yourself up to a middle on the spread.

It just seems to me that you are avoiding the ultimate risk by moving on air.  You know for a fact if you dont move that you will be one sided - and by moving - and everyone moving - you are willing to possibly forego having totally matched action but you give up the risk of definitely having non-matched action.

Im just speculating here - I have never run a book or been involved on the other side - but that is my observation and assumption.

pjrez says:

I believe sports insights just tracks % of wagers made.  I don't think they claim to have any monetary figures.  Not sure if that makes their info better, worse, just as insignificant?  But it WOULD negate the presumption that bigger plays means smarter plays.

Ace77 says:
vanzack



Americans who cannot make a bet without mentioning the following,betting percentages,the fix is in,fishy line,trap game,reverse back extension roll line movement,fade the public,square bettors,

madrice1 says:

vanzack says:

There is one thing I know for sure in this whole thread:

Getting the best line consistently is the biggest determinant of longterm success, and it is what good books like Pinnacle use to rate players.  Pinnacle doesnt care if you win or lose (short term), they care if you consistently get the best line because they know longterm you will win.

m15525 says:
The betting percentages are just 1 piece of information (they are not the only piece of information). The odds makers do this for a living, they know everything about every team, every coach, every city  and referee. They also have software that dates back to the beginning of time that tells them when certain teams play who the public backs, who they are likely to back now, how travel affects teams, amazing hone field advantage numbers...blah..blah...blah..) In addition to this software they have game simulators that predict outcomes.

The bottom line is that once a point spread move occurs the value is almost always lost, so if your not the one making the move your opportunity is lost.

BTW a change in wind speed, wind direction, bad sod (loose grass) kicked up in warm-ups from bad weather the night before...any of this stuff could be the cause of a line move...its not always sharp action 1005 of the time...assuming anythng else is flat out dangerous...

Use the percentages as a handicapping tool or place to start (like 10% of your opinion) but nothing more.

FYI..I think you will find more times then not...that you can pretty much guess where everyone is going to be on a game anyway. Its human nature to bet on the favorite and over.

Not many people have the balls to bet on the worse team...At the end of the day, the book is going to be holding the opposite side of the bet tickets. Te books generally know damn well most of the time who they are going to need to cover before the lines ever get posted.  truth be told anyone reading this post probably knows too.

cacabware says:

 

empire13 says:
mrat -  Please post here more often .

 

 

Vanzack - Thank you for making this thread . This is the type of thread that should be on the frontpage of a main forum on covers . Great stuff as always bro .

 

 

pistol pete - Good stuff from you as well . Getting the best number is the most important factor for long term success .

 

 

 

 

bopelinisucks says:
well, i believe that as a whole, this site has lost some of its luster.  There are so many posters on here that pick every game on Sunday and post "good luck" in everyone elses' thread just to get numbers up.  i know that it is my responsibility to just ignore these people, but it is hughly annoying and I need to get that off of my chest.  People that have joined in September of 2008 and have 2000 posts, annoy me.  Sorry I am venting but getting to your point,  this site doesn't have the skilled cappers that it once had.  More and more people using thes falsehoods and stupid percentages that other sites are trying to charge you for rather than capping the game with your own knowledge and gut. 

the shambler says:
oh and if there are bait lines how does one explain why on earth the line was -5 for SD this week.

 

 I read a few places people saying take S.D because the line is fishy and Vegas is begging you to take Atlanta.  Again it has to do with perception. Atlanta would have been favored or at most been +3 had they not been a small market team. 

 

Teams like Dallas,N.E, Indy,S.D, NYG are always sexy teams for people to play on and therefore it is harder to find good value when backing these teams.Linesmakers will add on additional points on these teams.

 

 Same goes for all the big name teams whether it is pro or college

the shambler says:

 

Well Said ....Too many losers that have nothing to say except those stupid

and it just makes people .

don't you just want to them?

Seriously though what a waste of space. I hate those posts

I think this is the first or second tme I have used those emoticons.Usually those are the same goofs that will bash a good capper when they lose 1 game

PistolPete21 says:
It appears to me to be more and more evident that the road to profits is more easily attainable once one accepts his limitation of picking <55% and instead, searches for the best possible number/scalps/middles.

 

To do this, there's a certain amount of humility one needs to adopt. I'm not sure there's a more egotistical bastard than a capper who thinks he can consistently hit 55%+ year in and year out. Shed this ego and maybe stop shedding profits

PistolPete21 says:
And just one more thing about the above: I think it's almost a preferable approach to handicapping. It focuses less on the inherent subjectivty of the process and manages to install some semblance of scientificness to the practice. When you're consistently hunting for the best number, it becomes more of an art than traditional handicapping is.

 

If you ask me, this practice is more preferable than floundering amid stats, betting percentages, tout picks, etc. You don't need to watch a bevy of games to do this. You don't need to read press clippings left and right. You don't need to spend years going back and forth with someone who just signed up a month ago and has 5 total posts.

 

GL to everyone.

glyde69 says:
I don't know where these numbers come from, but I believe they are fairly close to being legit.  At the end of the day, I don't think the books give a flying shit about disclosing that information.  Does anyone truly believe that blindly fading the public is a winning strategy to begin with?  Even if it was a winning strategy, don't you think that the millions of suckers betting parlays, reverses, and teasers would STILL find a way to muck it up and lose money?  Out the millions of dopes out there, what percentage of them even fucking know what the term "public" means?  This covers community is a very vocal minority in a big world of gamblers.

 

Theres a couple of reasons why I believe the percentages to be somewhat close to what people are betting.  The first reason is myself.  Every week I can pretty much nail the opening lines, and every week I can pretty much tell you in advance what the sheep are going to flock to.  These percentages that some sites give out almost always coincide with what I am thinking.  Now I'm no sports messiah.  I'm just a guy who has some experience.  The second reason is two different office pools I am in.  One has 50+ guys, the other has 27 guys.  Believe it or not, those pools are very accurate to what Joe Schmo is betting, and those pool numbers are usually in the ballpark to something like the percentages a site like Sports Insights releases.  The last reason is a friend of mine.  Lets just say he takes some considerable action and over the last 15 years or so, he has always let me pick his brain(or his guys brains) for figures and such.  He has squares, he has sharps, he $20 bettors, he has $10,000 a game bettors.  Looking over what these guys do on a weekly basis is usually fairly close to these public percentages.

 

Wow, I'm babbling.

 

I also believe in Vegas looking for 50-50 on each side.  Anything else just doesn't make sense.  While I firmly believe that, I still think there are a few choice games through the year where the "powers that be" do set a trap.  It's not often, but it does happen.  MY OPINION. I don't know.  You got a group of highly paid guys(the big dawg oddsmakers from Vegas/Pinnicle etc) who once a month or so find a high profile game where they all agree on an outcome that may not be so obvious to Joe Schmo.  They take a shot.  IT SEEMS PLAUSIBLE TO ME.  Please note I strongly strongly believe that 99.9% of games are by the book and looking for even money to clean up on the vig, but I would be naive to think that maybe 4 or 5 times a football season these casinos/books don't take a shot.

 

Sorry if this is disjointed.  I'm too fucking tired to look back at what the hell I wrote.

14daroad says:
By the way, this is at least the 3rd time vanzack has started a thread like this framing the question in a shamelessly dishonest fashion.
That is, pretending that anyone is claiming if you bet against the public in every instance you will win.

Vanzack does not want to be convinced. And that is ok, but why not just say "I don't believe it and never will" and be done with it?

vanzack says:

Sorry pal, those are not listed above in the info by sportsinsights.

Where does pinnacle give any of this info out?  Please show me.

I was quoting the above listed sportsbooks in this thread quoted from sportsinsights themselves.  Please tell me where you can get this info from the 3 books you list.

DiscoD69 says:

van,

I've been monitoring reverse line movement for a while, just to see if there is anything there...I've only recently started noting the results, and will now keep them for refrence. I could not find them all but I found what I've noted from week 5 on. (PS - the biggest problem I have is qualifying a game as having 'reverse line movement' with any type of exact science. I stated at looking at anything with 60% or more, but have tried to note anything at 51%)

week 5: 2-3

week 6: 2-2

week 7: 2-0

week 8: 2-0 (or 2-0-1)

week 9: 5-2

week 10: 2-1

week 11: 2-2

week 12: 1-4-1

week 13: 0-1

Overall (blindly it's 18-14-2), but this is a very small sample size, just from my notes, and I'm still in the midst of determining what conditions must be met for a game to have reverse line movement...

DiscoD69 says:
sorry week 8 should be:

 

2-0 (or 1-0-1)

DiscoD69 says:

From SI: (FAQ)

How is the "number of bets" statistic calculated?
The number of bets placed is tracked on live odds page. It should be used to help users judge the quality of this information. An average size sportsbook will take at least 1,000 bet items for any major pro sporting event (conservative number). The "number of bets" statistic is the total number of bets placed on that game. Bet items include any wager on the spread, moneyline, parlay, teaser, or O/U. SportsInsights.com gathers the "number of bets" stats from Skybook.com, BetUs, and CaribSports ONLY. The other sportsbooks DO NOT provide us with the "number of bets" info. Estimated handle size of each sportsbook from largest to smallest,  Sportsbook.com > BetUs > Sports Interaction > Skybook > Carib > Wagerweb > Sportbet.

This is very important to note

 

PS - Pokin I also did not see those books on the list

DirtPro13 says:
Vanzack - I don't know why you keep raising a question year after year on a topic you know the answer to. There always have been and always will be people who want the action and excitement of wagering but either don't know how and/or don't want to take the time to learn how to make informed picks. The vast majority of "gamblers" play games every day which is all the evidence you need to tell you that they are in it for the action and not to win money. There are people on this site who reload every week and bet it all only to lose and keep that cycle going. That is their business, not mine and not yours. I think you do this to try and embarass or expose the novices, the lazy, the ignorant and the born losers. What I don't know is what you get out of it. Why not write more blogs sharing your knowlege and experiences? It'd be much more interesting than this dead horse.

MJ2345 says:
 Also i have said this b4.You should use line movements along with other things like handicapping,trends etc..

 

DiscoD69 says:
I agree Skipster.

 

overall 50/50 is no risk low reward...taking a side in that situation is medium risk, very high reward...as mentioned before, these books are a business, and are thinking about the bottime line. They are also very experienced...thinking they won't try to use their knowledge against us is naiive.

 

Even if they get hosed on one game or even a couple...in the long run, they're better cappers, and don't give gifts away..."if a line looks to good to be true, it usually is"

jkochvar says:
You guys must remember that no matter how much Vegas's casinos, sportsbooks, the LVSC and other cappers know, a betting line always has a 50/50 chance of hitting.

Statistically, and therefore of economic importance, the book wants to live off of juice.  It is their livelihood.  They do realize that due to public favoritism, they will be unable to keep all games close to this proportion.  But those games with such heavy sided action, as with all others, are still subject to hitting at a 50/50 ratio. Therefore, over time, these "out of hand pockets" even out and the book continues to operate primarily off of juice.

It's as simple as the most fundamental economic strategies my friends

str8_chaser says:
wagerline is not the same as sportsinsights but it is surprisingly similar.  hopefully that is somewhat informative.

VegasMaxx says:
this is laughable.  if you think pinnacle is going to rate you a good player and move the line accordingly(and let you keep betting) you are wrong.  if you are sharp and win substanial money you will be banned.  your account will be froze and you will call them up and say wtf and they will simply say they dont want your action.  that goes for every offshore and every casino,  ask billy baxter

mrat says:

Good morning,

first of all thanks VGPOP and Vanzack for the warm welcome. I didnt expect that my post would even be recognized, let alone be answered like that. I didnt read everything in here (I have a big problem reading big chunks of foreign language text without any punctuation and free lines, and theres plenty of it), so sorry if I talk about something that has already been talked about.

Let me answer some of your questions.

PistolPete: "This seems to depart from what you have stated above--that is, that pros make their profits by middling numbers. That would seem to suggest that pro's don't even need to know the teams, that they would just need to be good at anticipating line moves?"

I didnt fully explain that, sorry... there are actually two kind of "pro" bettors' bets. The "real" bets are the "big ones", the right picks at the right time. Those are the ones where in-depth knowledge of the game is vital. The others rely solely on the mathematial background of betting, ie predicting line moves correctly (known as middling).

So, they dont win at a higher percentage... they just cut their losses whenever it is possible.


As for the "knowing the game" part: Yes and no.

Sure, you have to know the game. If you just look at the stats, see the immortal LA Lakers at +3.5 and bet everything you have on them because you see nothing that could get you out of it and they have only one injured player, some backup player you never heard of named Kobe Bryant, you actually shouldnt bet. So, yes, this kind of knowledge is essential.

Too much of it distracts you, tho. A quick example: Watch some TV specials like "Rick Nash at home" or read the blogs of ATP (Pro Tennis) players on their page. None of these guys actually see the kind of sport they do as their hobby... they have other things to do when theyre not playing.

Sure, all of them became big in their sports because they loved a specific game, collected every article about it, watched every minute of it on TV, played it 10 hours a day as a kid and so on. As soon as they got professionals, they had to leave that behind. You can make your hobby your job, but you can never have your job as a hobby.


Thats the same for bettors. If you own a Reggie Wayne jersey and love rooting for the Colts with your friends and a sixpack, stay with it. Watch the games, have some bets for excitement to go with. If you win, tell the whole world about how great you (and the Colts) are with a funny "Colts Rule" hat at work on monday or with some useless forum posts like OMG I AM 11-3 LAST 13; IM ON FIRE!!!. Its your hobby. You will win some, lose some more and waste your time/have some fun, end of the story. Just dont tell anyone you are a "pro bettor" just because you know the starting center's middle name and you won a 3-team parlay once. That just doesnt seperate you from millions out there doing the same thing every sunday.

If you want to make money, watch the games alone, no beer, no rooting. Write down things you might need (FG was defensive mistake, rushing defense looks better than the numbers say, ...) Dont come online telling total strangers how impressive your betting is. Do it just for yourself. No one profits off the things you do.

Dont fall into the "you can find the edge if you look hard enough" trap. You dont need 2 hours of strange calculations per game. If you have an objective point of view, you will know a) who most likely wins, b) who the public thinks wins and c) how bookies set the lines according to these facts. As a result, you will be able to place bets. No need to hide in a dark room behind paper stacks, talking about traps and reverse traps on an internet board like the crazy mathmatician in A Beautiful Mind... that will get you nowhere.


As for staying here and contributing more... I dont like forums stuffed with threads by 12-year-olds screaming at me (LOCK OF THE CENTURY, I GET YOU TO THE PROMISED LAND) and containing picks without any information or with the usual nonsense ("Teams from a city with an odd number of mayors in the last 17 years are 8-1 ATS last 9 when playing with a linebacker whose mother is divorced"). I got hit by some of these right after I first came here and only replied to this thread because this mentioned friend of mine dragged me into it.

This board contains some valuable help for bettors, but unfortunately theres enough that distracts from it, too. If theres any way to share my thoughts with those who actually think about the things behind betting, I will gladly stay in contact with you. Otherwise, good luck with your search for answers.

Marty

Diamondjake says:
One interesting comment I read from Dan Gordon who wrote a book called Beat The Sports Books (An insiders guide to beating the NFL). Its a good book on how he beats the NFL. Very in depth. What Dan says is that he looks early Monday for favorable lines and puts his plays down....if he holds out on some games thinking the line will go in his favor and he is wrong and the line moves against him the game is off the board. Of course Dan determines his own lines and see the spread as not what Vegas thinks the score will be but rather a number set to get action on both side. But never betting into a number going the wrong way is a concept used Dan that makes since if you are a professional in it for the long haul with no emotion or could care less about action. This is not me or 99% of the people on Covers in my opinion.

Livan33 says:
Damnit, I hate it when that happens.

C-Pu says:
I base a lot of my handicapping on public percentages and line movement. No matter how much I may like a particular game, if the public and the line movement don't agree with my, for lack of a better word, system, then I lay off.

I say I bet against public percentages, that doesn't mean that I go to Covers/Vegas Insider/TheSpread and check the percentages, then simply pound the other side. Checking the percentages, for me, is just the tip of the iceberg.

I look at the percentages on certain games to give me some direction in the 2nd step of my process.

For this step, I go on various handicapping message boards and read what people are playing. So now, whether the numbers that these services are providing can be validated. It's fair enough that Vegas Insider has 95% on the Nets tonight, but if I read through 50 posts and I don't see one person playing the Nets, I know that this is not a 'major public play'.

When reading capper's post, you can often tell 'public bettor' from a savvy bettor. The public bettor will roll out a card with 6 favorites and 5 OVERs, night in night out. So I look at what that capper is taking, then I try to poll as many of this type of capper as possible.

I now consider myself to have a general idea of what the 'squares' like on that particular night. I then start(continue) to watch the lines, looking to see if I can get some movement in the opposite direction for one of the 'major public plays'.

I know saying I watch the lines is rather vague. Most sportsbooks have varying lines and all sportsbooks have different demographic of cappers. However, for watching line movement, there is no better place to watch than at a quality sportsbook with high limits. You know that thier line movement is often caused by 'steam' and they're moving the line to cover their ass from getting hammered again.

So I continually check 1 or 2 quality sportsbooks until 10 minutes prior to the game closing. I make decisions based on the public percentages/line movement, then I journey over to a 'not so savvy' sportsbook to place my bets with better lines.

It must be noted, this strategy has been shaky recently, public bets have been cashing like never before.

I don't have any hard figures for the rate at which I win, however, I win.

C-Pu says:
I mainly use TheGreek, they're an old fashioned sportsbook with high limits.

There are a few others I trust, but not at the same level. I like using Pinnacle as well, not that I consider them a great book, but they give smaller indications of line movement because they don't just offer multiples of 5 as their juice. That being, they give lines like -108 or -117.

andarmac99 says:


Mine as well.     ^^^

MoneylineMan says:
I for one, have always thought that sportsinsights has false numbers, imo, there is no way these sportsbooks are giving a site real numbers!

vanzack says:

And thanks to you for posting your stats - you are one of the very few who could or would.

Do you think that you are on to a continuing trend in MLB and NHL or do you think it is just something fluky that worked for a couple of years?  In other words - is it sustainable - or what I call "retrofit statistics" - looking back on any historical data you can find trends - but are they trends that continue or just trends in that set of data points?

Thanks again for your input in this thread.  I am more convinced than ever that these numbers are used (or misused) by people who have no idea what to do with them - and no justification for what they are using them for.  Except for you - there is no post in this thread with actual stats that show a positive history for NFL or NCAAF - but still if you look in the forum everyone throws around these numbers.

I understand the point above about it just being another stat - but imagine if you had a stat that was kept regarding teams that win with the most green eyes on their team - and you had no frame of reference as to what that even means.  I have a feeling that the same people at covers would say things like "Tampa has 24 green eyed players, and Buffalo only 20, Im taking Tampa".  Maybe a bad example - but my point is that if you have statistic with no frame of reference of significance - how can you base anything off of it?

Thanks for your input in this thread.

VegasMaxx says:
Not trying to sound like a dick but offshores, pinnacle included will cut players off and tell them they dont want their action much in the same way casino's treat card counters.  Has happened to several people i know.

VegasMaxx says:
bet u a dollar van, post next time u coming to vegas and i'll introduce you to 2 or 3 of them.  greek george and danny to name two of the top of my head if you're familiar with high stakes poker action players you will know who im talking about.

vanzack says:
Vegas maxx - it will be worth the dollar for me to see it because I have never heard of a player getting banned for any reason at pinnacle other than obvious cheating.

 

I think we will have to agree to disagree until a later date....

 

C-Pu says:
Fact of the matter is, when you see a line like Portland Trailblazers -6.5 vs New York Knicks. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out where the public percentage will lie.

I don't think many squares will look at that game and think, well D'Antoni's up pace system could give the Blazers some fits, especially if they aren't shooting well. If the Knicks could get some hustle points they could catch the Blazers in a let down spot. The Blazers are coming off two big wins vs NO and Det, they'll soon have to face Boston. Not to mention the Knicks have been reasonably successful at home.

I don't need to see any percentages on this game.

ownedbymerc says:
I think its safe to say that the legitimacy of the percentages released by sportsinsights and others is mildly irrelevant.  Whether the numbers were real or not, no one has ever been able to produce a long-term winning system from these percentages.

 

What they WERE able to produce however, is a bunch of people who will bet on ANY game that met certain characteristics based on these numbers.   The numbers create additional ACTION.

 

So really, if I were the books I'd release my numbers (in aggregate) for free.  Hell, I'd want people to look at those numbers if they thought it gave them an edge.  Because once someone thinks they have an edge, they're going to double or triple their 'comfortable' betting amounts...

 

VegasMaxx says:
I'd bet if you had 50 years of data from sportsinsights and put them in the hads of a guy like nate silver he'd come up with a long term winning system based the percentages and line moves.(for baseball)

AJLightning says:
great stuff...between working and reading this thread, which has took all day, basically out of ALL that I got: 1) get the early lines for value. 2) think long, think wrong

MJ2345 says:
Linemovements are important if used right as "part" of  determining the right side along with handicapping,weather,trends etc... 

 

The funny thing about sportsinsights is that their numbers are right on along with my friend who has 100 customers.So yes i do think those  numbers are pretty much correct but i don't know how they are doing it because along with most i can't see offshores etc.. just giving them their mumbers but who knows maybe they are.

 

seriousdope says:
.10 or 10% is alot over time it doesnt matter what you bet you basicly lose juice and the books bankroll is never busted but yours can good luck

cd329 says:

heres another thing you arent taking into consideration.  Even if the numbers were legit on these consensus sites, you have no way of actually know which lines moved because of smart money and which lines moved because of dumb bettors with large amounts of money. 

Another thing is the fact that sharp bettors arent all going to line up on the same games everyday.  In every game on the board you are going to have some sharps on one side and some sharps on the other side.  This could kill a bettor trying to follow sharp money, because you could endup playing alot of wrong sides.

Lastly the best way to get real numbers is to know somebody in a sportsbook who could supply you with real info and could also tell you that sharp bettor Joe who wins more games then he loses is betting this team.  Then you can make some money.

When these site all first came out, i myself was a believer in them and then i finally realized these numbers are all bogus, designed to make bettors believe they have found the golden goose.  In fact what these sites have now accomplished is they have gotton alot of bettors to stop spending time actually capping games and instead just use these numbers to pick their plays.

Look at it this way, if you owned a sportsbook would you want to give these numbers away?  If your a smart sportsbook owner your answer would be no.

You dont see Bill Gates giving away his code for the windows system, nor do you see kentucky fried chicken giving away their chicken recipe even thou the majority of people would bother making the recipe anyways.   Its just smart business not to give your secrets away no matter what type of business you own

str8_chaser says:
no one has addressed this concept directly so i am reposting it

assuming Sportsinsights posts real

numbers from the low tier books (squares), and that 80% of gamblers

lose their money, wouldn't fading very popular picks from these people

be profitable in the long run?

this also assumes that the 80%

losers do so not because of bad money management and stupid parlays but

by routinely picking losers.  i think this might be the problem with

the whole concept because money management probably kills more accounts

than anything.

but if those assumptions are correct, this would mean a  slow advantage in the long run.

thoughts?

redskinsnut says:
bmoose-  Very interesting take.  I must admit it makes a lot of sense.  Kinda makes you want to just stop gambling though.  What fun is that?  

sean2114 says:
1. Where does a company like sportsinsights get their numbers?

a select group of sportsbooks who most likely charge them a fee to have access to their databases.

2. Why would any sportsbook give up to sportsinsights (or anyone like them) any information about betting patterns?

sportsbooks will put out them nevers online to suck the average joe into betting with the heavy percentages, i have seen it pharsed "new to betting, see what the rest of our clients are betting on." they are attempting to get the squares to stick together. now will some others use this info to their advantage, yes but I am sure they are charging sportsinsights to access that data and I am sure they are picking up enough people to follow the high percentage plays that they are making money.

3. What type of sportsbook gives up these numbers? If crappy sportsbooks with 500 dolar limits are the main contributors, what good is that? Does pinnacle really give out these numbers? Try walking up to a Vegas sportsbook and ask the manager about their handle - let me know what they say....

strictly online sportsbooks, i highly doubt like you suggest vegas is giving out these numbers.

4. Think about the business model of sportsinsights. Spread a popular belief that you know more than the average gambler, then charge for that info - sounds a lot like a tout in different clothes if you ask me. Explain sportsinsights motivation to be forthright in any capacity.

it is a touting service, no argument here. it goes to trust, sportsinisights free verison is on a 20 min delay and only gives you spread and ml details, so it is only showing half of the picture, but the reason to keep that data true is because it builds trust among the free users, it just makes the sales pitch easier if you are giving truthfully information, trying selling your pitch when the user knows you are giving them wrong info initially, why would they trust you and pay for more information that may or may not be wrong.

5. Assuming the numbers are real, and from a real sporstbook, and from legitimate sportsbooks - what do they mean? What - specifically - do you do with them and why would that make any sense?

they can alert you of potential trap situations. i have been looking at these for a few years now trust most games that seem like a trap usually have a strong reasoning why they look like a trap? i.e. Arizona + 3 was refered to earlier, another poster said that a year ago he would have unloaded on the Cards but why did you like philly, well i took philly because i didn't expect them to be laying 3 at home in there situation. so when i saw that i began to research the game and problem solve as to why they were laying 3, well Kurt Warner has tradationally struggled in cold weather, he has tradationally struggle against teams who have complicated bltizing schemes, they were coming off a emotional home loss to the giants on short rest and have struggled mightly on the road this year. so it just helps you to think about things and look deeper into why that line might be set where it is.

6. Do people who bet more money win at a higher percentage than those who dont bet as much?

yes and no, just because you bet more money doesn't mean your a sharp bettor, charles barkley could go lay 20 grand on the chargers on thursday and that doesn't mean that the chargers are the sharp play. but there is a small group of people that are sharps that make money sports betting by making big wagers on fewer games, they pick their spots and lay down maybe 50 bets a year, the word sharp and "sharps are on this play" is undoubtly vastly overused around this forum.

7. Please provide any history, statistics, or a model of when to use the numbers and how. Not a vage answer - but specifics - with backup. Example: When a team is 80% or higher, and the line has moved 1 point in the opposite direction, that team wins at a 58.5% rate over the past 5 years.

this i don't have nor i am sure where i could go get it from, this is where half of the people quit this theory and say its bull and walk away and this is where the other half hang on and believe because they have seen results and it makes sense, everyone in this world is one of those two types, type 1 needs to see the evidence and wants to see proof, type 2 is a theorist, they like theories and don't need real data or stats with they think they are right. just two schools of thoughts that all, know debating which one is right or wrong is ultimately going to get you nowhere because you are asking people to leap to the opposite of the way they think.

bird_fidrych says:
Str8chaser,

I would say, 80% of bettors lose money not because they "pick losers" necessarily, but because they think alike. In sports betting markets, as in financial markets, you pay a premium for following the herd.

As someone posted above, linesmakers are easily able to predict which games/teams the public will jump on each week, and they inflate lines against them. They are not able to inflate the lines as much in the NFL and NBA because there are so many professional/syndicate bettors who will jump on line value and make limit bets (and the limits are bigger generally in NFL and NBA than MLB, NHL).

So the markets in the NFL and NBA end up being pretty efficient, in my opinion. And that is basically what bmoose11 is saying above.

Here's what I think:
MLB and NHL lines are easier to beat because there are fewer professional/syndicate bettors who will lay huge sums of money in the interest of line value (maybe because betting limits are generally lower in these sports). With less force pushing back against linesmakers desire to inflate lines against the public, it creates a situation where prices on certain favorites can continue to be out of step with reality as long as the public is in love with them.

Here's what I know:
I've personally profited about 150 units over the last two years selectively fading public consensus plays in MLB and the NHL. Those are real bets that I made and cashed, not some trend that I went back and uncovered in hindsight. I have no doubt the value in this strategy is slowly leaking away and will become more inconsistent as more people catch on to it. But it has worked and it was not a fluke.

My final thought on this is that people who make betting decisions solely based on public betting percentages in the NFL and NBA are not making wise decisions. I don't think the profit is there (once the vig is figured in) and str8chasers numbers back that up. On the other hand, if you are routinely on the same side of heavy consensus plays, you're chances of turning a profit are even slimmer. If you want to have any chance of turning a long-term profit in the NFL, you would have to either A) uncover meaningful trends/situations the betting public is unaware of, or B) have access to inside information (ie sources in the training room, knowledge of player's personal lives, etc.)

str8_chaser says:

i think i agree with all of this

bird_fidrych says:
poor rich guy?

that should read dumb poor guy. sorry.

mkan20 says:

I know if I am running a book, theres no way i would give out accurate information that shows what % of people are betting on what particular event.  Plus, I don't think we should take the numbers we see for having any value because most of the people who bet on sports are doing it on impulse or simply for casual fun.  This whole discussion reminds me of the electronic board at the roulette tables.  It shows the past numbers so people will be enticed to guess (and wager) a possible trend.  Its simply to create action.  Just my thoughts right or wrong.   

MJ2345 says:
So the key is SELECTIVELY fading the public when most everything lines up.Not just looking at sportsinsights numbers and plain fade the numbers WILL NOT WORK.But using it as a tool with other factors at your disposal does work.Again i don't know how sportsinsights do it but their numbers are close to the percentages what real books have or at least real books i know

vanzack says:

And once again, this post and the post  you made right after this one are EXACTLY WHAT I AM NOT LOOKING FOR.

This is the definition of anecdotal personal experience evidence - not a single statistic to back up what you state - and actually saying "using it as a tool" without telling us HOW to use it as a tool.

 

14daroad says:


Um, register for an account and login. You can select the books you want to see the %'s on.

14daroad says:
For example, in college football right now:

Sports Insights has 64% on Rutgers.
sportsbook.com has 67% on Rutgers

A lot of the others are more disparate but they will trend in the same direction as the game approach.

MJ2345 says:

bird,

I think he was talking about my 2 posts!

malibusurfer says:
i would go sharp.  public is at Target right now.

chodya says:
 

1.  Where does a company like sportsinsights get their numbers?

     There is a program to import the numbers from different sites.

 

2.  Why would any sportsbook give up to sportsinsights (or anyone like them) any information about betting patterns?

Information makes people actually feel good about their bets?

lots of people like better with the public trend?

 

3.  What type of sportsbook gives up these numbers?  If crappy sportsbooks with 500 dolar limits are the main contributors, what good is that?  Does pinnacle really give out these numbers?  Try walking up to a Vegas sportsbook and ask the manager about their handle - let me know what they say....

Cant compare sportsbooks in vegas with online books.

 

4.  Think about the business model of sportsinsights.  Spread a popular belief that you know more than the average gambler, then charge for that info - sounds a lot like a tout in different clothes if you ask me.  Explain sportsinsights motivation to be forthright in any capacity.

 

5.  Assuming the numbers are real, and from a real sporstbook, and from legitimate sportsbooks - what do they mean?  What - specifically - do you do with them and why would that make any sense?

 

6.  Do people who bet more money win at a higher percentage than those who dont bet as much?

 

7.  Please provide any history, statistics, or a model of when to use the numbers and how.  Not a vage answer - but specifics - with backup.  Example:  When a team is 80% or higher, and the line has moved 1 point in the opposite direction, that team wins at a 58.5% rate over the past 5 years.

 

I got bored after the 3 question... How long did it take you to actually think about this?   Wait.... How do you have this much time in life anyway?

Allbutbroke says:

Thanks for the clarification........how can this be your job because the picks you post do not result in profit earned?  I ask that seriously.

DiscoD69 says:

Van, here is where I think using SI is useful, especially given some of the points raised by various people in this thread.

CIN/IND: Pinny opened at -14 and is showing 70% on IND. The current line is -13.5 (+103), CIN is (-111).

Now, there is no way "the rich kid" or casual better with lots of money is picking the 1-10-1 Bengals against the resurging Manning led Colts. IMO, that has to be sharp money keeping that line BELOW the key # of 14, opposite one of the most public teams we've ever seen.

This is an example of where SI & this method can be useful.

MJ2345 says:

Disco,

Good posts!

DiscoD69 says:

That's the point! There is no formula or system...stop asking for one. You use it as you would use any stat or trend or anything...objectively.

Thats why the books report it! Because people use it with their own oppinions. People will draw conclusions for BOTH sides.

Like, you're basically saying if some1 can't provide me with concrete evidence that looking at PPG (or any stat) will give you 100% winning system then there is no point at looking at it. 

Yes I'm making assumptions, that's part of what capping is about. So let me ask you this: If it's not sharp money on the bengals, then the books don't care if people are on the Colts, so either way I lean Cincy. Agree or disagree?

bird_fidrych says:
Disco,
Regarding the Indy/Cincy game:
There are plenty of "sharps" who are blindly jumping on double digit dogs this year. They bit on the chance to take Cincy at 14 early because they didn't see the public ever pushing it to 14.5 with Indy having trouble covering smaller spreads this year. It's interesting that LVSC released the line at 14.5, which definitely would have attracted a lot of action from the pros in vegas who love big dogs. No vegas or offshore books were gutsy enough to open it higher than 14 as far as I can see.

So you're getting mixed signals here. Yeah, 65-70% of bets are coming in on Indy so far and the line has dropped basically everywhere except BetEd and Bodog (very square books), but it looks like the smart linesmakers wanted to set a line high enough to entice some early action from the sharps, only to have their books balanced out by the public on Sunday morning.

The public will think they're getting a good Indy price at 13 or 13.5 on Sunday since the game opened at 14, and that might entice even more action on the fav.

This game is the second or third most popular game to bet on so far, which is strange considering Indy is laying so many points and has a bad ATS record this year. Obviously Cincy is not a popular team to bet on either. It looks like the lines have been set to entice as much balanced action as they can get in this game and it's playing out perfectly for them.

This game is just an example of good linesmaking, imo.

DiscoD69 says:

bird - very solid take! All good points...I'm glad you wrote on this.

Van - Also, it's hard to create an exact science out of this because it also depends on when you get the numbers. I've been trying to keep it as consisten as possible and just do it on Friday afternoons when I know I'll always have the time. However, I always take it for what it is...considering the fact that the SI board does not reflect the entire betting market, and especially does not reflect the entire smart or sharp betting market (as smart dog players would wait as long as possible to try and get the best line)

This is why I think it's useful to a certain extent, but asking for some1 to prove there is a system or exact science you can use it with to create and blindly follow which always produces winners is just plain crazy. If some1 does it, props to them & tonnes of respect...same as if some1 created a system of simply looking at trends or stats and creates a system that always produces winners. Props if they do.

Crashdavis565 says:
Great post-

I have to admit, most of my bets are reverse line movement bets and they do pretty well. We have a perfect example today with the Badgers and Wolverines. Covers has 70% of the people on the Badgers, the stats say this is a no contest yet the line continues to get smaller favoring the Wolverines.

Is there more huge money on the Wolverines causing the line movement?

or, do the books want exposure on the Wolvernes?

Either way, I will bet Michigan against popular public perception and be on the line with what I think is the smart money. When I look at this game, to me, Michigan has no chance, yet the line keeps moving to them. I will follow the line and the money to The Big House.

If there are any "sharps" out there who are on the Woverines and think they are a better team, please post why , either before or after this game.

Crash