Who says theres 80% on -5 and its not moving to 5.5/6 forget -7 i cant see it getting to 7. These %s that you see or hear about I just dont buy into it. If a book gets 80% on a game they have to find the buy back # which should be 6.
I was using an api to pull NFL data from betfair and it seemed like nearly all the volume is on one side on a regular basis. I also did some looks at fairlay and seen the same thing. Now the thing I did not check is the other side on 6 or 7, so it may be the bettors are taking side A at 5 and are taking 6 or whatever on the other side, because the exchange uses separate markets for the different lines. I will have to peak at that data but it just seems
books know they will never get even action but if they are getting bombed at 5 wouldnt they slow that action down with moves of the line or do they just know 5 is a good number and they ride the lightning on that number.
The bookmaker is responsible and accountable as a risk manager and has find the buy back number. Im not familiar with your betting exchanges and really dont know other than your betting against other people and only take money thats available from other people or unless they like a side and add money to the side they like..its hard for me to answer your question dont know much about exchanges.
well the exchange is the only place you can see where the actual bets went and it seems like they just load up on one side on MOST games and I am just curious why that line never moves
here is an example yes its small action but all the bets are on one side and the line does not blink
those 80% of bets might not add up to anything , while the 10% of the bets could = the same amount ,its not the tickets sold ,its the amount they equal up to ..Id love to see how much money is layed out on each game , ive seen lines at the nugget during march madness and everyone was betting the same game over and over and over, line never moves ,derek walks across the street from the D and places 10 grand on same game line still doesnt change , 80 percent of the money on that team , but some very respected sharps put down a ton of money on the other side ,maybe part of that 10 % ,line may move a little or not at all due to the liability isnt there yet. Its money not tickets. imo
I was talking about 80% of the bets and 80% of the money, basically where all the bets are going is on the -5 team. I am trying to understand the marketing or the logic behind the not moving.
if I can sell tomatoes for $1 a lb why would I settle for .90?
seems if everybody is going nuts and betting on the -5 that implies the line could be -6 or -7 and that could even out the action.
a few thoughts
at -5 sharps dont play at -7 the sharps would put seriously liability quickly on the other side
in a perfect world a book would love to have zero liability on a game and just keep the juice and staying on 5 seems to go completely against that.
I got an interesting discussion going on twitter and wondered if anyone here might want to chime in, really would appreciate some opinions or facts.
a book has 80% of the bets and money on the Donkeys at -5, what does that mean, if -5 was a fair number shouldnt it be close to 50-50 on both sides if -5 was fair in theory
anyway what does this mean 80%+ money and bets on Donkeys -5, what does that mean in general?
It means that people really like -5. That is all that it means.
It probably means that there is enough smart money on +5 to think it is worth holding.
Pure speculation here because I am no expert on books: 80% might not count in some situations. If NBA team A is getting 80% of all betting money vs team B, would anybody in the book worry about it if it was Super Bowl Sunday? In other words, maybe sometimes the 80% isnt 80% of very much to begin with, so the books focus on the larger betting venues where more money is at stake?
we all know books try really hard to offer as many products as they can to bettors so it seems it would be smart to set a line that both sides want.
if everyone that bets is betting the Rams -5 that means the Donkeys fans are missing out on betting because they dont like +5. Even if they think 5 is the magic number for probability it does not seem it is the best number for marketing.
The book does not want Fred going to another book because he can get 6 there. Seems the idea would be to keep everyone betting here by offering a line that attracts Donkey and Rams bettors. I guess I am just missing the strategy here.
we all know books try really hard to offer as many products as they can to bettors so it seems it would be smart to set a line that both sides want.
if everyone that bets is betting the Rams -5 that means the Donkeys fans are missing out on betting because they dont like +5. Even if they think 5 is the magic number for probability it does not seem it is the best number for marketing.
The book does not want Fred going to another book because he can get 6 there. Seems the idea would be to keep everyone betting here by offering a line that attracts Donkey and Rams bettors. I guess I am just missing the strategy here.
On a separate note, you have not been very good about keeping up with Jambos. I had forgotten about them and looked and they are down about 20 units in football. Too bad you did not get in on that deal.
All right, here we go! NBA starts Tuesday night. Big bet on the Lakers -1. -2 (what BM offers right now) should work just as good. Ive got some CLV already danshan, so dont try to talk me out of it!
they know people will take the Donkeys at -5 all day and they know -5 is fair. they cannot knock the bettor out so they leave that 50-50 line out there and know that it will hit 50% of the time long term even though they get pounded on one side on it, the next game they will win and get their juice.
The market thinks Donkeys -5 is light and the book knows that -5 is a 50-50 position, so they know the juice is coming long term.
the book does not want to crush the bettors by putting up -7 because then they would eventually crush out the bettor and the bettor would probably still take it. So the book protects the bettor by offering a true fair line and not what the bettor is willing to pay.
On a separate note, you have not been very good about keeping up with Jambos. I had forgotten about them and looked and they are down about 20 units in football. Too bad you did not get in on that deal.
Jambos is doing exactly as well as anyone throwing darts. they got almost 600 plays and are down 12 or so units, that is a perfectly normal coin flipper record, 4% edge minimum, that was dumb when they said and is more dumb now. I am still lost on what the Jambos end game is. any thoughts on why they are even doing the tout service?
All right, here we go! NBA starts Tuesday night. Big bet on the Lakers -1. -2 (what BM offers right now) should work just as good. Ive got some CLV already danshan, so dont try to talk me out of it!
I model kinda weird and I need 10 games in to get started. I will post my nba lines and power rankings once we have 10 games in, so roughly 2 weeks from now I will start.
I personally like the Clippers and Pistons from the eyeball test. Rockets are going to have a major injury or 2 and be out of it and the Nuggets will come back to reality, Nets come on they are the new Celtics, play good but dont make it, Raptors are toast, Spurs same thing 5 6 seed and out, Jazz regression but still make the playoffs. I cant think of anything else I liked or disliked so far. Anyway I will start in roughly 2 weeks 10 games in. I am planning on putting out power rankings and lines daily after the 10 games.
Good luck and I think I forgot Lakers win it all and dominate or James or Davis get hurt and it all falls down.
No, you still have it wrong. The book does not put up -7 because they would get crushed on +7. They keep -5 because it makes them the most money. -7 loses them money.
As for Jambos, you have a one part scam and one part a very naive guy. I think he actually did think he had something but his primary goal was to attract Wall Street money as an investment which is why he went on the finance shows and talked up his Wall Street backing. He has never been interested in being an average tout. He thought his math guys were way smart but none of them had a clue about betting or what they were up against.
No, you still have it wrong. The book does not put up -7 because they would get crushed on +7. They keep -5 because it makes them the most money. -7 loses them money.
As for Jambos, you have a one part scam and one part a very naive guy. I think he actually did think he had something but his primary goal was to attract Wall Street money as an investment which is why he went on the finance shows and talked up his Wall Street backing. He has never been interested in being an average tout. He thought his math guys were way smart but none of them had a clue about betting or what they were up against.
they would not get crushed on +7 because they would still be getting the -7 money but it would make the position not a 50-50 play and that would have long term negative effects on bettors.
and for Jambos it still is not clear to me what the heck the end game was or the game plan all along. I mean they obviously did not know much about betting. they just thought we are making good money stealing from minor league ignorant desperate poor guys who need to send money back to their 3rd world families and will take any deal to do that.
But why the tout service, they thought they could use probability player data they were using to pick poor guys to rob from to probabilities in games. I just am really confused on why the tout service, that shit is going to ruin their image. Although there will still be plenty of desperate poor 4th world players that will take 20k now and give up 200k if they make it in the big leagues later.
No, they seek to leverage their position to maximize their profit. -7 does not maximize profit. It creates loss.
Yes, the nature of the guy was exposed by his trying to scam minor league players. He is a scammer. But he thought he could make gambling on sports into an investment for rich people. With sports betting becoming legal, it obviously has a lot of potential. So he went to the Wall Street guys and said he was going to take a Wall Street approach to the gambling market and clean up with major league talent analysts. They gave him a lot of money and he came up with the scam pitch to showcase his confidence and provide a risk-free investment with the suckers not knowing they were just going to get extended time.
Unfortunately for him, his talented analysts got their jobs by sending out resumes and they are up against people that don't need no stinking resume.
Jambos is basically another version of a bitcoin ICO like Wagerr. You come up with a concept, you sell it, you take your pool of money and work on the concept for a few years and pay yourself a high salary until the money runs out and then you come up with another idea.
He is trying to make his own way instead of just being a pitchman.
you dont think math skills rule the betting world now? you think the old gut guys AKA cappers are still in play on a significant level?
Math skills are a dime a dozen. You need some other knowledge. To beat the gambling market, you have to be able to beat the math guys and the handicappers and the guys that can do both. That is why it is so hard.
But you can say I was a baseball player that used sabermetrics and I can win at sports because I have extra knowledge and the market is ripe for the taking and some people will believe it.
you dont believe that in todays market it literally is just a math race?
lets say a guy makes -130 on a game
now
guy 1 says -130 ok so I will take it no matter what at -110
guy 2 says -130 ok so I will take it if its not the Jets because they are cold after last week
guy 3 says -130 does not matter all that matters is that the Jets are cold and the Spears are hot
do you think any of these strategies has a true advantage over the other 2 and if so which one and why?
you dont believe that in todays market it literally is just a math race?
lets say a guy makes -130 on a game
now
guy 1 says -130 ok so I will take it no matter what at -110
guy 2 says -130 ok so I will take it if its not the Jets because they are cold after last week
guy 3 says -130 does not matter all that matters is that the Jets are cold and the Spears are hot
do you think any of these strategies has a true advantage over the other 2 and if so which one and why?
As I have told you before, a modeler does not believe in handicapping because he cannot do it. No doubt you are the worst handicapper in the world. That has nothing to do with the value of that type of analysis which is completely unknown to you and will remain a mystery for all time.
Now here is an example of some good handicapping. I bet Oregon State +11 this past week against Cal. I bet Oregon State because I felt they were underrated both offensively and defensively against Cal. Cal was playing their backup QB who has been pretty bad. But even if he had been pretty good, they still would have had a tough time.
Oregon State played Stanford and lost but should have won the game straight up and Stanford was a very comparable team to Cal. Stanford got a little lucky with big plays or they would have lost by 10 points in that game.
So now we have Cal playing Oregon State coming off a blowout which no doubt impacted the line and the statistics and they win straight up. Cal was the type of team that Oregon State could handle and they did.
Does that type of handicapping have value? That is one true outcome for me in my book. I only need two more in my next 100 bets.
Because your knowledge of handicapping is so poor, I cannot even comment because your examples are so bad. Handicapping is not based on hot and cold.
you missed the point I guess. I was not going to do a 300 word essay write up on each scenario
I was saying guy A bets when he thinks the line has value
guy B bets when he thinks the line has value and he likes the bet
guy C bets when he thinks the team will win
how they get to these decisions can vary wildly.
I think you are completely wrong about me, I have a very good working knowledge of the sport of football. I actually think that makes me stay away from it more because I know even more that knowledge TO ME means nothing. you think the analyst on TV are idiots about the game they played and coached, NOPE not so much most of them just dont understand the value of the line.
Sure Pats are a better team than the Skins but are they 18 points better over 50% of the time over 1000 of the same game.
this crazy shit you are saying about Cal beat Stanford on a rainy day, and Cal and Stanford are the same teams or whatever that is all great, sound like the guys on espn its relevant data but will it cover the spread over 52% of the time over 1000 games and that is where the capping hits the bankruptcy court!
you missed the point I guess. I was not going to do a 300 word essay write up on each scenario
I was saying guy A bets when he thinks the line has value
guy B bets when he thinks the line has value and he likes the bet
guy C bets when he thinks the team will win
how they get to these decisions can vary wildly.
I think you are completely wrong about me, I have a very good working knowledge of the sport of football. I actually think that makes me stay away from it more because I know even more that knowledge TO ME means nothing. you think the analyst on TV are idiots about the game they played and coached, NOPE not so much most of them just dont understand the value of the line.
Sure Pats are a better team than the Skins but are they 18 points better over 50% of the time over 1000 of the same game.
this crazy shit you are saying about Cal beat Stanford on a rainy day, and Cal and Stanford are the same teams or whatever that is all great, sound like the guys on espn its relevant data but will it cover the spread over 52% of the time over 1000 games and that is where the capping hits the bankruptcy court!
Wrong. That is finding value where it is not seen. And that is what a good handicapper is able to do.
The guys on ESPN definitely will not lead you to any good bets.
You don't deal on the level of handicapping. You are just a math guy. If you have to actually reason your way to a good bet, you will lose. It is not what you are good at. It has nothing to do with being smart. Gamblers are more clever than smart. It was a clever bet.
Comments
if a book can get 80% of the money on a team at -5 why not move it to -6 or -7 it seems that the bettors think -5 is not enough, right?
books know they will never get even action but if they are getting bombed at 5 wouldnt they slow that action down with moves of the line or do they just know 5 is a good number and they ride the lightning on that number.
here is an example yes its small action but all the bets are on one side and the line does not blink
https://fairlay.com/archive/detroit-lions-green-bay-packers-75/?referral=a599f4d5-c046-47db-a630-0fc0bcf2211f
- - - Updated - - -
I just assume if the exchange is seeing this one sided action I would kinda assume the books are seeing similar action
if I can sell tomatoes for $1 a lb why would I settle for .90?
seems if everybody is going nuts and betting on the -5 that implies the line could be -6 or -7 and that could even out the action.
a few thoughts
at -5 sharps dont play at -7 the sharps would put seriously liability quickly on the other side
in a perfect world a book would love to have zero liability on a game and just keep the juice and staying on 5 seems to go completely against that.
It means that people really like -5. That is all that it means.
It probably means that there is enough smart money on +5 to think it is worth holding.
we all know books try really hard to offer as many products as they can to bettors so it seems it would be smart to set a line that both sides want.
if everyone that bets is betting the Rams -5 that means the Donkeys fans are missing out on betting because they dont like +5. Even if they think 5 is the magic number for probability it does not seem it is the best number for marketing.
The book does not want Fred going to another book because he can get 6 there. Seems the idea would be to keep everyone betting here by offering a line that attracts Donkey and Rams bettors. I guess I am just missing the strategy here.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3590093?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
yes exactly, that is what I believe.
they know people will take the Donkeys at -5 all day and they know -5 is fair. they cannot knock the bettor out so they leave that 50-50 line out there and know that it will hit 50% of the time long term even though they get pounded on one side on it, the next game they will win and get their juice.
The market thinks Donkeys -5 is light and the book knows that -5 is a 50-50 position, so they know the juice is coming long term.
the book does not want to crush the bettors by putting up -7 because then they would eventually crush out the bettor and the bettor would probably still take it. So the book protects the bettor by offering a true fair line and not what the bettor is willing to pay.
good article, thanks for that R
- - - Updated - - -
Jambos is doing exactly as well as anyone throwing darts. they got almost 600 plays and are down 12 or so units, that is a perfectly normal coin flipper record, 4% edge minimum, that was dumb when they said and is more dumb now. I am still lost on what the Jambos end game is. any thoughts on why they are even doing the tout service?
I model kinda weird and I need 10 games in to get started. I will post my nba lines and power rankings once we have 10 games in, so roughly 2 weeks from now I will start.
I personally like the Clippers and Pistons from the eyeball test. Rockets are going to have a major injury or 2 and be out of it and the Nuggets will come back to reality, Nets come on they are the new Celtics, play good but dont make it, Raptors are toast, Spurs same thing 5 6 seed and out, Jazz regression but still make the playoffs. I cant think of anything else I liked or disliked so far. Anyway I will start in roughly 2 weeks 10 games in. I am planning on putting out power rankings and lines daily after the 10 games.
Good luck and I think I forgot Lakers win it all and dominate or James or Davis get hurt and it all falls down.
As for Jambos, you have a one part scam and one part a very naive guy. I think he actually did think he had something but his primary goal was to attract Wall Street money as an investment which is why he went on the finance shows and talked up his Wall Street backing. He has never been interested in being an average tout. He thought his math guys were way smart but none of them had a clue about betting or what they were up against.
they would not get crushed on +7 because they would still be getting the -7 money but it would make the position not a 50-50 play and that would have long term negative effects on bettors.
and for Jambos it still is not clear to me what the heck the end game was or the game plan all along. I mean they obviously did not know much about betting. they just thought we are making good money stealing from minor league ignorant desperate poor guys who need to send money back to their 3rd world families and will take any deal to do that.
But why the tout service, they thought they could use probability player data they were using to pick poor guys to rob from to probabilities in games. I just am really confused on why the tout service, that shit is going to ruin their image. Although there will still be plenty of desperate poor 4th world players that will take 20k now and give up 200k if they make it in the big leagues later.
Yes, the nature of the guy was exposed by his trying to scam minor league players. He is a scammer. But he thought he could make gambling on sports into an investment for rich people. With sports betting becoming legal, it obviously has a lot of potential. So he went to the Wall Street guys and said he was going to take a Wall Street approach to the gambling market and clean up with major league talent analysts. They gave him a lot of money and he came up with the scam pitch to showcase his confidence and provide a risk-free investment with the suckers not knowing they were just going to get extended time.
Unfortunately for him, his talented analysts got their jobs by sending out resumes and they are up against people that don't need no stinking resume.
He is trying to make his own way instead of just being a pitchman.
- - - Updated - - -
Math skills are a dime a dozen. You need some other knowledge. To beat the gambling market, you have to be able to beat the math guys and the handicappers and the guys that can do both. That is why it is so hard.
But you can say I was a baseball player that used sabermetrics and I can win at sports because I have extra knowledge and the market is ripe for the taking and some people will believe it.
lets say a guy makes -130 on a game
now
guy 1 says -130 ok so I will take it no matter what at -110
guy 2 says -130 ok so I will take it if its not the Jets because they are cold after last week
guy 3 says -130 does not matter all that matters is that the Jets are cold and the Spears are hot
do you think any of these strategies has a true advantage over the other 2 and if so which one and why?
As I have told you before, a modeler does not believe in handicapping because he cannot do it. No doubt you are the worst handicapper in the world. That has nothing to do with the value of that type of analysis which is completely unknown to you and will remain a mystery for all time.
Because your knowledge of handicapping is so poor, I cannot even comment because your examples are so bad. Handicapping is not based on hot and cold.
Oregon State played Stanford and lost but should have won the game straight up and Stanford was a very comparable team to Cal. Stanford got a little lucky with big plays or they would have lost by 10 points in that game.
So now we have Cal playing Oregon State coming off a blowout which no doubt impacted the line and the statistics and they win straight up. Cal was the type of team that Oregon State could handle and they did.
Does that type of handicapping have value? That is one true outcome for me in my book. I only need two more in my next 100 bets.
you missed the point I guess. I was not going to do a 300 word essay write up on each scenario
I was saying guy A bets when he thinks the line has value
guy B bets when he thinks the line has value and he likes the bet
guy C bets when he thinks the team will win
how they get to these decisions can vary wildly.
I think you are completely wrong about me, I have a very good working knowledge of the sport of football. I actually think that makes me stay away from it more because I know even more that knowledge TO ME means nothing. you think the analyst on TV are idiots about the game they played and coached, NOPE not so much most of them just dont understand the value of the line.
Sure Pats are a better team than the Skins but are they 18 points better over 50% of the time over 1000 of the same game.
this crazy shit you are saying about Cal beat Stanford on a rainy day, and Cal and Stanford are the same teams or whatever that is all great, sound like the guys on espn its relevant data but will it cover the spread over 52% of the time over 1000 games and that is where the capping hits the bankruptcy court!
Wrong. That is finding value where it is not seen. And that is what a good handicapper is able to do.
The guys on ESPN definitely will not lead you to any good bets.
You don't deal on the level of handicapping. You are just a math guy. If you have to actually reason your way to a good bet, you will lose. It is not what you are good at. It has nothing to do with being smart. Gamblers are more clever than smart. It was a clever bet.
the question is about your opinion on those 3 guys
share it !!!!!
They are all bad because squares are betting them.