From what I wrote I would hope one would be able to interpret the idea I am trying to get across.
All I am saying is with public betting percentages and line movements one has the ability to possibly identify what side sharp money is coming in on. Is it always accurate? No. The examples I gave were legitimate questions. Those two totals that moved. Are they gifts? Public is pounding one side and in two of the mentioned cases the total line has moved half a run.
One would always expect a line to move when one side is being pounded.
The Red Sox Orioles game is a red flag example.
Because 85% of the public is taking the O and the line has not moved like it has in the previous two examples it can be argued that sharp money is taking the U and fading the public. This has caused the line to stay at 8.5 instead of moving like the other two totals mentioned.
Didn't think I would need to articulate my point but hope that clarifies for people.
here's whats not mentioned- the amount of money being wagered on both sides
fas a small example, 9 out of 10 people can put $100 on Team A (90%), yet the lone person who bets on team B wagers $1,000. The line is not going to move bc 90% of the public is on the team bc the action is practically even.
From what I wrote I would hope one would be able to interpret the idea I am trying to get across.
All I am saying is with public betting percentages and line movements one has the ability to possibly identify what side sharp money is coming in on. Is it always accurate? No. The examples I gave were legitimate questions. Those two totals that moved. Are they gifts? Public is pounding one side and in two of the mentioned cases the total line has moved half a run.
One would always expect a line to move when one side is being pounded.
The Red Sox Orioles game is a red flag example.
Because 85% of the public is taking the O and the line has not moved like it has in the previous two examples it can be argued that sharp money is taking the U and fading the public. This has caused the line to stay at 8.5 instead of moving like the other two totals mentioned.
Didn't think I would need to articulate my point but hope that clarifies for people.
here's whats not mentioned- the amount of money being wagered on both sides
fas a small example, 9 out of 10 people can put $100 on Team A (90%), yet the lone person who bets on team B wagers $1,000. The line is not going to move bc 90% of the public is on the team bc the action is practically even.
Pasteur.........you said the oddsmakers can predict outcomes at a rate of 80%
dude are you fuckin NUTS. you just lost all credability with that outlandish statement. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. The more you say, the more foolish you look !!
Here is how it works..... vegas is NOT into gambling, think seriously about what I just said. VEGAS IS NOT INTO GAMBLING. They want equal action on both sides.......they NEVER, I repeat NEVER want to be exposed too heavily on one side or the other of a game. They put out a line that attracts equal play on both sides, plain and simple.
That is how it works........TRUST ME...I KNOW !!
Vegas loves people that "think" like you do. BOL with your plays.
Pasteur.........you said the oddsmakers can predict outcomes at a rate of 80%
dude are you fuckin NUTS. you just lost all credability with that outlandish statement. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. The more you say, the more foolish you look !!
Here is how it works..... vegas is NOT into gambling, think seriously about what I just said. VEGAS IS NOT INTO GAMBLING. They want equal action on both sides.......they NEVER, I repeat NEVER want to be exposed too heavily on one side or the other of a game. They put out a line that attracts equal play on both sides, plain and simple.
That is how it works........TRUST ME...I KNOW !!
Vegas loves people that "think" like you do. BOL with your plays.
The only reason I am responding to your ididocy is because I am bored this afternoon and trolling through the covers forum.
I have never met you before BUT I can tell with 100% complete certainty you are clueless when it comes to sports betting, You're green and have never won long term doing this so please don't act like you have some wisdom about how vegas works..........you too sound like a complete fool.
You have no idea who you are talking to.....trust me !!
Vegas is a business..........they don't like to gamble.........THEY HAVE NO IDEA WHO IS GOING TO WIN ANY GIVEN GAME ON ANY GIVEN DAY.
The only reason I am responding to your ididocy is because I am bored this afternoon and trolling through the covers forum.
I have never met you before BUT I can tell with 100% complete certainty you are clueless when it comes to sports betting, You're green and have never won long term doing this so please don't act like you have some wisdom about how vegas works..........you too sound like a complete fool.
You have no idea who you are talking to.....trust me !!
Vegas is a business..........they don't like to gamble.........THEY HAVE NO IDEA WHO IS GOING TO WIN ANY GIVEN GAME ON ANY GIVEN DAY.
here's whats not mentioned- the amount of money being wagered on both sides
fas a small example, 9 out of 10 people can put $100 on Team A (90%), yet the lone person who bets on team B wagers $1,000. The line is not going to move bc 90% of the public is on the team bc the action is practically even.
Yeah this. If 90% of the public wins a bet but the total amount on it is peanuts, 90% of peanuts is still peanuts. But this past Sunday with 70% of the action on the Braves, in a game that was the ONLY game left to bet on that night, so people that are down can chase on and people that are up can bet some house money on, a 70% rake of THAT game is huge.
here's whats not mentioned- the amount of money being wagered on both sides
fas a small example, 9 out of 10 people can put $100 on Team A (90%), yet the lone person who bets on team B wagers $1,000. The line is not going to move bc 90% of the public is on the team bc the action is practically even.
Yeah this. If 90% of the public wins a bet but the total amount on it is peanuts, 90% of peanuts is still peanuts. But this past Sunday with 70% of the action on the Braves, in a game that was the ONLY game left to bet on that night, so people that are down can chase on and people that are up can bet some house money on, a 70% rake of THAT game is huge.
your whole theory is predicated on the fact that vegas can predict outcomes at a higher rate than the public...this is simply, utterly, completely wrong.
Here is another fact.....when you mention "the public".........here's a newsflash dude.....YOU ARE THE PUBLIC !! Never forget that.
your whole theory is predicated on the fact that vegas can predict outcomes at a higher rate than the public...this is simply, utterly, completely wrong.
Here is another fact.....when you mention "the public".........here's a newsflash dude.....YOU ARE THE PUBLIC !! Never forget that.
your whole theory is predicated on the fact that vegas can predict outcomes at a higher rate than the public...this is simply, utterly, completely wrong.
Here is another fact.....when you mention "the public".........here's a newsflash dude.....YOU ARE THE PUBLIC !! Never forget that.
You ARE the public !!!!
......................................
when are you going to post some winners in the NFL, matey?
your whole theory is predicated on the fact that vegas can predict outcomes at a higher rate than the public...this is simply, utterly, completely wrong.
Here is another fact.....when you mention "the public".........here's a newsflash dude.....YOU ARE THE PUBLIC !! Never forget that.
You ARE the public !!!!
......................................
when are you going to post some winners in the NFL, matey?
I'm pissed off I can't use the quote button, it's not working.........c'mon covers.
Dude, you need to stop...you sound like a complete idiot.YOU HAVE NO FUCKING IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
You are talkng in a forum that has professional gamblers in it, they have been doing this for years and know how things work. Don't come in here with these fucked up theories and spew like you know how vegas works.................you are very green !!
I'm pissed off I can't use the quote button, it's not working.........c'mon covers.
Dude, you need to stop...you sound like a complete idiot.YOU HAVE NO FUCKING IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
You are talkng in a forum that has professional gamblers in it, they have been doing this for years and know how things work. Don't come in here with these fucked up theories and spew like you know how vegas works.................you are very green !!
Alien, you're certainly entitled to your belief that the operators of a decades-old business that generates billions in revenue are just regular shmoes like us who don't have a clue who's going to win or lose a game.
Alien, you're certainly entitled to your belief that the operators of a decades-old business that generates billions in revenue are just regular shmoes like us who don't have a clue who's going to win or lose a game.
I'm pissed off I can't use the quote button, it's not working.........c'mon covers.
Dude, you need to stop...you sound like a complete idiot.YOU HAVE NO FUCKING IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
You are talkng in a forum that has professional gamblers in it, they have been doing this for years and know how things work. Don't come in here with these fucked up theories and spew like you know how vegas works.................you are very green !!
Well, at the very least , he kept his cool after you repeatedly insulted him. You keep saying he's clueless and how everyone should just TRUST you and yet you provided nothing.
I'm pissed off I can't use the quote button, it's not working.........c'mon covers.
Dude, you need to stop...you sound like a complete idiot.YOU HAVE NO FUCKING IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
You are talkng in a forum that has professional gamblers in it, they have been doing this for years and know how things work. Don't come in here with these fucked up theories and spew like you know how vegas works.................you are very green !!
Well, at the very least , he kept his cool after you repeatedly insulted him. You keep saying he's clueless and how everyone should just TRUST you and yet you provided nothing.
My Dad used to be a local book. One NFL Monday night game years ago Sea was a home dog to Oak. This was before computers were being extensively used so most info was on printed page. Well I had been tracking various stats and angles and subscribing to every stat sheet there was at the time and had never seen such a mismatch in a game that year. Made my largest play of the season on Sea, told my father and he moved his line from like Oak -4 to Oak -2, said most of his bettors were playing Oak anyway but now they were doubling up and not shopping for lines. Brought in a ton of money on Oak and he made a killing as Sea won like 44-10. Now thats just a local book playing with his line in order to capitalize on a situation because of superior information and knowing his bettors, don't you think the big boys do that as well but on a much larger scale? I think so.
My Dad used to be a local book. One NFL Monday night game years ago Sea was a home dog to Oak. This was before computers were being extensively used so most info was on printed page. Well I had been tracking various stats and angles and subscribing to every stat sheet there was at the time and had never seen such a mismatch in a game that year. Made my largest play of the season on Sea, told my father and he moved his line from like Oak -4 to Oak -2, said most of his bettors were playing Oak anyway but now they were doubling up and not shopping for lines. Brought in a ton of money on Oak and he made a killing as Sea won like 44-10. Now thats just a local book playing with his line in order to capitalize on a situation because of superior information and knowing his bettors, don't you think the big boys do that as well but on a much larger scale? I think so.
Pasteur.........you said the oddsmakers can predict outcomes at a rate of 80%
dude are you fuckin NUTS. you just lost all credability with that outlandish statement. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. The more you say, the more foolish you look !!
Here is how it works..... vegas is NOT into gambling, think seriously about what I just said. VEGAS IS NOT INTO GAMBLING. They want equal action on both sides.......they NEVER, I repeat NEVER want to be exposed too heavily on one side or the other of a game. They put out a line that attracts equal play on both sides, plain and simple.
That is how it works........TRUST ME...I KNOW !!
You just lost all credibility for spelling it credability. No in all honesty though, to some of us it seems silly but its good foster up these kinds of discussions
Pasteur.........you said the oddsmakers can predict outcomes at a rate of 80%
dude are you fuckin NUTS. you just lost all credability with that outlandish statement. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. The more you say, the more foolish you look !!
Here is how it works..... vegas is NOT into gambling, think seriously about what I just said. VEGAS IS NOT INTO GAMBLING. They want equal action on both sides.......they NEVER, I repeat NEVER want to be exposed too heavily on one side or the other of a game. They put out a line that attracts equal play on both sides, plain and simple.
That is how it works........TRUST ME...I KNOW !!
You just lost all credibility for spelling it credability. No in all honesty though, to some of us it seems silly but its good foster up these kinds of discussions
Braves are the better team, were on fire and Sheets on the mound who has been stellar.
Yet they were only -105 vs the struggling Mets. Trap!
Again, perception. The oddsmakers use advanced stats and Sabermetrics as key considerations in setting lines; the majority of the public completely ignores these numbers. The metrics indicated Sheets was way overdue for a bad outing, a fact lost on the types of bettors who chase their losses on nationally-televised events like SNB.
Go back and read what Tone posted as he is 100% right on this issue.
Braves are the better team, were on fire and Sheets on the mound who has been stellar.
Yet they were only -105 vs the struggling Mets. Trap!
Again, perception. The oddsmakers use advanced stats and Sabermetrics as key considerations in setting lines; the majority of the public completely ignores these numbers. The metrics indicated Sheets was way overdue for a bad outing, a fact lost on the types of bettors who chase their losses on nationally-televised events like SNB.
Go back and read what Tone posted as he is 100% right on this issue.
My Dad used to be a local book. One NFL Monday night game years ago Sea was a home dog to Oak. This was before computers were being extensively used so most info was on printed page. Well I had been tracking various stats and angles and subscribing to every stat sheet there was at the time and had never seen such a mismatch in a game that year. Made my largest play of the season on Sea, told my father and he moved his line from like Oak -4 to Oak -2, said most of his bettors were playing Oak anyway but now they were doubling up and not shopping for lines. Brought in a ton of money on Oak and he made a killing as Sea won like 44-10. Now thats just a local book playing with his line in order to capitalize on a situation because of superior information and knowing his bettors, don't you think the big boys do that as well but on a much larger scale? I think so.
This is all I'm saying. It's not some conspiracy, they just know more than we do. At the end of the day we still have to cap the damn game. If a line looks fishy to us it's because they know something we don't, and it's our job to dig further into the game to find out why the line is where it's at.
My Dad used to be a local book. One NFL Monday night game years ago Sea was a home dog to Oak. This was before computers were being extensively used so most info was on printed page. Well I had been tracking various stats and angles and subscribing to every stat sheet there was at the time and had never seen such a mismatch in a game that year. Made my largest play of the season on Sea, told my father and he moved his line from like Oak -4 to Oak -2, said most of his bettors were playing Oak anyway but now they were doubling up and not shopping for lines. Brought in a ton of money on Oak and he made a killing as Sea won like 44-10. Now thats just a local book playing with his line in order to capitalize on a situation because of superior information and knowing his bettors, don't you think the big boys do that as well but on a much larger scale? I think so.
This is all I'm saying. It's not some conspiracy, they just know more than we do. At the end of the day we still have to cap the damn game. If a line looks fishy to us it's because they know something we don't, and it's our job to dig further into the game to find out why the line is where it's at.
The public wins every once in a while thats it. i dont believe that every game is fixed, but alot of them are, especially nfl and nba. Vegas job is to take the public's money so they will use all of their resources to do so.
The public wins every once in a while thats it. i dont believe that every game is fixed, but alot of them are, especially nfl and nba. Vegas job is to take the public's money so they will use all of their resources to do so.
Again, perception. The oddsmakers use advanced stats and Sabermetrics as key considerations in setting lines; the majority of the public completely ignores these numbers. The metrics indicated Sheets was way overdue for a bad outing, a fact lost on the types of bettors who chase their losses on nationally-televised events like SNB.
Go back and read what Tone posted as he is 100% right on this issue.
All true, but I think you're missing the point. Line makers anticipated where the public would be betting, and they maximized their profit by making it a very accessible line. They could've made a line of Braves -150 and they still would've made bank, but maybe not as much because they would've scared away value shoppers. At -110 you had a lot of people saying "hey, that's great value for the Braves! I'll bite". I believe it has more to do with maximizing profit than announcing to the public "Our numbers say this game should be close, and we're sharing that info with you".
Again, perception. The oddsmakers use advanced stats and Sabermetrics as key considerations in setting lines; the majority of the public completely ignores these numbers. The metrics indicated Sheets was way overdue for a bad outing, a fact lost on the types of bettors who chase their losses on nationally-televised events like SNB.
Go back and read what Tone posted as he is 100% right on this issue.
All true, but I think you're missing the point. Line makers anticipated where the public would be betting, and they maximized their profit by making it a very accessible line. They could've made a line of Braves -150 and they still would've made bank, but maybe not as much because they would've scared away value shoppers. At -110 you had a lot of people saying "hey, that's great value for the Braves! I'll bite". I believe it has more to do with maximizing profit than announcing to the public "Our numbers say this game should be close, and we're sharing that info with you".
Nope.....wrong. You are talking about one example. What if vegas did this ALL the time....predicting the winner then manipulating the line to induce action either way based on who they thought was going to win.
This would be a disaster if they were wrong.........they(vegas) would be gambling......like I said VEGAS DOES NOT GAMBLE.
Nope.....wrong. You are talking about one example. What if vegas did this ALL the time....predicting the winner then manipulating the line to induce action either way based on who they thought was going to win.
This would be a disaster if they were wrong.........they(vegas) would be gambling......like I said VEGAS DOES NOT GAMBLE.
The trap lines have nothing to do with the LVSC or shady mobsters making back door deals. Its a matter of PERCEPTION people and the statistics behind it all. Our perception as observers of the game tell us ATL and the red-hot Ben Sheets should crush a lowly and struggling Mets team. You can thank ESPN and social media for that folks. Moving on, if you had done your research properly, whether it be historical situations, trends, market data, or just hard cold facts, you would've viewed this game as a toss up. By Golly, the Mets won by 1 run, huh? I am not saying that you can't use these "trap lines" to analyze and ultimately help your own cause as a sports bettor, but enough with the conspiracies. Vegas wins no matter what. They create a product and we consume it.
Not to mention, weird things happen in sports. It's the nature of the beast. Football teams lose as 14 point favs. Pitchers on fire have a bad game. How 'bout when Boston came back from 3-0 against NY. Some dope actually said he bet $25K to win $1K. And he lost. I doubt the amount was right, but it just goes to show, weird things happen.
All this trap nonsense is just peoples' ways to make sense out of something that contains a LOT of uncertainty.
The trap lines have nothing to do with the LVSC or shady mobsters making back door deals. Its a matter of PERCEPTION people and the statistics behind it all. Our perception as observers of the game tell us ATL and the red-hot Ben Sheets should crush a lowly and struggling Mets team. You can thank ESPN and social media for that folks. Moving on, if you had done your research properly, whether it be historical situations, trends, market data, or just hard cold facts, you would've viewed this game as a toss up. By Golly, the Mets won by 1 run, huh? I am not saying that you can't use these "trap lines" to analyze and ultimately help your own cause as a sports bettor, but enough with the conspiracies. Vegas wins no matter what. They create a product and we consume it.
Not to mention, weird things happen in sports. It's the nature of the beast. Football teams lose as 14 point favs. Pitchers on fire have a bad game. How 'bout when Boston came back from 3-0 against NY. Some dope actually said he bet $25K to win $1K. And he lost. I doubt the amount was right, but it just goes to show, weird things happen.
All this trap nonsense is just peoples' ways to make sense out of something that contains a LOT of uncertainty.
My Dad used to be a local book. One NFL Monday night game years ago Sea was a home dog to Oak. This was before computers were being extensively used so most info was on printed page. Well I had been tracking various stats and angles and subscribing to every stat sheet there was at the time and had never seen such a mismatch in a game that year. Made my largest play of the season on Sea, told my father and he moved his line from like Oak -4 to Oak -2, said most of his bettors were playing Oak anyway but now they were doubling up and not shopping for lines. Brought in a ton of money on Oak and he made a killing as Sea won like 44-10. Now thats just a local book playing with his line in order to capitalize on a situation because of superior information and knowing his bettors, don't you think the big boys do that as well but on a much larger scale? I think so.
I like the story and analysis but this theory wouldn't hold on such a grand scale. I'm assuming your father had several clients...maybe 50? 100? 300? Ok we are talking millions of clients worldwide here. Normal people don't analyze trend data, or do their research before making picks. they simply have spare cash, drink and mingle at the local casino, and put some bets down. Plus with the advent of online gambling there are more sharps than ever before. When it comes down to it its gambling. If you hit 60% of your pics you are considered an elite capper, the best of the best. 55% is all you need to skim from the top, but its much harder said. The point I'm trying to make is these books have to stay true to the public because the public will always dump more money than squares in the long run. And just like there are more good cappers than ever before, I believe, there is also a wider margin of uninformed casual bettors and that's the bread and butter of the books.
My Dad used to be a local book. One NFL Monday night game years ago Sea was a home dog to Oak. This was before computers were being extensively used so most info was on printed page. Well I had been tracking various stats and angles and subscribing to every stat sheet there was at the time and had never seen such a mismatch in a game that year. Made my largest play of the season on Sea, told my father and he moved his line from like Oak -4 to Oak -2, said most of his bettors were playing Oak anyway but now they were doubling up and not shopping for lines. Brought in a ton of money on Oak and he made a killing as Sea won like 44-10. Now thats just a local book playing with his line in order to capitalize on a situation because of superior information and knowing his bettors, don't you think the big boys do that as well but on a much larger scale? I think so.
I like the story and analysis but this theory wouldn't hold on such a grand scale. I'm assuming your father had several clients...maybe 50? 100? 300? Ok we are talking millions of clients worldwide here. Normal people don't analyze trend data, or do their research before making picks. they simply have spare cash, drink and mingle at the local casino, and put some bets down. Plus with the advent of online gambling there are more sharps than ever before. When it comes down to it its gambling. If you hit 60% of your pics you are considered an elite capper, the best of the best. 55% is all you need to skim from the top, but its much harder said. The point I'm trying to make is these books have to stay true to the public because the public will always dump more money than squares in the long run. And just like there are more good cappers than ever before, I believe, there is also a wider margin of uninformed casual bettors and that's the bread and butter of the books.
Nope.....wrong. You are talking about one example. What if vegas did this ALL the time....predicting the winner then manipulating the line to induce action either way based on who they thought was going to win.
This would be a disaster if they were wrong.........they(vegas) would be gambling......like I said VEGAS DOES NOT GAMBLE.
Yes, you're right, Vegas does not gamble. If you don't know the odds, it's gambling. But they DO know the odds and probabilities and the wagering habits of bettors and will increase their exposure in certain situations. They will essentially expose (risk) a little more to make A LOT more.
Nope.....wrong. You are talking about one example. What if vegas did this ALL the time....predicting the winner then manipulating the line to induce action either way based on who they thought was going to win.
This would be a disaster if they were wrong.........they(vegas) would be gambling......like I said VEGAS DOES NOT GAMBLE.
Yes, you're right, Vegas does not gamble. If you don't know the odds, it's gambling. But they DO know the odds and probabilities and the wagering habits of bettors and will increase their exposure in certain situations. They will essentially expose (risk) a little more to make A LOT more.
They weren't surprised the public was all over Atlanta and they weren't surprised when the Mets won and they raked it in. And the ones the public get right? They knew they were going to pay out on it before the game ever started. They aren't right 100% of the time, but I bet they are close to 80%...
__________________
If they truly knew 80% of the time, they could shade lines even more and just rape people.
I'm not saying Vegas doesn't MIND having some exposure in certain situations (ie. lots of Rams -13 in the SB against NE.....lots of NE -13 in the SB against the Giants), but to be correct 80% of the time?
They take some calculated risks as well, but to say they new the Mutts were going to win the other night is a joke.
They weren't surprised the public was all over Atlanta and they weren't surprised when the Mets won and they raked it in. And the ones the public get right? They knew they were going to pay out on it before the game ever started. They aren't right 100% of the time, but I bet they are close to 80%...
__________________
If they truly knew 80% of the time, they could shade lines even more and just rape people.
I'm not saying Vegas doesn't MIND having some exposure in certain situations (ie. lots of Rams -13 in the SB against NE.....lots of NE -13 in the SB against the Giants), but to be correct 80% of the time?
They take some calculated risks as well, but to say they new the Mutts were going to win the other night is a joke.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.