Sucker Bets

how do you know this to be true?  how do you define a "square" play? and who decides if a play is "square" or not?

betting against the the so called "public" is about as flawed of a method as it gets, you find me a "contrarian" bettor that hits 60% over the course of the season (I'll be waiting bro, like forever)

this is a method of trying to outsmart the system and thinking you are siding with the books, doesn't work bro, people don't lose betting because they can't pick a side, they lose because of juice and poor money management

I'm not criticizing you by any means bro so don't take it personal, I'm only telling you for 100% certain that contrarian bettors are right about 50%-53% just like the rest of systems that are out there

I can list 5-10 guys on our website that bet like this, they are all nice guys and I like them but they simply can't win in the long run, they are outsmarting themselves by trying to be "sharp", meanwhile they end up betting on the worst possible teams and usually end up with the worst team in almost every matchup

"square" and "sharp" are terms people have created over the years to explain losing to themselves

we have a member that post Oregon & Baylor, first half spread and over every week, he gets called "square" by the so the called "sharps" who bet the other way thinking that no way those two teams could keep covering, he is "squarely" undefeated and made a small fortune while the "sharps" haven't won a single bet going against him, its baffling to me that he is called a square because he bets on the better team with a great offense and wins every single week, let me repeat, every single week

I could go on and on about this subject forever but the simple way of looking at things is this, don't try to outsmart yourself and be a wise guy, it won't work in the long run just like you suggest being a square won't work in the long run, the juice catches both of you regardless of your "nickname" in the betting industry

yes indeed, agree with this take

These are systems that everyone knows about, and tons of people think its the easy way to winning, but they will never pan out over the long haul... you might have one winning year, but that will only be a bad thing, because it will trick you into thinking that what you were doing was fundamentally sound, and it wasn't... here are a few such systems:

  

Anybody who takes the Jags +anything is a moron and I do not feel bad for all the $ they lose.  And betters will still be like "I really like the jags +12 vs the rams this week, on the road" lol, even though they have eyes that work, espn that comes in clear, and a goose egg against the spread they still see value.  

I would never give names, I like to get along with people, not create internet fights, it is hard enough to win doing this without those distractions

TAKE STANFORD TAKE BAYLOR TAKE CLEMSON TAKE NORTHERN ILL

Wahoo, i completly agree with you, you cant blindly bet aginst the public and win. What i like to do, is look at the games that are being heavily bet on one side and find one or two where i think the public has it wrong. With all thing being equal, i would rather be rooting for the same team that vegas needs. With that said, you are 100% correct that to win in this raquet you first have to have disapline and money managment. So i think we are on the same page here. When i created this thread i was really trying to get discussion going and i think identifying games that will have heavy action on one side is a good place to start.

And yes, i'm on the jags this week.

Oh please, Ice, name us some names ... 

u is a yes man... everything whaoos say u yes sir mr.whaoos.. get off whaoos  fuk boy