Vegas DOES NOT NEED to fix games.

You don't even know the rules of the game...

^
HAHAHA...missed that one

Why do people not realize that this is sports...

No wonder eddothebook lost money as a "bookie".

Right now you can get consensus of game everywhere, but that doesn't tell you where the big money was. If someone had access to all the casino's figures, he or she will be rich. the good cappers on this site, they all base their picks on which side the public or the money is on and take the opposite. What eddothebook said was 100% correct. There were so many times that the score was out of reach and the colck was winding down, but the winning team will score another touch down and the other team won't even defend it.

Not to mention he lost money because of his tiny sample size relative to the amount of action vegas sportsbooks take, or the gambling industry as a whole

Yup and that meaningless late te kills all teasers on the dog...or total

Td

Right.  The point of this thread is that given a large enough sample size, Vegas holds a statistical edge that is guaranteed to yield profits over time.

$$$ Wagered / 10% Vig = Profits.  A pretty simple business model that brings in billions of dollars of profit annually.  They simply do not need to fix games.. the risk of doing so (on the scale that some of you are arguing) and getting caught FAR OUTWEIGHS the extra reward of fixing games.  If you're still confused, refer back to the thread title.

Guys like Biggame90 just don't get it. They don't have to get 50/50 action all games. Even on the ones that are 60/40 or even 70/30 sometimes, they still have to win way under 50 percent of those to make money. A game with 70 thousand dollars on one side and 30 on the other still means they are risking only 30 grand to win 47000. Just hitting 45 percent of those heavily unbalanced games brings in a million bucks on a hundred games like that. On the 55 the house losses they pay out 70 grand and collect 33.  On the 45 the house wins they collect 77000 and pay out 30 grand. So they are not afraid of unbalanced games. And remember Vegas takes in less than a tenth of one percent of action on games these days. Sportsbooks are peanuts to their revenue and the thought they could "make a call" and get a coach or a team to alter a game in any way is completely ludicrous.  Not saying a ref (like in the NBA) or an individual (college kids shaving some points) hasn't gone on, but Vegas not a chance. That would mean the league would have to be in on it, and that's not gonna happen. The NFL has the league set up with so much parityand drama and unpredictibility that it's a gold mine like never before. Only thing that couild hurt it would be to stoop to wrestlings level.  The only fixes there are involve individuals making sure they don't cover a big spread in college or a ref maybe influencing a game for his personal gain. Even the NBA scandal wasn't about him doing that, it was about him trying to provide inside info. He never admitted to altering games with calls and they watched all the tapes and couldn't find anything either as far as I understand.

I mean really think about what you are suggest in the OK St game last night. People are actually suggesting that Gundy kicked the FG instead of going for the td BECAUSE HE HAD MONEY ON STANFORD.

Vegas has soo many ways to make money.  They don't just make off of a team winning or losing the half and game spreads.  They have the many team and individual prop. bets, futures, half, quarters, live bets to help them as well.  They can afford to take hits on games with 80%+ players on one side.  They'll just make it up on the next game or the next game. 

I'm thinking maybe the oddsmakers in Vegas this year are setting some of these lines up to make the local bookies lose money.  It's weird that so many favorites have been covering this season.  The locals basically rely on half, game and overs for most of their income.  A lot of them don't even offer half time bets or moneyline or any of the other exotic bets out there.  If there's a ton of action on one side only they usually get smashed if that side covers.  I know a few small time bookies here that are losing their ass this year because so many faves are covering the spread thsi year.

Over the course of a calender year.. there are so many bets wagered that variations caused by individual games are rendered meaningless.  They win in the long run - statistically, it's a sure thing.

The part in bold is very well said.  I agree completely.

Another example, about 11 years ago someone introduce a big bookie to me and wants my action. This big bookie insist that I have to use his line and I have to give him at least 50% of my action. The first week I was shocked, his line is alway one point above or below the standard lines, so naturally my bets were all one sided and  I got scared and gave him all my action. It turn out that 90% of the bets were all losing bets. From that week on I use his line and gave him 50% of the action and made a killing that year. I ask him once how did he come up with the line and he said its from an Italian family in New York, because the family owe him a favor. the sad part of the story for me is that he got caught by the Feds the next year and the money confiscated from his house bought two helicopter for the county of fairfax. I on the other hand doing so so again booking bets and lost all the money that I made the previous year to Atlantic City.

^^^

This guy has no clue

I am just trying to help. I am saying fixxing is good. When we see a line that is fishy, either stay away or bet the opposite. Every Sunday I can always pick one or two games that Vegas is going to fix. Last Sunday was against San Fran and the under. My problem is that I bet too many games and I would always wind up only up a little. If I just stick to the games that I think the fix is in then I am good. I am only telling people don't always bet the obvious.

That will probably only work half the time as well.  If you wagered half and game on that play you would have lost the juice though either way.  Plus ATL was the obvious pick too. 

Thanks for the contributions everyone.  It's interesting to see the variety of opinions that people have about sportsbooks' influence in the outcome of games.  Some very intelligent things were said in this thread as well as some other things I just can't believe.  Definitely an entertaining read!

Am I missing something here? If Oklahoma State goes for it on 4th and Goal from inside the 1 yard line, and miss. Then Stanford gets the ball back inside their own 1 !!! They would be in a very awkward position. A 3 and out would mean OSU would get great field position and a new set of downs. Any turnover almost guarantees OSU a TD. A Safety results in 2 points + possession of the ball for OSU.

What am I missing?

 

you def dont know the rules

I was not talking about OT.

Tomlin refuses to accept a holding penalty that would have put CLE out of FG-range and would have forced the Browns to punt.  Instead, he declined 10-yards of field position (although the ref confirmed his choice with him, incredilously btw, not once, not twice, but three times), and allowed Dawson, one of the reliable kickers in the league, to kick a 49-yard FG with the wind at his back.  As a result, PIT won but CLE covered.

This happens all the time.  Tomlin declined the penalty because it put Cleveland in a 4th and long.  Giving them another opportunity on third down would have given them another opportunity to score a touchdown.  Conceding an opportunity for a 49 yard field goal was a better play strategically and gave the Steelers the best chance to win the game.  Imagine if he had accepted the penalty and then given up a defensive pass interference call on the next play!  Tomlin made the right coaching decision.. it had nothing to do with point shaving.