This isn't a trap game, the line is the right line. But i do beleive the linesmakers do try and lure public money on what they beleive is a bad play from time to time.
0
This isn't a trap game, the line is the right line. But i do beleive the linesmakers do try and lure public money on what they beleive is a bad play from time to time.
This isn't a trap line. If it were a trap line, it would be Detroit -150. That's a trap line. No one would bet Toronto at +140 unless they "knew" something.
0
This isn't a trap line. If it were a trap line, it would be Detroit -150. That's a trap line. No one would bet Toronto at +140 unless they "knew" something.
I've written this many times but there are no traps. That would imply the linesmakers know results beforehand, which they don't. They set lines and hope to make money on all the action that results. Well, the books all over the world make money based on the lines that are put up which any particular shop can adjust how they see fit based on action that comes in, their client betting patterns, etc. etc. No question as Lance Logan commented they may lure money from time to time, but that's not in the opening line itself, that's more not moving a line despite 70 percent action on one side. if the book thinks a spread is fine at 2and a half on the favorite but overall the money is heavier on the fav and the book leaves it at 2and a half instead of moving it to 3 for example, they are taking a position on the underdog in that way. But overall, the lines get plenty of action both ways and they make plenty of juice overall week to week. Obviously, they don't get perfectly balanced action every game, but they don't need to. Remember, even on games where 60 percent of the money (say 60 grand) is on one team and 40 percent is on the other(say 40 grand) they make 26,000 grand if the heavier bet team loses. If it goes the other way, they pay the 60 grand but make 44000 from the losers just as a raw example. So in a situation like that they are essentially risking only 16000 to win 26000. Play that out over hundreds of basketball and football games and even on games that they don't have guaranteed money coming they still have a huge advantage as far as making money. The book can win 7 and lose 10 times on a game with 60/40 type action and come out way ahead so there is no magic need to trap anybody or any other myth because while many times they make a smaller profit on a large number of games where they have much more balanced action, they don't need balanced action because their edge is so solid. Overall, though they pay the linesmakers to generate 2 way action as much as possible and adjust from there. And as far as the linesmakers being predictors of games, it's just not the case. NFL lines are very easy to set based on power rankings, injuries, etc. Each week I can nail every game within a half point and it has nothing to do with predicting outcomes, I can assure you. If you follow and bet the NFL you should be able to guess lines almost exactly on a weekly basis. It's not magic. And with all the parity in the league. and all the games decided on the last possesssion, people that cry fix in the NFL are a joke. That league would never risk rigging games. and unless you got to a crooked QB or something back in the days when they weren't paid as well, I doubt it's ever happened, but that's a whole other topic. As for theguy who pointed to the Lakers being substandard against the spread, that has nothing t do with trapping anybody. That has to do with their lines always being inflated as a popular and overrated team in recent years. To balance action somewhat on their games, lines are generallya little higher than they should be. For basketball gamblers, that's old news. I would think the more casual bettors may often be betting the Lakers regardless of the line quite often. but I can assure you experienced gamblers are often taking the value. That is a trap I guess only to people who find that it's surprising the Lakers don't have a great spread record in recent years. The Mavericks as double digit favs at home have been awful the last few years, but it doesnt mean its a trap when they are an 11 point favorite and win by 8. You always are paying a premium on the top teams at home. If you aren't paying attention to how teams are performing in certain situations, it's awfully tough to win. So the next time you see a line and think it's a trap. it's not. Their are many factors that go into setting them, including perception, but remember the lines are there for the casual bettors and the pro gamblers and everyone in between. Mostly they want action action action and the money will roll in. They only have to really pay attention to the games that end up way unbalanced and they have a big edge there too as I pointed out earlier. Bottom line is don't overthink the lines because their really is no magic in them at all. The magic and fun is trying to pick more winners than losers.
0
I've written this many times but there are no traps. That would imply the linesmakers know results beforehand, which they don't. They set lines and hope to make money on all the action that results. Well, the books all over the world make money based on the lines that are put up which any particular shop can adjust how they see fit based on action that comes in, their client betting patterns, etc. etc. No question as Lance Logan commented they may lure money from time to time, but that's not in the opening line itself, that's more not moving a line despite 70 percent action on one side. if the book thinks a spread is fine at 2and a half on the favorite but overall the money is heavier on the fav and the book leaves it at 2and a half instead of moving it to 3 for example, they are taking a position on the underdog in that way. But overall, the lines get plenty of action both ways and they make plenty of juice overall week to week. Obviously, they don't get perfectly balanced action every game, but they don't need to. Remember, even on games where 60 percent of the money (say 60 grand) is on one team and 40 percent is on the other(say 40 grand) they make 26,000 grand if the heavier bet team loses. If it goes the other way, they pay the 60 grand but make 44000 from the losers just as a raw example. So in a situation like that they are essentially risking only 16000 to win 26000. Play that out over hundreds of basketball and football games and even on games that they don't have guaranteed money coming they still have a huge advantage as far as making money. The book can win 7 and lose 10 times on a game with 60/40 type action and come out way ahead so there is no magic need to trap anybody or any other myth because while many times they make a smaller profit on a large number of games where they have much more balanced action, they don't need balanced action because their edge is so solid. Overall, though they pay the linesmakers to generate 2 way action as much as possible and adjust from there. And as far as the linesmakers being predictors of games, it's just not the case. NFL lines are very easy to set based on power rankings, injuries, etc. Each week I can nail every game within a half point and it has nothing to do with predicting outcomes, I can assure you. If you follow and bet the NFL you should be able to guess lines almost exactly on a weekly basis. It's not magic. And with all the parity in the league. and all the games decided on the last possesssion, people that cry fix in the NFL are a joke. That league would never risk rigging games. and unless you got to a crooked QB or something back in the days when they weren't paid as well, I doubt it's ever happened, but that's a whole other topic. As for theguy who pointed to the Lakers being substandard against the spread, that has nothing t do with trapping anybody. That has to do with their lines always being inflated as a popular and overrated team in recent years. To balance action somewhat on their games, lines are generallya little higher than they should be. For basketball gamblers, that's old news. I would think the more casual bettors may often be betting the Lakers regardless of the line quite often. but I can assure you experienced gamblers are often taking the value. That is a trap I guess only to people who find that it's surprising the Lakers don't have a great spread record in recent years. The Mavericks as double digit favs at home have been awful the last few years, but it doesnt mean its a trap when they are an 11 point favorite and win by 8. You always are paying a premium on the top teams at home. If you aren't paying attention to how teams are performing in certain situations, it's awfully tough to win. So the next time you see a line and think it's a trap. it's not. Their are many factors that go into setting them, including perception, but remember the lines are there for the casual bettors and the pro gamblers and everyone in between. Mostly they want action action action and the money will roll in. They only have to really pay attention to the games that end up way unbalanced and they have a big edge there too as I pointed out earlier. Bottom line is don't overthink the lines because their really is no magic in them at all. The magic and fun is trying to pick more winners than losers.
Honestly I'm more comfortable taking the Cardinal's RL instead of the Detroit RL. Happ has pitched pretty well lately and Detroit is an average lineup vs. LHP. Do you want to be praying for a solo shot in the bottom of the 8th to put the Tigers up 3-1?
Conversely Keuchel is horrible, playing for a horrible team. And the Cardinals do very well vs. LHP as it is. Even if Westbrook allows 2-3 runs it won't matter if the Cardinals have 8. At least that's how it plays out in my head
I AGREE
0
Honestly I'm more comfortable taking the Cardinal's RL instead of the Detroit RL. Happ has pitched pretty well lately and Detroit is an average lineup vs. LHP. Do you want to be praying for a solo shot in the bottom of the 8th to put the Tigers up 3-1?
Conversely Keuchel is horrible, playing for a horrible team. And the Cardinals do very well vs. LHP as it is. Even if Westbrook allows 2-3 runs it won't matter if the Cardinals have 8. At least that's how it plays out in my head
According to casinoreview.org, for the NBA reg seasons for the last 3 years...
Lakers ATS 2011 28-38
Lakers ATS 2010 39-42-1
Lakers ATS 2009 33-46-3
On the other hand....
Golden St ATS 2011 36-30
Golden St ATS 2010 41-40-1
Golden St ATS 2009 46-36
Those numbers have NOTHING to do with "traps." They're merely an indication that the betting public overvalues the Lakers year after year simply because of the name on the front of the jersey. Conversely, GS is one of the league's least popular teams and thus attracts generally little support from bettors.
It all boils down to perception.
0
Quote Originally Posted by composite:
There are trap lines...
According to casinoreview.org, for the NBA reg seasons for the last 3 years...
Lakers ATS 2011 28-38
Lakers ATS 2010 39-42-1
Lakers ATS 2009 33-46-3
On the other hand....
Golden St ATS 2011 36-30
Golden St ATS 2010 41-40-1
Golden St ATS 2009 46-36
Those numbers have NOTHING to do with "traps." They're merely an indication that the betting public overvalues the Lakers year after year simply because of the name on the front of the jersey. Conversely, GS is one of the league's least popular teams and thus attracts generally little support from bettors.
Honestly I'm more comfortable taking the Cardinal's RL instead of the Detroit RL. Happ has pitched pretty well lately and Detroit is an average lineup vs. LHP. Do you want to be praying for a solo shot in the bottom of the 8th to put the Tigers up 3-1?
Conversely Keuchel is horrible, playing for a horrible team. And the Cardinals do very well vs. LHP as it is. Even if Westbrook allows 2-3 runs it won't matter if the Cardinals have 8. At least that's how it plays out in my head
these are good points. even though the lines are the same, you get a much better situation with the cards. verlander has had a couple tough outings when nobody expects it.
either way only squares & rookies lay these kinda lines. because once you lose 3 grand to win 1, it makes you either stop doing it or you just quit the game.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Pasteur:
Honestly I'm more comfortable taking the Cardinal's RL instead of the Detroit RL. Happ has pitched pretty well lately and Detroit is an average lineup vs. LHP. Do you want to be praying for a solo shot in the bottom of the 8th to put the Tigers up 3-1?
Conversely Keuchel is horrible, playing for a horrible team. And the Cardinals do very well vs. LHP as it is. Even if Westbrook allows 2-3 runs it won't matter if the Cardinals have 8. At least that's how it plays out in my head
these are good points. even though the lines are the same, you get a much better situation with the cards. verlander has had a couple tough outings when nobody expects it.
either way only squares & rookies lay these kinda lines. because once you lose 3 grand to win 1, it makes you either stop doing it or you just quit the game.
I could never lay that much juice on any baseball game either where so many things have to happen right just to get a hit, let alone score, let alone keep a lead. I do not think it is a trap game and I think the line is right. However, those Vegas Conspiracy nuts out there the point someone already made that would concern me the most is the fact that everyone who plays parlays will be putting DET in the parlay. It looks so easy.
0
I could never lay that much juice on any baseball game either where so many things have to happen right just to get a hit, let alone score, let alone keep a lead. I do not think it is a trap game and I think the line is right. However, those Vegas Conspiracy nuts out there the point someone already made that would concern me the most is the fact that everyone who plays parlays will be putting DET in the parlay. It looks so easy.
Why? Because squares would still play Verlander up to -500?
Traps don't exist. Only those who do not understand perception believe in them.
I don't claim to know it all, but you nailed it on the head. I've said since day 1 traps are non existent. The books don't know the results ahead of time or see into the future, they merely set lines based on the public's perception which they believe will give them the best opportunity to finish with profits, period. I see a couple threads everyday regarding traps, and I can't help but to chuckle a bit.
0
Quote Originally Posted by JFen31:
Why? Because squares would still play Verlander up to -500?
Traps don't exist. Only those who do not understand perception believe in them.
I don't claim to know it all, but you nailed it on the head. I've said since day 1 traps are non existent. The books don't know the results ahead of time or see into the future, they merely set lines based on the public's perception which they believe will give them the best opportunity to finish with profits, period. I see a couple threads everyday regarding traps, and I can't help but to chuckle a bit.
I just don't see how anyone can lay -300 on any baseball team or starting pitcher period! The RL also has zero value at -150, this is a game with many many variables. Verlander tweaks a muscle or hit by ball I mean anything can happen, Detroits bats may go stale which happens a lot with aces on the mound. Look at Tampa the other night with Price on the mound against Hoch, they lost 1-0 as a favorite -270. I like Detroit odds to win here but -300 just has no value in my eyes at all. GL to all on your plays
0
I just don't see how anyone can lay -300 on any baseball team or starting pitcher period! The RL also has zero value at -150, this is a game with many many variables. Verlander tweaks a muscle or hit by ball I mean anything can happen, Detroits bats may go stale which happens a lot with aces on the mound. Look at Tampa the other night with Price on the mound against Hoch, they lost 1-0 as a favorite -270. I like Detroit odds to win here but -300 just has no value in my eyes at all. GL to all on your plays
As JFen said, they do not exist. They may be a figment of people's imaginations because they don't understand how lines are set... but it's not like the oddsmakers are intentionally doing it.
It's all perception... that's all.
0
Please... not another one of these trap threads.
As JFen said, they do not exist. They may be a figment of people's imaginations because they don't understand how lines are set... but it's not like the oddsmakers are intentionally doing it.
You can call it whatever you want... If you are laying -300+ on an MLB game the you deserve to be slapped in the face. The truth is lots of people do it and probably don't post it to save themselves the embarassement. I say that because you cant justify or convince anyone that laying that kinda chalk is right.
0
You can call it whatever you want... If you are laying -300+ on an MLB game the you deserve to be slapped in the face. The truth is lots of people do it and probably don't post it to save themselves the embarassement. I say that because you cant justify or convince anyone that laying that kinda chalk is right.
Bruins, RL or a Parlay is the only way to play something with this much juice. If you feel confident enough to lay -360, you should have no problems just playing the RL right? I mean -360 confidence should definitely mean you are feeling a blow out. So once again no reason at all to lay that kind of ML chalk
0
Bruins, RL or a Parlay is the only way to play something with this much juice. If you feel confident enough to lay -360, you should have no problems just playing the RL right? I mean -360 confidence should definitely mean you are feeling a blow out. So once again no reason at all to lay that kind of ML chalk
Bruins, RL or a Parlay is the only way to play something with this much juice. If you feel confident enough to lay -360, you should have no problems just playing the RL right? I mean -360 confidence should definitely mean you are feeling a blow out. So once again no reason at all to lay that kind of ML chalk
This is a misconception among a lot of bettors.
You are still laying the juice if you parlay.
0
Quote Originally Posted by SJSharks99:
Bruins, RL or a Parlay is the only way to play something with this much juice. If you feel confident enough to lay -360, you should have no problems just playing the RL right? I mean -360 confidence should definitely mean you are feeling a blow out. So once again no reason at all to lay that kind of ML chalk
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.
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
