I read a book where the author said something about not going thru with a bet he would have otherwise made if he had watched the line all week and it moved against him toward the end. He didn't say by how much, so it's assumed that even a half point would nix the deal. The book mainly discusses spreads, not O/U. He may have been speaking more of spreads than O/Us, especially key numbers, though he didn't say it had to be a key number moving against him in order for him to not bet. I presume his reasoning was due to him getting burned in the past more times than it was worth, so he just doesn't risk it anymore.
I'm wanting to get other takes on this idea, i.e. what your experience/policy is, on both spreads and O/Us. For example, if your numbers still have you winning if they hold up, even with a half point less of an edge than you could have gotten had you acted sooner, do you take on that extra risk in either instance? I've had several times when my numbers tell me what to do, and I lose a half point on the line being offered, and I still would have won (or lost) anyway. That half point moving against me hasn't made a difference that I can remember. On the other hand, I've had numerous times when holding out for a BETTER line, or jumping on one BEFORE it moves against me, HAS made a difference. I follow line movements on COVERS to decide whether to act now or wait.
As for tonights game, I decided to hold off after the line moved a half point against me when the reason I had waited was because I thought it might move a half point in my favor. I don't know that it was worth it. I had the under and will be very surprised if it would have made a difference, as it usually doesn't. As for the book author, he may have been speaking ONLY of the spread, not totals, yet I've been practicing his policy for totals as well. Given my record so far, doing so hasn't helped me. If anything, I'm worse off than if I had gone ahead with the bet.
1
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
I read a book where the author said something about not going thru with a bet he would have otherwise made if he had watched the line all week and it moved against him toward the end. He didn't say by how much, so it's assumed that even a half point would nix the deal. The book mainly discusses spreads, not O/U. He may have been speaking more of spreads than O/Us, especially key numbers, though he didn't say it had to be a key number moving against him in order for him to not bet. I presume his reasoning was due to him getting burned in the past more times than it was worth, so he just doesn't risk it anymore.
I'm wanting to get other takes on this idea, i.e. what your experience/policy is, on both spreads and O/Us. For example, if your numbers still have you winning if they hold up, even with a half point less of an edge than you could have gotten had you acted sooner, do you take on that extra risk in either instance? I've had several times when my numbers tell me what to do, and I lose a half point on the line being offered, and I still would have won (or lost) anyway. That half point moving against me hasn't made a difference that I can remember. On the other hand, I've had numerous times when holding out for a BETTER line, or jumping on one BEFORE it moves against me, HAS made a difference. I follow line movements on COVERS to decide whether to act now or wait.
As for tonights game, I decided to hold off after the line moved a half point against me when the reason I had waited was because I thought it might move a half point in my favor. I don't know that it was worth it. I had the under and will be very surprised if it would have made a difference, as it usually doesn't. As for the book author, he may have been speaking ONLY of the spread, not totals, yet I've been practicing his policy for totals as well. Given my record so far, doing so hasn't helped me. If anything, I'm worse off than if I had gone ahead with the bet.
I read a book where the author said something about not going thru with a bet he would have otherwise made if he had watched the line all week and it moved against him toward the end. He didn't say by how much, so it's assumed that even a half point would nix the deal. The book mainly discusses spreads, not O/U. He may have been speaking more of spreads than O/Us, especially key numbers, though he didn't say it had to be a key number moving against him in order for him to not bet. I presume his reasoning was due to him getting burned in the past more times than it was worth, so he just doesn't risk it anymore. I'm wanting to get other takes on this idea, i.e. what your experience/policy is, on both spreads and O/Us. For example, if your numbers still have you winning if they hold up, even with a half point less of an edge than you could have gotten had you acted sooner, do you take on that extra risk in either instance? I've had several times when my numbers tell me what to do, and I lose a half point on the line being offered, and I still would have won (or lost) anyway. That half point moving against me hasn't made a difference that I can remember. On the other hand, I've had numerous times when holding out for a BETTER line, or jumping on one BEFORE it moves against me, HAS made a difference. I follow line movements on COVERS to decide whether to act now or wait. As for tonights game, I decided to hold off after the line moved a half point against me when the reason I had waited was because I thought it might move a half point in my favor. I don't know that it was worth it. I had the under and will be very surprised if it would have made a difference, as it usually doesn't. As for the book author, he may have been speaking ONLY of the spread, not totals, yet I've been practicing his policy for totals as well. Given my record so far, doing so hasn't helped me. If anything, I'm worse off than if I had gone ahead with the bet.
bump city...food for the little gray cells
1
Quote Originally Posted by handicap6272:
I read a book where the author said something about not going thru with a bet he would have otherwise made if he had watched the line all week and it moved against him toward the end. He didn't say by how much, so it's assumed that even a half point would nix the deal. The book mainly discusses spreads, not O/U. He may have been speaking more of spreads than O/Us, especially key numbers, though he didn't say it had to be a key number moving against him in order for him to not bet. I presume his reasoning was due to him getting burned in the past more times than it was worth, so he just doesn't risk it anymore. I'm wanting to get other takes on this idea, i.e. what your experience/policy is, on both spreads and O/Us. For example, if your numbers still have you winning if they hold up, even with a half point less of an edge than you could have gotten had you acted sooner, do you take on that extra risk in either instance? I've had several times when my numbers tell me what to do, and I lose a half point on the line being offered, and I still would have won (or lost) anyway. That half point moving against me hasn't made a difference that I can remember. On the other hand, I've had numerous times when holding out for a BETTER line, or jumping on one BEFORE it moves against me, HAS made a difference. I follow line movements on COVERS to decide whether to act now or wait. As for tonights game, I decided to hold off after the line moved a half point against me when the reason I had waited was because I thought it might move a half point in my favor. I don't know that it was worth it. I had the under and will be very surprised if it would have made a difference, as it usually doesn't. As for the book author, he may have been speaking ONLY of the spread, not totals, yet I've been practicing his policy for totals as well. Given my record so far, doing so hasn't helped me. If anything, I'm worse off than if I had gone ahead with the bet.
If your capping model is strong and proven, if your model doesn't warrant for the move, top up again on the even better line!
This is it. It seems the author does not trust his capping skills. Lines shift due to many reasons, but the two most important ones are: 1) The book has received much more money on X side and needs to balance it; or 2) The books has received bets from guys it considers to be sharp and is decides to move the line to the point where it may be more efficient since it assumes those sharp bettors have found value with their bets.
Only in case 2) could you argue against making the bet. In case 1), nothing tells you that those bets are value plays.
In my case, I dong care at all about line movement, since I trust my capping skills. However, if I had a lean towards Falcons +4 and the line has shifted "against me" so that now the spread is Falcons +6; I will almost certainly bet that line. The other way around, where the line shifts to Falcons +2, I will 100% not bet that.
1
Quote Originally Posted by vivablu:
If your capping model is strong and proven, if your model doesn't warrant for the move, top up again on the even better line!
This is it. It seems the author does not trust his capping skills. Lines shift due to many reasons, but the two most important ones are: 1) The book has received much more money on X side and needs to balance it; or 2) The books has received bets from guys it considers to be sharp and is decides to move the line to the point where it may be more efficient since it assumes those sharp bettors have found value with their bets.
Only in case 2) could you argue against making the bet. In case 1), nothing tells you that those bets are value plays.
In my case, I dong care at all about line movement, since I trust my capping skills. However, if I had a lean towards Falcons +4 and the line has shifted "against me" so that now the spread is Falcons +6; I will almost certainly bet that line. The other way around, where the line shifts to Falcons +2, I will 100% not bet that.
If you want to do that then just always wait and see. I like to try and get a bit of a jump on some lines if I think they'll move with my bet. You sometimes will get caught out when it goes the other way but it is part of the game you play to beat the book.
A 3.5 point line can move to 5.5 or 3, you take extra risk betting early but it could be for extra reward ie making it easier to cash
0
If you want to do that then just always wait and see. I like to try and get a bit of a jump on some lines if I think they'll move with my bet. You sometimes will get caught out when it goes the other way but it is part of the game you play to beat the book.
A 3.5 point line can move to 5.5 or 3, you take extra risk betting early but it could be for extra reward ie making it easier to cash
I read a book where the author said something about not going thru with a bet he would have otherwise made if he had watched the line all week and it moved against him toward the end. He didn't say by how much, so it's assumed that even a half point would nix the deal. The book mainly discusses spreads, not O/U. He may have been speaking more of spreads than O/Us, especially key numbers, though he didn't say it had to be a key number moving against him in order for him to not bet. I presume his reasoning was due to him getting burned in the past more times than it was worth, so he just doesn't risk it anymore. I'm wanting to get other takes on this idea, i.e. what your experience/policy is, on both spreads and O/Us. For example, if your numbers still have you winning if they hold up, even with a half point less of an edge than you could have gotten had you acted sooner, do you take on that extra risk in either instance? I've had several times when my numbers tell me what to do, and I lose a half point on the line being offered, and I still would have won (or lost) anyway. That half point moving against me hasn't made a difference that I can remember. On the other hand, I've had numerous times when holding out for a BETTER line, or jumping on one BEFORE it moves against me, HAS made a difference. I follow line movements on COVERS to decide whether to act now or wait. As for tonights game, I decided to hold off after the line moved a half point against me when the reason I had waited was because I thought it might move a half point in my favor. I don't know that it was worth it. I had the under and will be very surprised if it would have made a difference, as it usually doesn't. As for the book author, he may have been speaking ONLY of the spread, not totals, yet I've been practicing his policy for totals as well. Given my record so far, doing so hasn't helped me. If anything, I'm worse off than if I had gone ahead with the bet.
You hit the nail square on the head. Rarely will it make any difference. Mostly when it involves a key number but even then does not happen very often. Always worth trying to get to a key number as the few times you get there and it matters is worth the effort but losing half a point in the line I'd still make the same play as I'll win or lose the same far more then not and even more so with no key number involved.
0
@handicap6272
Quote Originally Posted by handicap6272:
I read a book where the author said something about not going thru with a bet he would have otherwise made if he had watched the line all week and it moved against him toward the end. He didn't say by how much, so it's assumed that even a half point would nix the deal. The book mainly discusses spreads, not O/U. He may have been speaking more of spreads than O/Us, especially key numbers, though he didn't say it had to be a key number moving against him in order for him to not bet. I presume his reasoning was due to him getting burned in the past more times than it was worth, so he just doesn't risk it anymore. I'm wanting to get other takes on this idea, i.e. what your experience/policy is, on both spreads and O/Us. For example, if your numbers still have you winning if they hold up, even with a half point less of an edge than you could have gotten had you acted sooner, do you take on that extra risk in either instance? I've had several times when my numbers tell me what to do, and I lose a half point on the line being offered, and I still would have won (or lost) anyway. That half point moving against me hasn't made a difference that I can remember. On the other hand, I've had numerous times when holding out for a BETTER line, or jumping on one BEFORE it moves against me, HAS made a difference. I follow line movements on COVERS to decide whether to act now or wait. As for tonights game, I decided to hold off after the line moved a half point against me when the reason I had waited was because I thought it might move a half point in my favor. I don't know that it was worth it. I had the under and will be very surprised if it would have made a difference, as it usually doesn't. As for the book author, he may have been speaking ONLY of the spread, not totals, yet I've been practicing his policy for totals as well. Given my record so far, doing so hasn't helped me. If anything, I'm worse off than if I had gone ahead with the bet.
You hit the nail square on the head. Rarely will it make any difference. Mostly when it involves a key number but even then does not happen very often. Always worth trying to get to a key number as the few times you get there and it matters is worth the effort but losing half a point in the line I'd still make the same play as I'll win or lose the same far more then not and even more so with no key number involved.
I never try to predict line movements, just watch and wait, if line starts moving against me I'll get down quick at one book where the line has not moved yet. If the line goes up I wait it out till later and see how many extra points I can get with trying to get to a key number in mind if possible.
If the line is at a key number I'll take it right away most of the time, may watch it for a short time but alaways be ready to grab the key number quick.
1
I never try to predict line movements, just watch and wait, if line starts moving against me I'll get down quick at one book where the line has not moved yet. If the line goes up I wait it out till later and see how many extra points I can get with trying to get to a key number in mind if possible.
If the line is at a key number I'll take it right away most of the time, may watch it for a short time but alaways be ready to grab the key number quick.
I make my plays based upon my research. Generally speaking if the line goes against me 1.5 or more I'm happy. Anything less than that, meaningless. If I am between and betwixt on a game that I would like to play and the line is adjusting 1.5 or more, I may play it, against the public. Right more than wrong. 40 years of betting. Yea luv it when the public is heavy against me.
"I'm afraid all we may have done is awakened a sleeping giant."
1
I make my plays based upon my research. Generally speaking if the line goes against me 1.5 or more I'm happy. Anything less than that, meaningless. If I am between and betwixt on a game that I would like to play and the line is adjusting 1.5 or more, I may play it, against the public. Right more than wrong. 40 years of betting. Yea luv it when the public is heavy against me.
Hot Forum Topics
