The less u concern yourself with the square plays/sharp plays the better off u are in the long run. Just cap the games as u see it and move on. I've made a killing this year on supposed "square" plays and have been very successful for years doing so. I don't post my picks b/c I don't feel that I have anything to prove to anybody. I come to this site for peoples opinions on games and thats it. I think your big problem is you feel u need to post your picks every week and prove something to this forum and its affecting your judgement.
The less u concern yourself with the square plays/sharp plays the better off u are in the long run. Just cap the games as u see it and move on. I've made a killing this year on supposed "square" plays and have been very successful for years doing so. I don't post my picks b/c I don't feel that I have anything to prove to anybody. I come to this site for peoples opinions on games and thats it. I think your big problem is you feel u need to post your picks every week and prove something to this forum and its affecting your judgement.
so do you think Houston was the "Sharp" play, but you just got burnt? thats kind of the point im making... sometimes when you go sharp, you get burnt... Was baltimore the "Square" play and just got lucky? whatya guys think?
You saw the stats - if you were to say square or sharp then yes, I would call the Houston play sharp. Baltimore D got shredded, Houston should have at worst pushed in OT, would have covered if they didn't convert the 2 point conversion, the oddsmakers didn't want to come off the 3 (Hou +3 was heavily juiced), was supposed to be the only game on the board with lopsided action on the Ravens - the game fit the mold of being a "sharp" play. I had Baltimore, the ball bounced my way. I also had Hou 2nd half pk and the 2nd half over 23, I got very lucky last night and hit everything in that game.
I no longer console myself by saying "I had the right side" - the only right side is the winner. Sometimes you get there, sometimes you don't.
so do you think Houston was the "Sharp" play, but you just got burnt? thats kind of the point im making... sometimes when you go sharp, you get burnt... Was baltimore the "Square" play and just got lucky? whatya guys think?
You saw the stats - if you were to say square or sharp then yes, I would call the Houston play sharp. Baltimore D got shredded, Houston should have at worst pushed in OT, would have covered if they didn't convert the 2 point conversion, the oddsmakers didn't want to come off the 3 (Hou +3 was heavily juiced), was supposed to be the only game on the board with lopsided action on the Ravens - the game fit the mold of being a "sharp" play. I had Baltimore, the ball bounced my way. I also had Hou 2nd half pk and the 2nd half over 23, I got very lucky last night and hit everything in that game.
I no longer console myself by saying "I had the right side" - the only right side is the winner. Sometimes you get there, sometimes you don't.
I gotta agree with RJ here. Their is no true definition. Their are so many ways to look at games. I have seen guys talk about refs, temperature, grass, turf, games won in certain months etc. I have done some studying and kept some notes without wagering to see if the direction I was taking was the right one. I stick with my form on wagering on games. Is it sharp or is it square? Who the hell knows and who the hell cares. Their must be 1001 angles to look at games nowadays with all the information available at your fingertips. The only friend you have in this business is your pocket. Thats the sharpest move you can make, because at the end of the day its your $. My advice is dont buy into the sharp/square nonsense. At the end of the game your either on the right side or the wrong side. It's about doing what works for you, patienece and money management. GL
I gotta agree with RJ here. Their is no true definition. Their are so many ways to look at games. I have seen guys talk about refs, temperature, grass, turf, games won in certain months etc. I have done some studying and kept some notes without wagering to see if the direction I was taking was the right one. I stick with my form on wagering on games. Is it sharp or is it square? Who the hell knows and who the hell cares. Their must be 1001 angles to look at games nowadays with all the information available at your fingertips. The only friend you have in this business is your pocket. Thats the sharpest move you can make, because at the end of the day its your $. My advice is dont buy into the sharp/square nonsense. At the end of the game your either on the right side or the wrong side. It's about doing what works for you, patienece and money management. GL
Yo Bets! With all due respect, I have been gambling on sports since 1986, and I have only heard the terms "squares" and "sharps", since I have been on Covers, and personally I think its nonsense! I know your just commenting on these terms b/c they are used so frequently on this forum, but I cap a game and whatever team I feel is going to cover I bet on, no matter how someone wants characterize or label it? Maybe Im a square?
Yo Bets! With all due respect, I have been gambling on sports since 1986, and I have only heard the terms "squares" and "sharps", since I have been on Covers, and personally I think its nonsense! I know your just commenting on these terms b/c they are used so frequently on this forum, but I cap a game and whatever team I feel is going to cover I bet on, no matter how someone wants characterize or label it? Maybe Im a square?
Yo Bets! With all due respect, I have been gambling on sports since 1986, and I have only heard the terms "squares" and "sharps", since I have been on Covers, and personally I think its nonsense! I know your just commenting on these terms b/c they are used so frequently on this forum, but I cap a game and whatever team I feel is going to cover I bet on, no matter how someone wants characterize or label it? Maybe Im a square?
no offense taken my friend... but I agree, this is the 1st place that I've heard of those terms too. I agree with RJ... There isnt really an "exact" definition of "Square" or "Sharp" plays... Its just lately Ive found myself "Fading" the public when I should be Hammering the Public and then Hammering the Public, when I shouldve "Faded" the public... I think I put WAY too much stock in the "Consensus" Link here at Covers.com and sometimes I avoid a "Gift Line" bc theres 70%+ on that side so I think its a "Square"/Public Play, when its infact a Very Solid bet... I just need to COMPLETELY ignore the public going forward, I think itll REALLY help!!!
Yo Bets! With all due respect, I have been gambling on sports since 1986, and I have only heard the terms "squares" and "sharps", since I have been on Covers, and personally I think its nonsense! I know your just commenting on these terms b/c they are used so frequently on this forum, but I cap a game and whatever team I feel is going to cover I bet on, no matter how someone wants characterize or label it? Maybe Im a square?
no offense taken my friend... but I agree, this is the 1st place that I've heard of those terms too. I agree with RJ... There isnt really an "exact" definition of "Square" or "Sharp" plays... Its just lately Ive found myself "Fading" the public when I should be Hammering the Public and then Hammering the Public, when I shouldve "Faded" the public... I think I put WAY too much stock in the "Consensus" Link here at Covers.com and sometimes I avoid a "Gift Line" bc theres 70%+ on that side so I think its a "Square"/Public Play, when its infact a Very Solid bet... I just need to COMPLETELY ignore the public going forward, I think itll REALLY help!!!
Its just lately Ive found myself "Fading" the public when I should be Hammering the Public and then Hammering the Public, when I shouldve "Faded" the public...
Have you noticed yourself fading the red jerseys when you should be hammering the red jerseys and hammering the blue jerseys when you should have faded the blue jerseys?
You can insert any descriptor in place of the word public in your statement above and it would make as much sense.
Do you notice that you have been successful betting against brunette referees but terrible when a blonde is doing the game? Why not?
Im not being an ass, just trying to make you see that unless something is related to causation you should ignore it as noise.
Its just lately Ive found myself "Fading" the public when I should be Hammering the Public and then Hammering the Public, when I shouldve "Faded" the public...
Have you noticed yourself fading the red jerseys when you should be hammering the red jerseys and hammering the blue jerseys when you should have faded the blue jerseys?
You can insert any descriptor in place of the word public in your statement above and it would make as much sense.
Do you notice that you have been successful betting against brunette referees but terrible when a blonde is doing the game? Why not?
Im not being an ass, just trying to make you see that unless something is related to causation you should ignore it as noise.
With NE/Chi, I should have known better than to bet Chicago. Remember when Brady torn the Titans a new A hole in that snow storm?
Now imagine taking Cutler in the same snow storm. What an easy pick. Like you said, I loved NE, but decided to be a sharp and lost.
With NE/Chi, I should have known better than to bet Chicago. Remember when Brady torn the Titans a new A hole in that snow storm?
Now imagine taking Cutler in the same snow storm. What an easy pick. Like you said, I loved NE, but decided to be a sharp and lost.
BTW - to continue that thought....
The only way to define sharp is someone who consistently beats the line (square would be the opposite).
So if sharps are on one side, by definition they have already beaten the line because the line has moved. So now in order to side with those sharps, you have to take a bad line, thus NOT beating the line, making you a square. So you are on the same side on the same game, but you are the square and they are the sharp because of line.
The only determinant in long term sports gambling winning or losing is beating the line. It is the only thing that books like Pinnacle use to profile players - they dont care if you win or lose - but they do care if you beat the line - because they know that someone who does that consistently will win consistently (a sharp).
So that is the stupidity of following the "sharp" play - you end up with a worse line that is no longer "sharp", and by following the sharp play, you have just made yourself square.
Think about it.
BTW - to continue that thought....
The only way to define sharp is someone who consistently beats the line (square would be the opposite).
So if sharps are on one side, by definition they have already beaten the line because the line has moved. So now in order to side with those sharps, you have to take a bad line, thus NOT beating the line, making you a square. So you are on the same side on the same game, but you are the square and they are the sharp because of line.
The only determinant in long term sports gambling winning or losing is beating the line. It is the only thing that books like Pinnacle use to profile players - they dont care if you win or lose - but they do care if you beat the line - because they know that someone who does that consistently will win consistently (a sharp).
So that is the stupidity of following the "sharp" play - you end up with a worse line that is no longer "sharp", and by following the sharp play, you have just made yourself square.
Think about it.
With NE/Chi, I should have known better than to bet Chicago. Remember when Brady torn the Titans a new A hole in that snow storm?
Now imagine taking Cutler in the same snow storm. What an easy pick. Like you said, I loved NE, but decided to be a sharp and lost.
With NE/Chi, I should have known better than to bet Chicago. Remember when Brady torn the Titans a new A hole in that snow storm?
Now imagine taking Cutler in the same snow storm. What an easy pick. Like you said, I loved NE, but decided to be a sharp and lost.
BTW - to continue that thought....
The only way to define sharp is someone who consistently beats the line (square would be the opposite).
So if sharps are on one side, by definition they have already beaten the line because the line has moved. So now in order to side with those sharps, you have to take a bad line, thus NOT beating the line, making you a square. So you are on the same side on the same game, but you are the square and they are the sharp because of line.
The only determinant in long term sports gambling winning or losing is beating the line. It is the only thing that books like Pinnacle use to profile players - they dont care if you win or lose - but they do care if you beat the line - because they know that someone who does that consistently will win consistently (a sharp).
So that is the stupidity of following the "sharp" play - you end up with a worse line that is no longer "sharp", and by following the sharp play, you have just made yourself square.
Think about it.
Vanzack, let me play 'devils advocate' here... I highlighted the text im referring to... According to what youve said, if i take a line early and it moves away in the opposite direction from my play, im a "Sharp".... But Ive tried this before... I've tried 'middling' the line.... For those that dont know what this is, "Middling" is as follows.... You bet the obvious "public" line that u think will move away from you bet later in the week... and then when it moves, u bet the other side... the idea behind this is you only risk 10% but can hit 200%, ie. risk 100 to win 2000.... Middles barely EVER hit! therefore, the "Sharp" line that moved to a "Square" line, ussually doesnt matter... in other words, the "Opening Line" rarely wins against the "Closing Line"... so what exactly makes it "Sharp"???.... At the end of the day, In My Humble Opinion, lines move in order to create 50-50% action... NOT to distinguish "sharp" from "square"...
So "Beating the Line" does not make you "sharp" in my opinion, it merely gives you a slightly better line..... VERY Rarely, does the line "middle", therefore, VERY rarely, does betting the "early line" against the "closing line" make you "Sharp", it just gives you a slightly better line which could be considered "sharp", its all subject to interpretation....
At the end of the day, I agree with a few people above when they said "the sharp line is the winning line"... As Vanzack has already said, the term "sharp" is just as relevant as "noise", its COMPLETELY a made up concept by bettors...... Im just trying to give an opposing view, lets hear your responses
BTW - to continue that thought....
The only way to define sharp is someone who consistently beats the line (square would be the opposite).
So if sharps are on one side, by definition they have already beaten the line because the line has moved. So now in order to side with those sharps, you have to take a bad line, thus NOT beating the line, making you a square. So you are on the same side on the same game, but you are the square and they are the sharp because of line.
The only determinant in long term sports gambling winning or losing is beating the line. It is the only thing that books like Pinnacle use to profile players - they dont care if you win or lose - but they do care if you beat the line - because they know that someone who does that consistently will win consistently (a sharp).
So that is the stupidity of following the "sharp" play - you end up with a worse line that is no longer "sharp", and by following the sharp play, you have just made yourself square.
Think about it.
Vanzack, let me play 'devils advocate' here... I highlighted the text im referring to... According to what youve said, if i take a line early and it moves away in the opposite direction from my play, im a "Sharp".... But Ive tried this before... I've tried 'middling' the line.... For those that dont know what this is, "Middling" is as follows.... You bet the obvious "public" line that u think will move away from you bet later in the week... and then when it moves, u bet the other side... the idea behind this is you only risk 10% but can hit 200%, ie. risk 100 to win 2000.... Middles barely EVER hit! therefore, the "Sharp" line that moved to a "Square" line, ussually doesnt matter... in other words, the "Opening Line" rarely wins against the "Closing Line"... so what exactly makes it "Sharp"???.... At the end of the day, In My Humble Opinion, lines move in order to create 50-50% action... NOT to distinguish "sharp" from "square"...
So "Beating the Line" does not make you "sharp" in my opinion, it merely gives you a slightly better line..... VERY Rarely, does the line "middle", therefore, VERY rarely, does betting the "early line" against the "closing line" make you "Sharp", it just gives you a slightly better line which could be considered "sharp", its all subject to interpretation....
At the end of the day, I agree with a few people above when they said "the sharp line is the winning line"... As Vanzack has already said, the term "sharp" is just as relevant as "noise", its COMPLETELY a made up concept by bettors...... Im just trying to give an opposing view, lets hear your responses
This past week got me thinking... Ive been betting for a long time now, but I still remember when I was a "n00b" and me and my friends always reminisce about the one season where we Bet 3 teams for like 5 consecutive weeks in a row, teased, reversed, and hit em all, EVERY week! Now that Im an "experienced" bettor, I look back and say... "boy, did I get lucky! i was such a square!"... but was I really? I mean, the public Wins sometimes right? I was the typical public bettor, I would Hammer every public play, I didnt know about trends, i didnt care about spots, I just pounded the "Obvious Plays"... or the "LOCKS".... But I had some SERIOUS Winning Streaks as a result... Fast forward to this season and lately it seems everytime I go "Sharp", I shouldve gone "Square" and vice-versa... Theres got to be a way to identify when the "let-downs" are or where the "Good/Bad Spots" are?
For example, this past week, if I were still a "Square", I wouldve almost undoubtedly hammered Atlanta, NE, and Indy... Because those are 3 Public teams, and I was a Public Bettor... But now, I try and be a "Sharp" bettor and because the Atlanta line was too low, it was a "trap" so I layed off, and since NE had such a HUGE Monday Night game, they were Perfect Fade Material, so I went with Chicago and Lost... But I did make one "Square/Public Play", I pounded Indy bc I felt despite 80+% of the Public being on Indy, they were in a "Must Win", and they did Win... but I Lost on a Last Second TD... So after the game I kicked myself for not being "Sharp"... which mightve led to me being "Sharp" on Chicago.... But I Lost there too!... So now what do I do?
The question I pose to you guys is this, when is a Bet just TOO GOOD to be true? ....and when is a Line just a "Gift Line"? ... I remember a couple weeks ago when Pitt played @ Buffalo, in the 1st half my friend said to me, "Damn Jay, we shoulda POUNDED Pitt, it was a 'Gift Line' " but by the end of the game, we laughed and were glad we didnt take Pitt... Again, before Wk14, we felt like Atlanta was a "Gift Line" but it seemed a bit low so we decided to layoff and we were wrong... So how do you guys decide when to lay off or when to POUND that "Gift Line"??
Despite our conspiracy theories, Vegas DOES NOT control the outcome of games, they just set a line and we dictate the action... Every season, every game, every week, I try and BETTER my handicapping skills, I try and learn something new every week, and I try and teach myself lessons... After this week, I felt like a completely MISSED some "Obvious Bets" where I couldve smashed but I didnt wanna Bet with the Public...
Thats another thing, following the Public Plays can sometimes help, and other times, REALLY hurt! This past week it REALLY hurt me!...... I "went against the grain" on Thursday with the Colts being a HUGE Public Play and got killed so then I faded the Public on Sunday and got killed again!.... When do you guys follow the public? Do you guys pick and choose or do you religiously follow percentages over a certain number? Or do you completely ignore the Public? Whats your opinion of following or fading the Consensus???
Im just really curious to hear when you guys Ride the "Square Play" or make a "Sharp Play".... and what makes it a "Square Play" if it ends up being the Winning Play?? Id REALLY like to hear what you "Veterans" out there think about this concept.... Lately I've found myself laying off some really solid plays bc of the Public being ALL over them and Im sick of missing these "gimmes"... I wanna better myself as a Handicapper and I really think this will help! Thanks for ALL the feedback!!!
This past week got me thinking... Ive been betting for a long time now, but I still remember when I was a "n00b" and me and my friends always reminisce about the one season where we Bet 3 teams for like 5 consecutive weeks in a row, teased, reversed, and hit em all, EVERY week! Now that Im an "experienced" bettor, I look back and say... "boy, did I get lucky! i was such a square!"... but was I really? I mean, the public Wins sometimes right? I was the typical public bettor, I would Hammer every public play, I didnt know about trends, i didnt care about spots, I just pounded the "Obvious Plays"... or the "LOCKS".... But I had some SERIOUS Winning Streaks as a result... Fast forward to this season and lately it seems everytime I go "Sharp", I shouldve gone "Square" and vice-versa... Theres got to be a way to identify when the "let-downs" are or where the "Good/Bad Spots" are?
For example, this past week, if I were still a "Square", I wouldve almost undoubtedly hammered Atlanta, NE, and Indy... Because those are 3 Public teams, and I was a Public Bettor... But now, I try and be a "Sharp" bettor and because the Atlanta line was too low, it was a "trap" so I layed off, and since NE had such a HUGE Monday Night game, they were Perfect Fade Material, so I went with Chicago and Lost... But I did make one "Square/Public Play", I pounded Indy bc I felt despite 80+% of the Public being on Indy, they were in a "Must Win", and they did Win... but I Lost on a Last Second TD... So after the game I kicked myself for not being "Sharp"... which mightve led to me being "Sharp" on Chicago.... But I Lost there too!... So now what do I do?
The question I pose to you guys is this, when is a Bet just TOO GOOD to be true? ....and when is a Line just a "Gift Line"? ... I remember a couple weeks ago when Pitt played @ Buffalo, in the 1st half my friend said to me, "Damn Jay, we shoulda POUNDED Pitt, it was a 'Gift Line' " but by the end of the game, we laughed and were glad we didnt take Pitt... Again, before Wk14, we felt like Atlanta was a "Gift Line" but it seemed a bit low so we decided to layoff and we were wrong... So how do you guys decide when to lay off or when to POUND that "Gift Line"??
Despite our conspiracy theories, Vegas DOES NOT control the outcome of games, they just set a line and we dictate the action... Every season, every game, every week, I try and BETTER my handicapping skills, I try and learn something new every week, and I try and teach myself lessons... After this week, I felt like a completely MISSED some "Obvious Bets" where I couldve smashed but I didnt wanna Bet with the Public...
Thats another thing, following the Public Plays can sometimes help, and other times, REALLY hurt! This past week it REALLY hurt me!...... I "went against the grain" on Thursday with the Colts being a HUGE Public Play and got killed so then I faded the Public on Sunday and got killed again!.... When do you guys follow the public? Do you guys pick and choose or do you religiously follow percentages over a certain number? Or do you completely ignore the Public? Whats your opinion of following or fading the Consensus???
Im just really curious to hear when you guys Ride the "Square Play" or make a "Sharp Play".... and what makes it a "Square Play" if it ends up being the Winning Play?? Id REALLY like to hear what you "Veterans" out there think about this concept.... Lately I've found myself laying off some really solid plays bc of the Public being ALL over them and Im sick of missing these "gimmes"... I wanna better myself as a Handicapper and I really think this will help! Thanks for ALL the feedback!!!
Yes it's exactly as VZ suggests and all about beating the #. Squares.....sharps whatever it's all about getting onboard w/ your play when the # suggests the best value. Example.....Sharp loves team X when line comes out at -6. By gametime the # is 7 and money is still coming in on team X if you got the # at 6 consider your action sharp if you get it at 7 consider it square either way square/sharp can both win on the same team. In the long run sharp action will win out because they are getting better value w/ their lines. It goes the other way as well where the sharp $ comes in late after public moves a # one direction by jumping in late going the other way. There is enough to digest each and every week that I can't get hung up on whether my plays are sharp or square it's hard to control. At the end of the day you try and get the best value on your lines from the number to the vig as possible and your action will be more sharp than square when it's all said and done. Someone is gonna say "the value play is the winning play" and that's BS. I work w/ 4 books and most of the time I'm able to find the best # combined w/ the vig for the side I like at one of them so this is what I am talking about when I say value. It can not be overstated enough how important it is to have multiple books if you want to win long term.
Yes it's exactly as VZ suggests and all about beating the #. Squares.....sharps whatever it's all about getting onboard w/ your play when the # suggests the best value. Example.....Sharp loves team X when line comes out at -6. By gametime the # is 7 and money is still coming in on team X if you got the # at 6 consider your action sharp if you get it at 7 consider it square either way square/sharp can both win on the same team. In the long run sharp action will win out because they are getting better value w/ their lines. It goes the other way as well where the sharp $ comes in late after public moves a # one direction by jumping in late going the other way. There is enough to digest each and every week that I can't get hung up on whether my plays are sharp or square it's hard to control. At the end of the day you try and get the best value on your lines from the number to the vig as possible and your action will be more sharp than square when it's all said and done. Someone is gonna say "the value play is the winning play" and that's BS. I work w/ 4 books and most of the time I'm able to find the best # combined w/ the vig for the side I like at one of them so this is what I am talking about when I say value. It can not be overstated enough how important it is to have multiple books if you want to win long term.
Vanzack, let me play 'devils advocate' here... I highlighted the text im referring to... According to what youve said, if i take a line early and it moves away in the opposite direction from my play, im a "Sharp".... But Ive tried this before... I've tried 'middling' the line.... For those that dont know what this is, "Middling" is as follows.... You bet the obvious "public" line that u think will move away from you bet later in the week... and then when it moves, u bet the other side... the idea behind this is you only risk 10% but can hit 200%, ie. risk 100 to win 2000.... Middles barely EVER hit! therefore, the "Sharp" line that moved to a "Square" line, ussually doesnt matter... in other words, the "Opening Line" rarely wins against the "Closing Line"... so what exactly makes it "Sharp"???.... At the end of the day, In My Humble Opinion, lines move in order to create 50-50% action... NOT to distinguish "sharp" from "square"...
So "Beating the Line" does not make you "sharp" in my opinion, it merely gives you a slightly better line..... VERY Rarely, does the line "middle", therefore, VERY rarely, does betting the "early line" against the "closing line" make you "Sharp", it just gives you a slightly better line which could be considered "sharp", its all subject to interpretation....
At the end of the day, I agree with a few people above when they said "the sharp line is the winning line"... As Vanzack has already said, the term "sharp" is just as relevant as "noise", its COMPLETELY a made up concept by bettors...... Im just trying to give an opposing view, lets hear your responses
Your whole argument is false because of every time you use the phrase "very rarely".
Maybe in your perception a line move of a half point, or full point, or several points "very rarely" matter, but statistically they matter quite a bit. They matter differently according to what numbers you are moving across, but generally a half point is worth about 8 - 10 cents, a full point generally about 16 -20 cents.
So if you got a full point more on every bet, 4% of your losses at -110 would be winners with the extra point. That is huge. So while it seems imperceptable to you and it "very rarely" matters, it is absolutely gigantic statistically.
PS - you also state that you are risking 10% to middle something, which is also not true. You are risking 5% to make a middle, which means that one out of 20 middles would have to hit to break even. So while 1 in 19 might make your definition of "very rarely", 1 in 19 middles is a longterm winner. This is another great example of perception mindfucks in gambling, counterintuitive situations where the house takes advantage of the psychologoy of the gambler.
Vanzack, let me play 'devils advocate' here... I highlighted the text im referring to... According to what youve said, if i take a line early and it moves away in the opposite direction from my play, im a "Sharp".... But Ive tried this before... I've tried 'middling' the line.... For those that dont know what this is, "Middling" is as follows.... You bet the obvious "public" line that u think will move away from you bet later in the week... and then when it moves, u bet the other side... the idea behind this is you only risk 10% but can hit 200%, ie. risk 100 to win 2000.... Middles barely EVER hit! therefore, the "Sharp" line that moved to a "Square" line, ussually doesnt matter... in other words, the "Opening Line" rarely wins against the "Closing Line"... so what exactly makes it "Sharp"???.... At the end of the day, In My Humble Opinion, lines move in order to create 50-50% action... NOT to distinguish "sharp" from "square"...
So "Beating the Line" does not make you "sharp" in my opinion, it merely gives you a slightly better line..... VERY Rarely, does the line "middle", therefore, VERY rarely, does betting the "early line" against the "closing line" make you "Sharp", it just gives you a slightly better line which could be considered "sharp", its all subject to interpretation....
At the end of the day, I agree with a few people above when they said "the sharp line is the winning line"... As Vanzack has already said, the term "sharp" is just as relevant as "noise", its COMPLETELY a made up concept by bettors...... Im just trying to give an opposing view, lets hear your responses
Your whole argument is false because of every time you use the phrase "very rarely".
Maybe in your perception a line move of a half point, or full point, or several points "very rarely" matter, but statistically they matter quite a bit. They matter differently according to what numbers you are moving across, but generally a half point is worth about 8 - 10 cents, a full point generally about 16 -20 cents.
So if you got a full point more on every bet, 4% of your losses at -110 would be winners with the extra point. That is huge. So while it seems imperceptable to you and it "very rarely" matters, it is absolutely gigantic statistically.
PS - you also state that you are risking 10% to middle something, which is also not true. You are risking 5% to make a middle, which means that one out of 20 middles would have to hit to break even. So while 1 in 19 might make your definition of "very rarely", 1 in 19 middles is a longterm winner. This is another great example of perception mindfucks in gambling, counterintuitive situations where the house takes advantage of the psychologoy of the gambler.
Vanzack, let me play 'devils advocate' here... I highlighted the text im referring to... According to what youve said, if i take a line early and it moves away in the opposite direction from my play, im a "Sharp".... But Ive tried this before... I've tried 'middling' the line.... For those that dont know what this is, "Middling" is as follows.... You bet the obvious "public" line that u think will move away from you bet later in the week... and then when it moves, u bet the other side... the idea behind this is you only risk 10% but can hit 200%, ie. risk 100 to win 2000.... Middles barely EVER hit! therefore, the "Sharp" line that moved to a "Square" line, ussually doesnt matter... in other words, the "Opening Line" rarely wins against the "Closing Line"... so what exactly makes it "Sharp"???.... At the end of the day, In My Humble Opinion, lines move in order to create 50-50% action... NOT to distinguish "sharp" from "square"...
So "Beating the Line" does not make you "sharp" in my opinion, it merely gives you a slightly better line..... VERY Rarely, does the line "middle", therefore, VERY rarely, does betting the "early line" against the "closing line" make you "Sharp", it just gives you a slightly better line which could be considered "sharp", its all subject to interpretation....
At the end of the day, I agree with a few people above when they said "the sharp line is the winning line"... As Vanzack has already said, the term "sharp" is just as relevant as "noise", its COMPLETELY a made up concept by bettors...... Im just trying to give an opposing view, lets hear your responses
Here is a fact for you:
The only thing that Pinnacle tracks on their players to determine player risk is beating the line. Thats it. Not whether you win or you lose, but if you beat the line. Take a million from them last year but didnt beat the line? They are totally unafraid of you - but take a million from them where you beat the line way above the statistical mean? They are nervous.
So your definition above of a sharp is in direct contrast with Pinnnacles definition of a sharp. Care to take sides?
Vanzack, let me play 'devils advocate' here... I highlighted the text im referring to... According to what youve said, if i take a line early and it moves away in the opposite direction from my play, im a "Sharp".... But Ive tried this before... I've tried 'middling' the line.... For those that dont know what this is, "Middling" is as follows.... You bet the obvious "public" line that u think will move away from you bet later in the week... and then when it moves, u bet the other side... the idea behind this is you only risk 10% but can hit 200%, ie. risk 100 to win 2000.... Middles barely EVER hit! therefore, the "Sharp" line that moved to a "Square" line, ussually doesnt matter... in other words, the "Opening Line" rarely wins against the "Closing Line"... so what exactly makes it "Sharp"???.... At the end of the day, In My Humble Opinion, lines move in order to create 50-50% action... NOT to distinguish "sharp" from "square"...
So "Beating the Line" does not make you "sharp" in my opinion, it merely gives you a slightly better line..... VERY Rarely, does the line "middle", therefore, VERY rarely, does betting the "early line" against the "closing line" make you "Sharp", it just gives you a slightly better line which could be considered "sharp", its all subject to interpretation....
At the end of the day, I agree with a few people above when they said "the sharp line is the winning line"... As Vanzack has already said, the term "sharp" is just as relevant as "noise", its COMPLETELY a made up concept by bettors...... Im just trying to give an opposing view, lets hear your responses
Here is a fact for you:
The only thing that Pinnacle tracks on their players to determine player risk is beating the line. Thats it. Not whether you win or you lose, but if you beat the line. Take a million from them last year but didnt beat the line? They are totally unafraid of you - but take a million from them where you beat the line way above the statistical mean? They are nervous.
So your definition above of a sharp is in direct contrast with Pinnnacles definition of a sharp. Care to take sides?
Maybe a different way of looking at my point above would be more clear:
If you are betting at -110, and each half point is worth 10 cents (for ease of this example) - the following is true:
1. When you bet at the closing line you are laying -110 on a -100 proposition, thus you have a 50% chance of winning but you are laying 52.4%. So you have a -2.4% expectation.
2. When you beat the line by .5 point, you are laying -110 on a -110 proposition, thus you have a 52.4% chance of winning and you are laying 52.4%. So you have a 0% expectation.
3. When you beat the line by 1 point, you are laying -110 on a -120 proposition, thus you have a 54.5% chance of winning and you are laying 52.4%. So you have a +2.1% expectation.
So by beating the line by 1 point in every game you bet, you have effectively turned the breakeven threshold from 52.4% to 47.9%!!! That is HUGE!!
And BTW - this is at -110. This gets exponentially better at -105 or any other reduced juice.
Maybe a different way of looking at my point above would be more clear:
If you are betting at -110, and each half point is worth 10 cents (for ease of this example) - the following is true:
1. When you bet at the closing line you are laying -110 on a -100 proposition, thus you have a 50% chance of winning but you are laying 52.4%. So you have a -2.4% expectation.
2. When you beat the line by .5 point, you are laying -110 on a -110 proposition, thus you have a 52.4% chance of winning and you are laying 52.4%. So you have a 0% expectation.
3. When you beat the line by 1 point, you are laying -110 on a -120 proposition, thus you have a 54.5% chance of winning and you are laying 52.4%. So you have a +2.1% expectation.
So by beating the line by 1 point in every game you bet, you have effectively turned the breakeven threshold from 52.4% to 47.9%!!! That is HUGE!!
And BTW - this is at -110. This gets exponentially better at -105 or any other reduced juice.
RJ -
The correlation between consistently beating the line and winning is the highest correlation of longterm success there is.
So while I understand (and agree) with what you are saying about a "sharp is a winner", I suggest that a person who beats the line is a winner, and therefore a sharp.
It would be very hard to consistently beat the line and not win, and that is why Pinnacle (and most other books) consider these guys the most dangerous threat to them.
RJ -
The correlation between consistently beating the line and winning is the highest correlation of longterm success there is.
So while I understand (and agree) with what you are saying about a "sharp is a winner", I suggest that a person who beats the line is a winner, and therefore a sharp.
It would be very hard to consistently beat the line and not win, and that is why Pinnacle (and most other books) consider these guys the most dangerous threat to them.
Agreed - because almost always they are OVERPRICED.
If you could buy a point for 3 cents, you would buy all day. But because you have to OVERPAY, it is usually a bad idea.
Agreed - because almost always they are OVERPRICED.
If you could buy a point for 3 cents, you would buy all day. But because you have to OVERPAY, it is usually a bad idea.
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.