What are your picks for the weekend anyway? And.......
.........May the Force be with You
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.
Who is this too?
Who is this too?
Could'nt agree more. I was a bookie makes shit load off monies by betting against the Public, not the case anymore.
Could'nt agree more. I was a bookie makes shit load off monies by betting against the Public, not the case anymore.
this is
Thread of the Year 2010I was referred to this thread and have to say... it was very informative and helpful for a "newbie" here on covers. Great debate!
this is
Thread of the Year 2010I was referred to this thread and have to say... it was very informative and helpful for a "newbie" here on covers. Great debate!
I started this thread LASTYR and I really liked the responses and insight that I got from the Covers Community...
After lastnights BLOODBATH with the Saints (arguably SQUARE) DEMOLISHING the Colts ...... And then Tonight with the Jags (arguably the SHARP) Embarassing the Ravens on MNF.... I found myself both nights on the "Supposed" Square Side, with One Cashing and the Other Losing......
Lets strike up some GREAT Conversations and DEBATES again!!! ............
I'd like to hear from some of the TOP 2011 Cappers and of course from the Veterans!!!!
I started this thread LASTYR and I really liked the responses and insight that I got from the Covers Community...
After lastnights BLOODBATH with the Saints (arguably SQUARE) DEMOLISHING the Colts ...... And then Tonight with the Jags (arguably the SHARP) Embarassing the Ravens on MNF.... I found myself both nights on the "Supposed" Square Side, with One Cashing and the Other Losing......
Lets strike up some GREAT Conversations and DEBATES again!!! ............
I'd like to hear from some of the TOP 2011 Cappers and of course from the Veterans!!!!
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.
I think vanzack said it all right here
Beating the line + low juice
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.
I think vanzack said it all right here
Beating the line + low juice
How many of us would take winning 2 of every 3 bets? IMO its best just not to try guessing. When the numbers scream one side, and the public is hammering them, in the NFL take the other side or stay away. There's generally an angle that makes sense, you just have to look for it. Jacksonville had the ability to slow the game down and shorten it, making covering 10 a difficult task. I tend to think of the games like this. Sometimes I talk sports with my girlfriend's dad. Reading the numbers to a recreational fan like him, vs. someone who follows betting like me, I think, what would his reaction be if x was a favorite over y. The initial reaction, the "Baltimore will wax Jacksonville" is all i need to hear. I obviously like to look at the numbers, but sometimes there just aren't numbers to predict tonight.
College football weekday games have been cash in this spot btw.
How many of us would take winning 2 of every 3 bets? IMO its best just not to try guessing. When the numbers scream one side, and the public is hammering them, in the NFL take the other side or stay away. There's generally an angle that makes sense, you just have to look for it. Jacksonville had the ability to slow the game down and shorten it, making covering 10 a difficult task. I tend to think of the games like this. Sometimes I talk sports with my girlfriend's dad. Reading the numbers to a recreational fan like him, vs. someone who follows betting like me, I think, what would his reaction be if x was a favorite over y. The initial reaction, the "Baltimore will wax Jacksonville" is all i need to hear. I obviously like to look at the numbers, but sometimes there just aren't numbers to predict tonight.
College football weekday games have been cash in this spot btw.
very simple.
lay points only with top tier offense like brady/brees, preferably at home. Need dependability when laying chalk.
take points when average or untested teams are laying points vs good defense.
last night, you were laying chalk at home with brees in a bounce back game vs a shit team....public play.
tonight, you had an average QB laying big road chalk facing great defense. sharp play.
very simple.
lay points only with top tier offense like brady/brees, preferably at home. Need dependability when laying chalk.
take points when average or untested teams are laying points vs good defense.
last night, you were laying chalk at home with brees in a bounce back game vs a shit team....public play.
tonight, you had an average QB laying big road chalk facing great defense. sharp play.
How many of us would take winning 2 of every 3 bets? IMO its best just not to try guessing. When the numbers scream one side, and the public is hammering them, in the NFL take the other side or stay away. There's generally an angle that makes sense, you just have to look for it. Jacksonville had the ability to slow the game down and shorten it, making covering 10 a difficult task. I tend to think of the games like this. Sometimes I talk sports with my girlfriend's dad. Reading the numbers to a recreational fan like him, vs. someone who follows betting like me, I think, what would his reaction be if x was a favorite over y. The initial reaction, the "Baltimore will wax Jacksonville" is all i need to hear. I obviously like to look at the numbers, but sometimes there just aren't numbers to predict tonight.
College football weekday games have been cash in this spot btw.
But if you asked a "recreational fan" about the NO/Indy game last night they probably would have told you the same... that the saints are going to crush the colts.
So this system isnt dependable.
"Fading the public" (I hate that fucking phrase) is not a dependable way to wager. You must set your own line and get in early or late depending on the game in order to get the best line.
Somebody who grabbed JAX early at lets say +7.5 (-110) would not be considered "sharp" even though he was on the winning side because he could have waited and got JAX at +10.5 or +11.
Somebody who grabbed BAL -7.5 is "sharper" than the guy who grabbed them at -10.5 even though they both lost.
Somebody who had JAX +10 (-102) is sharper than somebody who had JAX +10 (-103)
How many of us would take winning 2 of every 3 bets? IMO its best just not to try guessing. When the numbers scream one side, and the public is hammering them, in the NFL take the other side or stay away. There's generally an angle that makes sense, you just have to look for it. Jacksonville had the ability to slow the game down and shorten it, making covering 10 a difficult task. I tend to think of the games like this. Sometimes I talk sports with my girlfriend's dad. Reading the numbers to a recreational fan like him, vs. someone who follows betting like me, I think, what would his reaction be if x was a favorite over y. The initial reaction, the "Baltimore will wax Jacksonville" is all i need to hear. I obviously like to look at the numbers, but sometimes there just aren't numbers to predict tonight.
College football weekday games have been cash in this spot btw.
But if you asked a "recreational fan" about the NO/Indy game last night they probably would have told you the same... that the saints are going to crush the colts.
So this system isnt dependable.
"Fading the public" (I hate that fucking phrase) is not a dependable way to wager. You must set your own line and get in early or late depending on the game in order to get the best line.
Somebody who grabbed JAX early at lets say +7.5 (-110) would not be considered "sharp" even though he was on the winning side because he could have waited and got JAX at +10.5 or +11.
Somebody who grabbed BAL -7.5 is "sharper" than the guy who grabbed them at -10.5 even though they both lost.
Somebody who had JAX +10 (-102) is sharper than somebody who had JAX +10 (-103)
But if you asked a "recreational fan" about the NO/Indy game last night they probably would have told you the same... that the saints are going to crush the colts.
So this system isnt dependable.
"Fading the public" (I hate that fucking phrase) is not a dependable way to wager. You must set your own line and get in early or late depending on the game in order to get the best line.
Somebody who grabbed JAX early at lets say +7.5 (-110) would not be considered "sharp" even though he was on the winning side because he could have waited and got JAX at +10.5 or +11.
Somebody who grabbed BAL -7.5 is "sharper" than the guy who grabbed them at -10.5 even though they both lost.
Somebody who had JAX +10 (-102) is sharper than somebody who had JAX +10 (-103)
so you believe its possible to be "sharp", yet still LOSE your wager??? ....im not arguing, im just discussing
But if you asked a "recreational fan" about the NO/Indy game last night they probably would have told you the same... that the saints are going to crush the colts.
So this system isnt dependable.
"Fading the public" (I hate that fucking phrase) is not a dependable way to wager. You must set your own line and get in early or late depending on the game in order to get the best line.
Somebody who grabbed JAX early at lets say +7.5 (-110) would not be considered "sharp" even though he was on the winning side because he could have waited and got JAX at +10.5 or +11.
Somebody who grabbed BAL -7.5 is "sharper" than the guy who grabbed them at -10.5 even though they both lost.
Somebody who had JAX +10 (-102) is sharper than somebody who had JAX +10 (-103)
so you believe its possible to be "sharp", yet still LOSE your wager??? ....im not arguing, im just discussing
How many of us would take winning 2 of every 3 bets? IMO its best just not to try guessing. When the numbers scream one side, and the public is hammering them, in the NFL take the other side or stay away. There's generally an angle that makes sense, you just have to look for it. Jacksonville had the ability to slow the game down and shorten it, making covering 10 a difficult task. I tend to think of the games like this. Sometimes I talk sports with my girlfriend's dad. Reading the numbers to a recreational fan like him, vs. someone who follows betting like me, I think, what would his reaction be if x was a favorite over y. The initial reaction, the "Baltimore will wax Jacksonville" is all i need to hear. I obviously like to look at the numbers, but sometimes there just aren't numbers to predict tonight.
College football weekday games have been cash in this spot btw.
this is a GREAT Post and a GREAT Point... and at the end of the day, i ALWAYS advise people to do this... AVOID betting with the "PUBLIC" at ALL costs!
.... Let me ask you this; Where are you getting your "PUBLIC" from????
.... Who exactly dictates the "PUBLIC's" Action????
-Using the Covers.com "Consensus Picks" only accounts for 'about' 5,000-10,000 TOPs! That is NOT the "Betting PUBLIC", in fact it's only accounting for a small minority of Gamblers. This small minority is actually 'educated' far beyond the 'average gambler'. So IMO, you CAN NOT use the Covers.com Consensus Picks, they are "EDUCATED GAMBLERS"... NOT Joe 'PUBLIC'!
.... These are Questions that MUST be answered before you say "the PUBLIC is Hammering one Side".... Where are you getting your information from????
-Lastnight was an OBVIOUS PUBLIC Play on the Ravens, but I heard SPECIFIC Statistics such as 75%-80% on Baltimore... Says WHO????
.... I think we would all be HELPING one another if we could share our sources. Where do you get your "PUBLIC Percentages" from????
How many of us would take winning 2 of every 3 bets? IMO its best just not to try guessing. When the numbers scream one side, and the public is hammering them, in the NFL take the other side or stay away. There's generally an angle that makes sense, you just have to look for it. Jacksonville had the ability to slow the game down and shorten it, making covering 10 a difficult task. I tend to think of the games like this. Sometimes I talk sports with my girlfriend's dad. Reading the numbers to a recreational fan like him, vs. someone who follows betting like me, I think, what would his reaction be if x was a favorite over y. The initial reaction, the "Baltimore will wax Jacksonville" is all i need to hear. I obviously like to look at the numbers, but sometimes there just aren't numbers to predict tonight.
College football weekday games have been cash in this spot btw.
this is a GREAT Post and a GREAT Point... and at the end of the day, i ALWAYS advise people to do this... AVOID betting with the "PUBLIC" at ALL costs!
.... Let me ask you this; Where are you getting your "PUBLIC" from????
.... Who exactly dictates the "PUBLIC's" Action????
-Using the Covers.com "Consensus Picks" only accounts for 'about' 5,000-10,000 TOPs! That is NOT the "Betting PUBLIC", in fact it's only accounting for a small minority of Gamblers. This small minority is actually 'educated' far beyond the 'average gambler'. So IMO, you CAN NOT use the Covers.com Consensus Picks, they are "EDUCATED GAMBLERS"... NOT Joe 'PUBLIC'!
.... These are Questions that MUST be answered before you say "the PUBLIC is Hammering one Side".... Where are you getting your information from????
-Lastnight was an OBVIOUS PUBLIC Play on the Ravens, but I heard SPECIFIC Statistics such as 75%-80% on Baltimore... Says WHO????
.... I think we would all be HELPING one another if we could share our sources. Where do you get your "PUBLIC Percentages" from????
very simple.
lay points only with top tier offense like brady/brees, preferably at home. Need dependability when laying chalk.
take points when average or untested teams are laying points vs good defense.
last night, you were laying chalk at home with brees in a bounce back game vs a shit team....public play.
tonight, you had an average QB laying big road chalk facing great defense. sharp play.
..... VERY SIMPLE huh?!?!?
So I'll assume your Record is 28-0 YTD????
This past week saw the Detroit Lions (Matthew Stafford & his Top Tier Offense @ Home) Laying Points to the Atlanta Falcons... Which LOST and did NOT Cover... According to your Logic, that was "SHARP" .... Sorry bud, but it is FAR FAR FAR from VERY SIMPLE!!!
very simple.
lay points only with top tier offense like brady/brees, preferably at home. Need dependability when laying chalk.
take points when average or untested teams are laying points vs good defense.
last night, you were laying chalk at home with brees in a bounce back game vs a shit team....public play.
tonight, you had an average QB laying big road chalk facing great defense. sharp play.
..... VERY SIMPLE huh?!?!?
So I'll assume your Record is 28-0 YTD????
This past week saw the Detroit Lions (Matthew Stafford & his Top Tier Offense @ Home) Laying Points to the Atlanta Falcons... Which LOST and did NOT Cover... According to your Logic, that was "SHARP" .... Sorry bud, but it is FAR FAR FAR from VERY SIMPLE!!!
I agree that this Thread has A LOT of VERY Valuable insight and if you can decyfer through all the BULLSHIT and pluck out the GEMS, this thread alone will make you a BETTER GAMBLER!!!
I'm gonna do my Best to HIGHLIGHT ONLY the Best and MOST Useful Information... I Hope this Thread Benefits EVERYONE, Veterans and NooBs ALIKE!!!!
I agree that this Thread has A LOT of VERY Valuable insight and if you can decyfer through all the BULLSHIT and pluck out the GEMS, this thread alone will make you a BETTER GAMBLER!!!
I'm gonna do my Best to HIGHLIGHT ONLY the Best and MOST Useful Information... I Hope this Thread Benefits EVERYONE, Veterans and NooBs ALIKE!!!!
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.