Something to think about..

Quote Originally Posted by Rookie_Bookie:

I've heard discussions before that the books only win from the juice..

The bet takers will call off money to even it out and just take the juice..

So how does it work..

Guy A calls off money to Guy B,, Guy B calls off money to Guy C.. Guy C calls his money off at Vegas..

Who does Vegas call their money off too???

Someone has to have the uneven money right?

  someone explain to me if i'm right or wrong

The fatal flaw in this argument is that you assume every book in the loop you describe is over on the same side.

The truth is that the layoff principle works because if the line is set right, some books are over on a side, some are under on a side, and once you reshuffle the deck with layoffs everyone is even.

That is in theory obviously, and it works differently in practice and gets very complicated because of line moves - but strictly in principle of your original post that is how it works.

Quote Originally Posted by Rookie_Bookie:

I've heard discussions before that the books only win from the juice..

The bet takers will call off money to even it out and just take the juice..

So how does it work..

Guy A calls off money to Guy B,, Guy B calls off money to Guy C.. Guy C calls his money off at Vegas..

Who does Vegas call their money off too???

Someone has to have the uneven money right?

  someone explain to me if i'm right or wrong

Let me attempt to explain how the layoffs work in a loop where there is more action on one side than another.

No, its not the "new jersey mob bosses" who are at the bottom of everything, its simple market economics.  Shadyness is easy to point to in conspiracty theories because it gives a simple answer to a somewhat complex issue, but when you take the time to understand it is simple market economics.

Book A, book B, and Book C are all over on the same side.  For the purpose of this example, they are the only books taking action on this game.  The line opened at Colts -7, and because everyone took action on the colts the line is up to Colts -10.  All 3 books are over by 100K on the colts at varying prices from -7 to -10.

Book A decides to lay off at -10 to Book B.  They get rid of their 100K.  Now the line goes up even more to -11.  Now the public starts to buy back the Cowboys at +11.  Book B is now getting buyback on their 200 over on the colts.  The line goes back to -10.  Now book B lays off at book C, and book C is still at -11.

Eventually, book C raises the line to attract enough Cowboys action to get buyback.

In the end, they might have some overlays still on the Colts, but the key to being a good book is to avoid the middle in prices, and to match action.  Part of the deal of setting lines is that sometimes you are going to be caught and stuck on a side - but that is different than saying that is the desired goal - it is the exact NON-desired goal. 

They want to match action, period, and anyone who says differently is naive and looking for conspiracy theories.

Sharp post.

Theory of diversification.

I took the approach of a one off situation, but you are right, long term if you set lines that will attract 50% action on each side LONG TERM, you will never need to lay off action....