Let's set this straight: the books are dumb. Without market information(i.e. where the money is coming in and where their smart clients are betting) they would out of business VERY quickly. They are top-notch, super sharp market makers. If they were so super sharp to begin with when it comes to predicting outcomes of games you would see zero or very little movement off the open
-
Comment -
Houston opened at +206 and is now +251. According to your theory, big money is the only thing driving this line, which means its coming in in bunches on the Giants. So why are you putting so much on the Stros? Is it the same theory you used earlier to bet Oakland in a 22-8 loss?Comment -
Because I believe the true line is far lower. All the money coming on the giants is heavily skewing the line to make the astros profitable. You don't even need to take my word for it, just look at the bumgarner line tomorrow
I thought oakland was a good bet at the open, the move just made it a better bet. It's hilarious had oakland won the game you would never say this. Seriously, I don't know why I bother with someone that comes back with samples sizes of 1 game. Oakland is supposed to lose the game easily over 60% of the timeIs it the same theory you used earlier to bet Oakland in a 22-8 loss?
And there is no interchangeable "theory" that works in these games. It's purely me believing the true line is well under what is posted. In the case of the astros, pinnacle has shown you that proof with the bumgarner -230 lineComment -
What is the "true line"?
I'm assuming your "true line" is better than Pinny's, right?
It's not like they lost 4-3.I thought oakland was a good bet at the open, the move just made it a better bet. It's hilarious had oakland won the games you would never say this. Seriously, I don't know why I bother with someone that comes back with samples sizes of 1 game
What about the game last week when you wrote me off and talked shit about taking Texas because of how superior Peavy was, then you did it again when he was throwing a no-hitter in the third inning, then disappeared when he got absolutely lit up?Comment -
Of course, Arizona breaks it open.Comment -
I'd put it around 200
Did you know that books are actually beatable??!!! Good to know huh? Pinny's true line has been wrong for home underdog games in baseball for the past 8 years...thousands of gamesI'm assuming your "true line" is better than Pinny's, right?
jesus completely irrelevantIt's not like they lost 4-3.
Sorry i'm not on this message board every mintue of every hour. Again 1 game sample size. This will be the last time I will ever respond to any "gotcha" 1 game or 3 game or 5 game whatever posts. Whether the astros win or lose tonight means VERY little on whether my bet was correct. I'm picking off 1-2% edges many times even smaller, that will never show up in the course of 1 gameWhat about the game last week when you wrote me off and talked shit about taking Texas because of how superior Peavy was, then you did it again when he was throwing a no-hitter in the third inning, then disappeared when he got absolutely lit up?
And if you really want to be results oriented why not mention that I won the other 3 bets I posted earlier this afternoon: tigers, orioles, orioles underComment -
I'm done arguing with the retarded. Have fun getting beat by the vig, I'll pop in when there's something reasonable to be discussedComment -
It's funny that you think everyone who posts in this forum is "retarded." You know what they say about people who think everyone else in the entire world is wrong....
You constantly tell people how stupid they are and take the "why do I bother" approach to SBR, yet you continue to post here and have multiple accounts. Why is that if we're not worth your time and effort?
Like I said, you must be a joy to sit and have a beer with.Comment -
I generally agree that the books do not take leans or do "head-fakes" with their lines. I am a firm believer that line movement is based on where the money goes and not much else. However, I would disagree that the books (Pinny) are "dumb" in the sense that they don't know what the true line should be or where it will end up.
For the most part, the books have a general understanding of where the line "should" be, but are forced to put up an opener off that true line because of the need to set a line according to public perception in order to get "even" action.Comment -
The closing line is the sharpest, if they knew what that was that would be the line. The books are dumb in the sense that they would go broke very quickly if they were forced to stick to their opening line
In many games yes, in many other games no. Even this late in the season we are seeing 30 cent moves off the openFor the most part, the books have a general understanding of where the line "should" be
The evening out of the action occurs after the open. The open is their best guess of what the true line will eventually be. They are wrong by alot somewhat oftenbut are forced to put up an opener off that true line because of the need to set a line according to public perception in order to get "even" action.Comment -
Hate to take G1's side, but you can't really base his performance off a small sample size. Endeavors such as these take months and years to show edges as you already know.Comment -
In baseball handicapping, yes it's full of complete idiots. I doubt u could find 1 ivy leaguer for every 100 posters in here. I bet the majority either didn't graduate college or went to community school. I'd bet the majority have menial or middle management jobs and there very few doctors, lawyers, bankers or any respectable professions here. Think tank is where all the very intelligent people are.
You know what, you're right. Besides trolling goldengreek or think tank, i'm done hereYou constantly tell people how stupid they are and take the "why do I bother" approach to SBR, yet you continue to post here and have multiple accounts. Why is that if we're not worth your time and effort?Comment -
I just find it hilarious and ironic that in the middle of this conversation, you have God fading 45 cent line movement tonight because, in his "humble" opinion, the "true line" is way off. So according to him, despite tons of big/sharp money being dumped on SF, the Astros are a play and he's adding to it.
Comment -
G1 - practicing patience with people will only help your skills as an investor.Comment -
I wouldn't argue with you if you say the pinnacle line is right and i'm wrong, there's really nothing I can say to that. We can just agree to disagreeI just find it hilarious and ironic that in the middle of this conversation, you have God fading 45 cent line movement tonight because, in his "humble" opinion, the "true line" is way off. So according to him, despite tons of big/sharp money being dumped on SF, the Astros are a play and he's adding to it.
Comment -
I've learned a ton about sports betting just in the past year.
A lot of it has to do with the line.
Whenver I look at a total and think it's way too high...it's not. Same holds true with an under.
Whenever I see a bad team only a slight underdog....they usually win the game. Basketball is a good example to use. In college hoops, whenever the home team was +2, +1.5 or something like that, it seemed like they won outright the majority of the time. When you see what you percieve to be a really good team only slightly favored over what over you perceive to be a weak team, take the weak team.
In addition, if you bet a side and the line starts moving against you right before the game, you're probably on the wrong side.
Paying attention to things like this doesn't always mean you'll win but I feel like it greatly improves your odds. It's almost like you have to put your money on teams your scared to put it on and win rather than put your money on teams your confident in and lose.
Ever place a large bet on a really good team like the Yankees, Patriots, Lakers, ect. and your shocked because they lose to some team that isn't very good or the game is a lot tighter than you think it should be??? It happens all the time.
When I first started doing this, the more confident I was in the game, the less likely it was to win.
As for the books, I feel they do have better information than us and are smart about putting out lines. That being said, they don't need to know the outcome because they are going to take most people's money regardless. Even if Joe Shmoe goes big on the Yankees and wins a -200 bet, he's going to lose it all back in a couple of games and then some. Books no this. The juice takes care of it for them. Math is against the average player.Comment -
God what do you do....where did you study pal?Comment -
How did I know some idiot was going to say this and turn this into a much bigger issue than it should be. I'll make this crystal clear:
-If you went to an ivy league school, there's a 95% chance you are intelligent and rational. The other 5% had parents with a boatload of money
-If you didn't go to an ivy league school, it doesn't mean you're dumb. If you went to a shit school and have a shit job, it does mean you're dumb 99% of the time. If you went to a shit school there;s probably an 80% chance you're a retardComment -
Hawley,
God is most often conceived of as the supernatural creator and overseer of the universe
DuhhhComment -
Lakers vs. a beat up Charlotte team comes to mind Big DofComment -
That's ok. I'm done here. Like I said, have fun losing to the vig. I'm off to watch the astros print me some money
Had to put a little more on +254
edit: If you believe the vogelsong line is correct, you should be putting a massive chunk on bumgarner right now at -230
edit: more evidence that pinnacle just weights the money....if they set the line independent of any market betting they would be moving the bumgarner line up from -230 after the vogelsong line got bet up from the 240s to -274. How does the vogelsong line move up 30+ cents while the bumgarner line stays flat? Because there's no significant action being taken on the bumgarner game in the last couple hoursComment -
Whoa, what happened to this thread?Comment
of course