2012 Picks

aznbluff · 07-08-12, 09:45 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

I took Boston at -115 at Bovada when Pinny was sitting at -130.

You rarely -- if ever -- see that kind of discrepancy. Pinny got their heads kicked in on this game, especially given the obvious volume of a Sunday Night game between the Red Sox and Yanks.

Probably not as hard as you think they did. Line only shifted 12 cents from opening when all is said and done, with the late, late money pounding the Yankees back to +120/-127. I would say they broke even or lost a tiny (relatively) amount on this game. They'll make it back and then some if the game gets 10+ runs as well.

Many other games see a bigger shift than this. But a higher volume with little (12 cents is relatively small) shift in line just generates more profit for Pinny, not the other way around, so thats why I say they still break even or lose just a little.

lunchbawks · 07-08-12, 09:45 PM

now its overl, sorry

2daBank · 07-08-12, 09:45 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

By that logic, none of us should be putting a cent on any of these games -- no one.

why is that? i believe i pick gms that if played 1000 times i would come out ahead, that is all you can do, not sure why i wouldnt gamble if i feel the bets im making are profitable long term? but far as gm to gm who knows it fukkin baseball...ill tell you this there no way in my mind nyy had less than a 50% chance of winning and odds suggested much worse so it a easy play id make every time, whether it won today is irrelevant,...

No coincidences · 07-08-12, 09:47 PM

Originally posted by aznbluff

Probably not as hard as you think they did. Line only shifted 12 cents from opening when all is said and done, with the late, late money pounding the Yankees back to +120/-127. I would say they broke even or lost a tiny (relatively) amount on this game. They'll make it back and then some if the game gets 10+ runs as well.

Many other games see a bigger shift than this. But a higher volume with little (12 cents is relatively small) shift in line just generates more profit for Pinny, not the other way around, so thats why I say they still break even or lose just a little.

Pounding the Yankees back to +120? From +122? Not exactly pounding. And why would they make it back if the game goes over 10? You think people were hitting the under? Hell no.

dynamite140 · 07-08-12, 09:47 PM

What have you guys learned from this thread?

No Coincidences knows nothing about gambling

.

All he does is pinnacle this pinnacle that yet he has no clue about whats going on.

No coincidences · 07-08-12, 09:49 PM

I'm seeing 71% on the Yankees ML and 68% on the over azn. If you have other numbers I'm all ears.

hydrosmak · 07-08-12, 09:53 PM

Betting percentages when it comes to MLB seems like a waste of time.

dynamite140 · 07-08-12, 09:54 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

I'm seeing 71% on the Yankees ML and 68% on the over azn. If you have other numbers I'm all ears.

He doesn't use those free services like you and probably actually pays a good monthly fee for the numbers he's talking about. So funny how a $10 bettor thinks he knows whats going on and gives numbers like he knows what he is saying.

If you want to hear those numbers, why don't you subscribe to a service? Oh wait, its because you bet $10 a game.

hydrosmak · 07-08-12, 09:54 PM

Vegas isn't trapping any squares with money lines. They are going to bet teams regardless.

aznbluff · 07-08-12, 09:56 PM

At Pinny specifically, the O/U went from 10 early down to 9.5 but not significant action on it. Most % numbers are meaningless since they come from small time bettors (we are all small time), which doesn't matter at all. The only ones who shift the line at all (relatively) are the big time bettors (those betting 20k+ every game, and yes these people exist, most "sharp", plenty not).

Dexter · 07-08-12, 10:04 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

I took Boston at -115 at Bovada when Pinny was sitting at -130.

You rarely -- if ever -- see that kind of discrepancy. Pinny got their heads kicked in on this game, especially given the obvious volume of a Sunday Night game between the Red Sox and Yanks.

pinnacle opened at -115 and closed at -127 (with late money on yankees) - why you always think the book got crushed in these scenarios is beyond me. they very well may have been rooting for the yankees.

dynamite140 · 07-08-12, 10:08 PM

Originally posted by Dexter

pinnacle opened at -115 and closed at -127 (with late money on yankees) - why you always think the book got crushed in these scenarios is beyond me. they very well may have been rooting for the yankees.

Don't even listen to no coincidences. Pinny this, pinny that. He has zero clue what is going on. All he does is look at that line movement and then said money must be on boston.

He's just a $10 bettor with theories that are just incorrect. He's been on this forum for so long and still haven't learned a thing besides the usual trap this trap that and oh look huge line movement on x game.

I bet no coincidences doesn't even know the value of 1/2 run in baseball. He clearly never even read a gambling book in his life and just goes with his newbie theories which has failed him every single time. I mean, when you pick 1000 games every year in baseball and can't even breakeven.... you're not unlucky. You suck.

No coincidences · 07-08-12, 10:12 PM

Originally posted by Dexter

pinnacle opened at -115 and closed at -127 (with late money on yankees) - why you always think the book got crushed in these scenarios is beyond me. they very well may have been rooting for the yankees.

Late money may have trickled in a little on the Yanks, but it only went from -130 to -127. Meanwhile, Bovada was at +108/-118. Like I said, you hardly ever see a double-digit cent line difference between a sharp book and a rec. one, and when you do, it's good to be on the side of the sharp book almost always.

LolsMcwinsey · 07-08-12, 10:16 PM

Small bettor syndrome

dynamite140 · 07-08-12, 10:17 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Late money may have trickled in a little on the Yanks, but it only went from -130 to -127. Meanwhile, Bovada was at +108/-118. Like I said, you hardly ever see a double-digit cent line difference between a sharp book and a rec. one, and when you do, it's good to be on the side of the sharp book almost always.

If thats the case and you side with the sharp book everytime, why is it you still down units over 600 plays?

dynamite140 · 07-08-12, 10:17 PM

Originally posted by LolsMcwinsey

Small bettor syndrome

No coincidences · 07-08-12, 10:23 PM

Originally posted by aznbluff

Probably not as hard as you think they did. Line only shifted 12 cents from opening when all is said and done, with the late, late money pounding the Yankees back to +120/-127. I would say they broke even or lost a tiny (relatively) amount on this game. They'll make it back and then some if the game gets 10+ runs as well.

Many other games see a bigger shift than this. But a higher volume with little (12 cents is relatively small) shift in line just generates more profit for Pinny, not the other way around, so thats why I say they still break even or lose just a little.

So just to clarify, a 12 cent shift in the opposite direction of the public on a high-profile Sunday night game isn't a big deal, but the Yankees were "pounded" late because it moved 3 cents back in their direction yet still closed significantly higher (12 cent difference between Pinny and Bovada on Yanks ML) than any other book at the sharpest shop in the world?

Dexter · 07-08-12, 10:24 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Late money may have trickled in a little on the Yanks, but it only went from -130 to -127. Meanwhile, Bovada was at +108/-118. Like I said, you hardly ever see a double-digit cent line difference between a sharp book and a rec. one, and when you do, it's good to be on the side of the sharp book almost always.

im not saying boston wasnt the sharp play.....im saying the books were likely more happy they lost all the $100 bets on the yankees instead of the $10k bets on boston.

you said pinnacle got crushed which i dont agree with

italianbandit · 07-08-12, 10:27 PM

NC,

Sorry about the loss. You were on tilt and upped your units based on emotions not information. Learn better discipline. When you get upset get out of the house, don't bet on the next game. Use line movement as a metric not the cornerstone of your betting logic. And listen to Dexter.

No coincidences · 07-08-12, 10:28 PM

Originally posted by Dexter

im not saying boston wasnt the sharp play.....im saying the books were likely more happy they lost all the $100 bets on the yankees instead of the $10k bets on boston.

you said pinnacle got crushed which i dont agree with

Do you think the quantity (i.e., public bets) is more than quality (i.e., big sharp wagers) on a play like this? I've always wondered that.

2daBank · 07-08-12, 10:30 PM

Originally posted by Dexter

pinnacle opened at -115 and closed at -127 (with late money on yankees) - why you always think the book got crushed in these scenarios is beyond me. they very well may have been rooting for the yankees.

most assuredly..like i said more than likely some syndicate or a few cats with super deep pockets went hard in the paint on bos so them getting their brains busted prob better for pinny than our measly little couple hundo dollar bets are hurting them...

aznbluff · 07-08-12, 10:30 PM

I used "pounded" relatively. In the sense that it probably took 100k to shift the line that much, but that's maybe still small compared to total volume bet on this game at Pinny today. 12cent overall shift in the line doesn't cost the book much if they are on the wrong side (considering what, 8 cents of vig give or take?). The fact that it's a high profile game should theoretically add volume to the game, but I doubt that it does. The big money bettors are the ones who dictate the market. It would take like 1000 extra bets (almost can guarantee that it didnt get this many extra casual bettors) on a single side to equate to a single big bet. What's more likely is that its split, you said about 70% to one side, so this just ends up generating extra vig for Pinny in the end (since it goes against the big bets).

vcj16 · 07-08-12, 10:32 PM

who gives a shit about bovada?

if pinny has a scalp between cris or greek in the last 10 mins before a game then just play the pinny side

2daBank · 07-08-12, 10:32 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Do you think the quantity (i.e., public bets) is more than quality (i.e., big sharp wagers) on a play like this? I've always wondered that.

i would say in this gm most def there was more money on bos just based on move...but again why are you convinced this money is any more right than any of us capping the gm? i dont think there that much info available to a select few in this day in age where anyone with half a brain can access everythig they could possibly need or more in most cases..

No coincidences · 07-08-12, 10:32 PM

Originally posted by italianbandit

NC,

Sorry about the loss. You were on tilt and upped your units based on emotions not information. Learn better discipline. When you get upset get out of the house, don't bet on the next game. Use line movement as a metric not the cornerstone of your betting logic. And listen to Dexter.

Again, contrary to popular belief and the trolls who frequent this thread without consequence, I make very few bets based on line movement only.

As for betting out of control, I've already admitted that because of what happened earlier today. I was raped on two bets and I saw an opening here. I wouldn't go as big as I did if I had it to do over again, but I will say this play wins much more often than it loses long term. If you can find more than a dozen plays total this season where Pinnacle is offering a team at a DD-cent price gap better than Bovada -- let alone plays like that where the wager crashes and burns -- I'd love to see it. It doesn't happen very often. For whatever reason, though, beating the closing number and getting good # has been not only irrelevant this weekend, but completely useless and damaging to a bankroll. Look through the plays and you'll see what I mean.

Trust me, if I only bet on line movement, I would've been buried much, much worse than I just was over the course of the last two days believe it or not. Trolls would just like for you to believe that's all I do, when in fact it's not even close if you go through the plays in this thread.

dynamite140 · 07-08-12, 10:33 PM

Originally posted by italianbandit

NC,

Sorry about the loss. You were on tilt and upped your units based on emotions not information. Learn better discipline. When you get upset get out of the house, don't bet on the next game. Use line movement as a metric not the cornerstone of your betting logic. And listen to Dexter.

He been betting this way ever since he came to this forum. And STILL does it and has no clue whats going on

2daBank · 07-08-12, 10:33 PM

Originally posted by aznbluff

I used "pounded" relatively. In the sense that it probably took 100k to shift the line that much, but that's maybe still small compared to total volume bet on this game at Pinny today. 12cent overall shift in the line doesn't cost the book much if they are on the wrong side (considering what, 8 cents of vig give or take?). The fact that it's a high profile game should theoretically add volume to the game, but I doubt that it does. The big money bettors are the ones who dictate the market. It would take like 1000 extra bets (almost can guarantee that it didnt get this many extra casual bettors) on a single side to equate to a single big bet. What's more likely is that its split, you said about 70% to one side, so this just ends up generating extra vig for Pinny in the end (since it goes against the big bets).

pretty on point i would think

dynamite140 · 07-08-12, 10:34 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Again, contrary to popular belief and the trolls who frequent this thread without consequence, I make very few bets based on line movement only.

As for betting out of control, I've already admitted that because of what happened earlier today. I was raped on two bets and I saw an opening here. I wouldn't go as big as I did if I had it to do over again, but I will say this play wins much more often than it loses long term. If you can find more than a dozen plays total this season where Pinnacle is offering a team at a DD-cent price gap better than Bovada -- let alone plays like that where the wager crashes and burns -- I'd love to see it. It doesn't happen very often. For whatever reason, though, beating the closing number and getting good # has been not only irrelevant this weekend, but completely useless and damaging to a bankroll. Look through the plays and you'll see what I mean.

Trust me, if I only bet on line movement, I would've been buried much, much worse than I just was over the course of the last two days believe it or not. Trolls would just like for you to believe that's all I do, when in fact it's not even close if you go through the plays in this thread.

More delusional lies

italianbandit · 07-08-12, 10:34 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Do you think the quantity (i.e., public bets) is more than quality (i.e., big sharp wagers) on a play like this? I've always wondered that.

It depends. But it certainly can be.

No coincidences · 07-08-12, 10:35 PM

Originally posted by 2daBank

i would say in this gm most def there was more money on bos just based on move...but again why are you convinced this money is any more right than any of us capping the gm? i dont think there that much info available to a select few in this day in age where anyone with half a brain can access everythig they could possibly need or more in most cases..

Let's just say you don't want to be on the side of a different book vs. Pinny on a play long term and leave it at that.

It's not 100% -- nothing is -- but to pretend this type of play misses more than it hits is naive in my book. I just happened to pick a time where it crashed and burned to flush a huge chunk of my bankroll. I really thought Lester and the Sox would show up tonight; I've been watching Nova pitch all year and haven't been impressed. The Red Sox had plenty of chances, including the bases loaded with 1 out down 3-2. Oh well -- life goes on.

dynamite140 · 07-08-12, 10:36 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Again, contrary to popular belief and the trolls who frequent this thread without consequence, I make very few bets based on line movement only.

As for betting out of control, I've already admitted that because of what happened earlier today. I was raped on two bets and I saw an opening here. I wouldn't go as big as I did if I had it to do over again, but I will say this play wins much more often than it loses long term. If you can find more than a dozen plays total this season where Pinnacle is offering a team at a DD-cent price gap better than Bovada -- let alone plays like that where the wager crashes and burns -- I'd love to see it. It doesn't happen very often. For whatever reason, though, beating the closing number and getting good # has been not only irrelevant this weekend, but completely useless and damaging to a bankroll. Look through the plays and you'll see what I mean.

Trust me, if I only bet on line movement, I would've been buried much, much worse than I just was over the course of the last two days believe it or not. Trolls would just like for you to believe that's all I do, when in fact it's not even close if you go through the plays in this thread.

You mentioned this over and over again. And more often then not, you are wrong and always whining about it.

Self Denial must suck.

No coincidences · 07-08-12, 10:37 PM

Originally posted by aznbluff

I used "pounded" relatively. In the sense that it probably took 100k to shift the line that much, but that's maybe still small compared to total volume bet on this game at Pinny today. 12cent overall shift in the line doesn't cost the book much if they are on the wrong side (considering what, 8 cents of vig give or take?). The fact that it's a high profile game should theoretically add volume to the game, but I doubt that it does. The big money bettors are the ones who dictate the market. It would take like 1000 extra bets (almost can guarantee that it didnt get this many extra casual bettors) on a single side to equate to a single big bet. What's more likely is that its split, you said about 70% to one side, so this just ends up generating extra vig for Pinny in the end (since it goes against the big bets).

I respect what you're saying, and agree with most of it.

Look, I'm no betting savant. I never claimed to be. I've only been doing this for three years total. But I do know that when lines are set up like this at one book vs. another, it's typically wise to follow the sharper book -- especially if the public's on the other side. That's all I'm saying. But there are no guarantees and no free money in this racket, so on this particular case, I was wrong and got crushed accordingly.

dynamite140 · 07-08-12, 10:39 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

I respect what you're saying, and agree with most of it.

Look, I'm no betting savant. I never claimed to be. I've only been doing this for three years total. But I do know that when lines are set up like this at one book vs. another, it's typically wise to follow the sharper book -- especially if the public's on the other side. That's all I'm saying. But there are no guarantees and no free money in this racket, so on this particular case, I was wrong and got crushed accordingly.

Well since you never read a gambling book in your life, no one would assume you know what you are doing.

No coincidences · 07-08-12, 10:39 PM

I appreciate the thoughts and discussion. I'm learning as we go. Thanks for the input guys. See everyone in a week or so.

2daBank · 07-08-12, 10:47 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Let's just say you don't want to be on the side of a different book vs. Pinny on a play long term and leave it at that.

It's not 100% -- nothing is -- but to pretend this type of play misses more than it hits is naive in my book. I just happened to pick a time where it crashed and burned to flush a huge chunk of my bankroll. I really thought Lester and the Sox would show up tonight; I've been watching Nova pitch all year and haven't been impressed. The Red Sox had plenty of chances, including the bases loaded with 1 out down 3-2. Oh well -- life goes on.

speaking long term you out of your rabid ass mind if you think laying juice with sox in this gm was a long term winner...yes the reason bofuk had it way shorter to play bos is because guys betting the living shit out of gms arnt playing at bodog and guys betting small are so obviously odds were gonna be higher at the sharper books today, but that isnt indicating anything except that as i said a syndicate/few big time players/whatever liked red sox and again i find it hard to believe they know any more than the rest of us that can work a computer in this day and age..

certainly not trying to bash you like soem of these guys and certainly thinnk you understand baseball which makes it evven more puzziling to me that you rely on such things, like ive said before years ago this way of thinking was far more relevant than it is today imho..