[No coincidences]

Congratulations! You "beat the closer" and "got a great number," yet went 0-3. I'm sure your bookie will give you a cookie before he kicks you in the dick.

Most overrated nonsense in gambling today -- thumping your chest over that bullshit, which means next to nothing.

[GHSCREW]

sry uconn couldnt pull through on that last drive. sick games today. That Indiana game = conspiracy city

[smitch124]

Beating the closer is only something that works in the long run. The long run being slightly longer than 3 plays.

[leetreaper]

[TheMoneyShot]

Beating the closer is only something that works in the long run. The long run being slightly longer than 3 plays.

Beating the closer doesn't gain you sh#$ over the long period

[jjgold]

Congratulations! You "beat the closer" and "got a great number," yet went 0-3. I'm sure your bookie will give you a cookie before he kicks you in the dick.

Most overrated nonsense in gambling today -- thumping your chest over that bullshit, which means next to nothing.

long run you will win

[smitch124]

Beating the closer doesn't gain you sh#$ over the long period

Actually it does and its understood throughout the betting community, what evidence do you have to the contrary?

[thetrinity]

Actually it does and its understood throughout the betting community, what evidence do you have to the contrary?

what evidence do you have that it does?

[FlipsideRM]

Who cares, you beat the closer and lost. Good deal

[trytrytry]

what evidence do you have that it does?

trinity trinity trinity not you too...

[smitch124]

what evidence do you have that it does?

well one example, if you have access to a book like Matchbook in a ML type sport (i.e. baseball) you can take your profit right away by selling your position if you beat the closer.

[Eddy Munny]

Well common sense pretty much asserts that if you consistently beat the closer, it'll pay dividends over the long haul. I'm not sure why that would even be a point of debate. It's not a big deal on a week to week basis though.

[paco]

Anyone who took uconn or Miami deserves to lose. Indiana losing on a hosed fg call I can see

[jtoler]

Over the long run it does matter, just think for a second.

[No coincidences]

Over the long run it does matter, just think for a second.

I've thought about it plenty. Won more bets than I've lost by far over the last 7-8 years. Beaten the closing number a ton of times. Had a "bad" number a ton of times. It hasn't produced any difference one way or another in my bottom line -- especially not in recent seasons.

In this day and age, where everyone has "inside" info and access to instant injury reports, breaking news before kickoff, behind the scenes dirt on a player's wife getting boned by another player, etc., you can't trust lines/movement the way you used to -- at least not enough to the point that it means what it did from a linear perspective 5-10 years ago. It's a stale philosophy that no longer directly equates to winning.

[daneblazer]

Arizona is the only game where beating the closer could have won you either side. Common sense says getting the best line pays off in the long run. It's like running AK vs pocket tens. Ak may have a little run but sooner or later tens will come out ahead.

Bowl games are a little different animal. Past 5 years, the SU winner has covered 90% of the time. This year doesn't look to be any different

[Da Manster!]

I've thought about it plenty. Won more bets than I've lost by far over the last 7-8 years. Beaten the closing number a ton of times. Had a "bad" number a ton of times. It hasn't produced any difference one way or another in my bottom line -- especially not in recent seasons.

In this day and age, where everyone has "inside" info and access to instant injury reports, breaking news before kickoff, behind the scenes dirt on a player's wife getting boned by another player, etc., you can't trust lines/movement the way you used to -- at least not enough to the point that it means what it did from a linear perspective 5-10 years ago. It's a stale philosophy that no longer directly equates to winning.

[uvarunthetable]

Hahaha you are basing your conclusion off 3 plays....what a moron. The closing line represents all available information, and if you beat it you will win in the long run. If you think differently open a book where you offer lines beyond the closing line at -110 odds and see how you do.

[RavensFan2k3]

Can we stop with this

[leetreaper]

[kmarinouofm]

Miami game was sick.. they were in the redzone like 6 times in the 2nd half and only got 7 out of it

[BigdaddyQH]

Nice try, but you guys are still way off. Just reverse everything. What about all of the games where a team covered the OPENERS (something that most of you guys cannot get because you do not wager enough per game) and the final line. Example: I grabbed Michigan State -2 1/2 against Iowa. The line closed at -3 1/2. MSU won by 3. The openers were a winner for me. The closer a loser for all of you who took MSU and gave the points. The same can be said for "Games of the Year Wagers" that come out in June. I hit a middle taking Michigan State -1 over Oregon,and then Oregon +3 1/2 over Michigan State. Many of you have it half right. The fact is that anytime you can beat the closing line, your odds of winning are better. Everyone knows this. The question is this. How many of you have the ability to wager at any time of the wagering cycle, from Sunday Afternoon, when the lines for the following week come down, to minutes before the game kicks off. How many of you have the money and the connections to wager big money on "games of the year"? This is the biggest edge that the "Pros" have over you guys. The "Pros" have the ability and financial resources to wager any amount at any time. Some of you guys laughed at my "ML Favorites of the Week" plays, but I never lost one and I will guarantee you that I made more money than ANYONE else in here. That means ANYONE. 13-0 will do that for you. You have to have gthe money going in. Then you have to find the right line and jump on it before it changes. This is why the "High Rollers" get to wager first and why the rest of you have to wait.

[Vegas39]

Nice try, but you guys are still way off. Just reverse everything. What about all of the games where a team covered the OPENERS (something that most of you guys cannot get because you do not wager enough per game) and the final line. Example: I grabbed Michigan State -2 1/2 against Iowa. The line closed at -3 1/2. MSU won by 3. The openers were a winner for me. The closer a loser for all of you who took MSU and gave the points. The same can be said for "Games of the Year Wagers" that come out in June. I hit a middle taking Michigan State -1 over Oregon,and then Oregon +3 1/2 over Michigan State. Many of you have it half right. The fact is that anytime you can beat the closing line, your odds of winning are better. Everyone knows this. The question is this. How many of you have the ability to wager at any time of the wagering cycle, from Sunday Afternoon, when the lines for the following week come down, to minutes before the game kicks off. How many of you have the money and the connections to wager big money on "games of the year"? This is the biggest edge that the "Pros" have over you guys. The "Pros" have the ability and financial resources to wager any amount at any time. Some of you guys laughed at my "ML Favorites of the Week" plays, but I never lost one and I will guarantee you that I made more money than ANYONE else in here. That means ANYONE. 13-0 will do that for you. You have to have gthe money going in. Then you have to find the right line and jump on it before it changes. This is why the "High Rollers" get to wager first and why the rest of you have to wait.

tell us again how you are a high roller you broke fukk

http://www.sharkscope.com/#Player-St...ers/BigdaddyQH

[leetreaper]

0.36 averaGE STAKE :HUNG:

[t-wizzle]

Congratulations! You "beat the closer" and "got a great number," yet went 0-3. I'm sure your bookie will give you a cookie before he kicks you in the dick.

Most overrated nonsense in gambling today -- thumping your chest over that bullshit, which means next to nothing.

Uhh nobody is thumping their chest for getting good numbers. Wtf are you even talking about?

[stevenash]

I've thought about it plenty. Won more bets than I've lost by far over the last 7-8 years. Beaten the closing number a ton of times. Had a "bad" number a ton of times. It hasn't produced any difference one way or another in my bottom line -- especially not in recent seasons.

In this day and age, where everyone has "inside" info and access to instant injury reports, breaking news before kickoff, behind the scenes dirt on a player's wife getting boned by another player, etc., you can't trust lines/movement the way you used to -- at least not enough to the point that it means what it did from a linear perspective 5-10 years ago. It's a stale philosophy that no longer directly equates to winning.

"you like a side, you bet the side, get the best possible number you can and book it"

Been preaching this for years.

My point being, you like a side, then bet it.

[CanuckG]

Always bet 5 mins before the game and take the non pounded side. RLM is overrated.

[TxRangerssuk]

Wow. Dont even know where to begin with the lack of intellect and high level of ignorance in this thread. Beating the closing number doesn't automatically equate to a win but anyone who says games don't frequently come down to a point or half a point simply hasn't wagered enough. Not only that anyone willing to wager on Uconn football simply hasn't watched them play. Not only that +5 isn't anywhere near a key # in football. Anyone taking +5 in football cuz they are getting an additional point or point and a half than the opener thinking they got a good # just flat out ignorant. Also, these are college bowl games meaning some of the oddest match-ups, teams that never see eachother that have been off for weeks yea prob not an edge beating the closing line on most of those games but to generalize all sports based on 3 really pathetic examples is just irresponsible not sharp and reeks of bitterness and immaturity.

[LT Profits]

Wow. Dont even know where to begin with the lack of intellect and high level of ignorance in this thread. Beating the closing number doesn't automatically equate to a win but anyone who says games don't frequently come down to a point or half a point simply hasn't wagered enough. Not only that anyone willing to wager on Uconn football simply hasn't watched them play. Not only that +5 isn't anywhere near a key # in football. Anyone taking +5 in football cuz they are getting an additional point or point and a half than the opener thinking they got a good # just flat out ignorant. Also, these are college bowl games meaning some of the oddest match-ups, teams that never see eachother that have been off for weeks yea prob not an edge beating the closing line on most of those games but to generalize all sports based on 3 really pathetic examples is just irresponsible not sharp and reeks of bitterness and immaturity.

UConn closed +2.5, so anything between +3.5 to +5 (which I agree is almost the same thing with 4 being only quasi-key) should be considered significant.

[TxRangerssuk]

UConn closed +2.5, so anything between +3.5 to +5 (which I agree is almost the same thing with 4 being only quasi-key) should be considered significant.

Never saw the line get below 3 if it did was only for a few min before kickoff and some joints I'm sure never dipped it below 3.

[LT Profits]

Never saw the line get below 3 if it did was only for a few min before kickoff and some joints I'm sure never dipped it below 3.

There was a lot of +2.5 at the end, including major books like CRIS family, 5 Dimes, Heritage. Pinny closed +3 -123.

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/bett...?date=20151226

[daneblazer]

Wow. Dont even know where to begin with the lack of intellect and high level of ignorance in this thread. Beating the closing number doesn't automatically equate to a win but anyone who says games don't frequently come down to a point or half a point simply hasn't wagered enough. Not only that anyone willing to wager on Uconn football simply hasn't watched them play. Not only that +5 isn't anywhere near a key # in football. Anyone taking +5 in football cuz they are getting an additional point or point and a half than the opener thinking they got a good # just flat out ignorant. Also, these are college bowl games meaning some of the oddest match-ups, teams that never see eachother that have been off for weeks yea prob not an edge beating the closing line on most of those games but to generalize all sports based on 3 really pathetic examples is just irresponsible not sharp and reeks of bitterness and immaturity.

I kinda like you...Opie however, will not

[Da Manster!]

Wow. Dont even know where to begin with the lack of intellect and high level of ignorance in this thread. Beating the closing number doesn't automatically equate to a win but anyone who says games don't frequently come down to a point or half a point simply hasn't wagered enough. Not only that anyone willing to wager on Uconn football simply hasn't watched them play. Not only that +5 isn't anywhere near a key # in football. Anyone taking +5 in football cuz they are getting an additional point or point and a half than the opener thinking they got a good # just flat out ignorant. Also, these are college bowl games meaning some of the oddest match-ups, teams that never see eachother that have been off for weeks yea prob not an edge beating the closing line on most of those games but to generalize all sports based on 3 really pathetic examples is just irresponsible not sharp and reeks of bitterness and immaturity.

well, Uconn (+5) was a winner until a last minute FG made it 16 - 10...far from a lock either way...Marshall sucks as well and they were very fortunate to cover, let alone win the game...btw, I didn't do any action on the game and had no vested interest...I'm just sayin.

[daneblazer]

well, Uconn (+5) was a winner until a last minute FG made it 16 - 10...far from a lock either way...Marshall sucks as well and they were very fortunate to cover, let alone win the game...btw, I didn't do any action on the game and had no vested interest...I'm just sayin.

Marshall dominated that game. It could have just as easily been a blowout. UConn could barely get into Marshall territory.

as it played out, Marshall was a lucky cover. Due to some coaching and special teams buffoonery UConn stuck around. It was a hard game to watch

[yisman]

Beating the closer is only something that works in the long run. The long run being slightly longer than 3 plays.

This is accurate.

I have tracked thousands of plays over the past few years, and it does show a long term profit. If you don't believe me, SportsOptions also has a database. I can run a query if you'd like.

The fact that someone beat the closer once, twice, or three times and lost does not mean anything.