-
Comment -
The statistics provided by the offshore casinos is nothing but a scam. Services that are paying for this information are getting taken and all this information does is confuse the public. And guess what, thats exactly what the offshore casinos want. I guarantee, if you follow this system you will wind up with a win/loss % of 50%. I can assure you if we really know how the public is betting, we would all be millionaires. As usual the public is wrong.Looks like a good service, but you have to pay.....
Sites that give you basic data from limited books may be useful to small time bettor:
see:
for free Sports Insights data.
I use this service to try and spot reverse-line moves and apply a criteria to look for good bets.
Why?
My criteria is:
Public bets less than 30% bet on a team (near 3000 bets made)
Reverse lines of 1.0 points or more (eg -5(open) to -6, +4(open) to +3).
Ideal RLM > 1.5 points
Spreads should be less than 17 points (1.5+ RLMs for greater than 17 points)
and is a home team.
Exampes this week may be:
Michigan State (v. Michigan at home)
Public bets: 24% bet on MSU (4205 bets)
Line (open at +2 to 0 (current)) RLM of 2 points.
and
Texas A&M (v. Arkansas at home)
Public bets: 23% bet on A&M (3374 bets)
Line (open at +2 to +1 (current)) RLM 1 point.
But you have to watch how the public betting changes and how the line moves as well, and hope this holds up to game time....
An attempt at this late year:
GLComment -
Possibly (never take anything at face value including your own comments) the data is biased, but unless you want to pay for the service, whay else can you rely on? If I take what you are syaing as true, then why is SI bothering to put this information out for free - likey to win customers.
If the books are putting this fraudulent data out then SI should be out of business by now......
It is interesting that if you are actually taking Vegas' side on this matter to dismiss SI's data. How do I know that you don't work (or post on these boards) for Vegas? Your comments can be dismissed as a con (A Vegas con) unless you post some meangingful data to support RLM or SI's data is false.
I am NOT saying to pay for SI's data. I am saying it is out there and it is free, so why not take a look at it?
Your comments may be true that the information is biased and limited, but your assertions are as good as mine without hard data. As such, it would be best to look at multiple sites that provide public beting data. I support a reliable SBR handicapper like LT Profits versus your comments, and have used RLMs sucessfully in the past.
I also agree that the best handicappers work at their craft. RLMs exist, why they exist is a metter of conjecture, and if you don't have the time to do your homework and see every angle availalbe...RLMs can help in your assesment of the game becuase they may point out a reason to look more carefully at your handicapping work.
Ultimately, Vegas does not gamble (they want a 50/50 betting spread (and capture the Vig as is the case with 90% of the games) and should move the lines accordingly)...when this does not happen YOU BETTER ASK WHY - and when a line moves AGAINST what vegas should be doing - there better be a dammed good reason for it - a reason that may not be evident to the typical bettor.
Some may say a RLM is a bet by Vegas against the betting public. I cannot say if that is the case, but I would prefer to put my money on the side Vegas is versus the beting public at large. (If the assertion and data is acorrect)
I agree, Vegas would not prefer the data to be available and may conspire to distort the Book data, but all of this is conjecture......Bottom line is that you should have a feel of how the public is betting after doing your own handicapping, and the SI data should be used to verify that public betting assertion basied on your own handicapping efforts.
Looking at how Vegas posts a line is part of Handicapping - versus sticking your thumb up your ass and dismissing that RLMs exist and can aid in your handicapping efforts.
Perhaps it is best to keep the public bettor (and the average SBR reader) from thinking about this data, after all, Vegas would like the masses to keep betting with their hearts and closed minds....
End of comments on this tread, and back to posting meaningless dribble for the masses.........like some of these posters seem to prefer.Last edited by jon13009; 10-02-09, 05:36 PM.Comment -
Potential RLMs to note
10/3/09
NFL
----------------
Pittsburgh (v. SD at PIT) 36% (20635 bets) -5 (open) to -6.5 : RLM 1.5
NCAA
----------------
Ball St. (v. Toledo at BSU) 22% (9058 bets) +7 (open) to +5 : RLM 2.0
Maryland (v. Clemson at UMD) 30% (21650 bets) +13.5 (open) to 11.5 : RLM 2.0
Michigan St (v. Mich at MSU) 26% (31887 bet) +2 open to -4 : RLM 6.0 (!?)
UTEP (v. Houston at UTEP) 20% (19661 bets) +16 open to +14 : RLM 2.0
Note:
DQs
-----------------------------------------------------------
Vanderbilt (v. Miss at VAN) 41% (16095 bets) +9.5 (open) to +10 : RLM NONE
Buffalo (v. Cent Mich at BUF) 18% (9115 bets) +9 open) to +8.5 : RLM 0.5 (RLM below 1.0)
Texas A&M (v. ARK at TAM) 40% (3250 bets) - over 30% -
Kentucky (v. ALA at UK) 21% (30910 bets) +17 to +16. : RLM 0.5 (RLM below 1.0
Virginia (v. North Carolina at UNC) 30% (1698 bets - low) +14 (open) to +12 : RLM 2.0 - AWAY GAMEComment -
10/4/09
NCAA (3-1) = 75%
----------------
Ball St. (v. Toledo at BSU) 22% (9058 bets) +7 (open) to +5 : RLM 2.0
L - BSU 30 - Toledo 37
Maryland (v. Clemson at UMD) 30% (21650 bets) +13.5 (open) to 11.5 : RLM 2.0
W - UMD 24 - Clemson 21
Michigan St (uv. Mich at MSU) 26% (31887 bet) +2 open to -4 : RLM 6.0 (!?)
W - MSU 26 - UM 20
UTEP (v. Houston at UTEP) 20% (19661 bets) +16 open to +14 : RLM 2.0
W - UTEP 58 - UH 41Comment -
RLM using certian criteria seemed to do pretty well this week:
10/5/09 Overall
-------------------
W-L: 4-1: 80%
10/4/09
NFL (1-0) = 100%
-----------------------
Pittsburgh (v. SD at PIT) 36% (20635 bets) -5 (open) to -6.5 : RLM 1.5
W - PIT 30 - SD 28
NCAA (3-1) = 75%
----------------
Ball St. (v. Toledo at BSU) 22% (9058 bets) +7 (open) to +5 : RLM 2.0
L - BSU 30 - Toledo 37
Maryland (v. Clemson at UMD) 30% (21650 bets) +13.5 (open) to 11.5 : RLM 2.0
W - UMD 24 - Clemson 21
Michigan St (uv. Mich at MSU) 26% (31887 bet) +2 open to -4 : RLM 6.0 (!?)
W - MSU 26 - UM 20
UTEP (v. Houston at UTEP) 20% (19661 bets) +16 open to +14 : RLM 2.0
W - UTEP 58 - UH 41
--------------------------------------
As always, you have to go week by week and cap the games yourself, but if you just relied on RLMs this week, it did provide a big bang for the buck.
In fact, it is not of any benefit to acknowledge this type of betting pattern exists.
It should be common sense that a line moving against what Vegas should inherently do is fishy.
Allowing the masses to blindly follow where Vegas wants them to go is part of why a handicapper needs to be aware of the presence of RLMs. If the public would stand up and look where the line is going instead of accepting what (and why) it is served up, then the public betting percentages would indeed change, and RLMs would be meaningless.
Granted, if Vegas is skewing SI's numbers then looking at the RLMs that SI presents is also dangerous, but that is a risk you can take if you determine that the numbers do make sense. (by looking at other public betting sources, capping the games and thinking where the uninformed public would put their dollars, bypolling friends and looking at patterns in betting forums....)
End of RLM monitoring, and let the "Public" continue to bet with their hearts and hopefully Vegas will make them pay.
Not being concerned where the public puts their money, and observing how the line reacts, is ,in a sense, not doing your handicapping homework.Comment -
I have a friend that works for one of the large offshore casinos who is pretty knowledgable about the betting statistics that are released. I can tell you for a fact these offshore books only release what they want you to see. You will never get the truth because its not in their best interest. This does not mean SI should go out of business because 99.9% of the public thinks the data is correct. If we all knew how the public is betting we would all be rich men and there would be no bookies in business. I was a subscriber at SI for many years and thought it was the best thing next to bubble gum. It did not take me long to figure out the best you could do is somewhere between 48% and 52% and thats exactly what the bookies want. If you want to win create or get a few good handicapping systems and then do your own homework.Last edited by Formulawiz; 10-26-09, 10:44 AM.Comment
