your thoughts on this stratagy

**Sportslover** · 10-12-09, 06:15 AM

Originally posted by PASS IT ON

hey guys, im fairly new around, just wondering anyones thoughts of a stratagy i quite often use when picking my teams to put my hard earned on,

now im only a very small bettor but im just trying to build the bankroll and so eventually i can bet bigger,

when i pick my teams all i do is monitor the prices for a few days and see all the changes, like if a team is backed from say $2.00 into $1.70 i would get on.
my theory is that all the "smart" money must be on the team paying $1.70 therefor i also get on,

very basic i no, your thoughts???

Being successful with such a method would depend on your winning percentage using this method and the odds that you are betting. Your money management would also affect your profitability.

Let's assume you are using a flat betting strategy and wagering $100 on each game.

If you are betting teams at $1.70 once they have moved down in price, you would need to attain a winning percentage of about 59% to break even and a winning percentage of 60% would give you a 2% profit after 100 bets.

Are you confident of winning 60% of your wagers using this strategy? Have you got any past statistics to see what your winning percentage would be using this method? Perhaps you should write down your plays on a piece of paper using this method for the next few weeks and then record your winning percentage. Once you have an idea of your winning percentage then you can decide if you will be able to profit using this method.

Personally, I prefer to back myself to pick winners using odds of -110 ($1.90) or better. This will allow me to profit with a winning percentage of just 54%. However, everyone has their own methods and their own target winning percentage so you have to find out what suits your style of betting.

I would recommend reading the various handicapping forums but concentrate on the analysis that people provide, not just what their picks may be. This will help you to learn how to pick winners and learn why certain bets win.

Good luck.

**hillardoh** · 10-12-09, 06:41 AM

Generally speaking you should buy the first line that comes out unless you want a line to move a certain way however that being said you should do all your handicapping before the line comes out. I cant believe how many people dont check stats, standings,injuries, weather before they place a bet on a game.

**PASS IT ON** · 10-12-09, 06:55 AM

thanks hillardoh, but thats half the point of the question, i feel i dont have the time to do the handicapping, i dont watch every game as im in AUSTRALIA (we dont get every game here) the site i use gives me ALOT of stats, standings, weather, so i also place my bets based on this. i can tear apart any stat ever provided, but at the end of the day i dont no as much as alot of ppl out there, thats why i feel there "smart" money is worth alot....

**Domestic** · 10-15-09, 06:39 AM

Originally posted by PASS IT ON

thanks hillardoh, but thats half the point of the question, i feel i dont have the time to do the handicapping, i dont watch every game as im in AUSTRALIA (we dont get every game here) the site i use gives me ALOT of stats, standings, weather, so i also place my bets based on this. i can tear apart any stat ever provided, but at the end of the day i dont no as much as alot of ppl out there, thats why i feel there "smart" money is worth alot....

The "smart" money in my experiences is not always as smart as it seems. Just because the majority of the public are thinking the same way does not mean it is more likely. Keep in mind the house or Bookmaker always wins and the public on average always loses. I tried to bet square and bet "smart" money back when I was betting hundreds and it took one big play on the lakers to be champions to bail me out of that hole. Now that I bet a lot less I look for value in odds over $2 because in the long run (as sportslover said) it means my overall winning percentage does not need to be as high.

My opinion may be skewed over the fact that I used to bet a lot of Tennis and the amount of 1.50 or less favourites I backed that would end up losing was ridiculous. I then went on to betting NBA totals at $1.90 which was more profitable for me.

I don't consider the "smart" money to be smart as all and I know that a lot of punters fade the public on purpose as basically a system. There are always exceptions though for instance the NRL and AFL grand finals this year where both the slight favourites won and the bookies got pounded.

**man3645** · 10-16-09, 04:06 PM

Hey Pass it on..try following line movements in NCAAF totals..worked for me this season

**Arilou** · 10-17-09, 06:44 AM

Such strategies CAN work, but they usually don't and count on at least the following:
1. You need to be small enough to be under the radar of whatever books you use to follow the movement; otherwise, they can know you're coming and gouge you.
2. You need to shop around for the best price, especially if you're up against -110 or worse. Ideally you'll have multiple low-juice outs, assuming you are not chasing steam outright.
3. You need to know which types of lines this is worth doing on. College totals are a good place to start.
4. You need some way to tell the difference between a public and a sharp move. It need not be 100%, but if you reliably go with public moves and pay juice on secondary numbers you won't survive.

**Ruifgalmeida** · 10-17-09, 01:16 PM

i thing you shoud ask yourself if you are geting value on your odds, and i think you shoud do analasis on a game and not just beting because of the market droping

**IrishTim** · 10-17-09, 11:03 PM

To reiterate what others have said -- winning in gambling will never come to you long term if you're consistently giving up 20 cents on the dollar before betting a game. Cap the games yourself, look for value, and bet it at the best line you can find. Trying to follow the "smart money" is as good as flipping a coin.

**PASS IT ON** · 10-18-09, 05:09 PM

thanks for the info guys, ive been watching alot of the horse races lately and also worked with race horses for years, i noticed alot of the market movers have been doing well there, was just interested to see if it also applied to sport.

**GELATINOUS CUBE** · 10-18-09, 08:56 PM

It's the last thing I look at before I place a bet. The last minute shift in price or in the point spread, usually is the smart money or which side is getting pounded. But the books can also use it to funk with you. Because they know people watch line movements. So I'd say though over 50% the last minute movement points to the team that's gonna win. But sometimes an over or something will be getting more expensive -115 to -120 to -130, and then the under will hit. It seems like everyone was pounding the over, and they were all wrong.
So blindly following the last minute line movements won't hit over 62%, so you are gonna get juiced at an avg of -120.
But if you've capped the game, it's a good final thing to look at, and then do whatever with it.
In my opinon.

**shantystar** · 10-26-09, 03:56 AM

Originally posted by PASS IT ON

hey guys, im fairly new around, just wondering anyones thoughts of a stratagy i quite often use when picking my teams to put my hard earned on,

now im only a very small bettor but im just trying to build the bankroll and so eventually i can bet bigger,

when i pick my teams all i do is monitor the prices for a few days and see all the changes, like if a team is backed from say $2.00 into $1.70 i would get on.
my theory is that all the "smart" money must be on the team paying $1.70 therefor i also get on,

very basic i no, your thoughts???

good strategy but i didnnt like your avator!

**PASS IT ON** · 10-26-09, 04:46 AM

super thoughts, thanks for that

its my 1st greyhound, i wont be changing it untill my second one hits the track

**shantystar** · 10-26-09, 05:00 AM

right say!

**SheistyMike** · 10-26-09, 03:16 PM

Originally posted by shantystar

good strategy but i didnnt like your avator!

Good stategy???????? Terrible stategy, this is why

First of all you do not know who is moving the lines, Sure the books tell you they only move lines bases on smart money but that can be BS too. just because someone is dropping 50k on a games does not mean they know what there talking about. could be a trust fund baby from Cleveland whos going to the game and looking for a little action aside from just watching them punt.

Second and most important, What you are doing is called "chasing steam" kind of. You are Assuming sharps are the ones moving the line down, and because of that it must be a good bet and will cash. reasonable assumption, but the problem with it is the reason the sharps are hitting that wager is because the line is +200 and not +170. There not betting it because they nessesarily believe the +200 dog will win, there betting it because they believe the line should be something closer to +170 than +200 and giving the better 30c of value. By deffinition steam is hot, by the time the line has moved to +170 the steam has cooled and you missed the boat at that number. If there was still value at +170 they would continue to hit it and continue to move it down. Theres a reason it stoped at +170 and its because the line stopped getting bet by the guys you want to follow because there is no longer value.

You have to know that most of the time these guys are not betting on who is going to win or loose. They are betting on how a team is going to perform in relation to the line. a team at +200 could be a max bet where the same team at +170 could be a pass.

GL Mike

**Johnny 55** · 10-26-09, 04:11 PM

Mike is right on.

**noyb** · 10-26-09, 08:32 PM

trust fund babies don't move lines. books know whose bets they are booking and when they need to move.

i agree with the rest.

**SheistyMike** · 10-27-09, 12:29 AM

and when there risk is to high they move a line. Will they move a line because of a known sharp bet? of course, thats why they keep them around. The sharps let the books know where they are weak. but whale bets move lines regarless of who is making it all the time. Especially in low volume games where the books needs toinsure itself somewhat. Im not saying they will effect the market as a whole like a sydcate move but they will move a line at a book. Just adds to the uncertain science of interpreting line moves, It should not be the underlying reason why you are making that bet

**noyb** · 10-27-09, 02:51 PM

Originally posted by SheistyMike

but whale bets move lines regarless of who is making it all the time.

i'm quite sure this depends from book-to-book. there are definitely books that don't move despite a heavy bet if they think their lines is correct at the time, and know the guy betting is a whale. not every book primarily wants to reduce risk on a per-game basis, some will take shots if they think the shot has positive value. but anyway, this is a bit OT, in general we agree.

**SheistyMike** · 10-28-09, 02:48 PM

**skrtelfan** · 11-06-09, 04:04 PM

You need access to a book with stale/rogue numbers to use that strategy profitably. Play team A +200 when the market has dropped to +170, good. Play team A +170 when the market has dropped to +170, not so good.

**eberetta1** · 11-07-09, 04:24 AM

Headache

Originally posted by skrtelfan

You need access to a book with stale/rogue numbers to use that strategy profitably. Play team A +200 when the market has dropped to +170, good. Play team A +170 when the market has dropped to +170, not so good.

Geez, I need to be quiet and just listen. I did not understand the last sentence at all. It looks like you said don't play team A if you noticed the line has dropped +30, because you lost 15 percent of the value of the bet, so it is not longer as profitable as it was earlier in the week.

**fresnosurf** · 11-07-09, 07:08 AM

follow it for couple weeks and see what it turns out

**skrtelfan** · 11-07-09, 09:24 AM

Originally posted by eberetta1

Geez, I need to be quiet and just listen. I did not understand the last sentence at all. It looks like you said don't play team A if you noticed the line has dropped +30, because you lost 15 percent of the value of the bet, so it is not longer as profitable as it was earlier in the week.

It's actually 3.71% value lost:

100/300 = 33.33%
100/270 = 37.04%

Considering the small edges that exist in sports betting, 3.71% is a lot to give up.

The non-mathematical answer is that if the sharp money knocked the line down from +200 to +170, why did it stop there? If the sharps still found value in +170, they'd keep knocking it down further.