 SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks |
Best Sportsbooks List
|
|
| |||||
| #1 FanDuel | SBR rating 4.8/5 | Review | #6 BetRivers | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review | #2 Caesars | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #7 Fanatics | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review |
| #3 DraftKings | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #8 Betway | SBR rating 3.8/5 | Review | ||
| #4 BetMGM | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #9 Borgata | SBR rating 3.5/5 | Review | ||
| #5 bet365 | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #10 ClutchBet | SBR rating 2.9/5 | Review | ||
I should add this and it will go over as good as a fat guy to an all you can eat restaurant's owner. I think modeling totals and sides is a thing of the past. I think the modeling now needs to be 90% changes or maybe more. I think Sag and others have done such a good job, that modeling a game is just not necessary, now modeling adjustments is what I would say is the future of sports betting.
you dont think that change since 14 is reflected in the current line?Originally Posted by nash13
It has been included in the line, but deciding if the game goes over or under based on the metrics changed after 2014.
Another example:
I recognized in 2012 that the number of totals are correlating a lot based on the adjustment according to the last game between the two teams.
https://sportsdatabase.com/nhl/query...+S+D+Q+L+%21++
this was a money machine up to season 2017-18, but that happened after that?
A(goals@1) query 2.92 season = 2006 2.78 season = 2007 2.91 season = 2008 2.85 season = 2009 2.80 season = 2010 2.71 season = 2011 2.70 season = 2012 2.75 season = 2013 2.72 season = 2014 2.71 season = 2015 2.75 season = 2016 2.97 season = 2017 3.01 season = 2018
Scoring increased, the lines moved. And what was working fantastic lost its value.
https://www.sportsbookreview.com/for...lb-system.html
I shared this simple MLB system and earned a lot of criticism.
After I shared this on this forum it performed 118 Units profit for the whole 2018 season. But guess what, no one cared and cares. People don't like others who try to help them. I don;t know if they are envious or just not altruistic enough.
I think what I call roulette winners are just noise.
what a team did last time verse an opponent does not really have a direct reflection on the next meeting, and any part of it that is actually valuable is factored into the next meeting line.
As is stated before and i can only emphasize again. You are not playing vs the bookies, you are playing the market.
who you are playing against I am not really concerned who it is. I am more concerned with 2 things
knowing the line is fair and that I beat the line consistently!
i showed you that it is possible to beat the line year in year out, but you refuse to discuss things by stating that this is noise and included in the line. You can't have it both ways.
I guess I am not grasping what you mean by beating the line, can you clarify?
and Nash one thing NO ONE AND i MEAN NO ONE CAN SAY is I refuse to discuss, LOL
true
Let me clear things up.
You posted before a query showing https://killersports.com/nba/query?s...+S+D+Q+L+%21++ this.
It leads to the true assumption that the bookmakers are really good in making their lines over all aspects a game can cover.
This is true IF and that's a big IF, you are taking every game into consideration. The market as i call it, or the money, is included in this equation. They try to balance out things, look at moving margins, try to evaluate risks for the outcome. One thing people mistakenly assume: they care about what an individual will do.
No, they care about the masses of money. A Simple mathematical equation.
A bookmaker who let's you max bet 50$ on a moneyline of 3.0, can close their market anytime they want. when they move the line accordingly. If there is enough money on one side the line increases or decreases. In the end they have a risk evaluation process which leads to several numbers they earn or loose depending on the outcome of the game.
Back on the example.
A bookie who let's you bet on 3.0 on 50$ risks 100 dollar to loose. A company who let's you bet 500$ on 2.0 maximum on the same game, risks loosing 500$. So you can see in this example that the odds offered and money earned or lost are two different things.
If you see value in the odd you can only earn 100 dollar on bookie A and if the odds on 2.0 are value you can ear 500 dollar there.
The key here is understanding that the bookies are looking at metaperspective while you are looking on your individual perspective, if you can finde an unbalance in this gap, you are a winner. that is beating the line according to limits.
Opening - Moneyline
Team-Blue: $1.90 ... 50.0% ... -111
Team-Red: $1.90 ... 50.0% ... -111
12 hours later
Team-Blue: $1.60 ... ??.?% ... -167
Team-Red: $2.25 ... ??.?% ... +125
TLDR; How would Pinnacle's automated algorithm attempt to spread the juice?
This should be relevant to all professionals as most will be not betting the opening price due to low limits, OR timing... some other sharps getting their first. Though those competitors may bet in the opposite* direction, which is the purpose of this question, what to do?
A poker analogy... if you are playing in a brick and mortar casino, there are six fish / okay players at the table, a shark and you. Even IF you are a shark, it is foolish to take on that other shark if he is in the only one in the pot. Otherwise the ONLY winner is the house (or Pinnacle).
Two-way sharp / shark action is the enemy in professional gambling but few seem to get this so maybe they know something I am missing? Perhaps most sports markets do not increase much in efficiency until 1 or 2 or X hours before the match starts and therefore there is nothing to worry about if the odds are going in the wrong direction of what your model predicts. The aim though is obviously to get on Team-Red at $2.25 +125 not $1.90 -111.
For the above hypothetical, assume:
- One way action sent the Team-Blue price down, it took 3 max bets by the sharp(s) based on the odds movement.
- Small to medium market (US$500-$4000 closing limits for sharps)
- Manipulation is not out of control, closers are more efficient than openers.
- Little mugs only move the line 1-3 cents on a max bet.
- Pinnacle is not trying to take all the juice on either team due to favouritism, public bet shares are equal (50%).
- Bet365 is not manipulating the market either, they too expect public bet shares to be equal (50%).
I really dont understand that sorry Nash.
as far as books being even on a game, I think that is very rare and books make most of their money on juice on a side not on even action. I also believe books know what people will bet in advance and they price accordingly, supply and demand, if you want the Patriots you are going to pay for it more than people wanting the Bengals will pay!
It's true books set line trying g to get equal action on both sides and the vig in the line is there profit margin. But this doesn't mean they will get equal action on every game. The way it works is that over a large sample siZe it will be equal action on both sides if you take the avg and they Make a killing from the big.
But that's not it. Almost every bettors psychology works against him and they will find a way to blow through their deposit and reload; this is why books are successfull and always will be. Usually square books depends d on the latter andd their lines are not as sharp and that is exactly why they ban winning bettors. 90% of the books out there are like this and they ban winning bettors but most will never know this because over 99% of the sports bettors are life time losing bettors.
Sharp books like pinnacle, betcris or bookmaker etc make profit from both aspects. Their volumes and limits are high and they use sharp bettors to shape their lines. Lines will set somewhere where the value will be lost on both sides due to vig. In the meantime once the line settles the squares will still give them action to profit more. a good read
Last edited by shari91; 04-09-19 at 06:57 AM.
Hey Dan you snuck in another BR link, good job, you do a good job doing that!
my opinion is books like stores and sites know what we do before we do it and I think they price accordingly. I think if books priced fairly they would get destroyed. they price what we are willing to pay, how can they offer only 1% juice on some markets and 10% juice on others because they know what we will pay. I use to think books just beat you on the juice but that is not true, if you look at earnings reports of books you can see they bring in more than the juice, this would be impossible if they were not intentionally charging us more. if they have a 1% commission how are they earning 1.5%. I have no evidence of this, it is only at best a hypothesis. I think books know we like the Yankees and will bet the crap out of them and they charge us extra for it, right until the last minute when they incentivize the sharps to eat up some of that action and bring the line back to efficiency. look at the pats or yankees or lightning or Real Madrid lines look at what they generally do!
|
This post was nominated 1
time
. To view the nominated thread please click here.
People who nominated: Glitch
|
remember lines are not efficient until they close!
Excellent post. The difference here is that everyone likes to be a sharp bettor, but they don't understand the basic concept of a bookmaker and why they act like they do. Most of the betting community likes to believe that it is enough to bet winners.
Last edited by shari91; 04-09-19 at 06:57 AM.
minutes 5-25 of this youtube video from MIT's sports analytics conference from 2013 talk about whether or not books want to gamble a little, or move the line due to public volume to try to get even action on each side of the one game and expose themselves to "sharps".
around 20:15 is where this specific subject begins to really be dug into, but those whole first 25 minutes talk about a lot of things addressed and referred to here.
20:15 is when the guy who works for cantor claims thats what bookmakers are trying to do (even though they simultaneously want to somehow avoid creating arbs and middles) and the next 5 minutes is that likely mostly-myth being ripped apart by the other panelists.
They talk about why the books just wanna follow pinnacle like every shop does and not be the one who is left exposed and why it makes sense for books to want to pick a side sometimes when they "always" have the best of it and never want to expose themselves to sharps or be the whipping boy for arbs and middles.
Last edited by shari91; 04-09-19 at 06:58 AM.
that is interesting I listened to the whole thing many times.
I think people need to understand that there is a difference between professionalism and market manipulation. Same goes for the stock market and financial investments. Someone who bets a huge amount on single games will have a different mindset and evaluation process compared to the smaller fishes that most of us are.
it's pretty penetrating obvious that every other book follows pinnacle to the tee
Your thinking is slightly outdated now. 2-3 years ago this was the case. Nowadays with lower limits other bookies often set the market after being pounded in smaller markets (bet365 is one of them) and Pinnacle follows them after a few minutes.
possibly my outs died a long time ago
true
Reply With Quote