been wondering if it is possible to pick a non-random sample of closing lines and win?
-
Comment -
What you are overlooking is that averages block out information.
That -100 (2.00 decimal) odds (deduct the juice) win and lose 50% of the time means little when you have means of identifying a subgroup of those picks that, despite these odds, win 60% of the time.
Ultimately there is no way to know if any given line is actually efficient (as there can and will always be factors you know nothing about). All the bookies and the bettors can see is if they are in profit in the long run, if yes they probably did something right. But even for a profitable bettor it isn't really possible to determine which bets were super-value and which ones actually weren't. You just know overall and on average.Comment -
Actually knowing that a market is efficient is worthwhile in itself, but obv anyone able to identify a 60% subset of bets (with any degree of volume) has little else to be concerned with other than hoping its not in Thai Ladyboy fights and that its in the NFL.Comment -
The opening/closing/ efficient market theories have got to the point of obsession on sports forums. Winning takes a lot more than just following movements and if your stupid enough to think thats all it takes then you deserve what you get. Markets are not efficient, they only mirror weight of money. That money might be from that often touted on sports forums as squares ( even though most on forums are part of it) the general public. Isnt it funny how sharps are always on YOUR side of the game while the squares are on the other.
I know first hand of premiership games getting knocked silly on a Saturday afternoon by well known square whales, where's the effiency there? As always, when the steam comes in people talk of sharp money and naively forget when it went
up.
Comment -
Isn't it funny how you are never unable to put forth a coherent argument?The opening/closing/ efficient market theories have got to the point of obsession on sports forums. Winning takes a lot more than just following movements and if your stupid enough to think thats all it takes then you deserve what you get. Markets are not efficient, they only mirror weight of money. That money might be from that often touted on sports forums as squares ( even though most on forums are part of it) the general public. Isnt it funny how sharps are always on YOUR side of the game while the squares are on the other.
I know first hand of premiership games getting knocked silly on a Saturday afternoon by well known square whales, where's the effiency there? As always, when the steam comes in people talk of sharp money and naively forget when it went up.Comment -
nba and nfl spreads seem to be quite efficient.Comment -
this method is not working lately. is there something more to it?Comment -
Sample size.Comment -
I'm always amused by how those with predictive models dismiss with impunity the idea of being able to turn a profit in any other way. I think part of their incredulity comes from seeing the mass of idiots who think they have figured it out with trends or line movement and forget that there might just be a sharp side to using some of those tools. And I would also assume that most of them dismissed this idea early on enough that they never even bothered to tryComment -
I am sure there is a line more accurate, but obviously its not easy to identify it...you should find a math genius and discuss this
Are you a stock market trader? Give the SBR Stock Market Betting Book a try! Right here in the points forum!Comment -
-
That is legitimately embarrassing if English is your first language.Comment -
It's legitimately embarassing regardless imoComment -
A valid assumption?
I see that everyone agrees that closing lines are more accurate than opening lines? And that anyone that doesn't know that is some kind of idiot? I see lots of reasoning behind why that's true? So, maybe you'll humor a newbie? Where's the data that shows, say, opening lines at 3/2 are further off the mark than closing lines at 3/2? There must be 1,000,000 data samlles been analyzed for the fact to be so obvious to the grizzled veteran. Help a rookie out. Where's the proof of your common knowledge assumption.
I hope you'll excuse my tone. But common knowledge, in my general experience, is a load of crap.Comment -
derpComment -
Before making a closing line bet you should compare it with the opening line. If the closing line is more then 10 cents worth then the opening line then I usually forget about the bet.
I think in NFL more money can be made from the opening line couse the lines get more realistic as more and more people bet on them. If I could get information in time I would always bet on the opening line in every sport.Comment -
what proof did you want? the data exists. no one is going to do your homework for you.Comment -
Obviously, the close is more accurate than the open. That said, if you can't beat the close, your only edge is the fact that you are smaller/faster than other people who are bigger/slower than you. That's not sustainable long-term. I.e., if you are measuring your edge, and your goal is to make money for the next 10 years, beating the close is much more important/predictive than predicting open to close movement.Comment -
Where's the data? A website? Actually, people will do my "homework." The web is filled with such kind souls. Where's the website that compiles bet-result data? That's where my "homework" answer lies.
BTW, inspirited: calling names isn't very nice, is it? Are you a dipshit, inspirited? A cyberbully? Are you a tough guy? What's your story, hotshot?Comment -
Nice job finding data to support this idea. And, I"m totally sincere about that.
I would like to point out that the closing line beat the opener by only 11 games out of roughly 720 games, or 1.3%... but I won't because facts are facts and you've shown that in fact, the closer beat the opener for that specific time period. I'm just not sure that I'd want to make any kind of wagering decision based upon a 1.3% difference in prediction quality.Comment -
If the whole screen moved late, that would be different, but if it is say just Pinn or CRIS that moves right at the end, and that move is what determined the close for a set of data, there is a good chance the pre-move number is more accurate. Limits would already be maxed and most sharps/groups would have had their "long" money in well before then assuming no new info.Other than RAS, I know of no way to just "join" a syndicate (and yes, obv, I'm labelling RAS a kind of a syndicate; it's a publicly available one). -PokerJoe Oct 2010Comment -
I've seen Pinnacle move the closing line after the market closed, not once but regularly. And every time they moved it back from shaded to neutral. This happened in NCAAB totals. For those who have studied the Pinny lean (which is not consistent across markets), this could be an indicator that they wiped off their fingerprints.
So it may be more reliable to take the closing line five or ten minutes before the market closes.Comment
IMHO, lines reflect the market's perception, not the actual probability of an outcome...
it only encourages inmates to wallow in their delusions. 
how about a different reposte, the coherent angle is showing the depth of your intelligence. 
