[Highness]

But I totally disagree with the term "closing line". How likely is it that closing lines are sharper than lines that have been up for hours or days, and then bookies try to balance their action a bit in the end (like Pinny does, the famous hectic line movement before tip-off) ??

Extremely unlikely. How could you possibly believe that a much smaller market(say a 2 pm line thats been up all night) is more efficient than the entirety of the market(10 min before tip)? Will pinnacle better be able to set the true line with 1000 bets worth of information or 5000?

[statictheory]

Well my question is, are lines that move , more efficient than lines that don't?

[WWSports]

Well my question is, are lines that move , more efficient than lines that don't?

People disagree about who invented the point-spread system, but everybody in the business would agree with the anonymous gambler who told Ruchman, "The invention of the point spread is the single greatest creation since the zipper!"
Ruchman explained, "Now, instead of Notre Dame being a 7-1 favorite, they are a 14-point favorite, and if you think the underdog will get beat by less, you bet on the underdog." The new system attracted more bettors, and bookmakers could move the number to attract more customers on either side of a bet. They could cautiously attempt to balance the money on both sides, making a profit entirely from the commission, or "vigorish."
The line Martin posted at Churchill Downs, the industry quickly noticed, hardly seemed to move. "He used to say he tried to create a number that was so good he couldn't decide which side to play himself," said Ruchman.
"That was the genius of Bob Martin, that he put out numbers like that day after day, so the bookies didn't have to move their numbers. And I do not use the term lightly; it takes genius to do that.

***Peter Ruchman, general manager at Gambler's Book Club and author of a pending book called "After the Gold Rush: The Rise and Fall of Sports Betting's Glory in Las Vegas, from Bugsy to Boardroom."

[mikew]

Well my question is, are lines that move , more efficient than lines that don't?

seems like the answer has to be yes.. lines move when theres heavy, sharp action on a side, causing the market to adjust. if a line doesn't move, its because there is none of that action, meaning there is no value to be had.

[Highness]

Well my question is, are lines that move , more efficient than lines that don't?

This question doesn't really make much sense but I think I know where you're going with it. There seems to be a perpetual belief that lines that don't move for many hours must be sharp. This fails to take into account that the most money gets wagered when the markets are the largest, in the hour or two leading up to the game. The most efficient line will be the one that incorporates the most information which of course means right before tip off

[Highness]

seems like the answer has to be yes.. lines move when theres heavy, sharp action on a side, causing the market to adjust.

Lines also move when there is heavy, whale action on a side

if a line doesn't move, its because there is none of that action, meaning there is no value to be had.

Grossly incorrect

[WWSports]

Martin was right even more often than many people realized. A famous example was Super Bowl III, when Martin set a now-infamous opening line of Colts minus 17 against the New York Jets. The Jets and their upstart quarterback, Joe Namath, pulled off one of history's great upsets, beating the Colts 16-7.
Martin said, "I got a letter from somebody at Columbia School of Journalism, saying aren't you embarrassed? And I said, `Of course not, that was a great number.' "
The Columbia student, he explained, confused the betting line with a prediction of the score. Instead, it was merely a price meant to attract action on both sides, which it did -- Super Bowl III drew some of the heaviest betting to that date.

His opinion was so well respected that there was never a question as to their validity. If you thought that he somehow slipped up, all you had to do was step up to the betting window and back your opinion with cash. Martin never flinched.
One time a guy walked up and looked at the betting board and in a loud voice proclaimed that he couldn't believe the point spread on a particular game. He asked in an even louder voice if the joint would take a $10,000 bet. Martin said sure, and added that if he wanted to bet more he would book that too. The obnoxious bettor then asked if he could make a larger bet at the same number. Martin nodded yes. The bettor then backed off and Martin didn't move the line.
A couple of minutes later while the bettor was still hanging around the window, another bettor walked in and bet $300 on the other side of the game. Martin immediately moved the line a 1\2 point. The first guy looks at Martin really angry and says, "I bet 10 dimes and you don't move the line, this guy bets $300 and you move it. Why?" Without missing a beat Martin says, "I respect his opinion". In the golden age of Las Vegas Bob Martin was one of the most respected men in town. He ran a clean store. His integrity was above reproach

[mikew]

Lines also move when there is heavy, whale action on a side

if the line moves in that case, then it would move into a value area and would be pounded right back due to sharps, no?

[Highness]

if the line moves in that case, then it would move into a value area and would be pounded right back due to sharps, no?

No, not at all. Dispense with this notion that any out of whack line will always and quickly be pounded back to true value by sharp bettors, that's just not the case. Sports betting markets are not perfectly efficient mechanisms. By the close of the market they come very close but throughout the life of a trade(open to close) there are many states of inefficiency. It's self evident but just look at the massive fluctuations of lines open to close and then look at the historical of the efficiency of closing lines

[Dark Horse]

Don't be tempted into thinking that the 'sharpest' line has the same type of quality across the board. If 100,000 people bet on a NFL game, and 1,000 bet on a NHL game, which line do you think is sharper? It's not so much the timing of the closing line (which is probably sharper shortly before closing), but the amount of information that is fed into the line. If you bet on a game, based on widely available information, and the line moves against you, that is usually not a good sign. But if you have unique information, and the line moves against that information, that could be a good thing.

[WWSports]

Don't be tempted into thinking that the 'sharpest' line has the same type of quality across the board. If 100,000 people bet on a NFL game, and 1,000 bet on a NHL game, which line do you think is sharper? It's not so much the timing of the closing line (which is probably sharper shortly before closing), but the amount of information that is fed into the line. If you bet on a game, based on widely available information, and the line moves against you, that is usually not a good sign. But if you have unique information, and the line moves against that information, that could be a good thing.

Are you the one who helped to start baseball 'totals' betting?

[E Vincent]

I spent 9+ months beating pinnys closer and nothing to show for it lost $. if people want evidence of this I can give you more than 500+ plays (not all plays beat no vig lines) but have got more than $26 scalps for every $100 and just bet side no scalp, but thatl take time and effort not just going to post on forum if someone wants a serious talk about it I can

however i have found other ways to make $..to be honest not worth the effort yet

this makes sense because books getting killed this year in football.
market maybe over adjusted for sharps.
also more than 70% of steam moves are fake now this isnt the olden days.

so gd luck with that, i bet billy bet washington +3 at a book that ppl just copy lines from everyone moved jets -1 and he buried it game closed at-3 again. ppl dont know wtf to do.

however back to my original point and its unfortunate i dont think the real pros are going to comment anymore.

market tends to move towards efficent line, however efficent is a term thats on a scale and its not that efficient closing line is very beatable.

Amen to that. Up until around 2007-2008, those steam moves were a gold mine in college hoops. Almost like free money. That changed in a hurry though around 2008-2009. Those good ole days are indeed long gone.

[choo]

i forget who said it but one door closes another opens circle of life

[wantitall4moi]

This still going?

As for the contest. I dont play make believe contests with make believe people on forums. besides you can do that yourself and keep score since it is the usual make believe drivel that infests the so called thin tank. But then again the name is suitable since most guys here just THINK about sports gambling very few probably Do it.

The point is lines dont move on air at most books, there is a reason why the lines move, most generally action. But books also have to be careful about risk. There is no real bookmaking anymore just book keeping and risk aversion. Therefore lines are extremely volatile and move a lot more than they ever used to.

The advent of 'reduced' vig made the moves even more ridiculous. As in no more guys holding a line -110, they move it up or a down a penny here or there. So you get -108, -104, -106 or even -116, -125 etc. all while holding the same spread. So that made guys try and figure out what the spread was worth. Which is another debate to be sure, but impossible to figure out in the end. Even with as in depth a way as you want to try and figure it out, because it changes.

In the end 'beating' a closer is absolutely meaningless, it is more tout nonsense made to try and associate sports betting with the stock market or some other legitimate enterprise. Which is ironic since the stock market is more corrupt that sports betting ever thought of being. But it is a way to make it mainstream.

Seriously anyone with the ability to strip or mine data could answer this question for themselves very easily, that is why I can see not many people data mine or collect data, and if they do they have a very limited way of searching it.

While some 'excuses' can be given as in differing books having differing lines with a common book everyone should agree. I can access 17 books openers and closers, so I am sure i have access to any that are 'relevant' and ones that everyone else would probably be citing in some form or another and NONE of them show beating the closing line being any more profitable than not, at least not enough to be significant. Hell best available number (which beats the closer by a wide margin) isnt always profitable. Which is why i said moves are generally 'worse' than openers. To which guys cite mythology and one guy 'controlling' the board to get the 'right' number. If guys were that frigging smart they would bet the winning side to begin with and wouldnt need to manipulate the line at all.

Regardless it is easy to see why guys have such a hard time actually winning theyre too busy worrying about stuff that is easy to find the answer to (and arguing about it) and not even knowing how to use the information/answer when it is given to them. More than one guy here has said the closers are meaningless. Some have offered hard data. But guys still want to dispute it. so be it I guess. It just shows that ignorance is bliss.

[durito]

Nobody is make believe, the bet is offered for cash in las vegas. You won't make it because you are lying about having money. Your data ******* sucks.

[JR007]

I study line history all the time, my opinion pinny, too tough and volatile to read, better off looking at other books

[allin1]

I study line history all the time, my opinion pinny, too tough and volatile to read, better off looking at other books

But isn't pinny nr 1 place for sharps because of low vig and bigger max bets?

[JR007]

"THE STOCK MARKET IS A NO-CALLED-STRIKE GAME. YOU DON’T HAVE TO SWING AT EVERYTHING – YOU CAN WAIT FOR YOUR PITCH"......Warren Buffett....same thing in sports betting

[chris2b]

Really interested post. Thanks poker Joe.

I love also Justin7 messages.

Perhaps a good Strategy is to follow , to smell , winning bettor, for have a winning strategy .

I think we can smell winning bettors with volume and odds fluctuate.

Maybe Justin can tell us how he does for study winning players.

Thank you very much :

[CoachJB]

Martin was right even more often than many people realized. A famous example was Super Bowl III, when Martin set a now-infamous opening line of Colts minus 17 against the New York Jets. The Jets and their upstart quarterback, Joe Namath, pulled off one of history's great upsets, beating the Colts 16-7.
Martin said, "I got a letter from somebody at Columbia School of Journalism, saying aren't you embarrassed? And I said, `Of course not, that was a great number.' "
The Columbia student, he explained, confused the betting line with a prediction of the score. Instead, it was merely a price meant to attract action on both sides, which it did -- Super Bowl III drew some of the heaviest betting to that date.

His opinion was so well respected that there was never a question as to their validity. If you thought that he somehow slipped up, all you had to do was step up to the betting window and back your opinion with cash. Martin never flinched.
One time a guy walked up and looked at the betting board and in a loud voice proclaimed that he couldn't believe the point spread on a particular game. He asked in an even louder voice if the joint would take a $10,000 bet. Martin said sure, and added that if he wanted to bet more he would book that too. The obnoxious bettor then asked if he could make a larger bet at the same number. Martin nodded yes. The bettor then backed off and Martin didn't move the line.
A couple of minutes later while the bettor was still hanging around the window, another bettor walked in and bet $300 on the other side of the game. Martin immediately moved the line a 1\2 point. The first guy looks at Martin really angry and says, "I bet 10 dimes and you don't move the line, this guy bets $300 and you move it. Why?" Without missing a beat Martin says, "I respect his opinion". In the golden age of Las Vegas Bob Martin was one of the most respected men in town. He ran a clean store. His integrity was above reproach

Great story sounds like a character

[Courtesywipe]

Good stuff!

[Peregrine Stoop]

"THE STOCK MARKET IS A NO-CALLED-STRIKE GAME. YOU DON’T HAVE TO SWING AT EVERYTHING – YOU CAN WAIT FOR YOUR PITCH"......Warren Buffett....same thing in sports betting

except there aren't a ton of walks. Most are wasting time waiting for a pitch thinking it's inefficient. Learn something about compound interest and get your money in-play.

[JR007]

except there aren't a ton of walks. Most are wasting time waiting for a pitch thinking it's inefficient. Learn something about compound interest and get your money in-play.

that i will do, .....

[JR007]

there are clues all over the sbr odds board, for all sports if you are willing to put in the time and keep records

[Inkwell77]

great post

[wantitall4moi]

http://www.handicapper.net/

Look at the "closing line value" in college football, there is a distinct correlation between units won and the "CLV" basically the MORE he beat the closing line the less he won, The year he got the least 'closing line value' he had his best year.

Obviously that is cherry picking but it shows that picking winners is much more important than beating some number. The fact that RAS actually causes line moves makes them a great candidate to look at in terms of line moves. Because they not only give out a decent percentage of winners they have enough clients and followers and 'respect' to cause line moves on air at just about every book. So when a book hears RAS is releasing something they move it a point to start and then decide what to do from there.

But if a guy does what RAS does and has an AVERAGE of a 2 point move on EVERY game they release then they are self fulfilling this idea because if they win it corroborates its. If they lose it voids it (more or less). You stll have to have the winning side for it to be relevant. Their records show that.

[thechaoz]

What a great read

[chunk]

I think Justin is responsible for the idea of "beating the closing line." He writes about it in "Conquering Risk." He was doing some work for Pinnacle and noticed that the difference between a player's betting line and the later, closing line, more quickly predicted future success than mere win/loss records.

Justin's view was the bookie's view: when profiling players, the sharps are the threat, not the lucky. The lucky you send a limo for. Being able to see who's who is very useful for the books because they want to know who's action to respect for moving the line, booting, delaying or crippling ... and who to send the limo for.

The expression has value to the bookies. That doesn't mean it has value to us.

We don't get paid for BTCL. We get paid when we beat the spread. The point might seem trite, but the whole idea of BTCL, from the player's side, is trite. BTCL doesn't actually tell you anything. It's a gigantic "duh." If I say the way to make money in this game is to "beat the spread," would you get excited? Telling you to "just BTCL" isn't much different.

So let's look into who and why and how some players BTCL. Or maybe I should say, of what is BTCL a manifestation.

1) Line shopping helps you BTCL (I'm distinquishing line shopping from bet-timing). If the line is -7, and you, through shopping, find -7' or -6', you'll BTCL.

2) Bet-timing helps you BTCL (I'm distinquishing bet-timing and steamchasing). If you like a fave at -7, correctly anticipate that the line will rise and so bet early, you'll BTCL. I bet-time. I know I'm better off, for example, betting CFB totals early than late. This is broad bet-timing, and is simply a matter of comparing how I'd do betting at different times. Bet-timing is about getting the best price, and as such is an adjunct of line shopping.

3) Steamchasing helps you BTCL (I'm distinquishing steam chasing from syndicate membership). Steamchasing is BTCL, to some extent, at it's purest and oldest. To say it's BTCL, in fact, is redundant. Steamchasing, really, is best understood as syndicate betting without being a part of the syndicate (and by syndicate I really mean sharp action generally; RAS isn't a syndicate, but from a book's POV may as well be).

Steamchasers distinquish between sharp action and general market drift, and also distinquish between acting in time and having missed the boat. Further, they "steam anticipate," which is a great skill (related to bet-timing, I suppose, but obv I'm distinquishing it here).

Most of the guys who talk about BTCL are steamchasers, and for them it's a useful shorthand for "doing their job right." It's more useful short-term than "making money" because there's much less variance. There's still a large measure of line shopping involved, but line shopping isn't the same thing as steamchasing. Steamchasing is really about the ability to recognize what line movements mean, and even anticipate them, and that's a skill separate from, once having labelled the movement, acting on it. I don't personally steamchase (we can't all do everything), but I recognize the potential for profits with it, when done right.

A really good steamchaser (market reader) can sometimes see a line move a half point at only one book, so that the broad market line remains the same, recognize that half point indicates a sharp side, and bet, +EV, even though he won't BTCL.

But even steamchasers don't make money BTCL. They make money by being able to read market moves and react quickly, or even anticipate them. You can use the semantics of BTCL here, I admit, but "BTCL" doesn't tell you how to make the money. BTCL reflects the skill, but is not the skill. Steamschasers don't make money with BTCL. They make money making +EV bets, and where the line settles afterwards doesn't change the EV of those bets, and it's ridiculous to think it does.

4) Syndicate membership helps you BTCL. Originators (and syndicate members are essentially that, in that they are, even if mere beards, extensions of the originator), are the ones who most deeply BTCL, and are most problematic for books (though books are probably generally unable and uncaring about distinquishing between steamchasers and syndicate players).

This is where the advice "just BTCL" gets really pointless. It becomes tantamount to saying "get involved with an originator's syndicate." 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).

But even originators don't make money by BTCL. They make money by handicapping. The difference is huge, so I'm going to say it again: they BTCL the most of anyone, but they don't make money from BTCL. BTCL is the effect of the betting that follows their profitable handicapping. Essentially, they BTCL the most, and potentially earn the most, but don't earn anything from BTCL. They earn from handicapping +EV bets.

You can make money line shopping. You can make money anticipating market direction. You can make money interpreting line movements. You can make money handicapping. What you can not do is make money with BTCL because it is merely a reflection of handicapping or betting skills, not the cause.

Here are some more points:

If your focus is on BTCL, you aren't going to come up with anything new, because if it's new, it won't be in the CL. I BTCL big time in CBB totals. But that's coincidental (well, maybe not, because I don't really know how everyone else is approaching things; but it isn't deliberate, anyway, in that I don't know how everyone else is approaching things). IOW, if you focus on BTCL, you'll never be the originators who are the biggest cause of BTCL, because they cause BTCL by handicapping. (and using BTCL to reverse engineer originator's action still isn't the same thing as making money with BTCL; it's making money with reverse engineering).

Some of the real BTCL nuts will say that no one wins handicapping. The illogic of that is mindboggling, considering that, if no one is outhandicapping the openers, how can the CL be more efficient than the opener? They misunderstand their own results. They'll cite stats about how they lose when they don't BTCL and win when they do, failing to understand that, no, what's really happening is they're losing when handicapping poorly and winning when handicapping well, and BTCL is somewhat correlated with that.

If your focus is on BTCL, you'll fall if the cause of BTCL falls. Suppose you were on Dr Bob after his heyday. If you got his picks early and bet well, you'd BTCL big time. And get slaughtered at some point. You'd have been BTCL and slaughtered. BTCL is absolutely not in and of itself blindly a predictor of profits. Yes, the market is long run more efficient at close than at start, GENERALLY, but that isn't the same thing as being more efficient for any given game SPECIFICALLY. If you've been in this game a while you've seen a lot of hot hands come and go. Things change. I've known two steamchasers who won for years and then got wiped. I kind of think it's always a matter of time, blustering posters here notwithstanding. Think "Black Swan."

If your focus is on BTCL, you'll miss all the +EV bets that come about at the CL itself. This truth alone reveals the illogic of BTCL. If a line is moving the right way, I wait until it settles. Sometimes, then, I'm better off, not BTCL, but tying it. If you agree that's possible, then you are admitting to a logical flaw in the theory of BTCL.

If the Lakers are home and fave of -8, and I like the dog, I know there's a good chance it'll creep up to -8' by game time. So I'll wait. I'm deliberately not trying to BTCL. Does that mean I can't possibly have value? I think it's ridiculous to live in fear of opposing line movements. If I like the dog when the Lakers are faves, if it creeps up a half point close to game time, that gain of a half point is pure value, imo. IOW, I'm saying the CL was less efficient than a previous line.

If your focus is on BTCL, you'll become what poker players call "results oriented." That's a terribly misleading phrase, in that it means, actually, that you should not be results oriented (short-term results), you should be EV oriented. Here's my point, re BTCL: if your focus in on BTCL, if you bet and the line moves such that you should have bet later, you'll think you failed. And if it moves your way, you'll feel like a winner. But that's being results oriented. Inasmuch as line movements can be, from your POV, random, what they do after you bet can not intelligently be seen as the measure of your bet's wisdom. It's like judging the wisdom of your flush draws by whether they hit, not whether they were priced right.

Let's say, by my metric, I like a CBB total <140. Let's say I know RAS is going to release a play on that total, but I don't know which way he'll go. Then, his release, which will move the line, is just a random variable, from my POV, and unrelated to my bet's wisdom. It might be correlated to my bet's outcome, but that isn't the same thing as saying I was wrong to make the bet with the information at the time of my wager.

If you make a football bet, your bet should not be judged stupid if, later, your QB is announced out with an injury, nor judged brilliant if it's the opposing team's QB announced out. These are post-bet randomizations, and not at all related to your bet's wisdom.


Okay, enough. I did this a little quickly. I'm not getting paid to write it. It's also a little tl;dr. That's less okay, but, WTF. I not getting paid to edit it, either.

Cliffs: from the books POV, BTCL has value; from ours, no. Don't tell yourself to BTCL, tell yourself to line shop, bet-time, market-read and handicap.

This is actually one of the better posts that I've seen in here. I must say, however, that there is also more than enough crapolla to sift through. BTCL? This guy is so right! And don't give me the BS about RAS. If you don't know that it's artificial, then you need to educate yourself.

[Big Bear]

interesting

[paw]

great THREAD. However at the end of the day its still a 50/50 Prop on any 1 single or several selections made. BTCL I agree is all fluff. If you don't have checks and balances in place and or play a strict money management system and or TRUE Money-lines You will not win Anything. 2 types of gamblers. Players and Those whom Play to Win. You will never win anything long-term with Spreads EVER...................... Spreads are for Suckers. True money-line management is the ONLY WAY TO WIN. Largest players in the world ONLY Play Money-lines.

[Sarunas]

make the reading

[allin1]

You will never win anything long-term with Spreads EVER...................... Spreads are for Suckers. True money-line management is the ONLY WAY TO WIN. Largest players in the world ONLY Play Money-lines.

really?

[Jayvegas420]

make the reading

Sarunas, I tried to make the reading but, it was tough at times.
There sure was alot of Bull flying around, especially about arbitrage & middle betting & all sorts of things that had nothing to do with the original post. Granted, the original post had a lot bull in it too. He said he was only making one sipmle point when in reality, he had many sub-points & followed up with more sub points.
Later some socially awkward, barley litterate academics tried to distract from the main question. Should we be picking sides or should we be trying to beat the closing line? I came to the conclusion that his point was just that, beating the closing line wasn't that important (Maybe as a measure but not a results based- bla-blah-blah-...). Maybe that wasn't the point, who knows.
Everything got kinda lost 17-19 posts into this thing, with all the bull.

My Fater advised academics like these people & a University here in Canada. It is widely considered the Harvard of Canada. The Canadian version of Oxford, if you will.
He was hired through a head-hunting firm as the Manager of Human Resources, became director, then was finally asked to act as to Assistant Vice Pricipal (AVP). He could never become the Vice Principal because he never graduated from High School. He was certainly, by no measure an academic.
So, in addition to the many things my Father tought me, one of the most important was to detect bull, in a rather short period of time. And alot of those posts were full of .
I don't know if you believe that beating the closing line makes you a winner in the end? I don't care if that's what you believe.
I don't know if you can effectively arb & hedge & try to middle. I don't care, it wasn't part of the conversation.
I don't care whether you know what efficient markets are or not. I don't care when it comes to the OP.
I found this post rather interesting:

Originally Posted by WendysRox
I never said anything regarding opening vs closing lines. I am merely saying that the market is not efficient (e.g. line != probability); and I think he agrees with that - or am I misunderstanding him?

Then that GilMartin guy answers with this question:

Perhaps I misunderstood you in a previous thread, in that case. Suppose this scenario:

An MLB game's opening line is:
Boston +100
New York -110

The closing line for the game is:
Boston -110
New York +100

Which team is more likely to win?

I found this interesting because no one dared touch the hipocrisy that might have been attached to answering!
It was in fact, a brilliant question.

I think you need to be on the right side of the spread rather than Beating the Closing Line, in the long run. I was running a thread where I offered favourites at even money to try and see where the supposed sharp SBR action was. I was able to get Bobbywaves & some others to post what I believe, was their true opinons on which side they were on. It's always the scammers who seem to pick more sharply when you actually know which side they are betting.
Anyway I am now just rambling like some of the original posters earlier in this thread.

I'm gonna leave you with this story & allow you to make up your own mind.

There's a local lottery in my province called Pro-Line, which I have always wanted sue in a class action law suit, citing violations to anti-trust laws amongst other vialations. They are run by the Ontario Lottery & Gaming Corporation. I actually appeared, representing myself, in front of what is called a Board of Referees at a hearing conducted by the the Department of Human Resources & Development Canada, in which I filed a claim against the OLG. My case can still be found online in a (CAB) file at the government's site. I won, which I'm quite proud of.
Anyway, this company Pro-Line runs a game called Point Spread. They open they're lines at 8:00am or 9:00 am EST & those line are stagnant through to 11:00pm that day. So if a line opens in the morning & Bama is -27, you can get Bama at -27 untill 11:00pm.
The lines come out on a Thursday morning & if that Bama line moves to -28.5 or -29 in all the books, you can still get a Proline Point Spread ticket with Bama to cover only -27 until 11:00 that night & sometimes right up until kick off.
This is not an exaggeration by any means, these histories can all be found online at the OLG site.
I learned a long time ago not to bet Proline Point spread after I woke up on a Saturday morning & saw that Bama line was now at 30.5 at my book & a couple of places like Pinny & SIA had the line at 31. I went to get a ticket & actually checked my phone over & over again to see if any books moved this line to -32 before kick off & sure enough some actually did.
I'm flipping out becuase this is the quintesential example of BTCL. Proline Point Spread can't move this line. The best I've seen them do is take a line down all together if there is huge industry movement. But more often than not they leave the lines up till kickoff.
I noticed this happening every week, & I'm starting to just count the money already. Some games 3 point swings, some with 4 point differentials. It's litterally like a license to print money! Yet I'm still here in the forums posting & broke as a joke???

Well, there's something I forgot to tell you. Two things that I actually failed to mention.

Proline Point Spread requires you make a parlay of at least 2 games (max 12) & oh yeah....
The odds they pay well well, well, well below industry standards. A 2 game parlay pays what Proline calles 2x but a $10 wager with two teams returns you $20 ($10 that you bet & another $10) so it's even money.
Not 2 to 1 or even close to the industry standard of 2.5 or 2.6 to 1.

I was betting games where I was beating the closing Line in real time by 4 to 5 points & I still was losing 50% of my BR.
There was the hidden juice there but, I still was losing maybe 40% of my tickets in spite of BTCL every game I picked.

But don't listen to me, I'm just a fukkin loser.

[strixee]

Bet at Pinny then and become a millionaire

[ChuckyTheGoat]

Bump. Original post was terrific.