My last word on this issue (off to Vegas until Monday). What no one seems to understand is this model is based on the LTR. The Dogs covering at 54% and Overs at 56% are by-products of the system, they are the results of the bets, not the reason for them.
A little background on my work. For years I've maintained a database just for college CPs with the primary component being the LTR. Several years ago, when good books would take many CPs, I based my bets on the relative relationship between the line and the total (LTR). My study showed that if the LTR was 4.5 or less it was a good bet to bet both ways F/O and D/U (regardless of the line or total). When good books shut down CPs (at least the ones that were profitable), I changed gears. I studied the relationship between the D/O and the F/U when there was a very low LTR. After much analysis I discovered that if the LTR was 2 or less, again regardless of the line or total numbers, that the D/O came in at twice (or better) than the F/U. When you apply logic you can see why this is. But if you just bet these randomly, and not calculate the LTR, you would lose unless the LTR happened to be 2 or less. With more work, I determined, in increments of .20 (eg, 2-1.8, 1.8-1.6, etc.) the actual value projected.
Now the "market" can be efficient or not efficient, it doesn't matter to me. If they post lines and totals, and they meet my LTR criteria, I'll bet them.
Lastly, many bettors PM, e-mail, and call me on a regular basis for advice and opinions. Justin7 is one who has e-mailed or called me numerous times asking advice on teasers and other betting methodologies I use. I have shared some proprietary information with him that he uses extensively. My only stipulation was that he not disclose any of this information on any forum (or in his book). As far as I know he has honored that trust. I've been asked many times, why post any of your work, it's not in your best interest? The answer is simple, I'm altruistic by nature and will help others anyway I can (yes, I can just see the "eye rolls", but that's the way it is). Some, maybe many, just aren't interested in unproven methodologies by me or anyone else, I respect that and wish them well.
I'm off to Sin City