Beating the closing line and middling with live in play betting

**Actionbrett** · 12-04-11, 04:34 PM

Live betting is a great took for buying back, middling and earning.

**tomcowley** · 12-04-11, 04:36 PM

Does the fact they're down 7-0 enter your thought process like, at all, or do you just see ZOMG GB -155 soooo much better than -275!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and fire away?

Does the possibility that they score first and -275 is the best price you ever would have seen enter your thought process like, at all?

**ClimbSomeRocks** · 12-04-11, 04:43 PM

It does, but these factors would be out of my control if I bet in the beginning of the game. Also, I can already middle at +240 but I'm hoping to get it at +300. Now if this was a different match up I might stay away, but I know that the packers are simply a better team. I expected them to answer and give me a middling opportunity.

**FourLengthsClear** · 12-04-11, 04:58 PM

You must have been praying that GB didn't score on their first drive. Imagine the odds you could have got if they went 10-0 or 14-0 behind!

**ClimbSomeRocks** · 12-04-11, 05:39 PM

yea seriously. I'm okay though, I've got -155 middled with +290 and -3 middled with +8.5

**AceKingHigh** · 12-05-11, 01:03 AM

can you tell , by numbers how much did you profit from the process of this !? how did you place the bets IE. how much $$ you put on the favorite, and when you try to middle, how much do you put on the other team?

**suicidekings** · 12-05-11, 01:41 AM

Originally posted by tomcowley

Does the fact they're down 7-0 enter your thought process like, at all, or do you just see ZOMG GB -155 soooo much better than -275!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and fire away? Does the possibility that they score first and -275 is the best price you ever would have seen enter your thought process like, at all?

This is where being aware of game flow is important. Are you trying to tell me that if a team like the Packers goes down 7-0 in the first 90 seconds of the game, you weigh that early score so heavily that you now think a -7 favourite will lose straight up? This seems like an overreaction.

I would say you need to have a gameplan before starting as to what number you're looking for, know the tendencies of each team, and have the discipline to act accordingly. Dismissing it outright implies that there's no value to be found in live betting... silly.

**FourLengthsClear** · 12-05-11, 01:57 AM

Originally posted by suicidekings

This is where being aware of game flow is important. Are you trying to tell me that if a team like the Packers goes down 7-0 in the first 90 seconds of the game, you weigh that early score so heavily that you now think a -7 favourite will lose straight up? This seems like an overreaction.

I would say you need to have a gameplan before starting as to what number you're looking for, know the tendencies of each team, and have the discipline to act accordingly. Dismissing it outright implies that there's no value to be found in live betting... silly.

I don't think that is what he was doing.

**ClimbSomeRocks** · 12-05-11, 10:58 AM

Originally posted by AceKingHigh

can you tell , by numbers how much did you profit from the process of this !? how did you place the bets IE. how much $$ you put on the favorite, and when you try to middle, how much do you put on the other team?

Sure. My approach to this game was that the packers are going to win, but probably not cover 7 points, and there is a very real chance that the giants can win it outright.

First play was Packers -155 3.1 units to win 2 units
Next play was a small free play Packers -3.5 risking 0.25 units
Finally the line dropped to where I wanted it Packers -3(+100) 1 unit
Also got on Packers -155 again 3.1 units to win 2 units (two identical bets but placed 30 minutes apart)

This was all before the pack had the lead in the first quarter. 11 minutes after my last wager, clay mathew's pick 6 skyrockets the line.

Giants +8.5 2.5 units
Giants +290 (missed +310 by a matter of seconds) 2.1 units to win 6.2

41 minutes elapsed first wager to last wager. 20/20 hindsight would say I should not have hedged because the packers would not lose this game. I wagered the minimum amount possible to middle with the two -155 bets so that I would maximize profit if the packers won. If the giants won, I would break even. As far as the spread, I was surprised I missed my middle! From -3 to +8.5 is a gigantic gap.

Does anyone else have experience with live betting? Can the strategy be to simply realize that the game goes in cycles and aim for a middle every time?

**wrongturn** · 12-05-11, 04:13 PM

It is great when game zig zags, but bad if it goes lopsided. That is my experience.

**AceKingHigh** · 12-05-11, 04:20 PM

I Usually try to get the best number possible, I got Detroit yesterday at +17, I think that was a good number and shipped 1.5x on it...
never tried to middle even when there was a moment I saw NO -7 , should I made the bet !? not sure about it...

**suicidekings** · 12-05-11, 07:13 PM

Originally posted by ClimbSomeRocks

Can the strategy be to simply realize that the game goes in cycles and aim for a middle every time?

Yes and No. Sometimes teams just don't come to play so taking the discounted line can still be betting into a bad line. In the NFL especially, one turnover can make the difference in the game, and even in a game where one team looks great and the other looks like ass, the volatility is so high that it can get dicey. I actually did exactly what you did yesterday, although with GB -170 and NYG +450, and rather than hedge evenly, I just used the +450 to secure the GB bet partially.

GB ML (-170) to win 2u
NYG ML (+450) risking 0.4u

The composite line resulted in: GB ML (+100) x1.6. If I had played them equally, I could have guaranteed 1.02u profit, but I thought GB was the right and it was still early in the game. Had it been later in the game and GB not been moving the ball as easily, I probably would have split it down the middle for a safe hedge, or even gone the other way, using the GB line to secure a shot at the NYG ML (Zero risk for a potential 5.6u win if the Giants had won). Generally, the best value is available in the first quarter, as it becomes more obvious as the game progresses if one team is beating themselves. Either way, you need to have a gameplan before starting this, not trying to just do it on the fly.

This works better in basketball as the scoring in NBA often comes in runs from each side and the volatility from turnovers is lower (higher scoring and each turnover is worth less).

**smoke a bowl** · 12-05-11, 11:48 PM

Originally posted by ClimbSomeRocks

It does, but these factors would be out of my control if I bet in the beginning of the game. Also, I can already middle at +240 but I'm hoping to get it at +300. Now if this was a different match up I might stay away, but I know that the packers are simply a better team. I expected them to answer and give me a middling opportunity.

I am dumber now after reading this.

**donjuan** · 12-06-11, 01:38 AM

Originally posted by suicidekings

This is where being aware of game flow is important. Are you trying to tell me that if a team like the Packers goes down 7-0 in the first 90 seconds of the game, you weigh that early score so heavily that you now think a -7 favourite will lose straight up? This seems like an overreaction.

I would say you need to have a gameplan before starting as to what number you're looking for, know the tendencies of each team, and have the discipline to act accordingly. Dismissing it outright implies that there's no value to be found in live betting... silly.

What's sad is that you try to pass yourself off as someone who actually has a clue. Clearly you are just someone who can write better than the average fish.

**suicidekings** · 12-06-11, 03:25 AM

Originally posted by donjuan

What's sad is that you try to pass yourself off as someone who actually has a clue. Clearly you are just someone who can write better than the average fish.

Which part of that are you debating? Perhaps you could explain?