Someone please explain the logic behind "trap lines" to me?

[dwluv3333]

I see posts on here saying that lines look "fishy" all the time. It's like people try to think they're smarter than they are by going against a pick just because they think it looks too good to be true, rather than going off their own beliefs. i.e. someone takes OKC at -5 against team B but wouldn't take them at -2????

As far as I'm concerned the guys in Vegas would rather get bettors straight down the middle on spreads. 50% on favored, 50% on the underdog. This then GUARANTEES them a profit no matter the outcome. Now if they set a "trap line" where 90% bet on the favorite, sure they can get a huge profit if the favorite loses, but alternatively they get f#(ked if the "trap" team covers, and they helped it happen by artificially providing a "better" line.

So why wouldn't Vegas just tell the lines as they are? Someone please explain this to me?

[B1AZE]

You can't book action 50/50 on every game.

It's just impossible especially with big time favorites and crappy teams. You'll have to inflate the dog side so much to get a 50/50 split and then you'll have the "wiseguys" (hate that word) come in and pounce on the dog.

You'd have to move the line up and down all day to balance it and then you open yourselves to middling and other stuff.

that's why alot of books always stay within a 1/2 point with eachother regardless of what action they have on one side.

[dwluv3333]

It's definitely impossible to get 50/50 due to bettors having biases and the variability of people in general, but I'd think that Vegas would rather AIM to get a starting line that is close a 50% chance of hitting if you blindly bet it.

I just don't see why they would aim to purposely shift the lines one way to trick the public. Too much of a liability if indeed the favorite really comes to play, and with an easier line at that.

[dwluv3333]

Yeah, I hate the words "sharp" and "square" myself. Thrown around on this board way too often.