[suicidekings]

Same here, 2nd hook loss in a row with Indy at Cle yesterday. 3rd loss in a row adding a 2 point one Tor @ Atl. All that after a 9-1 stretch.

Bad picks or bad luck?

I don't feel bad about this loss really, so I'll call it bad luck. As Snowball said above... winning or losing by one point doesn't mean you did a good or bad job capping the game. Shit just happens.

[telespectatorul]

i bought 2 points, from -7 to -5 -> cashed.

[Gee]

Fix on a defensive team that is in the top 3 worst shooting teams without the one man that can actually put the ball in the basket... Golden State shot 58% in the 2H and still didn't cover... I got some back with a live -5 line but Milwaukee def wasn't the play there... they were just the play that won, which is all that really matters in the end...

Man, i gotta disagree about the 'right' play on this one. Yeah, Golden State are probably the better team and yeah, Bogut was out... doesn't mean 7.5 points was a fair line for these two teams in this IMO. Bucks aren't as hopeless as everyone makes them out to be as well.

I reckon if the Bucks hadn't been hammered by the Suns the night before we may have seen -4 or -5 and it wouldn't have been a good game to touch (or GSW).

then again, all this is easy to say and brag about in hindsight (although i did make these points before the game) - lets see how we go tomorrow, which is all that matters now

[suicidekings]

i bought 2 points, from -7 to -5 -> cashed.

Sure. See how often that helps you rather than hurts you... What was the juice? -150 if you're lucky, for a required win rate of 60% just to break even...

[telespectatorul]

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/nba-basket...es-thread.html
here.

well, actually, it helps a lot..last night -5 @ 1.66 (i am from europe)..

[suicidekings]

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/nba-basket...es-thread.html
here.

well, actually, it helps a lot..last night -5 @ 1.66 (i am from europe)..

-150 = 1.66. I'm not doubting your ability to pick games. Just saying that over time (ie: way more than 3 plays), buying the points is going to hurt you more than help you. You just paid 36% more per dollar won (compared to -110/1.91 odds) to gain approximately an 8.5% edge.

That being said, a win is a win, so congrats.

[telespectatorul]

thank you. well, sometimes I like buying a couple points, just like last night..call it feeling..the line was a little high for me so i went down to -5. hey, it is gambling, you win some, you lose some

[demens]

Would it make sense buying some points, or the hook at least if you got a good shot at beating the closer?

I'm starting to dislike lines with.5 on them. For example -5.5, i'd rather take -5 and the push if they win by 5 then only have the win/lose option. I got a good line for the GS game -6.5, it closed at -7.5. So technically, if i was to play the closer and want the line i had it would cost me -130. If i was to sell points to reach the closer i'd be playing -7.5 +110 right? Even if the move is only .5 a point and i can predict it say the line closed at -7 exactly, it would make it +100 for me right?

So is there value in taking -6 -120 over -7 -110?

[Power Play]

Never buy points in the NBA no exceptions; long term it will absolutely bury you. At most shops buying 3 points will put you at -200. Think about it this way if selling 3 points gets you +200(or even +185 when you factor in juice) will you do it? I'll do it every basketball ball game I bet on if I could. That's why they don't offer you the option to "sell points" at similar rates.

[telespectatorul]

as long as last night I had -5 @ 1.66 and i cashed it, i really don't give a **** on the odds. I like to win, I don't wanna win big every day..every day a little..i am in no hurry, got my entire life to bet on NBA, don't need to bet only the 1.9 odds to become rich overnight.

why is there no sense in the long run to buy points? i don't see the logic. If i will lose the bet even if the bought points, it's logic that i will lose the bet with no bought points. why risk so much with the -7 line and not diminuate the risk? just because you bet on 1.66 instead on 1.9?

[demens]

I have not seen books that allow selling points but heard people talk about it. But thats not the point, i would never buy upto -200, i'm just talking about buying off the hook IF you have a good feel on where the line is going.

Agains -6 @ -120 or -7 @ -110. Which is better?

-120 bumps your break even % to 54.6. So does beating the closer by 1 full point worth that?

[Pauulzcappin]

every half point you buy, itll cost you 10 cents, so for a full point would cost you 20.

[Power Play]

By the way if selling 1 point gives me +110 I'll do it every basketball game I bet on. Buying points is just like Parlays and Teasers: it increases the bookmaker's edge. It may make sense in football in a few key situations but not in basktball. As for winning last game because of buying points, of course it's going to happen from time to time but statistically long term it's -ev. Good luck!

[demens]

By the way if selling 1 point gives me +110 I'll do it every basketball game I bet on. Buying points is just like Parlays and Teasers: it increases the bookmaker's edge. It may make sense in football in a few key situations but not in basktball. As for winning last game because of buying points, of course it's going to happen from time to time but statistically long term it's -ev. Good luck!

This is not exactly true. There is a guy on the forums here, Cheme82, he had a system of buying points that creates +EV. I never tried it myself cause my book doesn't allow buying for then 1 point but there are a bunch of people that swear by that system. Haven't really followed it long enough to say that his record is 100% but it looks impressive as hell if it is indeed honest.

every half point you buy, itll cost you 10 cents, so for a full point would cost you 20.

I know that, my question is based on correctly guessing the closer. You only buy .5 for 10 cents, the other .5 difference is cause by the line move. You just have to make the decision to buy before the line moves (assuming to guessed right).

[thebestthereis]

certain numbers make sense buying points on. also you cannot do it blindly on every game, then you are toast. cheme was able to buy 3 points at -160 (no books offer this, -170 if lucky) and had a local who used a square line. both combined (getting 3.5/4 points for -160 in essence) will give you a huge edge in certain games long term. if you are at a sharp book and buying points costs too much you have no chance.

[suicidekings]

as long as last night I had -5 @ 1.66 and i cashed it, i really don't give a **** on the odds. I like to win, I don't wanna win big every day..every day a little..i am in no hurry, got my entire life to bet on NBA, don't need to bet only the 1.9 odds to become rich overnight.

why is there no sense in the long run to buy points? i don't see the logic. If i will lose the bet even if the bought points, it's logic that i will lose the bet with no bought points. why risk so much with the -7 line and not diminuate the risk? just because you bet on 1.66 instead on 1.9?

Because we're not talking about one game. We're talking about a sample size large enough to be truly representative of your capping ability. Anyone can go on a hot streak over the span of 10-15 wagers, but what about 100 bets? What about 1000 bets?

If you were in the top 2% or so of bettors, you can expect to achieve a long term success rate of 55-57%. Being generous, lets call it 57%, which breaks even when the average odds you're laying are about -133 (1.75). If you could maintain that 57% over 1000 wagers @ -110 you would be up 97 units. Long story short, the lower the juice you're paying on average (weighted by bet size), the lower your win rate needs to be to make money and the better your outlook for long term profitability.

Books aren't concerned at all about guys that buy 2 points for (-150) after the line has moved but they're terrified of a guy that can consistently hit openers at (-105) and have the line move/close in their favour. Those are the bettors that will take their money over the long term rather than take a little and then give it back in juice over time.