[dknight734]

well the line movement was right on gm, should jumped over. same with philly and xavier

[lcf]

This barely works in NCAA...

[Quagmire27]

Interesting thread, and for the most part, imo, accurate, but books never want to back 1 side or the other, they don't take the line they make being wrong that personal, they don't manipulate a line because they, the book, likes a side. Most always the moves are to get money on the other side, sometimes injuries, sometimes weather, sometimes who knows.... but not because the book wants to stand firm and gamble because they have confidence in a particular number they set. At least that is my experience, maybe some of these online books wish to back the sharp money and gamble, but I doubt it.

[2daBank]

Interesting thread, and for the most part, imo, accurate, but books never want to back 1 side or the other, they don't take the line they make being wrong that personal, they don't manipulate a line because they, the book, likes a side. Most always the moves are to get money on the other side, sometimes injuries, sometimes weather, sometimes who knows.... but not because the book wants to stand firm and gamble because they have confidence in a particular number they set. At least that is my experience, maybe some of these online books wish to back the sharp money and gamble, but I doubt it.

absolutely 100% untrue......as ive stated the majority of the time it is in the books best interest to get as close to 50/50 action as possible, however any1 who can try and say there are not clear games where the book has picked a side probably has bet teams like Pit at s. fla this week, pit at W.vir, GM at Geo st, just a few examples of games where books saw a edge and exploited public perception....ive seen you make post like this before and you are off base my friend and ive also saw you think you know more than most so im sure this will go in one ear out the other but hopefully some1 else will read this and keep themselves from dropping money on the next big bookmakers fuk job

[Quagmire27]

absolutely 100% untrue......as ive stated the majority of the time it is in the books best interest to get as close to 50/50 action as possible, however any1 who can try and say there are not clear games where the book has picked a side probably has bet teams like Pit at s. fla this week, pit at W.vir, GM at Geo st, just a few examples of games where books saw a edge and exploited public perception....ive seen you make post like this before and you are off base my friend and ive also saw you think you know more than most so im sure this will go in one ear out the other but hopefully some1 else will read this and keep themselves from dropping money on the next big bookmakers fuk job

easy cowboy

My opinion and experience is the books don't pick a side in those "rlm" games, the large money bets pick those sides, what you see is a percentage of total bets made on each side, correct ? you don't see the dollar amounts, right ?

True, it is most often wise to follow the "rlm", that is most often caused by some person or group with intimate knowledge on that match, placing a large wager opposite of the publics perception.

But it could be caused by any Joe Blow that hit some money on a slot, wants to bet on his alma mater. It does not take much money to move ncaa lines in Vegas, move it in Vegas, the online books will follow.

[2daBank]

yes i am well aware of why lines get moved and that we are looking at number of bets, not amounts as the irs probably doesnt even get that real number.....none of that changes the fact that at select times (not real often) the books draw the battle lines and have made there bed with a certain side....rlm isnt even the determining factor for me to believe this is the case as you are correct most rlm is caused by the big money being on a side...just doesnt change the fact that i believe and always will sometimes the books have a real good feel for a game and put a number out there inviting 1 sided action, it happens

[jeepsguy004]

Guys the RLM is not to be used as a betting option It should be used as a tool for betting. Yesterday their was another good example in the Buffalo Central Michigan game. You had 81% of the bets coming in on Central Michigan who was at home and favored but the line went down. Buffalo has not been playing that great of ball and Central has been playing well. Why did the line go down. The public was all over Central and the big money betters new something that the public did not know. Well Buffalo won outright. The other game I was looking at yesterday was Tenn Martin who was like 1-15 ATS going into last night game. This team is just horrible. But the line went from them being a 10 point dog to a 9 point dog with over 70% of the bets coming in on Austin Peay. Well again the big betters knew something the public did not know and Tenn Martin got the cover. I would have posted these games yesterday but the site was down most of the day. I am not saying that every game that you see reverse line movement you should bet on. All I am saying is that if you see something like this handicapp the game find out why this happened. When I see this kind of stuff I like to look and see why the lines are moving like that.

[2daBank]

jeeps i agree like i said earlier it is just a tool....may want to correct your post though as Buf surely didnt win i know i was on them

[jeepsguy004]

Sorry about that 2dabank...I must have misread the score. Too early in the morning sometimes when I am looking at this stuff. Got to take advantage when the kid is sleeping so I can get some handicapping done before he wakes up.