[Arnold]

I would think that the lines would be set to try to limit risk and lead to profit for the books...

If each team is given exactly a 50% chance, then how can a book lose? How can you win betting on 50% plays with -105 odds?

Just so you know, let me show you some stuff just from today. I love bein right.
Vandy 73% public
Ark 27%
Opened -1 vandy. Closed -1 Ark.
Vandy being heavily favored by the public is given two points even though theres plenty of action on that side of things. Thus the book coaxes more wagers on Vandy, and then BOOM
Ark wins.
This happened with quite a few games, check it out.
Also, i have yet to see anyone in this thread disprove this with fact/numbers.

This could be due to books knowing public betting trends. If they know the public will take Vandy at -1, even though the true line could be +1, then why not? It's in their best interest to attract more money to the wrong side. The public "traps" themselves by overrating a team. It's not like the game is fixed and Celtics are given +30 points @home vs. the Heat.

[BigOrangeTitans]

If each team is given exactly a 50% chance, then how can a book lose? How can you win betting on 50% plays with -105 odds?



This could be due to books knowing public betting trends. If they know the public will take Vandy at -1, even though the true line could be +1, then why not? It's in their best interest to attract more money to the wrong side. The public "traps" themselves by overrating a team. It's not like the game is fixed and Celtics are given +30 points @home vs. the Heat.

End of story here, Purdue lost outright. it was a trap, whether the book made it, or the public. too good to be true usually isnt true

[Arnold]

End of story here, Purdue lost outright. it was a trap, whether the book made it, or the public. too good to be true usually isnt true

Then how did they know that Purdue is going to lose? Do you think they have some psychic powers?

It doesn't make sense.