RLM

[Sidetracked]

not vikings, steelers is the play get it before it moves up to 6 boys!

[daneblazer]

yah crap...meant the steelers. I kinda liked this play before the movement and I'm a Vikings fan. Losing Winfield is a major blow. More people jumping on the Steelers late.

[Sidetracked]

yah i got steelers at 4 favres due for a 3 interception game

[Bogart45]

There's no such thing as a QB being due for a bad game, but I agree the play is still on Pit.

yah i got steelers at 4 favres due for a 3 interception game

[GGPLAYER]

Seeing the same things as you guys are. Here are the numbers from Bet Tracker:

Atl opened at +3 76% of the money is on them....17,000 bets --- line is now +4
Bet Dallas

Minny opend at +4 67% of the money is on them....16,000 bets --- line is now +5.5
Bet Pitt

NYJ opned at -7 68% of the money is on them....10,000 bets --- line is now -6
Bet Oakland

[Sidetracked]

There's no such thing as a QB being due for a bad game, but I agree the play is still on Pit.

there is when we are talking about favre the king of picks

[Totolover1409]

Already on Pittsburgh and Atlanta, I just cant get myself to bet on the Raiders

[TGoat]

Seeing the same things as you guys are. Here are the numbers from Bet Tracker:

Atl opened at +3 76% of the money is on them....17,000 bets --- line is now +4
Bet Dallas

Minny opend at +4 67% of the money is on them....16,000 bets --- line is now +5.5
Bet Pitt

NYJ opned at -7 68% of the money is on them....10,000 bets --- line is now -6
Bet Oakland

In each of these cases how do you know that 76%, 67% and 68% of the money is on the team that has the most bets? Those percentages reflect which team has the largest percentage of bets--not the most money. That could certainly be the case, but you have no real way of knowing.

6 $5000 bettors dwarf 1000 $20 bettors.

[Indecent]

That's just bad wording on his part. He meant 76%/67/68 of bets are on them, and using that and line movement we assume that most of the money is on the opposite side.

In each of these cases how do you know that 76%, 67% and 68% of the money is on the team that has the most bets? Those percentages reflect which team has the largest percentage of bets--not the most money. That could certainly be the case, but you have no real way of knowing.

6 $5000 bettors dwarf 1000 $20 bettors.

[jon13009]

RLM summary...

http://www.nflindex.com/rlm.html

[jon13009]

That's just bad wording on his part. He meant 76%/67/68 of bets are on them, and using that and line movement we assume that most of the money is on the opposite side.

Yes you can make that assumption, but without the actual dollar amounts, how do we know that is actually true (that the steam is there?)

RLMs are still a mystery to me....
- are they there to counter steam?
- are they there due to inside information on the games?
- are they there due to the books thinking the lines were wrong and after the %'s seem to be beyond 50/50 the Books feel they can make a "bet" aganist the public %'s?

[TGoat]

This is just my opinion. After looking at hundreds and hundreds of line moves for point spreads and totals. And after doing quite a bit of back testing using data base research. I've come to the conclusion that these line moves one way or the other are just meaningless noise that balances out over time.

When we see something work in the short term it's human nature to get all excited and think it will keep working long term. But just about every single system I've tested reverts to the mean over time. It will have a great year or two and then three bad ones.

So in particular, what exactly is a Reverse Line Move. Team A has 80% of the "bets" and the line moves from -10 to -8. Whoa, what's going on here. Shouldn't the line have gone up--not down?

The only logical explanation I can come up with is that team B has MORE MONEY BET ON IT. Some big bettors have stepped up to the plate and put the hammer down on the team causing the book to move the line to try and balance the action. Does this have any predictive ability? Beats me. I'd have to test it over five or six years to be confident of any outcome.

I don't really think the bookies have any special insight as to who is going to win or lose. They do employ professional line makers to help them balance their books. They're trying to hedge their risk and win about half of the games. They'll win some games they need and win some games they don't need. As long as they win about half of the games, with their 10% vig, they're gonna make out well over time.

I've looked at line moves, total moves, run line moves, every kind of move and after looking and looking and looking it comes out about 50-50 over time. There will be some short term streaks to be sure that get you all excited, which you have to temper that with reality, but over time it still just about evens out. Which tells me the lines are really, really good--especially in the NFL.

I just got through reading two very long threads about a baseball betting "chasing" system. With this system you (well it's simply a reworked Martingale system) keep increasing your bets until you win. What was amazing to me is all of the people jumping onto the system after reading a few posts thinking they had found the holy grail. At some point, let's say after you have lost five or six in a row, you might have to bet something like $360 to win $5!!! Who in their right mind would do that?

Everything said, I still keep track of these things, because I just can't help it. Maybe this will be the one. But I'm reminded of something Mark Cramer (a horse racing handicapper and writer par excellance) wrote:

When I die I want my epitath to read--'He went to his grave searching for the automatic bet.'

[jon13009]

Sorry for this large and wordy post (this whole thing is for my reference, and the reason for multiple edits....)

As mentioned before, a small number of large bets may be the root cause of all RLMs, and the battle here is between the Books and the steam plays. I have had the same feeling, as the idea that Vegas does not gamble (as it is their business to feed off the vig) does not play well with the idea that producing a RLM is a "bet" against the misguided public.

The question then becomes - what is the predictive value in those small number of large bets (steam?), and the whole thing can boil down into chasing the steam moves. Chasing steam is a difficult task for the average small bettor to accomplish, and chasing steam is always discouraged by Books in general.

However, unless the total dollar amounts bet are revealed, how do we know that steam is really the ultimate factor - and not just conjecture - in seeing a RLM emerge, regardless of the assumptions at hand and logic used?

While I agree that steam does play a factor in most RLMs, how can we say FOR SURE that Vegas is not making bets with SOME RLMs when steam is not there and they can't possibly bring the betting percentages back to 50/50? (In the ideal world for Vegas, 50/50 applies to the Syndicates as well as the public at large.)

We can't. Unless the total betting dollar data is revealed, the underlying cause of any particular RLM is a guessing game. However, if it is accepted that RLMs are due to where the money is flowing (as TGoat and others imply), we can move to some interesting points....

What interests me is that if you look at these RLMs you may see that some RLMs are better than others - regardless of the underlying cause. RLMs across certain amounts (RLMs >1.0, >1.5...) and at certian line boundaries (at 3,6, 7,10.... points) obviously have more value, as well as using home team RLMs. Using RLMs based on betting percentages is more difficult (RLMs where less than 20% of bets made versus less than 30% of bets made) due to the lack of data regarding betting dollars involved; however, the betting percentages should be considered. RLMs with SOME minimal statistical validity (say bets of at least 10,000) are also of more value. Taking all RLMs and lumping them together, without utilizing some minimum criteria, will increase the bias in the observation of RLM games as a whole.

Thus, specifing the criteria of the observations used with RLMs may also show some significance to the average bettor, versus observing RLMs as a whole.

If it is seen that Large RLMs are due to counteract even larger steam plays, the predictive value should fall....However, if this is not the case, those large RLMs may indicate that the particular steam involved is even more sigificant and that the RLM was not enough to counteract those plays. The casinos beat the "public" but lost to the syndicates. Did the Books even out their stake as a result? Possibly - depending on the amounts bet. Thus, playing "signficiant" RLMs (>1.5, less than 30% bets...) may mean taking the side of even higher stake steam since those RLMs may be after the fact and be preventative in nature to more later steam. This is all conjecture, but there for examples sake....To me Vegas doesn't want to gamble, they want to get the betting dollars won and lost to even out, even if they can't get the vig %'s correct, and if Vegas doesn't use RLMs properly they can lose a large amount of dollars in the process....

What is the point? By looking at RLMs and, if they are indeed based on large steam plays or other factors, it may be in the average bettors interest to consider buying points (at certain values) or just playing the moneylines (if costs are not too high....) if the situation seems right where they are taking the side of Vegas (and the syndicates) while playing against the public as a whole.

This is the underlying beauty of large RLMs (>1.5 points (at signficant values of 3,6,7,...), <30% bet on one side, >10,000 bets for a home team) It is also important to note that a RLM of 0.5 is significant if it crosses an important landmark (say -6.5 to -7.0 or +3.0 to +2.5)

Vegas versus the Public?
Vegas versus the Syndicates?
and where do you want to fit in?

Do I bet with the public and take the clear betting favorite? Do I bet with the Syndicates and try to catch the lines at other books before they move - become a "steam chaser"? (or buy points to position myself with them even at a loss of return?)?

Thus, it seems, books are playing the "public" versus the Syndicates by employing RLMs and trying to stay above it all by evening out the betting dollars. You as a bettor have to decide who (the public or the syndicates) is correct, and choose a side if you don't want to handicap the games yourselves.

What is the monkey wrench? Syndicates or the public betting large amounts of dollars minutes before the game begins....(thus having a poor samping population to predict such behavor will be at play here)

Even if RLMs prove to have little predictive value, RLMs may be used as a means of identifying games that may be considered to handicap for that week.

If it is found RLMs have any real predictive value, they must be used wisely and within a properly managed gambling bankroll (use of kelly criteria, setting limits....), as with any and all gambling strategies.

The problem with ANY and ALL gambling systems (except the exceedingly rare sportsbook arbitrage opportunitiy -requiring large amounts of work and capital and at great peril to you if used frequently) is that nothing is guaranteed (Imagine, when a large RLM fails, the public has had a big victory against Vegas and Syndicate plays! Causing a few bad heads to roll in the process?), and the magic value of winning over 53% of all bets made is a difficult task. Chasing (after making that large "can't miss" bet) is always a losing strategy.

Proper money management is the foundation of any responsible gambler. If this is not the case, then even the smallest gambing habit can ultimately escalate into financial ruin....(which the risk of happening actually fuels some pathologic addictive gambling behavior)

[jon13009]

I don't really think the bookies have any special insight as to who is going to win or lose. They do employ professional line makers to help them balance their books. They're trying to hedge their risk and win about half of the games. They'll win some games they need and win some games they don't need. As long as they win about half of the games, with their 10% vig, they're gonna make out well over time.

This is absoultely true; however,

Source:

http://www.winnersedgeonline.com/point-spread-made.html

"The linemaker is concerned about public perception because even though the line is designed to even the monetary action on wagers bet in the real world, that is not the case, as sports books always get stuck sitting on one side or the other.

For simplicity's sake I will use a typical NFL Sunday as an example. Let's say there are thirteen games on an NFL Sunday, a sports book will have little betting action on four of those thirteen games, even money action on five of those thirteen games, where both sides are bet equally, and four games where the casino is sitting on one side of a game, as the public has made a one-sided wager on a particular team they favor. The linemaker has to win half of those four games where the public has bet on one-side to make money for the casino. In this example that means the casino has to win two of the four games the public has significant one-sided wagers on. So the linemaker is very concerned about public perception, as he wants to beat the public on these four games if possible and get at least half of them in the long run.

The linemaker knows that NFL bettors, as a general rule, do little technical analysis and rely on team reputations. This is basically saying people who play NFL games are not working very hard towards analyzing why Denver is beating the spread through a 50/50 run/pass balance while holding the opposition to less than 3.4 yards per carry. The NFL bettors are basically thinking Denver is good and I think they will beat the Chargers by 17. Never mind that the Broncos' power rating is only 10 points above the Chargers, they are coming off of a huge revenge win over the Raiders, and the linemaker knows the entire NFL betting world wants to play them this week also. It is clear the linemaker wants to predict public perception in the world of NFL handicapping."

Thus, It would seem that as the weeks progress, the likelyhood of RLMs would decrease in the NFL as the books have a better understanding of public perception, since their goal is a 50/50 betting distribution.

Thus, as the weeks progress, the RLMs are more likely to be due to steam plays, but as stated before, unless the dollar betting amouts are revealed, you can't say for sure.

[Robust]

good luck to ALL your RLM plays this week!

Robust

[jon13009]

Robust,

I am not sold on RLMs that are not of real significance....... (RLMs that are <1.0, less than 6000 bets, between 30%-40% bet....)

However, I am interested in RLMs that are >1.0 points, less than 30% bet, a home team and of 10,000 or more bets in number.

The whole thing boils down to the Books balancing out the money (public versus syndicate dollars), and how that money is bet.

With a significant RLM, it may be that the Books are using the public dollars bet (and won) to balance out the Syndicate dollars bet (and lost).

By looking at significant RLMs, you may be provided with a map as to where the public and the Syndicates are betting, and (hopefully) can make an appropriate decisions on how to position yourself.

GL.

[Totolover1409]

There are 2+ really good RLM's that are of real significance. Take Dallas for sure. A side note: I think Pitt will put Minnesota back into their spot.

[Robust]

Robust,

I am not sold on RLMs that are not of real significance....... (RLMs that are <1.0, less than 6000 bets, between 30%-40% bet....)

However, I am interested in RLMs that are >1.0 points, less than 30% bet, a home team and of 10,000 or more bets in number.

The whole thing boils down to the Books balancing out the money (public versus syndicate dollars), and how that money is bet.

With a significant RLM, it may be that the Books are using the public dollars bet (and won) to balance out the Syndicate dollars bet (and lost).

By looking at significant RLMs, you may be provided with a map as to where the public and the Syndicates are betting, and (hopefully) can make an appropriate decisions on how to position yourself.

GL.

RLm has been explained in the thread "When the line doesn't move, follow the money".. I made that thread last year in this forum..

but to recap.. when you get RLM, this means someone with A LOT of money bet a side and significantly shifted it (the books HAVE to shift the line to get more $$ on the other team)..

now you might think, so what.. a millionaire was drunk and made a stoopid bet.. well.. no!!

how long can you remain a millionaire betting this way? the money comes from "sharps" who feel the line is wrong and bet accordingly.. and they consistenly win.. no ALL their plays, but 60% plus to get a winning season EVERY season..

RLM tells us which way they bet, and we simply tag along hoping they were right (and they usually are!)

I hope this explained it a little better.. if not, search for my other thread.. very good explainations were made by LT Profits himself..

Robust

[jon13009]

NFL RLM week 7.

3 teams this week are subjects of RLMs:

Pittsburgh (at home versus Minnesota) – 35% (with 47564 bet) –4 (open) to –6: RLM 2.0
Oakland (at home versus NYJ) – 38% (with 30674 bet) +7 (open) to +6 : RLM 1.0
Dallas (at home versus Atlanta) 26% (with 47471 bet –3 (open) to –4.5: RLM 1.5

General situational observations:

All of these games have a hint of statistical validity since the betting numbers are well above 10,000. Since no dollar amounts are (or ever will be) available, it can be only inferred indirectly that significant steam plays are likely to be present with the Dallas game since less than 30% are betting on Dallas and the RLM is greater than 1.0

Of these three games, Dallas is the most significant RLM with an RLM of 1.5 and less than 30% betting on Dallas. Dallas is playing an Atlanta team that has come off an emotional win versus Chicago last week at Atlanta. It is going to be tough to sustain that emotional intensity away from home at a rested and determined Dallas team coming off their Bye week. Now the Falcons are facing a Dallas team looking to prove it is a playoff contender and they have had a week to try to get th kinks ironed out. Romo and Wade Phillips are under the gun to win and win now. Wile the value of the line is getting worse (-3 to -4 to -4.5), the move from -4 to -4.5 is not that significant in terms of the raw line value. Can the Cowboys cover this spread? A few people are going against the betting public (and they have bet a lot of dollars in doing so) that say - yes.

Next, Pittsburgh with a RLM of 2.0 is a decent bet; however, the betting percentages are creeping towards 40%. The chance of the Vikings pulling a rabbit out of its hat in Pittsburgh are slim. Last week the Vikings beat a tough Ravens team at home, and should have lost that game if it were not for a last second miss of a makeable field goal by the Ravens. Pittsburgh is coming off an uninspired win versus Cleveland, and are looking to get into stride with the bulk of AFC division game coming up. The Vikings are due for a letdown, and may be looking towards the game Brett Favre has been planning for in the last two years – going to Green Bay. The game of Brett Favre’s heart and soul is next week, and this week may be the week Favre and the Vikings are going to just take it a bit easy in preparation for the game everyone is going to be watching for next week. While the betting percentages are moving to 40%, the timing of the line move is what is significant. The problem is that the line may have moved too far, and has pushed to -6 (versus -5 to -5.5 are probably where you should have played this game.) Those who caught this RLM early are sitting in a very good position, while the current value of -6 may be marginal.

Finally Oakland has a decent RLM of 1.0 but the betting percentages may push towards 40% by game time, and it cannot be said where the game dollar betting positions are drawn in this particular game. Oakland is facing a NYJ team that lost to Buffalo last week, while the Raiders beat a Eagles team that was clearly off key. This game is hard to pick due to the inconsistency of the Raider’s QB and the potential of the Jets overall. While team momentum is clearly in the Raiders favor, the Jets are determined to stop a slide that has lasted for the past two weeks. Overall, this game is a toss up.

Good luck to all RLMers today.

Robust, thanks for the thread reference (I see you bumped it).....Lots of good stuff there, just a bit spread out.

[GGPLAYER]

That's just bad wording on his part. He meant 76%/67/68 of bets are on them, and using that and line movement we assume that most of the money is on the opposite side.

Yes that is what I meant. Sorry for the confusion. You guys are doing a great job on this stuff. I'm on the fense with RLM in college games. Mich St. burned me baldly yesterday. Although it seems if you really stick to games which move over a 1.5 points you will do well.

Any way I do really like the Pitt and Dal bets today. Just don't trust Oakland enough to risk my money on them. What ever you do bet I say good luck to you!

FYI - Just went on BookMaker and Dallas is at -5.5!

[mcbaseball10]

Just got Cowboys at -4 at Bodog (-115) if anybody looking for that number still

[TGoat]

when you get RLM, this means someone with A LOT of money bet a side and significantly shifted it (the books HAVE to shift the line to get more $$ on the other team)...

RLM tells us which way they bet, and we simply tag along hoping they were right (and they usually are!)

Robust

If this is the case, then why does it fare so poorly for college football?

[jon13009]

Perhaps there are too many RLMs in NCAA that are not legit RLMs (or true steam plays.)

True RLMs in NFL are relatively smaller in number.

[jon13009]

NFL RLM week 7.

2-1 (66.7%)

Dallas (at home versus Atlanta) 26% (with 47471 bet –3 (open) to –4.5: RLM 1.5
W - DAL 37 - ATL 21

Pittsburgh (at home versus Minnesota) – 35% (with 47564 bet) –4 (open) to –6: RLM 2.0
W - PIT 27 - MIN 17

Oakland (at home versus NYJ) – 38% (with 30674 bet) +7 (open) to +6 : RLM 1.0
L - OAK 0 - NYJ 38

Previous NFL weeks:
Week 5- 3-0
Week 6- 2-0

[Totolover1409]

Also noticed some RLM on the Cincinatti game today which payed off well. Saw what the line opened and closed at on espn.

I think this was also a good week on RLM guys. As long as we are hitting over 50% of our RLM, we are gonna be making some profit.

Hope you all benefited today from this thread.

[jon13009]

I thought the magic number over 53%?

In any case, great job.

[Totolover1409]

[Dfjay9]

What about the o/u tonight? It's dropping with 60% on the over.

[Totolover1409]

Don't do RLMs with over/unders.

[Totolover1409]

A POTENTIAL RLM this week guys: (really premature to call it an RLM already, will explain.)

Denver/Baltimore game.

Baltimore opens at -4 with about 53% betting on Baltimore and the line moves DOWN to -3.5

Reasons for it being premature:

1.) 53-47% not enough for it to be an RLM, want to wait to til 70-30, perhaps 65-35
2.) Only about 6044 bets placed so far, wanna wait for that to go up to 8-10,000
3.) Only .5 point movement. Want 1 point movements.


Therefore, you pick DENVER if all three criteria are met.

Just wanted to throw this out for those who were kinda unclear about RLM. thanks to jon and robust, i've gotten a good idea of how RLM works. Will wait for more movement.

[TGoat]

2.) Only about 6044 bets placed so far, wanna wait for that to go up to 8-10,000

I don't think you have to worry about this parameter in the NFL. I'm only guessing, but I believe that just about every NFL game will go over the 10K mark. Not so for college.

3.) Only .5 point movement. Want 1 point movements.

Personally, I think it would be worth checking the .5 movements for the NFL, seeing as how the lines are much more efficient in the NFL than in the college games, and therefore a half point means a lot more.

[Totolover1409]

Much appreciated Tgoat

[GGPLAYER]

It's looking like the only game so far showing some RLM is that Balt/Den game. Some books now have the game at Balt -3 now.

[Sidetracked]

no RLM candidates this week

[Totolover1409]

Didn't find anything either. Will continue to look