RLM

[Totolover1409]

I tried to go for that half point movement on a key line and got screwed by the bears last week. By general consensus, I think it's better to play a bit more conservative so I can be in the green this weekend. Good look.

BOL tomorrow

[GGPLAYER]

NFL ones I see for sure as RLM today:

Buffalo
Hou
Minny
KC
TB

[LT Profits]

I tried to go for that half point movement on a key line and got screwed by the bears last week. By general consensus, I think it's better to play a bit more conservative so I can be in the green this weekend. Good look.

BOL tomorrow

3 is a "more" key number than 7 though, 3 is the only number that I actually buys points through (NFL only), and since it costs 20 cents (minimum) to buy each half, I consider it the equivalent of a full-point move.

[LT Profits]

Bills +7.5
Vikings +3
Tampa Bay -1

Good luck everyone.

Looks like Houston too with late move to 3.5 Edit: And now KC too.

[LT Profits]

NFL ones I see for sure as RLM today:

Buffalo
Hou
Minny
KC
TB

Looks spot on As mentioned, I'd use Oakland too.

[jolmscheid]

All looks good to me as well...watch the Colts..

[Totolover1409]

Adding:

Chiefs +14

[GGPLAYER]

NFL ones I see for sure as RLM today:

Buffalo
Hou
Minny
KC
TB

Hou blew it or else I would have had a monster day. I put them in a teaser and pushed the bet. Buff, Minn, KC and TB all cashed for me!

[Dogway]

Indy looks good right? .5 movement with 80 percent on Pitt

[FreeFall]

looks like the colts are starting to fit your system.

[Dogway]

My local has it @ plus 11

[Totolover1409]

Bills +7.5 WIN
Vikings +3 PUSH
Buc -1 WIN
Chiefs +14 WIN


3-0-1 tonight gentlemen.

Overall record 3-2

[Totolover1409]

Only half point movement on indy. not taking it

[Thirsty P]

Great day. 3-1-1 for me and a winning 5 game teaser that paid 4:1. Thanks for all the insight!

[ApricotSinner32]

Raiders were clearly rlm

[Totolover1409]

Yeah but under 65% bets placed on them so i didn't buy it. if you did, congrats. Still a positive day today. Cant complain

[LT Profits]

Yeah but under 65% bets placed on them so i didn't buy it. if you did, congrats. Still a positive day today. Cant complain

65? I use 60.

[Totolover1409]

Whatever works for you LT. I'm sticking with 65%

[AbeFroman]

I just don't have the time to read through the 32 pages here, I apologize guys. That being said, would one of you guys mind filling me in what version of RLM you are using here and what your perimeters are?

[LT Profits]

I just don't have the time to read through the 32 pages here, I apologize guys. That being said, would one of you guys mind filling me in what version of RLM you are using here and what your perimeters are?

Totolover1409 uses 65% consensus, I use 60%. Toto uses full-point reverse moves, I use full-point reverse moves except for half-point moves at and around the 3 (NFL only). Full-point only in college.

[jolmscheid]

RLM is doing very well so far...especially when limiting the plays to only those that have 10,000+ bets...

[Totolover1409]

I know LT's got a good track record. I did great last year. And this year we're off to a decent start. Can't wait til next weekend

[Dakota]

what site do u guys get the #s from for betting percentages and volume??thanks

[LT Profits]

I use Sports Insights. You can get their data for free at both thespread.com and twominutewarning.com Free data is delayed like 20 minutes though

[Capybara]

NFL had a couple of nice hits this weekend but didn't you college players get obliterated Saturday?? I specifically stayed away due to the crazy 8-0 day the week before ,and was glad I did... looked like it went around 3-9 or something, just like I feared!!

[LT Profits]

NFL had a couple of nice hits this weekend but didn't you college players get obliterated Saturday?? I specifically stayed away due to the crazy 8-0 day the week before ,and was glad I did... looked like it went around 3-9 or something, just like I feared!!

Not if you require 10000 plays before firing.

[bobbyk1133]

Not if you require 10000 plays before firing.

5000 "plays" can equate to twice as much $$ wagered than 10000 "plays". As stated, it doesn't differentiate between a 1$ bet or a 1000$ bet. The "40%" on the other side could easily have more $$ on the game than the 60%. Ticket count is pretty silly to have for an outdated betting strategy. Money moves lines, not ticket counts. Sports Insights was cutting edge with it's contrarian betting 5-10 years ago. The market has changed the last few years and the stats support this.

But it's amazing how people let "facts" get in the way of a "good" theory.

[LT Profits]

5000 "plays" can equate to twice as much $$ wagered than 10000 "plays". As stated, it doesn't differentiate between a 1$ bet or a 1000$ bet. The "40%" on the other side could easily have more $$ on the game than the 60%. Ticket count is pretty silly to have for an outdated betting strategy. Money moves lines, not ticket counts. Sports Insights was cutting edge with it's contrarian betting 5-10 years ago. The market has changed the last few years and the stats support this.

But it's amazing how people let "facts" get in the way of a "good" theory.

Don't you see that what you just said actually plays into the theory? If there is RLM, then yes the 40% has more money bet than the 60%, thus causing the RLM and triggering the play. Bet % by itself is meaningless. Bet % combined with RLM is not. RLM always points to the sharp side, regardless of the reason for it (pure money, respected bettor(s), book taking a stand). And the 10000 protects against late buy-backs pushing the line back to the opener or even the other way. Are there times when RLM disappears after 10000 bets (very late buy-back), sure. Does it happen often enough to have a significant effect on long-term results, not really.

[bobbyk1133]

Don't you see that what you just said actually plays into the theory? If there is RLM, then yes the 40% has more money bet than the 60%, thus causing the RLM and triggering the play. Bet % by itself is meaningless. Bet % combined with RLM is not. RLM always points to the sharp side

You're assuming..

1) that the public still significantly influences line moves
2) that the market is still the same it was years ago
3) that RLM has the same documented support today that it did years ago

You're also assuming that a RLM represents a true sharp position. How do you know a RLM isn't the end result of a middle attempt set up at the beginning of the week?

None of this even takes into account sharp action from teasers/parlays. Don't underestimate the amount of $$ that comes in from those bets and it's influence on the lines. A lot of times books open at -9 not because they think thats a true line, but to keep the sharps out of the teaser window. That number usually gets hit hard either because A) it provides inherent value on the dog B) and/or to bring it down into the teaser window.

The market just isn't as simple and kindergarten as you make it out to be.

Put the VCR away, its 2011

[Gee]

ok, I'll bite. What is the evidence that it doesn't work anymore? The maths behind a successful book is still the same and inviting more action on a heavily bet public team is a still a big warning sign. There are clearly limitations to the theory, but it is not a useless tool to have.

[bobbyk1133]

It doesn't work because the theory has become irrelevant in this marketplace. The NFL landscape isn't a situation like before where you had a million uninformed squares with a faction of sharps taking advantage of an obviously lopsided board of games. It's a global market with sharp $$ largely controlling most of the line moves and a lot of manipulation within those line moves.

A simple graph of public ticket counts and RLM the other way doesn't tell you what's going on behind the scenes. I've given a bunch of examples already that these guys choose to ignore. The whole "betting against the public" fad made so famous by Sports Insights worked like 10 years ago when the market was totally different. If you check out their records you can see that their winning percentages have consistently gone down over time and the sample size is so small it's almost laughable. Right now RLM amounts to nothing more than a coin flip in terms of success rates. The sooner these guys stop living in the past the better off their profit margins will be.

It doesn't take an Einstein to see that they can't even get their theory right. 65%? 60%? 10000 bets? lol C'mon man. Using ticket count as a criteria makes no logical sense whatsoever. Sports Insights pools the ticket counts of 8 online sportsbooks--nothing more. It's useful in that it tells us what the public like, but it tells us nothing about how it impact the lines or how much $$ is on each side. Why choose 10000? Another game with only 8000 could have WAY more $$ within those bets than the 10000. It's ludicrous! When you combine this with a RLM all it tells us is "this might be a sharp play, but we're just guessing".

Go back and read LT Profit's 2008 article. It's almost word for word what Sports Insights published on their website years ago. Of course the site isn't about to come out and admit their approach is outdated because that would be bad for business, but the facts are the facts. Any sharp in the know will tell you the same thing.

Does Sports Insights have some good info? Absolutely. I'm not trashing their site because it has some useful stuff there, but also know the limitations.

I'm not trying to splash the Haterade, but someone had to speak up!

[LT Profits]

You're assuming..

1) that the public still significantly influences line moves
2) that the market is still the same it was years ago
3) that RLM has the same documented support today that it did years ago

You're also assuming that a RLM represents a true sharp position. How do you know a RLM isn't the end result of a middle attempt set up at the beginning of the week?

None of this even takes into account sharp action from teasers/parlays. Don't underestimate the amount of $$ that comes in from those bets and it's influence on the lines. A lot of times books open at -9 not because they think thats a true line, but to keep the sharps out of the teaser window. That number usually gets hit hard either because A) it provides inherent value on the dog B) and/or to bring it down into the teaser window.

The market just isn't as simple and kindergarten as you make it out to be.

Put the VCR away, its 2011

It seems to me you are misinterpreting exactly what this thread is about. You seem to be confusing "Betting against the public" with "RLM", and they are not the exact same thing. Betting against the public would be simply betting the lower betting percentages on each game, and we both agree that is a long term loser and was only marginally profitable at best even in its heyday. We even agree that bet percentages by themselves are meaningless for the exact reasons that you mentioned, that they don't give you an allocation of the money bet.

But if you combine line movement with the bet percentages, then RLM is a very specific subset where squares and sharps are clashing, which is what we want and why you actually WANT the bet percentages to be from as many SQUARE books as possible, making me fine with a lot of what you describe as $1 bets being included.

Now let us assume that nowadays, ALL line moves are caused by sharp money which is what you are saying. Even in this environment, RLM works because it still sets up a square vs. sharp scenario. If sharps and squares are on the same side (line moves in same direction as the bet% and is thus not RLM), I would say that the results of the line moves are close to 50/50. But when the sharps and squares disagree after a significant number of bets (RLM), the sharp side was profitable again even last season, and it makes perfect sense.

You ask “How do you know a RLM isn't the end result of a middle attempt set up at the beginning of the week?” That question as expressed doesn’t make sense because when seeking RLM, you are always comparing the current line with the OPENING line. This is where waiting for a higher volume of bets (10,000 for football) helps weed out sharps that are middling. For example, line opens at -8, there is an early RLM move to -6.5 (very early in the week), and then buyback takes place making the line go back to either -7.5 or -8. Then it is not RLM because line is either back to opener or only half-point off. Now if buyback only pushes line to -7, it IS still RLM because line is still full-point off, and even with the buyback, sharps are still heavier positioned on the unpopular dog (this whole paragraph is only valid if more than 60% of bets are on favorite).

Just about the only caveat that I would be careful with is with games that open at -9 or -9.5 and move to the 7.5-8.5 range, again for the exact reason you mentioned (teasers), and if you scroll up to this past Sunday, I basically said the exact same thing as you did regarding the move on Buffalo. That was confirmed to be true RLM when it moved to -7 on game day, but you do have a valid point here that we actually agree on. The same caveat holds true with games that open at Pick or -1 and move to the 1.5-2.5 range, although that would require a popular dog (60% + on dog) to matter.

So outside of the teaser moves mentioned, a sharper overall market really does not change the principles of RLM on all the other spreads.

[LT Profits]

If you check out their records you can see that their winning percentages have consistently gone down over time and the sample size is so small it's almost laughable.

My method is totally different than SI's method, I often find myself scratching my head at what they pick up as "Smart Money" plays while not picking up what I think are obvious RLM moves. In other words, I have no idea what their specific method for determining plays is and I pay no attention to their record.

[Capybara]

Well played, LT!

[Capybara]

Not if you require 10000 plays before firing.

Regarding the college games last Sat, yes, I was referring to "eligible" RLM plays of 10,000 or more bets. Perhaps there were fewer than I said, but either way it seemed like even those did poorly. Was just looking for confirmation, do you recall their record?