RLM

[ebbearsfb1]

Lt are you posting the rlm plays in here or just when you do a daily thread

[GGPLAYER]

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!!

I learned last year that College was more and up and down than NFL. I try to use a larger point move like 2 or more to filter out plays. NFL just seems to work out better with the RLM plays.

[LT Profits]

Lt are you posting the rlm plays in here or just when you do a daily thread

I don't do it regularly only because my Sunday mornings are wild, but when I do get a chance, I post them here. My own threads are NOT RLM plays (although some plays may be), RLM is just one of many tools. (Maybe I should play RLM exclusively considering my 7-14 NFL record at SBR )

[LT Profits]

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?

Unfortunately, unless I am blind, SI no longer stores number of bets in their archive.

[bobbyk1133]

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.

I know the difference. I mentioned it because they are related.

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).

There are many examples that you could use. Let's look at last week for instance. I could make a legitimate argument that the OAK/NYJ game and/or the MIN/DET game was a middle attempt by the sharps. I could also make the case that it wasn't a middle and sharp action was simply split on those games. Many sharps loved OAK with the hook, but others loved NY at -3. That could be a middle, two-way action, or a real position by the sharps on OAK. Yet in your theory none of that is considered or differentiated. It's simply counted as the sharp side and labeled "RLM". Same thing with MIN/DET. Sharps loved MIN at +4 and +3.5, but they could have loved DET at -3. The books know if they come back off the 3 sharps are going to pound the dog again so they remain pat. Was OAK the sharp side? Yes, but NY could have been too depending on what the line is at. The square sitting at home looking for RLM has already lost the value if he wants the sharp side. Playing OAK +3 would be the wrong move. The sharp play was at +3.5 or +4 or NY at -3. This is how you guys are easily being led astray.

Lines aren't arbitrarily moved back and forth based simply on sharp $$ like you say. Factors such as critical numbers and books anticipating what the sharps will do also plays a big part. Examples like this happen all the time which should render your theory irrelevant.

[bobbyk1133]

If you want to break it down even more, let's look at the SD/KC game this past week. KC was added to this topic as a RLM, but in reality it was only the strict "system" sharps who played KC. This was not a universal sharp play like your theory would assume it was. There are a LOT of sharps out there who will take a double-digit dog on principle. Another large portion of sharps are fundamentalists who need to evaluate the game and all the relevant factors to know if that dog is worthwhile. For the most part they stayed off this game. This is another example of how your system recommends plays blind without considering what is really behind the RLM.

[RustedVegas]

Just go away bobbyk113. U=nonsense

[bobbyk1133]

Just go away bobbyk113. U=nonsense

Congrats for receiving 1 point for your troll response.

I respect that LT Profits gave a fair debate. I said I'd give matelionis 100 points if this theory hits 55% this season and I'll add another 100 for LT Profits too. I stand by what I said and hopefully it gave people something else to think about. If "RLM theory" works out then more power to them.

[8ArIvd5]

If you want to break it down even more, let's look at the SD/KC game this past week. KC was added to this topic as a RLM, but in reality it was only the strict "system" sharps who played KC. This was not a universal sharp play like your theory would assume it was. There are a LOT of sharps out there who will take a double-digit dog on principle. Another large portion of sharps are fundamentalists who need to evaluate the game and all the relevant factors to know if that dog is worthwhile. For the most part they stayed off this game. This is another example of how your system recommends plays blind without considering what is really behind the RLM.

remind me again, did kc cover?

we're not following the sharp money only when they have a particular thought process. we're following the sharp money because it's sharp money.

[bobbyk1133]

remind me again, did kc cover? we're not following the sharp money only when they have a particular thought process. we're following the sharp money because it's sharp money.

Fair enough, but tell me if it's wise to follow sharp money on a side regardless of the line? If you aren't getting the numbers they like you're pissing away value. Most sharps pass on a side if the value is gone regardless of how much they like a side. That's the risk you take when you try to follow late in the week because the lines have already been pounded into shape.

[8ArIvd5]

Fair enough, but tell me if it's wise to follow sharp money on a side regardless of the line? If you aren't getting the numbers they like you're pissing away value. Most sharps pass on a side if the value is gone regardless of how much they like a side. That's the risk you take when you try to follow late in the week because the lines have already been pounded into shape.

point taken. we'll just have to see how the season plays out.

[stickbit]

kicked serious ass in both nfl and cfb last season following rlm...I think I lost a couple games because I got a worse line than sharps early in the week, however it was only a couple and most I will buy .5 pt or 1 pt if its a key number. not sure if that is the wisest thing to do but it has worked for me. for example, i bought .5 pt on minny this past wknd to +3.5 and that made difference between a push and a win.

[Totolover1409]

Classic case of RLM on the Cards.

[Aussiecapper101]

Fair enough, but tell me if it's wise to follow sharp money on a side regardless of the line? If you aren't getting the numbers they like you're pissing away value. Most sharps pass on a side if the value is gone regardless of how much they like a side. That's the risk you take when you try to follow late in the week because the lines have already been pounded into shape.

Well said dude, however I followed it all last season and didn't get hurt by the somewhat bad numbers we were getting but it could quite easily go the other way this season.. Note to self on that one

[RustedVegas]

Congrats for receiving 1 point for your troll response.

I respect that LT Profits gave a fair debate. I said I'd give matelionis 100 points if this theory hits 55% this season and I'll add another 100 for LT Profits too. I stand by what I said and hopefully it gave people something else to think about. If "RLM theory" works out then more power to them.

Thank you very little.

[GGPLAYER]

Classic case of RLM on the Cards.

Strongest looking one of the week so far. Others to follow which may or may not become plays:

Jac
Hou
Mia
Den
Oak

[Totolover1409]

Dallas -2
Cardinals -1

[bobbyk1133]

Dallas -2

This thread should be officially declared dead and locked. I had a suspicion you had no idea what you were doing, but this pick confirms it. The Lions opened at +3 and almost every sharp on the planet bet Detroit BIG.

To anyone blindly trailing these picks....may the force be with you.

[Totolover1409]

Appreciate your criticism bobby. Good luck with your picks. I can care less of what you think. If i win on Dallas imma give you so much shit

[RustedVegas]

This thread should be officially declared dead and locked. I had a suspicion you had no idea what you were doing, but this pick confirms it. The Lions opened at +3 and almost every sharp on the planet bet Detroit BIG.

To anyone blindly trailing these picks....may the force be with you.

Lions opened at +1, not +3. Now the line is +2.5.

[GGPLAYER]

Where did Det open at +3?

[GGPLAYER]

Dallas -2
Cardinals -1

I like these two. What about Miami? Is the line move more related to SD offense injuries? Gates looks to be out and V-Jack and Matthews are both questionable.

[bobbyk1133]

Appreciate your criticism bobby. Good luck with your picks. I can care less of what you think. If i win on Dallas imma give you so much shit

Win or not, all the sharp $$ is on Detroit. Isn't that the whole point of this RLM theory?

Lions opened at +1, not +3. Now the line is +2.5.

Where did Det open at +3?

Do a little more research, sharps grabbed +3 on the opener at about everywhere that it was available.

[LT Profits]

I think these guys use Pinny as the official source, and they opened -1 -117. That said, I would be leery of using Dallas. CRIS books opened this game at Dallas -3, and as far as Pinny goes, not sure -1 -117 to -2.5 -110 is really much of a move. I don't think it's the equivalent of a "normal" one-point move.

[LT Profits]

Also, sharps could have pounded Dallas -1 to set up Wong Teasers on Detroit. I wouldn't count Dallas unless they got to -3, it would pay nicely to have a slow moving book if that happens.

[Capybara]

Dallas -2

This thread should be officially declared dead and locked. I had a suspicion you had no idea what you were doing, but this pick confirms it. The Lions opened at +3 and almost every sharp on the planet bet Detroit BIG.

To anyone blindly trailing these picks....may the force be with you.

Lions opened at +1, not +3. Now the line is +2.5.

Where did Det open at +3?

And herein is where so much of the confusion and bickering lies... different sources have different opening lines for this game. Bet Tracker shows it opening at Dal -1, but Sportsbook Spy and Sports Insights (who I thought did Bet Tracker) show at as Dal -3. Obviously that would make the difference between the current line showing RLM or not! I for one hate when different sources show varying info, makes it very hard to properly track RLM!

[bobbyk1133]

I think these guys use Pinny as the official source, and they opened -1 -117.

Official source or not, that's not what this game opened as. It was -3 across the board. Some books opened at -1 to keep Detroit out of the teaser window. I expected you to know this LT. Or is it that you guys only look at Pinnacle and ignore the rest of the betting marketplace?

I've seen people stick their head in the sand before, but this is getting laughable.

[The Seer]

Some books will let outfits bet the number before it is ever released out to the public so they can shape the number which is why you see them vary sometimes.

[LT Profits]

Official source or not, that's not what this game opened as. It was -3 across the board. Some books opened at -1 to keep Detroit out of the teaser window. I expected you to know this LT. Or is it that you guys only look at Pinnacle and ignore the rest of the betting marketplace?

I've seen people stick their head in the sand before, but this is getting laughable.

Basically YES because you have to have ONE source to avoid conflict for tracking purposes, and Pinny is the best source to use. But like I said in the two posts prior to yours (which I guess you missed), I'd be leery of Dallas because CRIS books opened at Dallas -3 and I even mentioned the teaser window.

[Totolover1409]

My source says Dallas opened at -1

[LT Profits]

Post 1117:

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.

It applies here.

[RustedVegas]

Do a little more research, sharps grabbed +3 on the opener at about everywhere that it was available.[/quote]

And how do you prove that sharks grabbed this +3? Just because you say so doesn't make it true. You don't have your finger on the pulse of all the sharps in the world, you just think you do.

[bobbyk1133]

Basically YES because you have to have ONE source to avoid conflict for tracking purposes, and Pinny is the best source to use. But like I said in the two posts prior to yours (which I guess you missed), I'd be leery of Dallas because CRIS books opened at Dallas -3 and I even mentioned the teaser window.

This makes zero sense! There are 4-5 primary books to look at for opening lines. All of them opened at -3 except Pinny. Pinny took a different route to avoid heavy action on the dog/teasers. Any move back towards -3 is going back towards the opener.

The only relevant question here is...do you want to follow sharp $$ or not? Because if the answer is yes no one following this thread would put a penny on the Cowboys. The love for Detroit that sharps have is probably the worst kept secret in Vegas.

[bobbyk1133]

Also, sharps could have pounded Dallas -1 to set up Wong Teasers on Detroit. I wouldn't count Dallas unless they got to -3, it would pay nicely to have a slow moving book if that happens.

This is where you're talking out of both sides of your mouth. On one hand you say be cautious because of the teaser window. Then you say if it goes back to -3 it counts as a RLM. You're pretty much saying every other important book in the market is irrelevant. I can understand trying to use one book for tracking purposes, but if the whole point is to follow sharp $$ then ignoring the rest of the marketplace is nothing less than idiotic.

It's almost as if you guys are purposely misleading yourselves to prove a point.

[LT Profits]

This makes zero sense! There are 4-5 primary books to look at for opening lines. All of them opened at -3 except Pinny. Pinny took a different route to avoid heavy action on the dog/teasers. Any move back towards -3 is going back towards the opener.

The only relevant question here is...do you want to follow sharp $$ or not? Because if the answer is yes no one following this thread would put a penny on the Cowboys. The love for Detroit that sharps have is probably the worst kept secret in Vegas.

I hear you, but for pure record-keeping purposes, once you pick a source, you have to be consistent with it or the integrity of the numbers gets blown up. From a COMMON SENSE viewpoint, just don't bet Dallas regardless of how it is going to be recorded officially.