Originally posted on 08/21/2011:

no way to tell, and I am a big believer in no such thing. Some books will use 'respected' players bets as a benchmark, but that still doesnt mean theyre right more often than not. Because in some cases they might be taking a position to buy back on later. So they open up the books who move on them to exposure to buy backs.

But most of the time it is predicated on unknowns, the books overall limits, their total handle on that game, and how much money they have tied up in other things related to that game/move that help them avoid exposure.

Seriously, trying to get a 'sharp' gamblers plays is not a good idea, at least once they make them. best thing they are good for it taking a position (if they are respected enough or followed enough to move aline) and then look to get back against that first position once the dust settles. Thats why these reduced book joints got played against each other so much in the early 2000s. You got college games with massive spreads and almost zero risk. Things like Over 42 -104 and Under 47 -105 for the same game. NCAA hoops was even better. Problem with them was limits. Then they made some adjustments.

Despite all the stories you hear no one is going to pick one side of a game consistently enough to beat the game. Books 'respect' guys mostly because others follow them and it generates a tidal wave of money because most guys dont get it. So they get over exposed in a hurry, so they adjust to makeup for it. Not always enough to balance themselves, since, as I said they have to protect against the initial originator buying back, but enough to get a few guys caught on the wrong side of a move.

But to answer the original question there is no way to tell unless someone who you think is 'sharp' tells you what theyre beting.