NFL as consistent as ever

[Smutbucket]

first off I didnt morph your argument into anything, your always talking about line movements...it should play no role in your capping, bc whatever info it is can/will be misleading.

please explain to me how they figure out the public %s.....do they send a memo out to all the bookies in the world asking them nicely to tell them how many bets are being placed by each side......or the books just willingly hand it over? hand over good information that can damage them....stop defending this arguement.....your looking like a bigger moron than I ever anticipated.....

[No coincidences]

first off I didnt morph your argument into anything, your always talking about line movements...it should play no role in your capping, bc whatever info it is can/will be misleading.

Line movements should play "no role in your capping"? Umm, OK.

please explain to me how they figure out the public %s.....do they send a memo out to all the bookies in the world asking them nicely to tell them how many bets are being placed by each side......or the books just willingly hand it over? hand over good information that can damage them....stop defending this arguement.....your looking like a bigger moron than I ever anticipated.....

Again, you're under the assumption that casual bettors look at this information and fade it instead of follow it. Maybe you have sharper friends than mine, but a lot of my buddies will see that No. 1 play and swear by it.

How do websites accumulate this information? Seriously? With a database that tracks them?

So you're saying these websites give out bad info -- that people were actually heavy on the Colts, Chiefs, Dolphins, etc. today?

I've never said any of this is the end-all, be-all to capping, but to completely dismiss it the other way seems pretty ignorant on your part. Like I said, I'll start tracking the No. 1 public play at Sportsbook.ag -- the most public book I know -- and we'll see if it's a hit or a miss long-term.

[drfunkmaster]

Books took a few hits late last night in college football, most notably with Oklahoma, West Virginia and Ohio State.

So what happens this morning?

Packers (No. 1 public play) don't cover
Bengals (No. 2 public play) don't cover
Falcons (No. 3 public play) cover, but not until the very end
Ravens (No. 4 public play) don't cover
Steelers (No. 5 public play) don't cover

Like clockwork.

but steelers cant cover.. eagles +3 was a gift. Ben rottenburger always chokes.

[Smutbucket]

you seriously believe they have databases that can track every bet from every different sportsbook? freaking unreal......books are the only one who have this information. and I doubt they are allowing outside website to track them in order so "sharps" can benefit.....lmao.....

ya I am saying its bad information......did I say that means people were heavy on colts/chiefs/dolphins? no I said their info is inaccurate....

[No coincidences]

you seriously believe they have databases that can track every bet from every different sportsbook? freaking unreal......books are the only one who have this information. and I doubt they are allowing outside website to track them in order so "sharps" can benefit.....lmao.....

ya I am saying its bad information......did I say that means people were heavy on colts/chiefs/dolphins? no I said their info is inaccurate....

The databases from the sites themselves. In other words, the % and the rank of bets at Sportsbook.ag is for the bets taken at Sportsbook.ag. I guess I don't understand what's so confusing about that.

It's just a general point, though -- I'm not saying that a website is saying 86% is on the Packers when it's actually more like 81%. I'm not saying a website is reading 64000 bets are on the Packers when it's actually only 62000. I'm saying it points you in a general direction that is relatively accurate about who the public likes and who it doesn't, which can be a very useful tool for NFL bets.

If you think line movement and such means absolutely nothing, there's really no point in furthering this discussion. We'll just agree to disagree and call it good. I don't swear by it, but I'd never say it's useless.

[Smutbucket]

oh so now your talking specific small markets? sorry when you say public I assume you mean "all bets" or "all online bets", you should be more specific next time in your title when you say "public makes a killing today!" okay, ya then I do believe their are some data bases that track certain markets, do I think this can be useful? freaking no....

[No coincidences]

oh so now your talking specific small markets? sorry when you say public I assume you mean "all bets" or "all online bets", you should be more specific next time in your title when you say "public makes a killing today!" okay, ya then I do believe their are some data bases that track certain markets, do I think this can be useful? freaking no....

Again, if a particular website is showing 84% on Team A -- you don't think that's a relatively accurate description of which side the public is on?

[Smutbucket]

either your a retard or you work for the bookies trying to sway innocent minds....yet I doubt your intelligent enough for the latter

im done here....to answer your question no its not relatively accurate, if there was accuracy and some signifcance to it, then the books wouldnt be releasing it

[CanuckG]

Public cleaned up afternoon and sunday night

[No coincidences]

either your a retard or you work for the bookies trying to sway innocent minds....yet I doubt your intelligent enough for the latter

im done here....to answer your question no its not relatively accurate, if there was accuracy and some signifcance to it, then the books wouldnt be releasing it

So we'll just fade Sportsbook.ag and see what happens, OK?

[No coincidences]

Public cleaned up afternoon and sunday night

Sure did.

[No coincidences]

to answer your question no its not relatively accurate, if there was accuracy and some signifcance to it, then the books wouldnt be releasing it

You are so far on the other end of the extreme that we'll just agree to disagree. Otherwise we'll just be running around in circles here.

No reason to call me a "retard" though. Not sure why you're stooping to that level just because you don't agree with what I'm saying here.

[BrigadierPudding]

The blog Beyond the Bets tracks the top three most NFL "public" bets every week using Sports Insights bet percentages. The record including this week is 8-7 ATS.

[zoo youk]

you mean consistently inconsistent

[NYSportsGuy210]

They were the top three plays volume wise for the entire day.

Where did I say the books were "killed"?

If this isn't what you are trying to imply then why are you even making this thread?

To point out that the NFL is hard as hell to predict.....gee any more in-depth analysis you'd like to provide for us Captain Obvious?

[No coincidences]

If this isn't what you are trying to imply then why are you even making this thread?

To point out that the NFL is hard as hell to predict.....gee any more in-depth analysis you'd like to provide for us Captain Obvious?

It's not my fault the NFL is owning you pal.

"Tilt proof baby."

[borednaz]

Let me help everyone out because your never going to get it. There can never be a sharp until they control the line. Guys like billy w. are sharp because they can and will manipulate markets. It is also why only a select few continuously beat the stock market.

The books don't lose. Ever. Even Ats @-110 your still leaving them money on the table. They only lay that line when they know money will be equal or close.

I also want you to get your idiot minds of the concept of high public money coming in. Most people bet $25-100 a game. Even if you get 1000 bets on the favorite and 250 on the dog the juice covers most of the loses. On top of that if you do the math one game might have 50k on the favorite with 15-20k on the dog. Do you really think they are scared of the favorite?

After juice and dog money they might take a 10k hit. How many big favorites cash a NFL weekend? How many dogs win S/U much less ATS? Bottom line they made back their loses.

[Smutbucket]

Let me help everyone out because your never going to get it. There can never be a sharp until they control the line. Guys like billy w. are sharp because they can and will manipulate markets. It is also why only a select few continuously beat the stock market.

The books don't lose. Ever. Even Ats @-110 your still leaving them money on the table. They only lay that line when they know money will be equal or close.

I also want you to get your idiot minds of the concept of high public money coming in. Most people bet $25-100 a game. Even if you get 1000 bets on the favorite and 250 on the dog the juice covers most of the loses. On top of that if you do the math one game might have 50k on the favorite with 15-20k on the dog. Do you really think they are scared of the favorite?

After juice and dog money they might take a 10k hit. How many big favorites cash a NFL weekend? How many dogs win S/U much less ATS? Bottom line they made back their loses.

this guys a genious. were over here debating the relevance of public %/line movement and he comes in with most captain obvious statement ever saying that we will never get the stated obvious fact that books win all the time overall against the public. you wonder why we been telling this other idiot no coin to stop posting garbage ass posts like "PUBLIC SURE DID CLEAN HOUSE TODAY"..... because we do get it......even before your sorry ass explanation....

sorry but their are "sharps" that dont need to manipulate markets and can still win. just because the books dont "ever" lose doesnt mean certain people cant profit off gambling/short and long term.

[Barnes & Whine]

Don't Tell me where the sharp money is going! I don't wanna know!!!

[thetrinity]

no coin makes good points but he puts a little too much stock into this public percentage stuff, its obvious who the "public" has game in and game out without looking at percentages.

[vyomguy]

packers, ravens and bengals were sucker bets..it was pretty obvious.

but surprised that steelers didnt cover -3. But polomalo and woodley got injured in first half and they played conservative in the second half.

[k13]

no coin makes good points but he puts a little too much stock into this public percentage stuff, its obvious who the "public" has game in and game out without looking at percentages.

No one needs to tell you the public will be on the Patriots vs Seahawks next week.

Some of percentages just re-confirm it. Really irrelevant if it's 64%, 73% 69%, 82%.
You can get a general perception from Streak4Cash, SU/ATS picks on espn/yahoo. This is basically the "public" and pseudo sharps.

I don't even care if someone is "betting" on Team A over Team B, as long as they "think" that one team should beat the other.

[Smutbucket]

Don't Tell me where the sharp money is going! I don't wanna know!!!

once agian your basing this under the assumption the market your tracking is a reflection of the "public" .....haha keep believing what you wanna believe.....just b/c it "sounds right" doesnt mean its right. or even relatively close. it could be close for one game, and completely off the wall in another game....just look at last nights game, "public" was all over new orleans, ......you guys are all falling for the biggest ruse of sports betting and I feel sorry for you, no matter what I say you think your right because it "sounds right" or "is relatively accurate" ....why is it? because you think it is? STFU clowns

[No coincidences]

just look at last nights game, "public" was all over new orleans

They were? Looked pretty even to me from what I can tell.

Where are you seeing this?

Once again, can you not keep this discussion up without saying "STFU clowns" at the end? Why are you so angry and bitter about this?

[Smutbucket]

according to vegasinsider. said 70%. must be relatively close right?

im really not that angry or bitter about this, Its more entertaining, but if I were angry and bitter, it would be because this forum is filled with threads debating line movements/public %'s/factors that dont involve the outcome of the game......

seems like laziness and ignorance multiplies/reinforces itself 10x that of what hard work/intelligence does.....

[No coincidences]

according to vegasinsider. said 70%. must be relatively close right?

im really not that angry or bitter about this, Its more entertaining, but if I were angry and bitter, it would be because this forum is filled with threads debating line movements/public %'s/factors that dont involve the outcome of the game......

seems like laziness and ignorance multiplies/reinforces itself 10x that of what hard work/intelligence does.....

70% ML or spread? From what I saw, the spread was around that but the ML was pretty evenly split.

You say you aren't angry, yet you feel the need to call people names who disagree with you about it. If you have hard-core proof/data that proves numbers on bet % posted at Vegas Insider, freesportsbet.com, etc. are completely off and/or misleading, I'd love to see them. Otherwise, it's just a matter of some of us choosing to believe they're relatively accurate vs. others choosing to believe they're complete bullshit.

Hey, whatever works for you. I never said make a bet strictly based on that, or strictly based on line movement -- but I do take those things into consideration, and you seem to think it's all a ruse. I haven't seen any proof to the contrary though, so it looks like it's just my opinion vs. yours, right?

[No coincidences]

I've talked to three friends of mine this morning alone, and every one of them are taking the Texans - the points tonight because of how popular the pick is on these sites, at ESPN, etc. I honestly believe that's why these books post them on their main page -- to sucker people in, not steer them away.

If you are steered away from them Smut, that means you're already thinking like a contrarian and don't need the numbers to validate that. Cool. I don't know why we can't just leave it at that, instead of pretending like it's some reverse psychology conspiracy filled with false data to get you further away from the truth.

[Smutbucket]

ya, any bet based on is a sucker bet, if its on the right side or wrong side, its a sucker bet that in will no shape or form allow you to profit long term, thats what Im saying, sorry you cant understand that,

ya, huge reverse pyschology conspiracy it would be, instead of numerical value of 50% they subsitute the a "9" for the "5" and that in turn would increase a large amount of bets for them.....could you imagine the outcry of the "public" if they ever found out these free websites werent accurate.....lol.....best way to demonstrate absurdity is to be absurd, and your arguement trying to defend this my friend ,is completely absurd in my honest opinion.....

[PAULYPOKER]

Never said it was entirely accurate -- far from it. But it does give a halfway decent indication of who the public likes.

Do you know how many buddies of mine see what the "No. 1 bet" is at their sportsbook and tail accordingly? It's not as if these sites are trying to steer you away from the "top bets" of the day. Most people see 90% on Team A and think that's why they should back Team A.

The public bets the favorite ATS over 90% of the time,hence wise bettors should be in search of the dogs that will most likely win straight up and play the ML..............

When the public is on the dog (only 10% of the time) the wise bettors should ALWAYS play the favorite ATS..................

[No coincidences]

ya, any bet based on is a sucker bet, if its on the right side or wrong side, its a sucker bet that in will no shape or form allow you to profit long term, thats what Im saying, sorry you cant understand that,

ya, huge reverse pyschology conspiracy it would be, instead of numerical value of 50% they subsitute the a "9" for the "5" and that in turn would increase a large amount of bets for them.....could you imagine the outcry of the "public" if they ever found out these free websites werent accurate.....lol.....best way to demonstrate absurdity is to be absurd, and your arguement trying to defend this my friend ,is completely absurd in my honest opinion.....

Again, if you have proof that these numbers aren't even close to accurate and that the books are manipulating them because they think bettors are fading instead of following their data, I'm all ears.

[PAULYPOKER]

.

and I think its hilarious how earlier you said apricot must be into drugs....drugs are all around us your moron. their a part of life. drugs are in plants. but theres a big difference between natural drugs and synthetic drugs. your gov't and pharm industry has effectively blurred the lines for people like you. making you think that all drugs are bad. but they arent. one is damaging to your body/addictive/life consuming the other isnt. one is made from a seed, the others involve isolating/mixing chemicals.......stop perpetuating myths...

Wow.

spot on

[Smutbucket]

Again, if you have proof that these numbers aren't even close to accurate and that the books are manipulating them because they think bettors are fading instead of following their data, I'm all ears.

what a logical smart response. except your "proof" that the numbers are accurate are "they told me so" and "it sounds right"

[No coincidences]

what a logical smart response. except your "proof" that the numbers are accurate are "they told me so" and "it sounds right"

So once again, it's your opinion vs. my opinion -- correct?

[Smutbucket]

your a dumbass bro, and your terrible at arguing ya sorry this whole time I thought it was rhetorical question, didnt think I need to state the obvious,

Im sorry you dont see it my way, your entitled to your wrong opinion, im just curious how many more annoying ass posts I will have to be subjected to having to read saying "PUBLIC MADE A KILLING TODAY, " "BOOKS GETTING HAMMERED!" followed by "I CANT FIGURE IT OUT, THE BOOKS GET BURIED IN NCAAF, AND NOW THEYRE MAKING A KILLING IN NFL" not to mention all the "90% of the public is on Team A, yet the line has only moved 3 cents instead of 4 cents!" , nothing youve ever said has validated your opinion, although the things Ive been saying having been pointing out flaws in your opinion, thats the point of discussion......sorry you get a little too offended when I call you mean words like "clown" and "dumbass"

im here to discuss football and picks based on anaylsis of the games, not to sit here and debate over a bunch of numbers "you think sound relatively accurate"

[No coincidences]

your a dumbass bro, and your terrible at arguing ya sorry this whole time I thought it was rhetorical question, didnt think I need to state the obvious,

Im sorry you dont see it my way, your entitled to your wrong opinion, im just curious how many more annoying ass posts I will have to be subjected to having to read saying "PUBLIC MADE A KILLING TODAY, " "BOOKS GETTING HAMMERED!" followed by "I CANT FIGURE IT OUT, THE BOOKS GET BURIED IN NCAAF, AND NOW THEYRE MAKING A KILLING IN NFL" not to mention all the "90% of the public is on Team A, yet the line has only moved 3 cents instead of 4 cents!" , nothing youve ever said has validated your opinion, although the things Ive been saying having been pointing out flaws in your opinion, thats the point of discussion......sorry you get a little too offended when I call you mean words like "clown" and "dumbass"

Such as?

If you are speaking in fact and I am speaking in theory, then it shouldn't be hard to show a little evidence. I'm not the one challenging the face value here -- you are. The burden of proof is on you.