[Albert Pujols]

1. "The right side is the one that cashes. "

The fact of the matter is that the right side loses often.

[LT Profits]

2. Winners don't pay vig

[noober]

3. A big dog won so the books must have made a killing.

[Thor4140]

the bookies want equal action on both sides

[soxwin]

the right side does always cash. Looking at it the other way means a person is trying to justify a loser.
If Butler shot 30% from the field last night, which is still way below a normal game for them, they would have covered. Does that mean the people on Butler were on the right side? Of course not, the right side was UCONN b/c that was the side that made your bankroll grow.

Other myths: bad beats or lucky winners. There are no such things. either you are right & win or wrong & lost.

[Duff85]

the right side does always cash. Looking at it the other way means a person is trying to justify a loser.

This is not the case though - variance kicks you in the nuts in the short term.

For instance I could log onto Bodog and bet on any favoruite on the board at half a point worse than I could get anywhere else and could win that day. Was I on the right side of that line? No I should have been on the other side of that number or have played it somewhere else - did I win - yes.

I could do this and win for days at a time, but in the long term i'm not going to win taking half a point worse than the market consistently. The reverse is true for staying away from underdogs on the moneyline because they win less frequently. You should be looking to make profitable bets regardless of which side your feeling.

All about implied probability if you want to win in the long term. Not I got a good feeling about my five teamer laying chalk on everything that includes the Heat, Lakers, Yankees, Red Sox, and Kansas (because everyone knows all of these teams win 100% of the time).

[Albert Pujols]

the right side does always cash. Looking at it the other way means a person is trying to justify a loser.
If Butler shot 30% from the field last night, which is still way below a normal game for them, they would have covered. Does that mean the people on Butler were on the right side? Of course not, the right side was UCONN b/c that was the side that made your bankroll grow.

Other myths: bad beats or lucky winners. There are no such things. either you are right & win or wrong & lost.

Bad beats happen but they are rare. Most gamblers think that if their team is up 2-0 in the top of the 4th, it's a bad beat if they lose. But if you lose an under by one in double OT, you can whine for a minute and it doesn't make you a douche.

One result means nothing. It doesn't make a win the right side. But I think you have to look at every matchup and figure out what your opinion would be if they played 100 times. There would be a lot of different outcomes. A 17 point dog would blow out the favorite once in awhile. This is why you can never vary your bet size to extreme levels.

[jjgold]

That is is inmoral

[Karayilan9]

Picking favorites is square picking dogs is sharp.

[wtf]

jj is hung

[slacker00]

One word: Martingale. (or any other of various & numerous implicit ignorances dealing with fundamental bankroll management)

[cobalt king]

You can make a living betting sports!

[HotStreak]

"I'm due"

[Smoke]

That betting on pujols and the cardinals is easy money

[Joe Sharp]

Dogs are +EV ; Favorites are -EV

[cant call it]

That is is inmoral

[grzftbl]

2. Winners don't pay vig

Sports Bar about a mile from my house:

[B1GER1C828]

the right side does always cash. Looking at it the other way means a person is trying to justify a loser. If Butler shot 30% from the field last night, which is still way below a normal game for them, they would have covered. Does that mean the people on Butler were on the right side? Of course not, the right side was UCONN b/c that was the side that made your bankroll grow. Other myths: bad beats or lucky winners. There are no such things. either you are right & win or wrong & lost.

unreal post.

That picking an underdog can't be considered square.

"How can it be square if its an underdog", i love it.

[mrmarket]

Negative EV gamblers fretting constantly over bankroll management and its importance.

[MartinBlank]

Yeah, I don't buy the right side/lost one either.

This isn't horseshoes. The right side is the one that cashes.

You can justify any losing selection by data snooping for trends. That doesn't make it the right pick.

[gryfyn1]

Yeah, I don't buy the right side/lost one either.

This isn't horseshoes. The right side is the one that cashes.

You can justify any losing selection by data snooping for trends. That doesn't make it the right pick.

I guess it goes by what you define as 'right side'; and i kind of agree that the right side is the winning one; but that also dosen't mean that the right side is the smart one.

If Someone were to say to you before the game last night Ill give you over 100 pts total for even money - would the smart side been the under?

Granted the under in that case would have been right; but if they play that game 100 times isg goes over over 100 what 90+ time ...

Then again, they only play the game once and thats the rub.

[flipside2469]

"Vegas needs 'Team A', everyone is on 'Team B' and if 'Team B' wins, Vegas will be hurting. Bet 'Team A'. Vegas was built on the underdog."

Since when do we worry about what Vegas needs in order to place our bets? Shouldn't we look at the numbers of both teams, then make our decision? Going against the public isn't necessarily the right call.

[gryfyn1]

2. Winners don't pay vig

ha, yep, winners are the only ones that pay the vig -- losers are the ones that dont pay the vig.

[Bill Dozer]

Parlays are only for suckers.

[Nicky Santoro]

if you're a good handicapper, you'll make money gambling.

[dfberger23]

All of the crap about who the public is on is all BS, total myth, doesn't mean shit.

[LT Profits]

ha, yep, winners are the only ones that pay the vig -- losers are the ones that dont pay the vig.

WRONG, Everybody pays vig.

[underthe total]

sharps make picks

[Igetp2s]

WRONG, Everybody pays vig.

Nonsense. Either winners pay vig, or losers pay. Can't be both. It depends on what you consider the vig. If you bet $11 to win $10, you can either consider the vig as being the 11th dollar you're not getting if you win, or the original extra dollar you need to pay if you lose. The distinction is meaningless and is an exercise in parsing semantics.

[bradthebloke]

you can win

[tony_come]

biggest myth: gamblers are gay

[muldoon]

That fading the public always wins.

[warriorfan707]

you cant win

[Robust]

that you *might* win in the long run..

Robust

[GTS925]

"Karma".