Now that the game is over, what were the books doing?

thetrinity · 02-03-13, 11:42 PM

coin give it up, you do realize that pinnacle and greek dont win every game, even the biggest game of the year?

Jayvegas420 · 02-04-13, 05:35 AM

They're looking to take your next dime!

Domestic · 02-04-13, 06:10 AM

There were some large discrepancies on the SF ML during live betting also, was surprised.

Maniac · 02-04-13, 07:48 AM

Nothing to worry about, both books have a different client base and with a game like this they may not necessarily get exactly the same sort of action as each other, and therefore have to adjust their line accoring to their own liabilities.

Not only that, but with the Superbowl, if you really want to completely balance your action, then you kinda have to take into account what sort of position you have on the "to win Superbowl" futures as well I think, as technically your futures liability on each team could now be added to the ML liability you have for the game and create a lopsided position one way or another forcing the book to adjust their ML accordingly.

floridagolfer · 02-04-13, 07:50 AM

Last thing I saw Sunday morning was that San Francisco money was pouring into Vegas, so I think the books did quite nicely.

PAULYPOKER · 02-04-13, 08:11 AM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Please explain.

Pinny closed 40 cents higher than Bovada on the ML. Greek was 50 cents higher. These are things you hardly ever see from such a small ML number -- especially given the magnitude of the game, and that the Ravens were a pretty popular public dog. Were they just that off in what they anticipated from this game?

The books and all public consensuses played all the line readers of SBR but me for a fool

that I am aware of...........

I warned you all in the link below but you were to damn stubborn to listen...............

To everyone wagering on the Superbowl

The books Put their hands right up your shirts
Pulled the strings that make you all work
Jaws parted, words fell out
Just Like the fish that placed the hook in its own mouth..................

Bostongambler · 02-04-13, 08:15 AM

Trinity u are correct. If u use pinny for a gage that's fine, but they are not right all the time. If they were we would win all the time.

t-wizzle · 02-04-13, 09:14 AM

They were reacting to the money.

brettels · 02-04-13, 09:23 AM

They were looking to take your last dime!

They were reacting to the money!

PAULYPOKER · 02-04-13, 09:42 AM

They were looking to take your last five & dime!

No coincidences · 02-04-13, 10:06 AM

Originally posted by PAULYPOKER

The books and all public consensuses played all the line readers of SBR but me for a fool

that I am aware of...........

I warned you all in the link below but you were to damn stubborn to listen...............

To everyone wagering on the Superbowl

The books Put their hands right up your shirts
Pulled the strings that make you all work
Jaws parted, words fell out
Just Like the fish that placed the hook in its own mouth..................

Every single recreational gambler I knew, like myself, had big wagers on the Ravens, playing the whole "Ray Lewis" angle. I had three buddies call me Sunday morning and ask me about the line moving in SF's favor. I told them Vegas doesn't typically give away free money -- especially on a dog. They said they didn't care and threw more money on Baltimore anyway. Long-term, that's not a smart decision. Just surprised that books would do this in the Super Bowl of all events. There was either a ton of isolated big money on SF, or more public money on SF than I believe. I honestly think it was the former, given the books that were reacting vs. standing pat. You didn't see Bovada, for instance, moving their line in SF's favor hardly at all.

PAULYPOKER · 02-04-13, 10:10 AM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Every single recreational gambler I knew, like myself, had big wagers on the Ravens, playing the whole "Ray Lewis" angle. I had three buddies call me Sunday morning and ask me about the line moving in SF's favor. I told them Vegas doesn't typically give away free money -- especially on a dog. They said they didn't care and threw more money on Baltimore anyway. Long-term, that's not a smart decision. Just surprised that books would do this in the Super Bowl of all events. There was either a ton of isolated big money on SF, or more public money on SF than I believe. I honestly think it was the former, given the books that were reacting vs. standing pat. You didn't see Bovada, for instance, moving their line in SF's favor hardly at all.

Will wait to see if Vegas won or lost on the Nevada gaming commission Superbowl report............

No coincidences · 02-04-13, 10:12 AM

Originally posted by PAULYPOKER

Will wait to see if Vegas won or lost on the Nevada gaming commission Superbowl report............

I think the action was pretty even overall. I also think the books were confident in a SF victory. You don't see the sharpest book in the world offering a dog at 40 cents more than the rec. books very often on a short line like this -- if ever.

vaas187 · 02-04-13, 10:23 AM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Every single recreational gambler I knew, like myself, had big wagers on the Ravens, playing the whole "Ray Lewis" angle. I had three buddies call me Sunday morning and ask me about the line moving in SF's favor. I told them Vegas doesn't typically give away free money -- especially on a dog. They said they didn't care and threw more money on Baltimore anyway. Long-term, that's not a smart decision. Just surprised that books would do this in the Super Bowl of all events. There was either a ton of isolated big money on SF, or more public money on SF than I believe. I honestly think it was the former, given the books that were reacting vs. standing pat. You didn't see Bovada, for instance, moving their line in SF's favor hardly at all.

Spread finished 50/50. they got hosed on the ML with wager amounts.

thetrinity · 02-04-13, 10:50 AM

Sf outgains balt by 100 yards. They also lost the turnover battle and gave up a 108 yd td on a kick return, thats enough to swing a game right there and sf still had a chance to win at the end.

pavyracer · 02-04-13, 12:32 PM

The big whales always follow line movement. So when the line moved from -3.5 to -4 they started pouring money on SF and moved it to -4.5. Unfortunately in sports players and coaches decide the outcome of games..not line movements.

allabout the $$$ · 02-04-13, 01:00 PM

if the game would have landed with sf winning by 1-3 points the books would have cleaned house yesterday

onacloud · 02-04-13, 01:01 PM

It was one game... one win/one loss

One game means nothing in the large scope for bettors and the bookies

PAULYPOKER · 02-04-13, 01:13 PM

Dimes only lost $250,000 on the ATS..............

TheMoneyShot · 02-04-13, 01:14 PM

I personally believe they wanted S.F ML to win. Baltimore spread to hit. That would of been perfect for Vegas. It just didn't happen.

Big Bear · 02-04-13, 01:30 PM

they were trying to burry the squares

No coincidences · 02-04-13, 01:42 PM

Originally posted by pavyracer

The big whales always follow line movement. So when the line moved from -3.5 to -4 they started pouring money on SF and moved it to -4.5. Unfortunately in sports players and coaches decide the outcome of games..not line movements.

Wouldn't big money be moving the line, and not the other way around?

No coincidences · 02-04-13, 01:43 PM

Originally posted by onacloud

It was one game... one win/one loss

One game means nothing in the large scope for bettors and the bookies

Do you have any idea how much is wagered on the Super Bowl?

Hint: it's a little more than tonight's Syracuse/Notre Dame college basketball game.

ChalkyDog · 02-04-13, 01:53 PM

The books absolutely struggled with this game. Their live lines were weird all night.

I was able to get SF +10 live, and they have Ravens all the way up to +180 when San Fran was in the redzone on that last drive.

Jonah · 02-04-13, 01:55 PM

Good thread, wanna read more about this later, but gotta run.

From Saturday night on my book would not budge off Ravens -3 +110. I was forced to take it due to a secure bet promo. Was not happy getting such a crappy number.

Also, had total at 49. Kinda worked cause it moved me from taking the over as I did not want to lose on the 48.

Also, had terrible odds on Ed Reed getting an int. not cool.

Jonah · 02-04-13, 01:56 PM

Originally posted by ChalkyDog

The books absolutely struggled with this game. Their live lines were weird all night.

I was able to get SF +10 live, and they have Ravens all the way up to +180 when San Fran was in the redzone on that last drive.

When did you get SF +10? Pleanty of reasonable times you could have got that.

Vinnie Paz · 02-04-13, 02:04 PM

Every square bag I know took SF. Couldn't pass up +190 ravens....afterall, they ARE in the superbowl.

ChalkyDog · 02-04-13, 02:21 PM

Originally posted by Jonah

When did you get SF +10? Pleanty of reasonable times you could have got that.

Late 1st half.

It was +8.5 moments before and moments after.

Considering I was on Ravens +5 for the game, it was impossible for me to pass up.

pavyracer · 02-04-13, 02:26 PM

Originally posted by Vinnie Paz

Every square bag I know took SF. Couldn't pass up +190 ravens....afterall, they ARE in the superbowl.

In Superbowls most of the sharps lose on sides. They make their money in props.

raydog · 02-04-13, 03:05 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Every single recreational gambler I knew, like myself, had big wagers on the Ravens, playing the whole "Ray Lewis" angle. I had three buddies call me Sunday morning and ask me about the line moving in SF's favor. I told them Vegas doesn't typically give away free money -- especially on a dog. They said they didn't care and threw more money on Baltimore anyway. Long-term, that's not a smart decision. Just surprised that books would do this in the Super Bowl of all events. There was either a ton of isolated big money on SF, or more public money on SF than I believe. I honestly think it was the former, given the books that were reacting vs. standing pat. You didn't see Bovada, for instance, moving their line in SF's favor hardly at all.

nocoin...pinny will move a price due to a sharp player... a rec book like bovada will move the square line(yes, they deal multiple lines) due to money ... huge difference... pinnacle doesnt give a shit if nocoin bets 50k on a play, but will take notice if Durito bets 1k ... you dig?

PAULYPOKER · 02-04-13, 03:21 PM

Originally posted by PAULYPOKER

Will wait to see if Vegas won or lost on the Nevada gaming commission Superbowl report............

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2013...in-super-bowl/

Books made money on the Super Bowl for the fifth straight year, making a profit on the most bet-on game in sports each year for the 20th time in the last 22 seasons.

allabout the $$$ · 02-04-13, 03:51 PM

Originally posted by allabout the $$$

if the game would have landed with sf winning by 1-3 points the books would have cleaned house yesterday

i guess from your article i called it

lakerboy · 02-04-13, 04:03 PM

Originally posted by pavyracer

The big whales always follow line movement. So when the line moved from -3.5 to -4 they started pouring money on SF and moved it to -4.5. Unfortunately in sports players and coaches decide the outcome of games..not line movements.

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/1326579/380-matches-suspect-in-european-fixing-probe?cc=5901

lakerboy · 02-04-13, 04:05 PM

Originally posted by raydog

nocoin...pinny will move a price due to a sharp player... a rec book like bovada will move the square line(yes, they deal multiple lines) due to money ... huge difference... pinnacle doesnt give a shit if nocoin bets 50k on a play, but will take notice if Durito bets 1k ... you dig?

durito does not bet nfl sides.