[MonkeyF0cker]

Now if I started a thread that said "HERE IS HOW I MADE MILLIONS GAMBLING" Of course in all caps. Then went on a rant about stuff that I may or may not have done and then gone ahead and proceeded to post a bunch of nonsense, or even some sense stuff that would be a little different.

True. Good thing you didn't do THAT...

[brooks85]

When you go 6-0 on your football plays and 5-1 on your soccer plays come talk to me bitch.

hahaha that was a good one

6-0!!!!

dam you are capping at a 100% rate!!!

[wantitall4moi]

What dumbshit nonsense. If your analysis is different than and superior to what other people can do (lol right), then the line, by definition, won't reliably move to your analysis because you're the only one doing it. So the *only* way to profit from the superiority of your analysis (lol again) is to let it ride dirty. But it's not like dinosaur posers like you and Chubby are a demographic well-known for ever making any sense about anything.

Umm its called knowing what the degenerates will do when offered a choice. I dont get into specifics on how I determine what side I think is going to move, but the way I do it is pretty accurate. Of course it isnt fool proof, but like I said you generate some movement with your own money so that helps when other people who are betting one way bet the opposite side you do.

But what you say doesnt make sense. If everyone bets the same side I do, then how is my analysis different? I bet a team -120 early, they move to 122 or 123 off that bet, then other people come in and start betting them, and they move to -128, -134, -140 and maybe get to -144, I come back and take the +134 or whatever I can find somewhere on the other side. How is that superior to anything? I just bet them earlier than everyone else did. And I buy back the other side when I think it got to its best spot, that is often harder than taking the lead. More people are buying back these days so you have to watch the buy back time more closely. That is one thing that has changed a little bit from the previous years. You get guys looking to buy back, and you also have guys who want that side anyway and are waiting for a good number, and you also have books that will inflate a side just to get some action on them (and then immediately move it to a less lucrative number) so they can balance off their exposure a little bit.

But both sides dont win, although they can possibly if you bet spreads. So handicapping a game and betting against the team the handicap picks will happen sometimes. Again wont get into details. Bt not everyone handicaps games and lines move for a lot of different reasons.

Here is some free advice. Watch Pinnacle lines sometimes on games with tremendous one way action. There is one today. Line moved about 12 cents, steadily, then suddenly it took a massive move, about 8 more cents, to basically beg for bets on the 'weak' side. Then within 5 minutes it was right back to the number it was at before the spike, and it has stayed pretty steady since. They do that a lot. I dont think it is action causing that one major jump, nor do I think it is action that moves it right back to the number prior to the move.

[tomcowley]

[quote=wantitall4moi;11317891]

If everyone bets the same side I do, then how is my analysis different?

YOU said your analysis was better than anyone else's (implying different). Not me.

Here is some free advice. Watch Pinnacle lines sometimes on games with tremendous one way action. There is one today. Line moved about 12 cents, steadily, then suddenly it took a massive move, about 8 more cents, to basically beg for bets on the 'weak' side. Then within 5 minutes it was right back to the number it was at before the spike, and it has stayed pretty steady since. They do that a lot. I dont think it is action causing that one major jump, nor do I think it is action that moves it right back to the number prior to the move.

And you're just a doddering fool. No game today (MLB side or total, muggle quidditch who knows) behaved like that. And it's called taking a max bet on opposite sides.

[illfuuptn]

You get guys looking to buy back, and you also have guys who want that side anyway and are waiting for a good number, and you also have books that will inflate a side just to get some action on them (and then immediately move it to a less lucrative number) so they can balance off their exposure a little bit.

Why would they want action on a +ev bet? People look at "balancing" in way too simplistic of a manner. They more likely are moving a line so they don't continue to get smashed on what could very well still be a +ev play on side A, not because they want action on side B. People need to understand that book's can't "inflate" a number while still maintaining high certainty that both sides are -ev(that being, 1 side is VERY -ev and the other slightly -ev). They DON'T know what the true odds really are.

[illfuuptn]

^^^from the quote in post 74...."beg for bets on the 'weak' side."

If they were begging for those bets, then why did they move the line back down after getting those bets? They were steadily moving the line up because they kept getting bet into by sharps, then they had to move it back because sharps bet the other side at the peak number. In your example, they were heavily exposed to good bets and then a lot of the money on the other side had a good chance of being +ev as well. IOW they got ****** by that game.

[CHUBNUT]

wantit, I think your talking to some brick walls on here. Here's a couple of words to include in your posts to bring them up to date and more acceptable in this changing world of betting.
derivatives. efficient market. poisson.
I'm sure tomcowley can post some more for you.

[JR007]

This dude knows his stuff, AT LEAST HE HAS THE "BRAINS" TO POST SOMETHING INTELLIGENT

[wantitall4moi]

wantit, I think your talking to some brick walls on here. Here's a couple of words to include in your posts to bring them up to date and more acceptable in this changing world of betting.
derivatives. efficient market. poisson.
I'm sure tomcowley can post some more for you.

Yeah I dont use the familiar math terms I use common sense terms. Since I am posting in this from the players talk mirror thread and not the think tank one it might make more sense to the 'normal' folk if I stay away from the terminology the math guys like to use.

I dont get fancy. I do stuff by trial and error. What I do works, is it the 'perfect' formula for success? Doubtful, but IMO ANY approach that never loses is good enough.

I also saw the tyipcal "why would you bet against a +ev play?" Which I assume means playing against a 25-30 cent more which means to that person a side and a number that has a 'cant lose' rate of return long term....I commented on this before. Line moves one way or the other are not indicative of probability of success. Meaning a team I got -120 that closes -150 isnt going to win anymore or less than a team that didnt move. Which flies in the face of all the fairy tales most guys have heard. But considering I have databases of results and lines and line moves (basically the line history you see when you press line history here, only every move not just some) and I have that going back years. So I can see, and break down not only odds, but line moves and degree of line moves. Doesnt mean I can predict anything better, just means I can proof out that moves and odds dont matter. So when people tell me and everyone else that line moves matter I know better.

[Radio Bemba]

wantit, I think your talking to some brick walls on here. Here's a couple of words to include in your posts to bring them up to date and more acceptable in this changing world of betting.
derivatives. efficient market. poisson.
I'm sure tomcowley can post some more for you.

I was going to post something to this effect. People think things are tougher than they actually are, that when they win they've beaten some complicated mechanism that no one can figure out. So when someone goes no, this is all made up nonsense, there's a violent rejection to the rejection of keywords and gambling expressions.

People saying that capping is a full time job, and that type of thing.

[illfuuptn]

Yeah I dont use the familiar math terms I use common sense terms. Since I am posting in this from the players talk mirror thread and not the think tank one it might make more sense to the 'normal' folk if I stay away from the terminology the math guys like to use.

I dont get fancy. I do stuff by trial and error. What I do works, is it the 'perfect' formula for success? Doubtful, but IMO ANY approach that never loses is good enough.

I also saw the tyipcal "why would you bet against a +ev play?" Which I assume means playing against a 25-30 cent more which means to that person a side and a number that has a 'cant lose' rate of return long term....I commented on this before. Line moves one way or the other are not indicative of probability of success. Meaning a team I got -120 that closes -150 isnt going to win anymore or less than a team that didnt move. Which flies in the face of all the fairy tales most guys have heard. But considering I have databases of results and lines and line moves (basically the line history you see when you press line history here, only every move not just some) and I have that going back years. So I can see, and break down not only odds, but line moves and degree of line moves. Doesnt mean I can predict anything better, just means I can proof out that moves and odds dont matter. So when people tell me and everyone else that line moves matter I know better.

I'm assuming you mean it doesn't win more than a game that opens at -150 and doesn't move. That is not quite true, but very close to the point that there's hardly a difference. Do you not understand what we're talking about when we say line moves? We're talking about when we bet it and THEN the line moves in agreement with us.

[High3rEl3m3nt]

I can only speak for myself, but I am sure this extends to quite a few people on this forum. Get a good paying job by working hard or getting the degree(s) and gamble in moderation. If you can keep a healthy perspective on sports gambling, then you'll fair far better than most of schmucks on here and not get in over your head. If capping, watching games, etc. becomes a full time job and consumes a significant portion of your life, then your missing out on life and your setting yourself up for regret. One of the most interesting exercises that a close friend of mine tried was comparing his capping performances when making "air bets" versus money bets. He took his strongest sport, which is NHL totals, small favs, and dogs and compiled a decent sample to compare each other to. Now, I will say that he's one of the believers, who wants to do this for a living, and this exercise might not be necessary for the majority of people, who gamble for fun. Unfortunately, when money was on the line, his capping performance and ability to pick winners was noticeably not as successful as when he made "air bets." Might be worth giving it a shot to see whether the money side of things affects your ability to win.

[No coincidences]

They DON'T know what the true odds really are.

They may not, but to assume any average gambler does over them is absurd.

It's kind of like following smart money -- they won't always be right, just like the books won't always be right, but which side would you rather be on: theirs or the Broke Landers of the world?

[MonkeyF0cker]

Let the wantitall4mois on this site run rampant...

We need more of them. Not less.

[pavyracer]

hahaha that was a good one

6-0!!!!

dam you are capping at a 100% rate!!!

This is something you will never achieve in your life. Post some plays bitch.

[ronibrown]

I can't win 3 times with odds 5 and above so far.

[rkelly110]

Pick one winning team from each sport and labby them to riches.

Simple, no capping or watching line movements. Use the KISS method. Keep It Simple Stupid.

[wiffle]

Pick one winning team from each sport and labby them to riches.

Simple, no capping or watching line movements. Use the KISS method. Keep It Simple Stupid.

wow wonderful idea

[wiffle]

wantit, I think your talking to some brick walls on here. Here's a couple of words to include in your posts to bring them up to date and more acceptable in this changing world of betting.
derivatives. efficient market. poisson.
I'm sure tomcowley can post some more for you.

yup good point

[wiffle]

Yeah I dont use the familiar math terms I use common sense terms. Since I am posting in this from the players talk mirror thread and not the think tank one it might make more sense to the 'normal' folk if I stay away from the terminology the math guys like to use.

I dont get fancy. I do stuff by trial and error. What I do works, is it the 'perfect' formula for success? Doubtful, but IMO ANY approach that never loses is good enough.

I also saw the tyipcal "why would you bet against a +ev play?" Which I assume means playing against a 25-30 cent more which means to that person a side and a number that has a 'cant lose' rate of return long term....I commented on this before. Line moves one way or the other are not indicative of probability of success. Meaning a team I got -120 that closes -150 isnt going to win anymore or less than a team that didnt move. Which flies in the face of all the fairy tales most guys have heard. But considering I have databases of results and lines and line moves (basically the line history you see when you press line history here, only every move not just some) and I have that going back years. So I can see, and break down not only odds, but line moves and degree of line moves. Doesnt mean I can predict anything better, just means I can proof out that moves and odds dont matter. So when people tell me and everyone else that line moves matter I know better.

good advice from one of the best. people could learn a lot from reading your posts.

[wantitall4moi]

I'm assuming you mean it doesn't win more than a game that opens at -150 and doesn't move. That is not quite true, but very close to the point that there's hardly a difference. Do you not understand what we're talking about when we say line moves? We're talking about when we bet it and THEN the line moves in agreement with us.

No I mean in games with significant moves the teams that got the big move didnt win any more than the teams that the line moved against, beyond what expectation they had according to the opening line. There will be difference because most guys will think a team that opened -125 should win about 55.5% of the time, but if that team moves to -150 they magically have a 60% chance. So even taking the vig line move into consideration teams that close -150 do not win 55% of the time if they opened at a smaller than a certain number (not going to give out everything). So expecting them to win 60% of the time is ludicrous. This is basically baseball I am talking about here.


Most people wont even agree on win probability for such teams, and odds, and I am one of them. But for sake of compromise I use the thought process of some people of some degree to put it in terms they might understand.


I dont care if a move agreed with me or not beyond the fact I hope it moved that way. When I take a lead I am not looking for a 'winner' I am looking for a move, and hopefully a big one. "Value" doesnt go beyond what I can make no matter what. The only time I change that point of view is if I have to eat a number, so say I bet a team +135, but they move to +140. So I 'guessed" wrong. I have to figure out how much I want to buy back the other side (at a worse number) and eat that loss. In some cases it is just enough to not get hurt too bad, in other it might be enough to make a profit on the other side (if there was a major reason it moved that way) or it might just be enough to lose the least amount possible. It is still all situational. But generally the options are plaentiful and the lines are varied enough that it isnt a crash and burn situation. Even if the lead is gorrible and I have 10K on a side -120, and they get to -113 before I get nervous. That will mean the dog side is going to be around +103 at that book, but maybe I find a +1-7 somewhere. So I am at -120/+107. So at worst I am going to lose around 525 bux. Which is a bit in scalping but if you know your shit it is less than a half days worth of profits,and that is on a SERIOUSLY bad move against you. Those dont happen very often, maybe 1 in 40 or 50 times. At worst a guy who knows what he is doing will have to eat a nickle. Which will be less than 200 bux most of the time. Usually less than 175. But I am not going to blueprint it out for people, they can figure it out themselves.

Basically lines moves, and even big line moves dont mean much. Even in spread based stuff. If people stopped focusing on NFL or NCAA football and looked at NBA and NCAA hoops as a comparison they would see just what a spread move means to a ML on a side, and realize if they compare it to the MLB a 20 cent line move really isnt all that significant. But the way baseball takes bets it is a very big issue. But people still use the same thought process to try and figure out win probability.

But it is also one of the reasons why those sports on the ML aspect are a resource people dont tap into nearly enough.

Basically people use the same aspect of a game, the ML and use it to calculate the win probability of a team. And they use that probability in every sport. But that is like comparing apples to oranges. because a -125 ML in baseball, basketball,and football dont have nearly the same 'chance' of winning respectively.

[Sawyer]

Basically lines moves, and even big line moves dont mean much.

Definetely. People think when line moves against you, you will lose. It's wrong. These guys who place huge cash always win? Hell, no! Yesterday Bos-Tor O9½ line was -120, in few minutes, line moved to +104! But game went over the total. Same thing happened 2 days ago. Fla-Nym game.

Don't let the line movement effect you. When line moves against you, it doesn't mean you will lose. Line doesn't play the game, players are playing the game.

[StackinGreen]

Recent surge in Green Bay over 11.5 to +135 ... which means, fade the public. Green Bay goes over (but not because of the public, because they are really good and their schedule is likely weaker than it should be).

[wiffle]

Definetely. People think when line moves against you, you will lose. It's wrong. These guys who place huge cash always win? Hell, no! Yesterday Bos-Tor O9½ line was -120, in few minutes, line moved to +104! But game went over the total. Same thing happened 2 days ago. Fla-Nym game.

Don't let the line movement effect you. When line moves against you, it doesn't mean you will lose. Line doesn't play the game, players are playing the game.

another sharp post

[gmcarroll33]

Definetely. People think when line moves against you, you will lose. It's wrong. These guys who place huge cash always win? Hell, no! Yesterday Bos-Tor O9½ line was -120, in few minutes, line moved to +104! But game went over the total. Same thing happened 2 days ago. Fla-Nym game.

Don't let the line movement effect you. When line moves against you, it doesn't mean you will lose. Line doesn't play the game, players are playing the game.

Do people around here actually take this guy seriously?
Screw Kelly flat betting is the way to go, you can make a living with 20k bankroll, don't worry about steam or people with the power and respect moving the line against you etc etc etc of terrible info

[CHUBNUT]

Do people around here actually take this guy seriously?
Screw Kelly flat betting is the way to go, you can make a living with 20k bankroll, don't worry about steam or people with the power and respect moving the line against you etc etc etc of terrible info

If you disagree with all that then you are a losing bettor, no different to one of those wilderbeest getting nailed by the crocs while trying to get across the river.

[WendysRox]

Wantitall4moi,

You sure give a lot of advice for someone who doesn't even regularly wager any more. Well here's some advice for you: things have changed in the 10-15 years since you supposedly wagered professional. In fact, it's changed A LOT. Most of your advice is silly in the context of the current state of sports betting. You might want to consider that before you didactically respond to every post in the Think Tank.

Congratulations on your past success, though.

Surely I'm not the only one, so.... http://tinyurl.com/3g5l7da

[Inkwell77]

another sharp post

I'm not a sharp math guy or anything, but this post did make me laugh.

I like the Sawyer guy and the guy seems legit at hockey, but that post was great.



This idea of moneylines in NCAA BBall and NBA being ignored does seems interesting and worth looking into

[CHUBNUT]

Surely I'm not the only one, so.... http://tinyurl.com/3g5l7da

Tom probably lost 20 minutes of his life hunting that word down.

Bettings changed a lot in the last 10-15 years. here again, statement with no back up, just statement after statement.

[wantitall4moi]

Do people around here actually take this guy seriously?
Screw Kelly flat betting is the way to go, you can make a living with 20k bankroll, don't worry about steam or people with the power and respect moving the line against you etc etc etc of terrible info

Kelly would work if it wasnt flawed due to a blatant unknown, I want ANYONE to show me their unbiased/unweighted win probability long term. Which you need when determining how much to bet using Kelly.

20K could be enough for a single guy with not many responsibilities and not a lot of ambition. 20K is enough to maybe make 50-250 a day on average. so maybe 10-40K during a baseball season. So even with modest expenses a guy could double his bankroll in a season, assuming he rolled over his winnings into the bankroll.

Steam is so over rated it isnt even worth mentioning anymore. Steam is a product of the internet, nothing more. It started when every book made their line available to everyone at the same time then let people watch them as they moved on air or because one guy bet a little bit of money at one book and everyone got scared to death to be open to an arb or a scalp or a middle and they all went that way to avoid being the place the guy who made the bet would buy the other side with.

You know there was gambling before the internet, and with connections in different cities one could find major differences in numbers. vegas might be painted at -125/+115. But Boston could have -135/125, Chicago might have -115/105, Philly might be -120/110, Cle might be in line with Vegas. Now everyone knows everything in real time. 30 cents at the same time with no need to buy early and wait, used to be common place in the 90s if you could call around. Still doesnt mean players have an advantage, just means they have less time and less options to get the best of it. But it also means guys who use their heads, and can form an independent thought can take advantage of air moves and over reaction of scared joints.

The irony is the fairy tales are based on some reality, but a reality that died about 12 or so years ago. And while some books might respect guys who can move money it isnt because they can pick a winner it is because theyre trying to generate the steam the books are scared of to generate moves that way. Books are not scared of one guy, theyre scared of the fools that follow them. That one guy already made his bet. Now they have to worry about all the money coming in on the same side. So they need to decide do they move it now or wait and see. So the internet was a curse and a blessing to books as well. Because a 'sharp' guy might beat them on a game in the old days, but now they have to worry about that guy ad all the fools following him because he has a reputation. Could books gamble and hope? Sure, but that isnt smart business. You only make money while youre in business, so while they could eat all the action from everyone and win a few and lose a few it isnt a sound accounting practice. Especially if you have to pay people when they win.

For example. Lets use brock Landers. if brock had enough guys following or fading him to actually move enough money to matter then books would move a line in a game he played. If they knew that a few million in action would be generated by his opinion they would do it. Brock landers is some random guy on a forum. Doesnt matter to them. So them moving aline isnt because of borck landers it is because of the money he generates. Again a totally hypothetical point but one that is valid.

Because RAS/Ed has that distinction right now. Ed is one of the better guys but his results are dubious at best. BUT he has enough clients following him that they can move enough money to make books nervous. Enough so that guys with in books got the service and moved the lines before they were released to everyone. I am sure they still get them now but not as bad as it was before. So do they respect Ed's opinion or do they respect the guys he has following him? Hard saying, but I know he bets some of the games himself and I dont ever hear of them moving aline because he bet it himself.

There is no real blanket sayings or theories that work. they all have their place. So just because something does something doesnt mean it is for the same reason another something did the exact same thing. there are many reasons why you just have to forget about all of them or take all of them into account and go forward. Second guessing and always asking why is the first step to disaster. Just know there is a reason and more than likely it is valid. Then figure out if your counter measure to it is still profitable. But you cant sit there and look at every little thing about a game, a line move, an odds change and then expect to be successful. You just drive yourself crazy that way.

[tomcowley]

Steam is so over rated it isnt even worth mentioning anymore. Steam is a product of the internet, nothing more. It started when every book made their line available to everyone at the same time then let people watch them as they moved on air or because one guy bet a little bit of money at one book and everyone got scared to death to be open to an arb or a scalp or a middle and they all went that way to avoid being the place the guy who made the bet would buy the other side with.

So when a guy made a big bet at -6.5, everybody steamed up to -7.5 so they would NOT be the place he'd buy back with at +7.5?????? That's your explanation? Donate to Alzheimer's research ASAFP because your days are seriously numbered.

Or, in the real world, books jump to -7.5 on air to avoid taking bets at -6.5 because they decided taking a bet at -6.5 would be -EV.

[brooks85]

This is something you will never achieve in your life. Post some plays bitch.

you are right i need to spend more time handicapping.

See recently I was looking for a random porn site with a hot milf so I could tell everyone on SBR I fuked her and they would think I did since I had a picture of her.. o wait that was you... haha jackass


o and btw "post some plays," when you have a proven record of any profit here let me know chump because I got a nice long thread and I didn't hide behind "units."

[wantitall4moi]

So when a guy made a big bet at -6.5, everybody steamed up to -7.5 so they would NOT be the place he'd buy back with at +7.5?????? That's your explanation? Donate to Alzheimer's research ASAFP because your days are seriously numbered.

Or, in the real world, books jump to -7.5 on air to avoid taking bets at -6.5 because they decided taking a bet at -6.5 would be -EV.

One of the best book makers ever offered these lines simultaneously in a Superbowl once....

Buffalo +7.5 and Wash -6.5.

How did that work out for him? He made MILLIONS. Now if it lands on 7 he looks like a goat right? Well it didnt. Which is the point. He wasnt some scared piece of shit looking at a screen. He put up a middle in the biggest game of the years for U.S. sports bettors. I knew guys betting 6 figures on both sides of that game. So he made his money just on the vig alone, like youre supposed to. did he do it 'wrong', yeah maybe, but in the end he got the last laugh on everyone.

So take that -ev and +ev bullshit and shove it up your ass. because what he did was obviously -ev to the math guys but to a gambler like him it wasnt. And he proved it. Could he survive doing it every time? Debatable, although some guys would bet their life he couldnt.

Bottom line is all the math in the world wont beat an all in type play that wins. because while you struggle to grind out pennies a guy bucking the math gets rich on one move.

That is the allure of gambling.

As for what you said. No the books move off 6.5 because they dont know how many followers this guy has that bets with them. it has nothing to do with the number he bet. But if they KNOW for a fact the line is going to move they just move it without action. So then they are in the same boat as everyone else. If anything the place that took the original bet might not move to 7.5 in the first place, they might just move the vig alittle or maybe make it a hard 7 and take a chance on a side.

But by the way you posed your example it is obvious you just take what seems to be the most obvious answer and throw it out there. Which shows you either try too hard to look right or just dont understand how and why lines move.

[bztips]

You are completely clueless if you think books don't consider EV, or that books just like the "allure of gambling" and don't use math.

Your rant definitely qualifies for Dumbest Post of the Year (which is saying something given that we have the likes of chubnut who routinely posts complete gibberish).

[tomcowley]

So take that -ev and +ev bullshit and shove it up your ass. because what he did was obviously -ev to the math guys but to a gambler like him it wasnt. And he proved it. Could he survive doing it every time? Debatable, although some guys would bet their life he couldnt.

Bottom line is all the math in the world wont beat an all in type play that wins. because while you struggle to grind out pennies a guy bucking the math gets rich on one move.

That is the allure of gambling.

It's so cute how the stories of donks who get lucky inspire the sheeple. God bless all of you.

Steam is a product of the internet, nothing more. It started when every book made their line available to everyone at the same time then let people watch them as they moved on air or because one guy bet a little bit of money at one book and everyone got scared to death to be open to an arb or a scalp or a middle and they all went that way to avoid being the place *****the guy who made the bet***** would buy the other side with.

As for what you said. No the books move off 6.5 because ****they dont know how many followers this guy has that bets with them****. it has nothing to do with the number he bet. But if they KNOW for a fact the line is going to move they just move it without action. So then they are in the same boat as everyone else. If anything the place that took the original bet might not move to 7.5 in the first place, they might just move the vig alittle or maybe make it a hard 7 and take a chance on a side.

Alzheimers much? Completely opposite things in less than 2 hours.