[k13]

You would be ~61%, why make it tougher than it is? Just saying.

That's around a 200 game sample not some mickey mouse sample of 25 games.

Not sure why people keep saying line moves are meaningless, they always bring up some silly example like Packers at Lions. Like one game really matters in the big picture.

[UntilTheNDofTimE]

so bet the side going with the immediate line movement of half point?

[iifold]

There are NO shortcuts in life...

The quicker you realize this, the better...

Hard Work and Discipline are proven...

You have to think weeks and months ahead and wait like a Fukkin Spider...

Hard to do...

[marcoloco]

You would be ~61%, why make it tougher than it is? Just saying.

That's around a 200 game sample not some mickey mouse sample of 25 games.

i love stats like this. thx for posting

[Inkwell77]

What type of line moves are you talking about? Line moves from the opening number on Sunday night? Late line moves right before kick off? Line moves from the beginning of the year where every game had a spread? Just saying follow line moves is too vague

[warriorfan707]

What type of line moves are you talking about? Line moves from the opening number on Sunday night? Late line moves right before kick off? Line moves from the beginning of the year where every game had a spread? Just saying follow line moves is too vague

[ssmann]

can you explain the method here? im a newbie

[hangtime]

can you explain the method here? im a newbie

once lines are opened for games to be wagered on, lines are sometimes adjusted or prices are juiced towards certain teams. He is saying if you follow these line movements for every game in the regular season you would be at a 61% clip.

[thebestthereis]

Fade Lang and stop wasting time with all of the other crap. Fade and get laid.

[warriorfan707]

Fade Lang and stop wasting time with all of the other crap. Fade and get laid.

If its so simple to just fade Lang and get rich why don't you do it?

[firehoyt]

once lines are opened for games to be wagered on, lines are sometimes adjusted or prices are juiced towards certain teams. He is saying if you follow these line movements for every game in the regular season you would be at a 61% clip.

If you wait for the moment before you wager, then you've gotten a bad number. Is the 61% based on winning ATS at line opening or closing?

[k13]

If you wait for the moment before you wager, then you've gotten a bad number. Is the 61% based on winning ATS at line opening or closing?

This is based on the closing line and getting a "bad" number.

[thetrinity]

i knew that a good majority of these moves were hitting, just by looking week to week. this is over 223 games to be exact. glad someone pointed this out. i wonder how many games you would have hit if you got the best possible number on these sides? detroit was a win with best possible number yesterday and minnesota was a win at best possible number early in the season vs detroit (closed on 3 for a push). wonder what the clip was for dogs and favorites separately? a bit curious on that.

[d2bets]

OK so are you saying that this is based on betting the into each closing line on the side that is a worse line than the opener (e.g. line moved from +3 to +2.5; bet +2.5)? How much of a move qualified - any half-point? What are you using as your official opener/closer?

[smoke a bowl]

You would be ~61%, why make it tougher than it is? Just saying.

That's around a 200 game sample not some mickey mouse sample of 25 games.

Not sure why people keep saying line moves are meaningless, they always bring up some silly example like Packers at Lions. Like one game really matters in the big picture.

Versus the closer?

[On Top]

"

[jstblaze]

are you saying you would be hitting 60% if you took the line after it had moved against you already?

then that is a solid statistic.

if you are saying that you would be 60% if you got the best line in situations where the line moved, then that is just a pointless observation.

[On Top]

Have you ever checked the record for college football??

[On Top]

I think what he is saying, for example GB line opened at -14 this week closed at -11, -11.5. There for bet the way the line is moving towards KC.

[thetrinity]

OK so are you saying that this is based on betting the into each closing line on the side that is a worse line than the opener (e.g. line moved from +3 to +2.5; bet +2.5)? How much of a move qualified - any half-point? What are you using as your official opener/closer?

this is a good question. id imagine he means for a half point move.

[thetrinity]

are you saying you would be hitting 60% if you took the line after it had moved against you already? then that is a solid statistic. if you are saying that you would be 60% if you got the best line in situations where the line moved, then that is just a pointless observation.

post 12 blaze.

[FourLengthsClear]

You would be ~61%, why make it tougher than it is? Just saying.

That's around a 200 game sample not some mickey mouse sample of 25 games.

Not sure why people keep saying line moves are meaningless, they always bring up some silly example like Packers at Lions. Like one game really matters in the big picture.

It was around 52% last year and 49% the year before.
So is the market becoming more efficient, less efficient or are we just looking at variance?

Is there a similar story with totals?

[k13]

Just did a quick study on "bad numbers".

Getting the very worst closing line would have resulted in 3 losses and 5 pushes on the year.

I'll look deeper when I have more time for accuracy but that's rather a minimal loss.

[jstblaze]

Thanks.

Pretty significant then, if you are always betting the bad number after line movement, and it is still hitting.

Would make me think there is some significance to the linesmakers this season and their starting line.

This was based solely on line moving atleast half point? and not taking into account juiced lines that stayed put?

[TheMoneyShot]

K13 - This has been the most unusual NFL and College season ever. Dogs aren't barking like they normally do. Worse season in 7 years. I'm not going to change my method because of some fluke year. I'll adjust and be ready for next year... using my same system.

[Ch Br]

You would be ~61%, why make it tougher than it is? Just saying. That's around a 200 game sample not some mickey mouse sample of 25 games. Not sure why people keep saying line moves are meaningless, they always bring up some silly example like Packers at Lions. Like one game really matters in the big picture.

Fade Lang and stop wasting time with all of the other crap. Fade and get laid.

LOL its posts like these that keep me comin back ahahahahah

[d2bets]

If the movement is really 61% against closers, it's gotta be hitting at least 65%+ against openers. Pretty amazing.

[k13]

It was around 52% last year and 49% the year before.
So is the market becoming more efficient, less efficient or are we just looking at variance?

Is there a similar story with totals?

Was this based on Pinnacle/thegreek lines?

At how many games do you draw variance out of the equation?

I don't follow totals, sorry. It is a lot of data to follow as is.

[FourLengthsClear]

Was this based on Pinnacle/thegreek lines?

At how many games do you draw variance out of the equation?

I don't follow totals, sorry. It is a lot of data to follow as is.

Based on the Pinny closer, yes although it depends on how much of a move is considered 'enough' to be included in the sample.

In terms of discounting variance, all you can do is measure in terms of standard deviations from the mean. 61% from 200+ games is certainly a substantial deviation but then there is also a correlation with the number of favourites covering the spread which is also much higher this season, so far. The implication of that is markets which are less efficient than in previous years which would be tough to explain.

Nonetheless there is no harm in riding a gravy train even if it can be expected to slow down/stop at some point.

[k13]

If the movement is really 61% against closers, it's gotta be hitting at least 65%+ against openers. Pretty amazing.

The difference is surprisingly minimal.

Very few games where it actually mattered and majority of people get a bad number to begin with since they don't bang lines on Sunday night when they come out.

Another thing to remember is lot of people like to buy off the key number (0.5 point).

[TheCentaur]

I was really bored and just a flipped a coin 100 times, no lie. One side came up exactly 60 times, while the other came up 40. Which side do you think came up 60? Now if you could only know that ahead of time.

It was tails by the way.

[4TH AND STUPID]

cool story bro..


but we all know you didnt flip a coin 100 times.

you were playing call of duty and in between a team deathmatch game you had a few seconds to spare and posted this stupidity. next time contribute something meaningful to a thread or fuk off and keep playing cod

[TheCentaur]

cool story bro..


but we all know you didnt flip a coin 100 times.

you were playing call of duty and in between a team deathmatch game you had a few seconds to spare and posted this stupidity. next time contribute something meaningful to a thread or fuk off and keep playing cod

That was a cool story too. It only took about ten minutes, and I don't play video games. Is that you Frizelli, or are you just another pissed off kid on a losing streak?

If you don't believe it happens do it yourself. The point is, 200 sample size has plenty of variance, and if betting against the line move happened to be ~61% this year there would be an almost identical thread pointing this out and how betting against the public is a sure thing.

[FourLengthsClear]

I was really bored and just a flipped a coin 100 times, no lie. One side came up exactly 60 times, while the other came up 40. Which side do you think came up 60? Now if you could only know that ahead of time.

It was tails by the way.

The probability of flipping 60 or more tails in 100 flips is 2.30%
The probability of flipping 120 or more tails in 200 flips is 0.23%

The argument that is only variance is tenuous.

[TheCentaur]

The probability of flipping 60 or more tails in 100 flips is 2.30%
The probability of flipping 120 or more tails in 200 flips is 0.23%

The argument that is only variance is tenuous.

Ok now double that because you could flip 60 tails or heads, now add the possibility of flipping 55,56,57,58,59 tails, now double that for heads, and add it all together.

Could be wrong, I know you are a smart guy. But saying 60 or more tails is 2.3% is misleading, isn't it?

Then you have to take in to account that the OP is probably searching for a trend in totals, Monday night games for the past ten years, domes vs. grass, teams coming off a bye week, etc., so the chances of not finding something at ~61% with around 200 samples would be a surprise.

I remember a few years ago my cousin was going to light a cigarette and dropped the cigarette on the ground. It landed on it's end, and didn't fall over, just stood there. We were amazed, and of course tried to do it again and again with no success. It was like lightning struck because the chances of doing that again are very long. But you also have to take in to account how many random events you observe every day, yet don't notice until something weird happens.

I'm not saying the op's observation can't be significant, but 200 is still a small sample size, especially when you are searching for a pattern, instead of forming a hypothesis and then testing it. It's the main reason sportsbetting is a multi billion dollar industry.