What Caused The Line In The Auburn Oklahoma Game To Go From -6 To -2?

[TheMoneyShot]

Just trying to ask a logical question.

Did the Public know something that Auburn was going to do? And out match Oklahoma?

Auburn's 2 players coming back from injury?


I mean... on paper alone... Oklahoma would beat Auburn.

Just don't know why the public would move the line like that?

[rm18]

Mixon video maybe. Also I think computer numbers favor Auburn because Big 12 was bad out of conference, but the thing is Oklahoma still has a lot of big time recruits and future NFL players.

[TheMoneyShot]

Charles Barkley made a 10 million dollar wager on Auburn +6 mother fukker.

[thetrinity]

qb injury game tight before that, also big 12/sec

[TheMoneyShot]

Mixon video maybe. Also I think computer numbers favor Auburn because Big 12 was bad out of conference, but the thing is Oklahoma still has a lot of big time recruits and future NFL players.

I like to study things like this. Taking in all the input. It just blows my mind that vegas would give you Oklahoma -2. I mean... even Landers probably won tonight.

Edit: No offense to anyone who had Oklahoma -2 I was just making a joke.

[The Kraken]

OU came on strong after their OSU loss

Too bad they stumbled against Houston or they would've played Alabama

This OU team is better than UW

[TheMoneyShot]

OU came on strong after their OSU loss

Too bad they stumbled against Houston or they would've played Alabama

This OU team is better than UW

This Mayfield is playing out of his mind tonight. Guy is definitely amped up.

[YoungGambler]

$EC

[thetrinity]

I like to study things like this. Taking in all the input. It just blows my mind that vegas would give you Oklahoma -2. I mean... even Landers probably won tonight.

Edit: No offense to anyone who had Oklahoma -2 I was just making a joke.

It's one game IMo. Dane kept a nice thread and the heavy consensus BTP picks got destroyed in NCAA this season. I'm pretty sure they did worse there than the NFL.

The qb getting hurt definitely made this look worse.

I do agree though, I was shocked how much this moved in Auburns favor, especially since Oklahoma was playing their best ball at the end of the season.

[HAPPY BOY]

once it did I bet Oklahoma -2.... run opposite of the herd

[jjgold]

Always bet opposite of big moves

long term winner

[BuckyOne]

So, you guys think it was a false move to scare off Oklahoma money? Remains to be seen if they actually got Auburn money or if players just said wtf and stopped betting on Oklahoma?

[BigdaddyQH]

What did the line finish at?

[rizespor]

Math guys loved auburn here. Probably what moved the line. Surprised there wasn't enough resistance late to push it back to 3

[BigdaddyQH]

Math guys loved auburn here. Probably what moved the line. Surprised there wasn't enough resistance late to push it back to 3

I know exactly what moved the line and believe me it was not some alleged math genius. I also know that the line did not finish at -2. I am just trying to find out what the number was.

[seaborneq]

It was the LT effect. LT was on auburn heavy and the steam followed

[BigdaddyQH]

I have been told that the line finished between 3 1/2 and 5, depending on where you wagered. For the many of you that played Auburn, welcome to the "Bait and Switch" racket. You have been had by the wise guys.

[LT Profits]

I have been told that the line finished between 3 1/2 and 5, depending on where you wagered. For the many of you that played Auburn, welcome to the "Bait and Switch" racket. You have been had by the wise guys.

Line closed at -2 or -2.5 except for 3s at square shops Bovada and SIA. And yes, sharps LOVED Auburn here, there were plenty of podcats around saying that exact same thing.

[rizespor]

I have been told that the line finished between 3 1/2 and 5, depending on where you wagered. For the many of you that played Auburn, welcome to the "Bait and Switch" racket. You have been had by the wise guys.

Is this true? I guess you're talking about offscreen though?

All the major shops closed at -2 or -2.5

I guess you're also saying it was a dummy move set up by the wiseguys but computer models did favor auburn in this spot

[LT Profits]

There is too much money bet on bowl games for "dummy moves", especially major New Year's Six bowls. You cannot manipulate lines as easily as during regular season, Auburn was the bona fide sharp side in this game and the squares won.

[tatddy]

There is too much money bet on bowl games for "dummy moves", especially major New Year's Six bowls. You cannot manipulate lines as easily as during regular season, Auburn was the bona fide sharp side in this game and the squares won.

Always funny when LT uses nomanclature like "sharp/square", says his side was "sharp" after getting obliterated, and continues to brag about his "good numbers". All this for a guy losing or break even at best in almost every sport the past few years except for one great baseball season.

Leave the "sharp" babble to the goons, Profits. You're a tremendous human being and one hell of an altruist your edge in this game is antiquated and you have shown no ability to adapt.

[YoungGambler]

Honestly, the starting qb for auburn made a difference also. Never got to see full product but it happens, but i do think SEC money was coming in that made line move.

[jt315]

Honestly, the starting qb for auburn made a difference also. Never got to see full product but it happens, but i do think SEC money was coming in that made line move.

How Auburn only threw 10 times with their starting QB before his injury was mind boggling.
They gave the Oklahoma secondary the night off.
The gameplan between the two offensive coordinators was a complete mismatch.

[TheMoneyShot]

I have been told that the line finished between 3 1/2 and 5, depending on where you wagered. For the many of you that played Auburn, welcome to the "Bait and Switch" racket. You have been had by the wise guys.

Line closed at -2 or -2.5 except for 3s at square shops Bovada and SIA. And yes, sharps LOVED Auburn here, there were plenty of podcats around saying that exact same thing.

Line actually closed at Oklahoma -1.5 at Heritage. 5Dimes closed at -2

[LT Profits]

Always funny when LT uses nomanclature like "sharp/square", says his side was "sharp" after getting obliterated, and continues to brag about his "good numbers". All this for a guy losing or break even at best in almost every sport the past few years except for one great baseball season.

Leave the "sharp" babble to the goons, Profits. You're a tremendous human being and one hell of an altruist your edge in this game is antiquated and you have shown no ability to adapt.

Don't take my word for it, there is plenty online regarding sharps vs. squares. My favorite podcast is BettheBoard with Todd Fuhrman. Dave Mason of BetOnline is on weekly and he is always lamenting about how he is getting KILLED in NFL this season with this being the Year of the Square. That aside, there is lots of good info in those podcasts.

[rizespor]

LT more often than not beats the closing number but I'm just not convinced that there aren't growing inefficiencies in the market that makes it somewhat obsolete.

It seems lot of the math guys using algorithms and models generally come to the same conclusion so when they bet a side or total, books will move the line just based on the amount of money bet regardless of whether they believe it is "sharp"

Take RAS for example. They had a couple good years but I don't think most oddsmakers regard them as sharp anymore. Yet they still move lines because they have a mass drove of followers all hammering their picks at the same time

[tatddy]

Don't take my word for it, there is plenty online regarding sharps vs. squares. My favorite podcast is BettheBoard with Todd Fuhrman. Dave Mason of BetOnline is on weekly and he is always lamenting about how he is getting KILLED in NFL this season with this being the Year of the Square. That aside, there is lots of good info in those podcasts.

PASS. It's all a waste of time/energy. Each game is it's own organism and there is nothing more than odds vs probability. When you have a significant edge you bet. If you lose (sure there are some seriously unlucky incidences where you had the right side and lost) you lose and didn't correctly gauge the odds/prob factor or didn't have a significant enough edge.

The rest of this nonsense is for the birds. Most people who aren't consistently profitable (not counting money mgmt issues) aren't able to correctly determine significant edges or just flat out bet too many damn games.

Adapt or die, boys. What's past isn't necessarily fukking prologue.

[rizespor]

One thing is for certain though

I'd rather be on the square side that wins than the sharp side that loses

[jt315]

Don't take my word for it, there is plenty online regarding sharps vs. squares. My favorite podcast is BettheBoard with Todd Fuhrman. Dave Mason of BetOnline is on weekly and he is always lamenting about how he is getting KILLED in NFL this season with this being the Year of the Square. That aside, there is lots of good info in those podcasts.

Matthew Holt from CG Technology is a good listen also.
The easiest way to determine sharps vs. squares in the NFL this year was the sharps love affair with the Cleveland Browns. Although they should have been called anything but for their love of the Brownies.
Books weren't moving lines in their games because of square money.

[LT Profits]

Matthew Holt from CG Technology is a good listen also.
The easiest way to determine sharps vs. squares in the NFL this year was the sharps love affair with the Cleveland Browns. Although they should have been called anything but for their love of the Brownies.
Books weren't moving lines in their games because of square money.

Jaguars too, seemingly every week.

[LT Profits]

One thing is for certain though

I'd rather be on the square side that wins than the sharp side that loses

Over the long run I strongly disagree. Sharps are sharps for a reason, some groups hit 56% ATS over some nice volume. The caveat though is you need to get their lines to match that success, which is why chasing steam is overrated since the number you get won't be as sharp.

[tatddy]

"sharps" "squares" "the public" "rlm"

Sooner you all get this clutter out of your head the better. May have been effective a few years back but that's irrelevant. Hell, I'm more worried if a line moves IN my favor these days.

Stick to the basics, determine where your greatest edges are, ditch the rest.

And for the love of God don't sit around analyzing games after the fact. At least a game like this. I mean i didn't watch the game but there's no way Auburn was the fukking "sharp" side. I don't care if 99 percent were on Oklahoma. That's just some misguided, forced ego bs there. It's not like some garbage backdoor here. Laugh it off and on to the next.

[rizespor]

Over the long run I strongly disagree. Sharps are sharps for a reason, some groups hit 56% ATS over some nice volume. The caveat though is you need to get their lines to match that success, which is why chasing steam is overrated since the number you get won't be as sharp.

But my caveat was that it's also the winning side

As long as it's winning I don't care if it's sharp, square or circle!

[KVB]

I know exactly what moved the line and believe me it was not some alleged math genius. I also know that the line did not finish at -2. I am just trying to find out what the number was.

I have been told that the line finished between 3 1/2 and 5, depending on where you wagered. For the many of you that played Auburn, welcome to the "Bait and Switch" racket. You have been had by the wise guys.

[LT Profits]

But my caveat was that it's also the winning side

As long as it's winning I don't care if it's sharp, square or circle!

You are judging ONE bet though. I bet Auburn +3.5 and would make the same bet over and over, the closing line validated that.