americans and money lines

**ouman101** · 03-05-11, 04:28 PM

I agree somewhat. I took Purdue -475

**FourLengthsClear** · 03-05-11, 04:29 PM

Part of the reason is that in US sports, books shade their odds towards the dog, which is the opposite of what happens in, say soccer three way lines.

Statistically you would be much better off (less bad) blindly betting soccer favourites than you would in the NBA.

**jjgold** · 03-05-11, 04:33 PM

No idea
I rarely bet them but maybe I should

In Europe ML bet is most popular in their sports

**teaserpleaser** · 03-05-11, 04:35 PM

parlayed pitt and purdue MLs i can handle a loss of 2 to 1 ... just dont like risking 5 or 4.5 to win 1 but i'd never knock anybody for playing high MLs

**ebbearsfb1** · 03-05-11, 05:06 PM

cause for example a game like yesterday mizz state is minus 11 for the game they were down 8 at half... so they gonna make up 20 points for u to win, where for the ml only need to make up 9...

now i understand the juice part,,, but its not like u gotta play minus 1000 and above....

just a curiosity question

**bamacards** · 03-05-11, 05:57 PM

online books have helped the moneyline players

**teaserpleaser** · 03-05-11, 06:13 PM

Originally posted by ouman101

I agree somewhat. I took Purdue -475

Purdue was playing the best basketball out of anyone imo and iowa is a bottom feeder anything can happen this is why dont like to lay -475 by the way **** purdue they didnt show up with a possible big 10 championship on the line.

**james4512** · 03-05-11, 06:14 PM

its because americans are smarter half the big 10 world is probably burried because of iowa

**Duff85** · 03-05-11, 06:40 PM

lol wat...

It's all probability based. A -500 chalkie only needs to lose one in every five times you place a bet to bury you. So where your standard -110 juice is going to need to win around 53% of the time, your big big chalk is going to need to hit over 80% of the time. It may still be possible to profit betting into these lines provided your being super selective about your bets - but your far better off picking off spreads and ml dogs - there will be far more bets in the market (thus getting you greater turnover) and they will likely provide higher edge than anything you can get at big chalk.

**ebbearsfb1** · 03-05-11, 06:47 PM

no bet should bury u

**Duff85** · 03-05-11, 06:57 PM

The majority of bets that the majority of people place are going to bury them in the long term.

**wiffle** · 03-05-11, 06:59 PM

does anyone know the highest ml to lose this cbb year

**Duff85** · 03-05-11, 07:07 PM

Butler lost to Evansville 71-68 as a -3000 chalkie.

**Gee** · 03-05-11, 07:45 PM

In games with lines, betting the ML is the same as buying the points. A lot of the time some of those points are going to be worthless, but you have to pay for them anyway and you pay through the nose.

i just can't handle the risk either - sport can be unpredictable.

**marcoloco** · 03-05-11, 08:24 PM

i play alot of ml. especially in parlays.

**FourLengthsClear** · 03-05-11, 08:35 PM

Originally posted by Gee

In games with lines, betting the ML is the same as buying the points. A lot of the time some of those points are going to be worthless, but you have to pay for them anyway and you pay through the nose.

i just can't handle the risk either - sport can be unpredictable.

This is not the case.
The books juice (theoretical hold) is the same for spreads and for ML.

A book that offers sides at -110 will also have 4.76% juice for their money lines. If you were having to pay through the nose (like when buying points or in teasers) when playing the favourite this would mean that they were giving those points away too cheaply on the dog.