I always wondered why no one can ever hit over 60% betting. My reasoning is that linemakers are human and they make mistakes. It just takes someone slightly smarter than the linemakers to see where the real edge is on a certain game and to get it right. I just never hear about people that are that good at betting.
-
-
54-57% and you should be rich.Comment -
many do ... they just dont chatComment -
60% at -105? -110? -150? :-)Comment -
Not true in the 11/10 sports like football and basketball. The best handicappers in the world are around 56% or so, and they make a nice living at that percentage.Originally posted by Shark79Comment -
True. I suppose there are people like that, but if they do hit they either get kicked out of the books, or have to disguise themselves all the time and wouldn't share their picks anyway.Originally posted by Shark79Comment -
ATS at roughly -110 i would assume.Originally posted by HeeeHAWWWWComment -
At 100.Originally posted by HeeeHAWWWWComment -
At -110 odds over a large # of plays, no one does.Originally posted by Shark79
And as to why?
Well, if you can hit 55% and can manage risk, you will be very rich very soon.Comment -
Well ... it may be ... I know a few that are solid yr round ... but are such d!ks that dont even talk much ... thats where I got my assumption.Originally posted by LT ProfitsComment -
If you are hitting -110 at 60% you aren't betting enough games.
This assumes of course that you prefer profits to win %.Comment -
For me it just against common sense that you can't consistently beat the line makers, especially if you know what they're doing.Comment -
Exactly what Durito said, the key is to make money. It is better to hit 55% out of 1000 plays than 60% out of 400 plays.Comment -
There is not a person on this earth that has a higher than 60% winning percentage betting -110 ATS football and basketball games, over a substantial number of games and seasons. History has proven it can't be done.
Maybe one season, but over multiple seasons 60% isn't possible.Comment -
Originally posted by Vision
55% is beating the the linesmakers BADLY at -110.Comment -
in 2005 I was at about 62% in CFB in NFL and made a SHITLOAD, then again if I remember correctly the chalk covered at a record clip that year. The next yr i came crashing back down to earth.Comment -
Why though? If you knew the exact formulas linemakers used and you see how the line moves, you would be able to cherrypick plays at the best price. Can't see why you wouldn't be able to get over 60% even with a ton of plays and over a long period of time. (Assuming you don't get kicked out).Originally posted by SlickFazzerComment -
Seems to me you are oversimplfying the process and underestimating the linemakers.Originally posted by VisionComment -
Probably, that's why I'm asking though.Originally posted by LT ProfitsComment -
I think you're getting stuck on this 60% number. 60% is a much larger majority than it seems. It means 60 wins 40 losses against guys who make their living setting the lines, they may be human but they have tons of information, experience and savvy. Beating these guys 55% of the time is quite a feat.Comment -
If you had a team working day and night, millions of dollars around the world to manipulate the lines, you still would not be able to maintain 60% for long...54-57% attainable for a fulltime professional with resources.Originally posted by VisionComment -
This is an interesting debate, but when people say: 'Try to beat the linesmaker,' surely the linesmaker is only hitting 60% if, on any given NFL and NCAAF weekend there are 100 games and he gets 60 right, so the linesmaker has already called 40 games wrong, all you have to do is find them. Given the fact you don't know which 40 they are, that becomes problem number 1.
When people talk about handicapping and 'edge,' how can you factor in a long snapper making a mistake or a punter having two blocked having previously been money? Thatsproblem number 2.
I think my point is, surely people are 51-53% because the other 47% is either an upset, a result caused by a mistake, a good team mailing it in etc etc. Total intangibles that more often than not comes down to luck and is the reason bookmakers exist.Comment -
just pay jucie and you can hit 90%Comment -
Comment -
850 to win $50 .... i better hope u ****ing hit 99% of that stuff....Comment -
and still lose money
Comment -
just watch and see my youtube vid tonight boys, and it will answer all your freakin questions. it is still uploading.. it will also blow your mind when i crunch you all some numbers.. it will wake you all up completely..
all your posts will be answered with a 7 min vid..
this vid will change your life when it comes to gambling...
you will never look at gambling the same way again...
MARK MY WORDS..
stay tuned...Comment -
.
Comment -
I believe in determinism and feel that humans have the potential to reach some degree of certainty. Having much greater resources and intelligence than linemakers should give you 60% winners. Am I wrong? Maybe my philosophy is flawed...Comment -
I think my point is 40% of games are 'uncallable' because of outside influences(such as bad play) or just sheer bad luck.Comment -
Comment -
can only hit a high % is if you bet once or twice a week onlyComment -
only REAL best bets.... not some dumb shit betComment -
you cannot hit 60% because the outcome of a pointspread is 50-50 similar to red or black on the roulette table
Long term you are right around 50% give or taker a few percentage points.
No such thing as one guy knowing more than another in sportsbetting because you have a 50% chance of winning your bet even picking blind.Comment -
This thread should have ended with Durito's post that IF YOU ARE PICKING 60% WINNERS YOU ARE NOT BETTING ENOUGH GAMES!Comment
