Do Vegas/online books and ESPN/mainstream media work together?

rm18 · 12-24-11, 08:15 PM

Only favorite I like is Clippers but I bet them at +1.5

Reload · 12-24-11, 09:14 PM

While I don't think they work together, Hammerin Hamk's picks alone drive lots of action. Might as well have it carry over to NBA for Christmas.

I wouldn't take any favorites on the opening day card. This has clearly been one of the wildest offseason's ever and teams that look loaded on paper could easily turn in clunkers tomorrow.

cleaveland · 12-25-11, 03:05 AM

Another ESPN "expert" (Jalen Rose) picks all five favorites to win:

http://espn.go.com/nba/preview2011/story/_/id/7378327/nba-christmas-lists-opening-day

Fishy indeed!

k13 · 12-25-11, 06:27 AM

They do the same for the NFL. Basically pick all faves. Ten guys all picking the same team.

Better to fade streak4Cash in certain spots than them though. Faves win SU a high % of the time.

k13 · 12-25-11, 06:32 AM

http://espn.go.com/nba/preview2011/story/_/page/Predictions1112-nbachamp/nba-nba-champion-predictions

Seriously............

ApricotSinner32 · 12-25-11, 06:39 AM

If you use espn for gambling advice you are fuked.Gambling is a math based game not a "who's the better team" game or a "who should win based on blah blah blah" game.

cleaveland · 12-25-11, 07:17 AM

Originally posted by k13

http://espn.go.com/nba/preview2011/s...on-predictions

Seriously............

That kind of stuff makes them look like a joke...or a borg.

cleaveland · 12-25-11, 07:29 AM

Originally posted by ApricotSinner32

If you use espn for gambling advice you are fuked.Gambling is a math based game not a "who's the better team" game or a "who should win based on blah blah blah" game.

Psychology and history as well as match-ups, styles, skills, and many other factors are important.

When it comes to statements like yours, I think about managers who make pitching changes based on 5-10 at bat histories. For instance, Batter A is 0-5 lifetime v. Pitcher B so the manager chooses Pitcher B to face him. The math-based bettors will scream that's "too small a sample" to make decisions off of.

Well, basically all the managers, coaches, announcers, "experts", former players, etc. make decisions based on what's called "too small of a sample" by the math-based bettors.

Who are we to listen to? Somebody who's never played the MBL/NBA/NFL/NHL etc. AND HAS EVEN BEEN NEAR BEING AN "INSIDER" (the logic and reasoning I gave you is used for all the sports) or the people who are actually playing/managing the games and being payed to analyze the games (almost all because they are or have been insiders)?

I made my decision a long time ago, I'm going with the latter, thank you. Experience wins out over theory frequently but not always. Good theory should compliment what one finds by experience but in my experience the math-based bettors and their math-based logic are not the best ways to predict what will happen (thus managers make pitching changes based on "too small of a sample" and the like), because they know know better.

ApricotSinner32 · 12-25-11, 07:38 AM

I agree that their are other factors in handicapping. My point was if you think about the end game of handicapping and you have hundreds/thousands of plays on a spreadsheet the importance of profiting based on hitting a higher percentage than the math that the line suggest if the most important.

ESPN "analyst experts" do not factor any of that in. They are mostly are the logical side based on what has the best chance to win. But when it comes to gambling the best chance to win out of the two teams does not translate to profitable gambling angles. You can hit 80% on bets and lose or you can get 35% and win gambling.Conventional wisdom does not make money in sports gambling.