[Goat Milk]

People have followed the trend of the old timers that have been here and are learning these terms from them. Its been referenced so many times, most of the guys that are using these terms have been gambling for 8 months and now think they have all the answers about books making "head fakes" and shit.

There is no such thing as a square or sharp play. If 84% of the public is on the Heat to beat the magic, people will say, "you square! take the heat and you'll get buried in the long run!" These claims make you sound idiotic. In the end, the play that wins is the right side. Sure there are bad beats where you think you made a good call but in the end all that matters is if you win or lose. There is no such thing as a sharp play. If 64% of the public is on the Heat -2, and yet the line moves down to Heat -1 (RLM), that does not make the Opposing side a Sharp play. Nothing is a sharp play and nothing is a square play. You are only a sharp player if you make good decisions and a square player if you make poor decisions.

I don't know who these guys are listening to on the forum about this sharp/square. If you continue to not take a certain play because its "square" then you will be out of the game in a few years max. "Square" plays, as many refer to them, cash at a solid percentage.

Sharp players take everything into consideration, but they do not let public %'s sway them from their original pick (based on x,y,z). A square player could be something that takes everything into consideration and even analyzes things TOO MUCH. Stop trying to analyze what Vegas is thinking because they are not picking a side on 95% of games!!!

Books try to get even action on every game. Theres only certain times where they are begging to to take a certain side (i.e. gambling themselves). People on this forum bring up this term everyday

"Heat -2 is bait! They are begging you to take the Heat!" At times they will beg you to take a team, like the Steelers plus the points clearly indicated who Vegas was gambling on to win that game (Green Bay).

Now we will get some point betters coming in here and lecturing me on something.

[big0mar]

So what you're saying is that Vegas is taking a side on 5% of the games??????

[Snowball]

word. been gambling for sports for 20 years..
the fact is, this sharp/square routine is a lingo created by the touts
and by the offshores.. you know, the offshores who post these b.s. bet
numbers that 90% of SBR goons take as gospel.
i've talked about this ad nauseum

good post.

[nyed1010]

great post. This dude yesterday posted a thread about how the last two nights the "public money" was right and the thread title was something like "when should we start fading the public"
All I could do was shake my head.

[paco]

Sharp post.

[ApricotSinner32]

[frostno98]

This about as squares as it gets.

[brooks85]

People have followed the trend of the old timers that have been here and are learning these terms from them. Its been referenced so many times, most of the guys that are using these terms have been gambling for 8 months and now think they have all the answers about books making "head fakes" and shit.

There is no such thing as a square or sharp play. If 84% of the public is on the Heat to beat the magic, people will say, "you square! take the heat and you'll get buried in the long run!" These claims make you sound idiotic. In the end, the play that wins is the right side. Sure there are bad beats where you think you made a good call but in the end all that matters is if you win or lose. There is no such thing as a sharp play. If 64% of the public is on the Heat -2, and yet the line moves down to Heat -1 (RLM), that does not make the Opposing side a Sharp play. Nothing is a sharp play and nothing is a square play. You are only a sharp player if you make good decisions and a square player if you make poor decisions.

I couldnt disagree more but good luck. I agree with the bold part.

[ApricotSinner32]

This about as squares as it gets.

Agreed

[ApricotSinner32]

I couldnt disagree more but good luck. I agree with the bold part.

Agreed goat is a fuking hamburger.

[BettingWizard]

blindly fade when 70+ are on one side and you win. There is no debating that.

[ApricotSinner32]

blindly fade when 70+ are on one side and you win. There is no debating that.

Not that simple but you're on the right track. Getting -110 could make it more difficult than it has to be. Doing this with matchbook no vig is very sharp. Long term you're going to grind a profit.

[Sunde91]

[brooks85]

blindly fade when 70+ are on one side and you win. There is no debating that.

^thats all im saying.

I definitely make plays with 80+% of the public on one side but it happens rarely for me. So im not saying its square too make a "public" play but over the long it is definitely. And if there is rlm, thats not even a question, I never make plays with rlm against me, never.

[Sunde91]

Sirs, it is a simpleton approach to simply "fade the public".

There is zero evidence that you're a winner in the long run by fading.

When you hear 99% of players lose, it's referring to their long run bankroll, and it's because
1) no money management/tilt leads to buried.
2) can't pick enough winners
3) juice

99% do not lose because they pick "the square side".

Priority:

1) Get the best line. Always look to beat the closer, scalp, middle, reduced juice, etc.

2) Make sure your angles are solid. Stronger the angles, larger the play (a 1-5 unit scale works well with this). You know your angles are solid if you have a good win % over a decent sample size. It is definitely possible to get an edge here.

Do you think Bill Walters gives a cheap fuk what side the public's on? No, he has his angle and he beats the number, period.

[brooks85]

I would bet every dollar I have anyone who takes every play I give them for the next 1000 plays will be a severe loser. And the only thing all those plays would have in common is betting with the public on high volume games, no other capping involved.

[ApricotSinner32]

Sirs, it is a simpleton approach to simply "fade the public".

There is zero evidence that you're a winner in the long run by fading.

When you hear 99% of players lose, it's referring to the long run, and it's because they
1) can't pick enough winners
2) juice
3) no money management/tilt leads to buried.

99% do not lose because they pick "the square side".

1) Get the best line. Always look to beat the closer, scalp, middle, reduced juice, etc.

2) Make sure your angles are solid. Stronger the angles, larger the play (a 1-5 unit scale works well with this). You know yours angles are solid if you have a good win % over a decent sample size. It is definitely possible to get an edge here.

Most lose because of money management and tilting but picking the square side long term has no chance of winning enough to beat the odds.

Ie all major books are hanging bobcats +4.5 with more juice on the bobcats side for the whole day vs the celtics. Books know that they will get more celtics action than bobcats action yet they put more juice on the cats side. If you can get a good number on the bobcats thats a sharp play.

To win like the books you must think like the books.

[pavyracer]

The OP is definitely a square. Has no clue on how sharp gambling works.

[brooks85]

Priority:

1) Get the best line. Always look to beat the closer, scalp, middle, reduced juice, etc.

2) Make sure your angles are solid. Stronger the angles, larger the play (a 1-5 unit scale works well with this). You know your angles are solid if you have a good win % over a decent sample size. It is definitely possible to get an edge here.

Do you think Bill Walters gives a cheap fuk what side the public's on? No, he has his angle and he beats the number, period.

I 100% agree with number 1, no doubt about that.

But number 2, imo the problem I have with that is the betting % and line movement means a hell of a lot more than anyone's "angle."

Bill walters would be the exception, not the standard.

[Goat Milk]

The OP is definitely a square. Has no clue on how sharp gambling works.

I will pick your arguments apart. Go find another scalp you rookie. Let me know once you pick a winner in a sport thats not cricket or swimming

[Goat Milk]

The OP is definitely a square. Has no clue on how sharp gambling works.

Go find another scalp you rookie. Let me know when you can pick a winner in a sport thats not cricket or darts

thanks

[pavyracer]

I can't argue with an idiot who posts the same post back to back every 1 hr and 12 minutes.

[Buried_PIRATE]

I can't argue with an idiot who posts the same post back to back every 1 hr and 12 minutes.

lmao...

[k13]

Celtics squares Lakers sharps
Dallas squares Denver sharps

Tonight

The outcomes don't even matter.