Looking for General Answers

[LT Profits]

Even Dr. Bob is "only" 56% over the last eight years on a strict W/L basis.

[SBR Lou]

Dr. Bob has run at, what, 57% (maybe less after last year)? Lines move significantly immediately after his plays are released. Do you see where he fits into that list?

The point is, while some of the OP's expectations are unrealistic there are still some respected sources he could choose from that have enough of an edge where he could expect to make more money versus making his own plays (assuming he has no quantifiable edge of his own which I presume is the case?).

[donjuan]

The point is, while some of the OP's expectations are unrealistic there are still some respected sources he could choose from that have enough of an edge where he could expect to make more money versus making his own plays (assuming he has no quantifiable edge of his own which I presume is the case?).

You missed this one:

c) you aren't getting the same numbers as them which means you won't have their win % and the numbers may have moved to the point that they aren't profitable at all, much less 60%.

[SBR Lou]

You missed this one:

Fair enough. However, if you're online the minute plays are released and already loaded into various sportsbooks chances are you can find the same number on some plays. And, there's always a chance it can move in your favor too for ones you're late to the party on.

[donjuan]

Fair enough. However, if you're online the minute plays are released and already loaded into various sportsbooks chances are you can find the same number on some plays. And, there's always a chance it can move in your favor too for ones you're late to the party on.

Those are probably not very strong plays, in that case. Either there may have been an injury or other significant piece of news or other advantage gamblers disagree and pushed it back.

[Mudcat]

Mudcat, do you have justification that the top handicappers who are verified are not hitting roughly 60%? Also, what is the average juice now a days?

As far as the question of average juice, it depends how hard you want to work at it and what exact bets you want to make. But assuming we're talking about bigger ticket bets like NFL spreads: -103 would be no problem. You don't even have to work hard to get there. For NFL spreads your starting point at Pinnacle is -104 - so you've got that with no effort whatsoever. Throw in Matchbook and if there is just slight variance you are down to -103.

For baseball, even less. Baseball can be pretty close to no-juice betting if you really get to know the books and work at your line shopping.

I can't speak much to the question of "verified" handicappers. I would question who is doing the verification (i.e. - one would hope it is not some ghost of the handicapper himself). But I don't know. I have been doing my own picks for years so I don't delve into that world very much.

I can tell you this: almost everyone loses. Most people who make claims otherwise are lying. That is just a fact.

[SBR Lou]

Those are probably not very strong plays, in that case. Either there may have been an injury or other significant piece of news or other advantage gamblers disagree and pushed it back.

I guess what I'm saying is, if the OP funds as many square books as possible chances are some of them will be late 'enough' for him to get down a bet at the same price. I mean, case in point is Beted hanging Oakland +8.5 -110 for around 7 hours as Pinnacle was on +7.5 -114. Although, that's NFL and I don't pay as much attention to college, but you can generally catch a book with its pants down I've found if you shop enough places.

[donjuan]

I guess what I'm saying is, if the OP funds as many square books as possible chances are some of them will be late 'enough' for him to get down a bet at the same price. I mean, case in point is Beted hanging Oakland +8.5 -110 for around 7 hours as Pinnacle was on +7.5 -114. Although, that's NFL and I don't pay as much attention to college, but you can generally catch a book with its pants down I've found if you shop enough places.

Sure, but he's not going to be able to get 10k down on games at these books and the 8 sure isn't worth 10% in NFL.

[LT Profits]

Fair enough. However, if you're online the minute plays are released and already loaded into various sportsbooks chances are you can find the same number on some plays. And, there's always a chance it can move in your favor too for ones you're late to the party on.

That is actually true, I have seen some square books slow to move on Bob's plays, althouggh rarely with a window of more than a half hour.

[durito]

200 bets a year

i average 2200-3000 investments a year

average investment= 125$

avg return on bottom line 5%-13% per year

so, in other words, slightly more than you'd make at mcdonalds.

[reno cool]

I am from Ottawa (Canada) and was told Pinnacle is the best so I registered an account there. Not really sure what makes them the best?

I guess the first question I have is if I were to find a handicapper that is consistant @ 60% on the spread (assume this to be the only variable but let's say it's a fact). If I were to bet let's say 200 games per year @ $10,000 with the average juice being -1.10. I would win 120 games and loose 80 games. On the 120 games I won I would win $1,200,000 and on the 80 games I would loose $880,000 ($10,000 x 1.10 x 80) + lets say $10,000 for a good handicapper ($50 per pick @ 200 games) I would be left with a yearly profit of $310,000. Am I missing something?

I'm sure you can win that amount betting 10,000 per game. Somebody will hit 60% over 200 games. Ones that do, advertise.

[RogueJuror]

You don't need someone to pick winners for you. You need someone that knows the game and can get you low juice (-102), and big limits on obscure leagues and early access to them. And then you can happily forget about 60%.

[ferrari355spider]

If anyone is willing to help out or looking for an investor, feel free to PM me. Thanks.