Hello all,
I have a Matchbook question. I get the concept and I might be missing something and if so please do tell me. But what is stopping someone from laying odds on both sides of a wager? For example if you want to take action on the Green Bay/Chicago game you could give better odds then the books say -105 and even with the 1% commission charged for laying each bet you would still make 3% bettors get better odds, you get 3% and matchbook gets commission everyone wins. I must have this wrong because if not I do not see why someone or a lot of people aren’t doing it.
I have a Matchbook question. I get the concept and I might be missing something and if so please do tell me. But what is stopping someone from laying odds on both sides of a wager? For example if you want to take action on the Green Bay/Chicago game you could give better odds then the books say -105 and even with the 1% commission charged for laying each bet you would still make 3% bettors get better odds, you get 3% and matchbook gets commission everyone wins. I must have this wrong because if not I do not see why someone or a lot of people aren’t doing it.

More importantly, we don't pay the 1% commission. We are now risking $99.80 to win $101.20. Our vig would be +101.40.
The little nit now runs crying to SBR to complain about how his offers only get filled when the line moves on Pinny.