I have written about this quite a bit at Covers, and it isn't that they are sharper, they are just inline with the more correct contingent.
IMO there are no real "sharp" books. Basically you have 2 or 3 that set a number (those that offer the overnight lines) and they put these up as a barometer. They are seen as the pioneers, but in essence all they are doing is offering numbers up at reduced limits to help set the market for the other books that open their lines the next day.
SO when Boyd's or Olympic or whoever posts the first set of overnight's takes plays, they move the lines accordingly. But as mentioned always as reduced limits, so in essence they might take some money,but surely not enough to kill them.
Then when the lines settle down a little, then the other books post theirs. By then you see very little movement actually. Unless of course a late injury occurs, or a player that is questionable is listed as definate.
It is all a divide and conquer thing. I am not sure how many books there actually are, but say there are 900. 300 will have a team -4, 300 will have 4.5, and 300 will have 5. So amongst them you do have a 1 point differential to work with, but for the most part it isn't worth the worry to most people.
But when lines are posted around the "key" numbers you will see 800 at -3, and 100 at -3.5. And at all those, more than likely you will need to lay odds.
It is all about the burden a book holds. And that is where laying off comes in. Because we all are smart enough to know that when a book follows a move it isn't because of money, it is because everyone else has moved that way. So even if they are lopsided the wrong way, they still move it. They may wait awhile to try and even up, but for themost part I am sure they simply follow the move. Because afterall they can probably call someone that has an uneven amount the opposite of them.
It is just like trading stocks. They have so much at this number, and so much at that number. Then they can get together and figure out who needs what and trade accordingly.
Of course some do gamble, but to say hedging a game a point is gambling might be stretch. The way they gamble is when the originator books post up a number and stick to it, no matter what the action is.
This was my argument way back when about playing at small books.Because small books are at the mercy of the bigger books. If a small book handles 1/10th of what a bigger books handles, then there is no way for that book to be in sync with the bigger book. For example, say Book A handles 100,000 a game on average. They have a split of say 50K and 30 K, they move a half point, to even up. But Book B might only handle 10k a game on average, and may have a split of 7500 to 1500 the OTHER way. SO is it right that they move AGAINST themselves? No, but almost necessary to avoid getting hurt. But if they are that lopsided, they can hold a little (as long as it isn't a "key" number move where they might get middled or sided) to even up some. But for the most part they have to do what everyone else is doing, or they will be the out everyone uses with middling in mind.
I know there are guys that book bets that post here, and I am sure they will gaffaw at this theory. But it is simply common sense. When you can join forces to reduce risk, as well as inundate the world with books to further reduce the amounts each book takes, books have a lot less wory of getting buried.
That is why it boggles my mind that they go out of business like they do. It obviuosly starts with the management's inability to handle money, and know how to reduce risk. But ultimately it is probably greed.
