Conan...I know the books are supposed to get 50/50 on the juice. But I really question how much juice the books are actually making when favored teams like OU, Florida and Texas are scoring 50-60 ppg and reeling off 9 and 10 wins ATS in a season. The general public likes to bet favorites. And we KNOW they certainly like to bet these teams. Like SoonerBS said, they couldn't set the lines high enough with these teams last year. They set the lines high, and they got even higher as the week went by. I still wonder who or how many were actually betting the other side. That's why I started this thread with a question. Will the books make adjustements to the lines to start the new season with these particular teams and set these lines high based on their closing lines last season. When I still see Florida and Texas on my Keepers most improved teams list, it makes me think that the books won't expect a dropoff of any kind from these teams. Although as I showed above, history says they won't duplicate those high ATS numbers again..
I think what you said lends itself to the fact that when a favorite or heavily sided team starts winning too consistently and too often, they make the adjustments accordingly.
However the bottom line has to do with the whole enchilada. It's a statistical game and naturally they will plug the leaks as they find them. A gradual shift, something short of actually pulling a game off the board. It's a business. But sometimes they make radical adjustments and it backfires one way or another. A bookmaker I once knew called that adjustment a cooler. He started inflating lines so fast it drove off a lot of his business. Other shops stated getting too much of his business. You see books that try that all the time...(can you say BoDog? I think they'd just as soon run a poker site and online casino and forget sportsbetting.)
But back on the subject.... If you look at the overall take, I think the games that get sided lose more often than they win. The books usually clean up. Once in a while a very public team will get hot. However they also account for the volume that bettors put down. It could be just fractional on a given card's action that the book takes in.
But most of the time, a sided game that draws a lot of action won't usually win because the line has already been adjusted. Not only that, but it but it befuddles me how often the steam runs a game in the wrong direction. Big moves are not usually winning moves. (Remember I said "usual".) Most people remember their winning teams and sides and would like to forget the rest. The average bettor can't change the way he thinks.
Also most of the time the slow line move tactic works. You can't go from giving a team a TD one week then 40 points the next vs comparable opponents. The fact that some bettors can spot a slow move -- they know that a team's lines are too loose. That's when you win. You would be surprised at how seldom that happens or how few people are lucky enough to follow that trend compared to the bettors that don't. That's why the books make a ton of money in the long run.
However the bottom line has to do with the whole enchilada. It's a statistical game and naturally they will plug the leaks as they find them. A gradual shift, something short of actually pulling a game off the board. It's a business. But sometimes they make radical adjustments and it backfires one way or another. A bookmaker I once knew called that adjustment a cooler. He started inflating lines so fast it drove off a lot of his business. Other shops stated getting too much of his business. You see books that try that all the time...(can you say BoDog? I think they'd just as soon run a poker site and online casino and forget sportsbetting.)
But back on the subject.... If you look at the overall take, I think the games that get sided lose more often than they win. The books usually clean up. Once in a while a very public team will get hot. However they also account for the volume that bettors put down. It could be just fractional on a given card's action that the book takes in.
But most of the time, a sided game that draws a lot of action won't usually win because the line has already been adjusted. Not only that, but it but it befuddles me how often the steam runs a game in the wrong direction. Big moves are not usually winning moves. (Remember I said "usual".) Most people remember their winning teams and sides and would like to forget the rest. The average bettor can't change the way he thinks.
Also most of the time the slow line move tactic works. You can't go from giving a team a TD one week then 40 points the next vs comparable opponents. The fact that some bettors can spot a slow move -- they know that a team's lines are too loose. That's when you win. You would be surprised at how seldom that happens or how few people are lucky enough to follow that trend compared to the bettors that don't. That's why the books make a ton of money in the long run.
I think the first week is EXACTLY why we have this Summer discussion. I personally went 13-3 last year in the first week for +30.5 units. The lines are notoriously soft in the first couple of weeks and it is our duty to smash them and make them bleed green . . . . .
Anybody with good sense disagree with that? I didn't think so . . . . . .
Anybody with good sense disagree with that? I didn't think so . . . . . .
That about says it all. I admit I don't know squat about the ins and outs of how the books actually operate. Somebody like Bellyputter on here could probably give us the two dollar tour. I would like to know exactly how much profit these books make. My guess is it's even more than what we think it is. When I start seeing some of our congressmen like Barney Frank pushing hard to make online gambling legal in the U.S. I know there has to be a good deal of tax money there for the taking. And they know it's alot.
I agree with you that with these Books it's all about tradeoffs. But my guess is when an inordinate amount of people start getting smart and betting the dogs, and the dogs start winning ATS the Books don't like it nearly as much as when the favorites are winning..Especially if more players played the dog than the favorite on a particualr game..And also because your paying juice to play the favorites. But your collecting the whole enchilada when your dog wins. But here again, most dog players don't beat the house in the long run. So there's another tradeoff. I think in the long run, the key to the whole thing is to be a little smarter than the books. And to be able to spot that line that is a little off before they make the correction. Not easy to do. You've got a few "wiseguys" and betting syndicates out there that do it all the time. But they are usually the people with the high tech equipment that uses the same mathmatical models or analysis as the books. But still have that extra tidbit of inside info which gives them the edge that maybe most of the betting pool isn't aware of.
Something that I really just got into only about 3 years ago is line value in games. As in why in the second week of the season was team A favored over team B by 7 points in a game they won by 10 points. But the same team A is favored by 17 points over team C four weeks later. And team C is statistically and every other way better than team B. The question you have to ask yourself is has team A improved by at least 7 points in period of one month since that game? Many times you'll find that the lines are media driven. And aren't the true line. But the books know they can ride the wave with certain teams and get away with setting a line that is a little higher than it should be. Especially if said Team A keeps beating the spread.. I find myself taking a little more time to handicap games now just because I look for this value in virtually every game I look at when we start getting a month or more into the season. And many times it has paid off for me.
As for the betting side of games. There's a million different ways to do it. And we could talk about that subject forever. But like I've said before, I much prefer to keep my betting simple and my capping complicated.
Gs
Your comment about keeping your betting simple and your capping complicated is one good rule to live by. That is what I meant when I said capping is more important than money management. BS said he bet 16 games in the first week of the season LY. Ouch. Could have just as well been 3 and 13 and then you are down the tubes right off the bat. You cannot bet with that much confidence unless you have done your homework. I don't know if he cut his incriments that week or if he bets that many games every week but I would think not. 16 bets on a single saturday sounds a little brazen unless they were just some picks he put on paper on the forum and didn't actually bet. Anyway you cut it 13 out of 16 you got no where to go but down but at least you start off on the right foot.
In terms of money management I wonder how many games some of you guys do bet on a given saturday. I usually focus in on five and I do bet parlys unlike a lot of people in here do. But that is worth discussing. That is why I bet on Sunday night or Monday. I know one guy that will get his tout sheets and then he is a talking parrot and can repeat everything he read in them. He has no opinion on Sunday or Monday and
the next thing you know he is a walking encyclopedia of football knowledge. I am sure we all know people like that. As far as him being a successful handicapper and better, well what do you think. He may have been on the other side of BS 13-3 the first week of last season.
"Betting simple and handicapping comlicated" is a good credo. I would also add never go against your instincts. If you have done your homework do not let other people sway you. I can imagine this forum is full of opinions
on every game. Maybe you did your homework better than them and maybe they didn't do their homework at all. But one thing is for sure they won't pay off your bet for you. Take responisbility and make your own decisions based upon sound judgement.
Your comment about keeping your betting simple and your capping complicated is one good rule to live by. That is what I meant when I said capping is more important than money management. BS said he bet 16 games in the first week of the season LY. Ouch. Could have just as well been 3 and 13 and then you are down the tubes right off the bat. You cannot bet with that much confidence unless you have done your homework. I don't know if he cut his incriments that week or if he bets that many games every week but I would think not. 16 bets on a single saturday sounds a little brazen unless they were just some picks he put on paper on the forum and didn't actually bet. Anyway you cut it 13 out of 16 you got no where to go but down but at least you start off on the right foot.
In terms of money management I wonder how many games some of you guys do bet on a given saturday. I usually focus in on five and I do bet parlys unlike a lot of people in here do. But that is worth discussing. That is why I bet on Sunday night or Monday. I know one guy that will get his tout sheets and then he is a talking parrot and can repeat everything he read in them. He has no opinion on Sunday or Monday and
the next thing you know he is a walking encyclopedia of football knowledge. I am sure we all know people like that. As far as him being a successful handicapper and better, well what do you think. He may have been on the other side of BS 13-3 the first week of last season.
"Betting simple and handicapping comlicated" is a good credo. I would also add never go against your instincts. If you have done your homework do not let other people sway you. I can imagine this forum is full of opinions
on every game. Maybe you did your homework better than them and maybe they didn't do their homework at all. But one thing is for sure they won't pay off your bet for you. Take responisbility and make your own decisions based upon sound judgement.
Pick your spots
Lsu was on the list too, w/only 3 covers. Lsu & USC have both been near top in recruiting for...EVER. LSU found their qb b4 the bowl game. How do you set an overinflated line in these 2 games ??? I will probably play UW some this year, in games where that they might have a chance to compete. Pick your spots.
:think2:
Lsu was on the list too, w/only 3 covers. Lsu & USC have both been near top in recruiting for...EVER. LSU found their qb b4 the bowl game. How do you set an overinflated line in these 2 games ??? I will probably play UW some this year, in games where that they might have a chance to compete. Pick your spots.
Last edited:
rloup,
All it means is that LSU was no bargain at the window last season. It's no be a surprise to see no value in a very heavily played on team. The OU's and Texas's that keep rolling up 45-60 points per week and keep covering big numbers don't come along often. They've been pulling that shit with USC bettors forever even though the Trojan offense has not been the same for years. Sometimes the books can get away with burying a team laying too many points week after week but they keep getting sided week after week after week. A bookmaker's paradise.
But about Washington... In past years, UW has started out strong. Very strong even though they may have lost a big game or 2 at the start. Boise St., OSU, BYU and this year LSU is visiting Husky Stadium. They played well enough to win all of them. I remember in the Ohio St. game, they managed to hang with them for 3 quarters until their lack of depth and conditioning caught up to them in the 4th. But they made a game of it.
As long as the game is played in Seattle and it's September, they can be counted on to show up and play tough. This year they have a new attitude and an improved version of Jake Locker. Sarkisian has brought a lot of excitement and instilled a lot of optimism on that team. Just what the doctor ordered.
I realize that's not going to make them bowl eligible, maybe they won't even win 4 games, but I bet you they continue to start out strong, maybe even a little stronger than they have in the past few years.
I will be picking my spots too... carefully. Keep an eye on Locker. Watching his game is like looking through a window at their ability to be competitive. Teams that have trouble with mobile QB's belong on everyone's fade list when they play the Huskies, especially in Seattle.
I hope you know that almost everything that's been discussed here won't mean diddly by October. It's hard to say how much of these disussions will turn out true to form. They are just a starting point, hopefully most of them contain a little reality. But after a few weeks team trends, strengths and weaknesses as well as the venue will begin to spell out how games get picked.
You sound like you've been there done that.
Despite LSU's bad season ATS, your not going to get much value with them early. They will be hyped by ESPN and pretty high in the preseason polls so the masses will still take them against Washington regardless if their giving up a big spread. Not saying that I like Washington but some teams on this list won't yeild good value early and LSU is one of them.
I think the key to picking teams on this list to do good ATS is finding the team that the average bettor will think your an idot for taking and Washington fits the bill so far as one of those teams. We will see as the summer progresses.
I will know where to find value once the pre-season magazines come out and the official preseason polls are released. SI is usually famous for picking a horrible preseason poll. I'm a big advocate of fading the media and siding with Vegas.
I think the key to picking teams on this list to do good ATS is finding the team that the average bettor will think your an idot for taking and Washington fits the bill so far as one of those teams. We will see as the summer progresses.
I will know where to find value once the pre-season magazines come out and the official preseason polls are released. SI is usually famous for picking a horrible preseason poll. I'm a big advocate of fading the media and siding with Vegas.
