Focker, isn't that a flaw in the system then? The first step in this system is to determine when the "public" is betting more on an underdog (number of bets as opposed to amount of money, I'm assuming). And whether the public is betting more on an underdog vs. a favorite isn't an opinion, it's a fact. Therefore, if one site says yes and another site says no, then one of them has to be wrong and if some of us are using that incorrect information, the system breaks down. Line movement, I think, is also a fact but is easier to determine with SBR. Plus, I would only make a play if the reverse line movement is clear since I'm a conservative better.
This goes back to my original question- What is a reliable source to determine where the public is betting?
This goes back to my original question- What is a reliable source to determine where the public is betting?
This is what I was talking about. According to scoresandodds, the public isn't favoring any of those dogs. The public is favoring NYM, CHC, BOS and CWS. Now, both sites can't be right. Scoresandodds had the Mets at 74% which is pretty high, so if they are wrong, they are way off.
It's unclear to me how this system can be of any benefit when we can't be sure of which teams even qualify with public betting percentages.
You say I'm not giving "bettors" enough credit, but it's the public I'm not giving credit to. I never said anything about the people on this site, because I think a lot of the people on this site are more tuned in to MLB than others (although I'm sure there are some who aren't). I would venture to guess that a great deal of the public doesn't even realize sites like this exist. Most of the people on this site understand value (at least I think they do), so that fact alone distinguishes them from most of the public.
You also have to understand that when people say "the public," they are talking about the casual fan who doesn't follow baseball very closely (at least from a capping standpoint). So no, I would venture to guess that the public knows little, if anything at all, about Edwin Jackson. So why would they bet on or against him if they don't know anything about him? Because they were playing THE YANKEES. That would be the definition of a public bet, IMO. Betting on a team simply because they are who they are, with little to no regard for matchups, umps, weather, etc. It happens with the Yankees and Red Sox in baseball, the Patriots in football, etc. People bet on the "big name" teams simply because they assume they will win.
You say that doesn't happen, but I can tell you from firsthand experience that it absolutely does happen. I know people who bet on the "successful" teams constantly, even when they're huge faves, simply because they are better than their opponent. I also know people who blindly bet on "their team" because they are a homer and can't look at games objectively. I live in Seattle and had a buddy tell me the other day "I'm taking the Mariners because Felix is pitching. They won't lose." That was the extent of his analysis. Not a word about the other team.
Just my opinion. This is a topic that's been debated for years, so I appreciate hearing other people's viewpoints.
Public = bettors. Dude, you need to wake up and realize that only a small, small, small, small, small contingent of people actually have a plan when they're betting, and pick teams based of analysis. I'd say it's less than 2%.
Everyone else simply plays the favorite, or plays the team that is a huge dog. No one plays +4 in an basketball game. No one plays +2 in a football game. No one plays +150 in a baseball game. People here don't identify value, and when they think they do, they fall right into a trap.
There is one place where this forum is tracked - that's the tracking forum. The overall record of posters here is 2018-2137 (-$2549). That's no smarter than the "public", this forum IS the public.
