Good post, but I strongly disagree with you.
I can most certainly set a market value on ANYTHING with no handicapping just based on a weighted average of what the sharpest books are dealing. Whether it be Swank to win best actress or Duke vs. Md.
NO QUESTION, you can then set a sharper line if you are a good handicapper and tweak the starting market average by a bit with your handicapping opinion. NO QUESTION, this will make you more money in the long run.
Where many decent handicappers fail, is they are way too egotistical. If the market has the line at -6.8 on a game, and their numbers have the line 3, and you ask them what their best unbiased estimate of the true line, they will say "3", rather than take a weighted average of the market and their number (and use a smore reasonable estimate of 5 for example).
Try to point out to these stiffs the obvious (hey, if lines were off by 4 points you would be hitting over 60%) and they backpedal like a fat center fielder with sun in their eyes, saying ridiculous stuff like "I do hit 60% on most games, but there are a few that for unforseen reasons I'm wrong on select games, but usually my numbers are right").
Don't even try to ask them why they aren't betting cars on their "60%" plays, like Kelly Criterion demands. They will refuse to say that 60% is way too optimistic, and rather say silly stuff like "Kelly doesn't work".
Everyone thinks 58% handicapping is an easy goal for gifted handicappers. Hahahhahahahhaahha. I'd bet anyone in the world $10,000 they cannot hit 58% on any select season on 100 plays vs. widely available lines. The best in the world hit 55-58% over all their plays, and make a boat load of money doing it. Most "good" handicappers are in the 52-55% range, accurately identifying games off by 1-2 points on average.
.....In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king. :monsters-
I can most certainly set a market value on ANYTHING with no handicapping just based on a weighted average of what the sharpest books are dealing. Whether it be Swank to win best actress or Duke vs. Md.
NO QUESTION, you can then set a sharper line if you are a good handicapper and tweak the starting market average by a bit with your handicapping opinion. NO QUESTION, this will make you more money in the long run.
Where many decent handicappers fail, is they are way too egotistical. If the market has the line at -6.8 on a game, and their numbers have the line 3, and you ask them what their best unbiased estimate of the true line, they will say "3", rather than take a weighted average of the market and their number (and use a smore reasonable estimate of 5 for example).
Try to point out to these stiffs the obvious (hey, if lines were off by 4 points you would be hitting over 60%) and they backpedal like a fat center fielder with sun in their eyes, saying ridiculous stuff like "I do hit 60% on most games, but there are a few that for unforseen reasons I'm wrong on select games, but usually my numbers are right").
Don't even try to ask them why they aren't betting cars on their "60%" plays, like Kelly Criterion demands. They will refuse to say that 60% is way too optimistic, and rather say silly stuff like "Kelly doesn't work".
Everyone thinks 58% handicapping is an easy goal for gifted handicappers. Hahahhahahahhaahha. I'd bet anyone in the world $10,000 they cannot hit 58% on any select season on 100 plays vs. widely available lines. The best in the world hit 55-58% over all their plays, and make a boat load of money doing it. Most "good" handicappers are in the 52-55% range, accurately identifying games off by 1-2 points on average.
.....In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king. :monsters-