The thing is people will still be losing.
Being sharp and being smart are two totally different things. Even sharp guys that gamble will have losing days, and who is to say that all these so called sharp guys don't lose anyways? Urban legends and myths? This weeks big hit could get pissed away with next weeks loser. Who really knows? people can CLAIM to know alot of things, but actually knowing them is also a different story.
Gambers sharp or square, all have the same problem, and I posted about it on here months ago. They all have a total lack of vision. No matter if they are poker players, to horse players, to sports bettors. They all live in the here and now. If they lose in the morning "I HAVE TO GET IT BACK IN THE AFTERNOON" , if they are down Sunday then," I NEED A MONDAY NIHGHT GET EVEN PLAY". What is wrong with betting games that matter? Why play a game that has no value? Watch this Friday night. The UConn/BC game. I will say that 85-90% of the guys will bet that game. I will also say that maybe 5% have any clue about either team. I also say that there isn't anyway you can handicap that game from afundamental standpoint, because basically there isn't enough to go on. Both benefitted from numerous turnovers last game, and UConn stil almost lost SU as a 2 TD fave when Duke mmissed a FG late.
But it is that lack of foresight that does all gamblers in. I have played poker with a lot of the guys people see on TV. All supposedly the best card players around. Shit, more than half those guys don't have a pot to piss in. Moneymaker was dead ass busted at the 4 Queens touney last Sept.
So what people think, and what is reality are very different worlds. Gamblers are by nature risk takers, and if they aren't taking risks they are living the life. But over all they are also not getting too far ahead. Rather than take the winnings and do something with it, they generally just iss it all away again. Or they up their bet sizes, or play more games than they should. Who knows, it differs from player to player.
But the difference betwen the guys that profit and guys that lose isn't talent or 'sharpness', it is a plan. Those that win and ultimately have long term profits ALL have a plan, the rest all lose, and prettt much do not have a plan to speak of. They are always looking for the next game, the next action.
Ultimately that is why the books always come out ahead, because as long as they have enough money to outlast the players that get hot from time to time, and they are not gambling too much, they will always survive.
It takes either a very stupid person or a very greedy one to fail at booking bets. Because the degenerates always come back, win or lose, they always come back, and since no one wins every time, they will ultimately lose...
Unless they have a plan.
Being sharp and being smart are two totally different things. Even sharp guys that gamble will have losing days, and who is to say that all these so called sharp guys don't lose anyways? Urban legends and myths? This weeks big hit could get pissed away with next weeks loser. Who really knows? people can CLAIM to know alot of things, but actually knowing them is also a different story.
Gambers sharp or square, all have the same problem, and I posted about it on here months ago. They all have a total lack of vision. No matter if they are poker players, to horse players, to sports bettors. They all live in the here and now. If they lose in the morning "I HAVE TO GET IT BACK IN THE AFTERNOON" , if they are down Sunday then," I NEED A MONDAY NIHGHT GET EVEN PLAY". What is wrong with betting games that matter? Why play a game that has no value? Watch this Friday night. The UConn/BC game. I will say that 85-90% of the guys will bet that game. I will also say that maybe 5% have any clue about either team. I also say that there isn't anyway you can handicap that game from afundamental standpoint, because basically there isn't enough to go on. Both benefitted from numerous turnovers last game, and UConn stil almost lost SU as a 2 TD fave when Duke mmissed a FG late.
But it is that lack of foresight that does all gamblers in. I have played poker with a lot of the guys people see on TV. All supposedly the best card players around. Shit, more than half those guys don't have a pot to piss in. Moneymaker was dead ass busted at the 4 Queens touney last Sept.
So what people think, and what is reality are very different worlds. Gamblers are by nature risk takers, and if they aren't taking risks they are living the life. But over all they are also not getting too far ahead. Rather than take the winnings and do something with it, they generally just iss it all away again. Or they up their bet sizes, or play more games than they should. Who knows, it differs from player to player.
But the difference betwen the guys that profit and guys that lose isn't talent or 'sharpness', it is a plan. Those that win and ultimately have long term profits ALL have a plan, the rest all lose, and prettt much do not have a plan to speak of. They are always looking for the next game, the next action.
Ultimately that is why the books always come out ahead, because as long as they have enough money to outlast the players that get hot from time to time, and they are not gambling too much, they will always survive.
It takes either a very stupid person or a very greedy one to fail at booking bets. Because the degenerates always come back, win or lose, they always come back, and since no one wins every time, they will ultimately lose...
Unless they have a plan.
wantitall4moi -
Excellent, thoughtful post. Who let you in?
As for the unlimited growth of sharps from squares, it ain't going to happen.
1) Their IQ's aren't going up.
2) Recreational players don't have the time (or interest) to invest to become sharp.
3) At small betting amounts (budgets of most non-pros), the investment of effort would not be worth the return.
4) Some people will always play their home team (or Notre Dame) no matter what the spread and still think they can hit 8-team parlays and teasers.
5) New squares are always coming in. So even with a former square becoming sharp after a few years, there will still be new squares and even inexperienced sharps entering the ranks.
6) But most of all, the industry is filled with a bunch of sick, greedy, degenerate bastards (and they're damn proud of it).
Excellent, thoughtful post. Who let you in?
As for the unlimited growth of sharps from squares, it ain't going to happen.
1) Their IQ's aren't going up.
2) Recreational players don't have the time (or interest) to invest to become sharp.
3) At small betting amounts (budgets of most non-pros), the investment of effort would not be worth the return.
4) Some people will always play their home team (or Notre Dame) no matter what the spread and still think they can hit 8-team parlays and teasers.
5) New squares are always coming in. So even with a former square becoming sharp after a few years, there will still be new squares and even inexperienced sharps entering the ranks.
6) But most of all, the industry is filled with a bunch of sick, greedy, degenerate bastards (and they're damn proud of it).
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> As for the unlimited growth of sharps from squares, it ain't going to happen.
1) Their IQ's aren't going up. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Good point, and seeing that the Republicans seem to be growing, one must correctly conclude that there are more and more stupid people emerging each and every day.
1) Their IQ's aren't going up. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Good point, and seeing that the Republicans seem to be growing, one must correctly conclude that there are more and more stupid people emerging each and every day.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by daringly:
The dynamic of squares versus sharps is definitely changing. In the past, square money would always overpower sharp money on big public games. That is no longer true. 3 examples from this season:
New England, the superbowl champion, opened at -3x. Superbowl champs always get bet up, until this year. Sharps moved in, and the line closed at -3.
USC, NCAA national champion. The line opened at +17x (or close to it), and closed about +15. Again, sharp money overpowered the public.
And, Monday night's game. Carolina -3x, moved towards -3. Since when has sharp money belittled the squares on Monday night football?
Now, there are just as many squares out there as always. But the VOLUME from sharps has probably grown.
What does this mean? In NFL, sharps won't make as much, and squares have a better chance. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
the true sharp players are the ones fishing out new opportunities. Things like this have been known for years, and it was a matter of time until the public caught up (at least somewhat). Just like the Monday night home dog - still maybe an edge but not as much as the past.
As these things become public knowledge, the lines adjust, public keeps playing them and the sharps move on to other things (or go the other way on the now overcompensated line).
IMO the biggest difference in making the lines tighter is the sheer quantity of out available to the average bettor and the knowledge of line shopping...everyone is scared to hang their own numbers, lines are becoming more vanilla, and naturally those lines are going to be sharper because every book is copying the lines from the sharpest linesmakers. With more competition, the books NEED sharper lines to stay in business
The dynamic of squares versus sharps is definitely changing. In the past, square money would always overpower sharp money on big public games. That is no longer true. 3 examples from this season:
New England, the superbowl champion, opened at -3x. Superbowl champs always get bet up, until this year. Sharps moved in, and the line closed at -3.
USC, NCAA national champion. The line opened at +17x (or close to it), and closed about +15. Again, sharp money overpowered the public.
And, Monday night's game. Carolina -3x, moved towards -3. Since when has sharp money belittled the squares on Monday night football?
Now, there are just as many squares out there as always. But the VOLUME from sharps has probably grown.
What does this mean? In NFL, sharps won't make as much, and squares have a better chance. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
the true sharp players are the ones fishing out new opportunities. Things like this have been known for years, and it was a matter of time until the public caught up (at least somewhat). Just like the Monday night home dog - still maybe an edge but not as much as the past.
As these things become public knowledge, the lines adjust, public keeps playing them and the sharps move on to other things (or go the other way on the now overcompensated line).
IMO the biggest difference in making the lines tighter is the sheer quantity of out available to the average bettor and the knowledge of line shopping...everyone is scared to hang their own numbers, lines are becoming more vanilla, and naturally those lines are going to be sharper because every book is copying the lines from the sharpest linesmakers. With more competition, the books NEED sharper lines to stay in business
JAVA........is right on the money...cept for this part...
"former square becomming sharp".............my analysis of "squares becoming sharps"
in the last 10 yrs i have seen a transformation in some "squares"
they have become what i call...."educated squares"
they are and dont take this the wrong way....many of the sports forum readers.....these gamblers are a step ahead of the basic "square" player...
the educated square is......
1. aware of the vast amount of info...(line services, game info, ect....this came available with the use of computers)
2. realizes the importance of value...(getting the best number available, m/l, ect.)
3. realize the importance of multiple outs..
4. handicapping skills, use of data-base, computer programs, ect. are all used to gain better insight into sportsbetting....
the above come immediately to mind..(i'm sure there are more)
if a person practices the above, he is still no-where near the caliber of a "sharp" gambler imo....
the characteristics of a "sharp" gambler are NOT LEARNED in a day nor are they learned as the person gets older....
sharps have the following.....imo they are traits a person learns long before the first bet is ever made...
1. discipline..........i will be blunt and honest....alot of you guys think you have it....but you dont.....you learn it at a young age..(remember when your grandmother said "save for a rainy day"...
2. the ability to view things (gambling) in the "long term" sense....
talking about years....not weeks
3. the ways and means to focus on gambling full-time not part-time.........(this is an interesting subject in its own...nowadays many "sharp gamblers" are people that have been succesful in their own careers and then pursued gambling...go back 20 years or more and "sharps" new only one career..gambling..
4. they arent afraid to lose, (losing is a no-no in american culture..if you were a sore-loser playing sports growing up...it will carry over to your gambling) sharps know how to deal with a losing streak....(losing affects your mind)...if you think you have losing under control and consider yourself sharp..quit your job and gamble full time...then answer #4
most sharps will not read this post because they are not wasting time on sports forums...lol
"former square becomming sharp".............my analysis of "squares becoming sharps"
in the last 10 yrs i have seen a transformation in some "squares"
they have become what i call...."educated squares"
they are and dont take this the wrong way....many of the sports forum readers.....these gamblers are a step ahead of the basic "square" player...
the educated square is......
1. aware of the vast amount of info...(line services, game info, ect....this came available with the use of computers)
2. realizes the importance of value...(getting the best number available, m/l, ect.)
3. realize the importance of multiple outs..
4. handicapping skills, use of data-base, computer programs, ect. are all used to gain better insight into sportsbetting....
the above come immediately to mind..(i'm sure there are more)
if a person practices the above, he is still no-where near the caliber of a "sharp" gambler imo....
the characteristics of a "sharp" gambler are NOT LEARNED in a day nor are they learned as the person gets older....
sharps have the following.....imo they are traits a person learns long before the first bet is ever made...
1. discipline..........i will be blunt and honest....alot of you guys think you have it....but you dont.....you learn it at a young age..(remember when your grandmother said "save for a rainy day"...
2. the ability to view things (gambling) in the "long term" sense....
talking about years....not weeks
3. the ways and means to focus on gambling full-time not part-time.........(this is an interesting subject in its own...nowadays many "sharp gamblers" are people that have been succesful in their own careers and then pursued gambling...go back 20 years or more and "sharps" new only one career..gambling..
4. they arent afraid to lose, (losing is a no-no in american culture..if you were a sore-loser playing sports growing up...it will carry over to your gambling) sharps know how to deal with a losing streak....(losing affects your mind)...if you think you have losing under control and consider yourself sharp..quit your job and gamble full time...then answer #4
most sharps will not read this post because they are not wasting time on sports forums...lol
lets remember, just cause you research games does not mean you are sharp, the percentage of players who make significant money year after year is always going to be between 2.5 and 5 percent, these people are not just sharp but also talented. sports betting is a skill and just like any other skill some people just have more raw talent, the books don't care about info heck most of them give tons of stats on the games, we will never see a time where 60% of players are sharpies, and remember just cuase you do research does not mean you are sharp, very simple, you are sharp if you win every year, it's all about the bottom line, almost all my friends look at stats and do research and almost all of them lose every year. Talent matters.
DPO basically mirrors my own sentiments.
The fact of the matter is that you could GIVE people winners and they would still lose. That is a 100% mortal lock, no chance or losing, the fix is in play. Basically tell them don't bet the game, tell me how much you want, and I will pay you now. You could give them 2 or 3 of those a month, and I would still say that the guys who lose will continue to lose, and the guys that win will continue to win.
Call it greed, call it lack of vision. Call it whatever you want. All they would do is take the money won from the mortal locks, and piss it away on other bets.
But ultimately being sharp isn't realy a gambling term, it is a life term. People that succeed at gambling can succeed at just about anything they try.
The fact of the matter is that you could GIVE people winners and they would still lose. That is a 100% mortal lock, no chance or losing, the fix is in play. Basically tell them don't bet the game, tell me how much you want, and I will pay you now. You could give them 2 or 3 of those a month, and I would still say that the guys who lose will continue to lose, and the guys that win will continue to win.
Call it greed, call it lack of vision. Call it whatever you want. All they would do is take the money won from the mortal locks, and piss it away on other bets.
But ultimately being sharp isn't realy a gambling term, it is a life term. People that succeed at gambling can succeed at just about anything they try.
