SBriand, on Tuesday, July 15th, 2008, 6:50 PM, said:
I have a headache, been at work for 8 hours and have an hour to go and I never studied economics (damn liberal art major).Can you get more in depth on what you would do here and why?
Yes. I will address this at some point. In the particular game I'm talking about, I mentioned that the Sox were a good bet, but that I didn't have the stomach to lay that much chalk. The Red Sox won handily.
Poppy_Hillis, on Tuesday, July 15th, 2008, 9:28 PM, said:
I followed you all the way, everything made sense. I think you could have something there, but how often would you say there are true +EV situations? I wouldn't think there would be all that many, and you would find yourself ultimately handicapping against the book without knowing and taking the games where you had a large discrepancy from what you thought the line should be and what it really is, although there is more to your theory than just that.I fully understand the last part. I tried to go a couple weeks in everyday life by doing the opposite of my natural instincts, and after awhile I had no idea what was me and what was the opposite. Anyway, I'll be looking forward to some in-depth stuff hopefully.
This topic should actually be covered in Sports Gambling 101. FIND REDUCED JUICE. If you're seeing splits like -110/-110, you're probably going to have a tough time showing a profit. One of the most important aspects of showing a profit betting on sports is posting up at a shop that spreads lines that look like -104/-104, or -- ideally -- at a place like Matchbook
, where I pay a 1% commission on winning baseball wagers (2% on other sports), and nothing else. Worst case scenario, for bases, I'm looking at -102/-102. At that point, I am ONLY losing money if the true price is even-money, or -101/+101 either way. All things considered, with juice this low, there are very, very few spots where I'm going to be any worse than break-even in the long run. It is significantly, significantly more likely that I have positive equity than negative, which is a recipe for longterm success and profitability.
BigDMcGee, on Tuesday, July 15th, 2008, 11:05 PM, said:
I have a question. Is there any way we, the wagering public, can have access to the information about how much money is going in on a game? Like, lets say 80 percent of the public is taking the bengals -8 over the browns. Is there anyway we can know that the public likes the bengals, so we should take the browns?
Well, I'm glad you asked. There are a handful of ways to tell where the public is.1) Wagerline
.The ultimate. Consensus data for all sports. Wagerline retards tend to blindly bet overs/favorites (or unders/favorites in baseball), but the information isn't provided by any individual sports book, which makes it significantly more trustworthy in my opinion.2) Vegas Insider.
Consensus data, powered by sportsbook.com.3) The forums at Covers.
Sports bettors go here to post their action and discuss sports betting. They are all idiots. It's easy to see which teams are popular by reading the forums and fading the sh
it out of them. Voila! You have your basic picture of the public's specific, game-by-game likes and dislikes.