Content Post OT-ish: The gambling thread

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Im not following... the more they have to move the line means the more of a chance they have to get middled which is terrible for them.

Yes, they’ll move the line to hedge on short term losses and occasionally get middled, but if they wanted to have equal betting, they could do so. They’d just get hammered by sharp, high rolling betters. They set the lines based on a team’s power rating, homefield, and occasionally adjust for a few factors. Point being they base the lines on actual probability and scientific predicting the outcome of games, not based on who they think the public will bet on heavily. Example, the site shows the Patriots have received more than 80% of the bets. Being professional handicappers, they know this is going to happen, but they aren’t going to set the line to New England -21. If the teams played 100 times, they expect the Patriots to win by roughly 16 points on average. Good bettors will note when lines move for hedging and often get good value (example if line moves to New England -19.). At that point the probability is now in Washington’s favor.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Go on. Because from where I'm sitting that's exactly why lines move - to avoid exposure after the initial lines failed to bring in a sustainable amount of risk.

You’re right. The lines do move to try to balance the bets and minimize exposure. But they generally do not move by huge amounts. Example, a line at 3.5 hit hard might move to 3. Sometimes you’ll see on mismatch games much bigger movements. But the initial odds are set by oddsmakers who predict outcomes, then adjusted slightly. To sum it up, just because everyone in Dallas will be betting on the Cowboys does not mean that a Dallas book will make them 20 point favorites to get balanced action (unless they’re playing Miami!) The line movements are still tied in with a wiggle room with the actual probabilities. Hence, on the link provided six games next week have quite unbalanced betting action.

Also, the public can be unpredictable at times. Again, New England receiving 83% of the bets for Sunday. That’s why they need to be close to 50/50 on actual probabilities, because there will be hundreds of unbalanced betting games during the year...they need to actually be right in how they set the lines and win half of those games where the public is strongly on one side.

 

[supafly]

Also, the public can be unpredictable at times. Again, New England receiving 83% of the bets for Sunday.

Just to add a thought to your comment, while the percentage of public tickets is something to take in to account, the overall money is usually the ultimate deciding factor.

Sometimes, there is a higher percentage of tickets bought for one side, but the other side has received more money (sharp action). This is referred to as “reverse line movement,” and can sometimes help as a predictor for where the experienced bettors are placing their action, in contrast to the general public opinion (squares, if you will).

 

[mgcolby]

I hope everyone will look at the betting trends to once and for all squash the oft repeated false idea that Vegas sets lines to attract equal betting.

I think in general that is the rule, but when I hear people state unequivocally that Vegas always tries to equalize the betting, I typically laugh. Vegas most definitely gambles at times. Reverse Line Movement is a big one, very common in college. They will definitely move the line towards the team they think will lose to entice more money on them. So when you hear things like "how is that line so low", or "how are they getting that many points" etc.., well that can be vegas gambling. Or in some cases it can just simply being the persons personal bias/opinion that one team is X amount of points better than them.

I have seen it on here where a person can't figure out why the line is the way it is and then my picker has a nearly identical line as Vegas. Its all based mostly on numbers as well as tangible data such as injuries, and in some cases inside knowledge.

I guess the point of my diatribe is that it is way more complicated than Vegas wants even action.

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

Vegas learned a long time ago that they cannot manipulate the line to guarantee equal betting on both sides. Vegas can't force people to bet, no matter where the lines are set.

So instead of counting on balancing risk per game via betting lines, Vegas does it across multiple games. They can skew the odds in one game and if they guess wrong, attempt to make it up in a different game. Bottom line is that Vefas wins as evident from those lavish casinos.

Regards,
Chris

 

[maust]

Bottom line is that Vegas wins as evident from those lavish casinos.

Regards,
Chris

Offsetting those cash winnings they also 'won' the Raiders. Further proof not even Vegas wins them all

 

[fightingirish595]

Yes, they’ll move the line to hedge on short term losses and occasionally get middled, but if they wanted to have equal betting, they could do so. They’d just get hammered by sharp, high rolling betters. They set the lines based on a team’s power rating, homefield, and occasionally adjust for a few factors. Point being they base the lines on actual probability and scientific predicting the outcome of games, not based on who they think the public will bet on heavily. Example, the site shows the Patriots have received more than 80% of the bets. Being professional handicappers, they know this is going to happen, but they aren’t going to set the line to New England -21. If the teams played 100 times, they expect the Patriots to win by roughly 16 points on average. Good bettors will note when lines move for hedging and often get good value (example if line moves to New England -19.). At that point the probability is now in Washington’s favor.

When you say “if they want equal betting” do you mean bets themselves or money.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

When you say “if they want equal betting” do you mean bets themselves or money.

Money.

 

[supafly]

Postseason baseball and NFL football. Whew.

 

[maust]

Postseason baseball and NFL football. Whew.

And...the puck has dropped as well

 

[supafly]

And...the puck has dropped as well

Just like baseball, hockey will need to be kept up with on a daily basis, as missing just one day can get you out of the groove pretty quickly. Similar to baseball, most of the teams that you want on a daily basis are going to be too expensive, so you’ll be forced to select close games where you’re giving -140 or less, or games where you like dogs to win outright.

I liked Vegas last night with the suspension to Kane and fact that Pavelski is gone for SJ, but it was -180, so there wasn’t much value there for my usual 50-75 dollar wagers. Washington was +125 on the road at STL for the banner drop, but I was hesitant and never pulled the trigger. Boston may be somewhat inconsistent this year, particularly at the start of the season, so perhaps there’s something there.

I think I like Nashville-135 tonight. Again, it’s early, so it may take a few weeks to get in a groove. In the meantime, I hit both wild card games in the MLB scene and am looking forward to some juicy underdog value in the coming days. Tampa Bay was +118 last night. There are going to be many more. Of course, choosing which ones can be challenging.

 

[maust]

Of course, choosing which ones can be challenging.

Truer words were never spoken

 

[supafly]

Truer words were never spoken

I think my approach may consist of taking the 3 seed dogs (STL and MIN) for game one. I haven’t fully decided quite yet, and the AL game has yet to even announce the starting pitchers as of last night, so I may be getting ahead of myself. Not sure that the 1 seeds (HOU and LA) are going to lose right off the bat. That seems more likely when you get a game or two into the rotation, and the zig-zag theory may become my friend once we get another game or two into it.

Aside from hockey, which has the lowest postseason home winning percentage around 53%, MLB is second with a number around 55%. There are going to be some juicy underdogs in there somewhere.

 

[fightingirish595]

Teams with hitting catchers usually do well in the post season. Might throw a wager on the twins despite being a Yankees fan. You never know

Fully expecting Houston to win it all though

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

Canucks ruined my parlay for the NHL games last night...Got Caps, Leafs and Knights right....

 

[supafly]

I decided to lay off of STL in the baseball game. While I think they’ll win a couple, the odds are much better with guys like Flaherty, Wainright, and Hudson on the mound.

Tough football game tonight.

 

[fightingirish595]

Board looks like **** until Saturday imo

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Vikings -5.5 at Giants

Does anyone else think this line is surprising? Really feels like this should be a pick em if not Giants outright favored. All three of us in my underdog pool are trying to figure out what we’re missing.

 

[supafly]

Vikings -5.5 at Giants

Does anyone else think this line is surprising? Really feels like this should be a pick em if not Giants outright favored. All three of us in my underdog pool are trying to figure out what we’re missing.

I don’t know that the NYG should be favored, but I agree with you that MIN-5.5 on the road seems odd.

 

[maust]

Vikings -5.5 at Giants

Does anyone else think this line is surprising? Really feels like this should be a pick em if not Giants outright favored. All three of us in my underdog pool are trying to figure out what we’re missing.

Barkley's ankle sprain?