Handicap
Quote: IcheckraiseUI like to bet sports like most men and some women who watch sports. I am not good at it. I am wondering if anyone can direct me to information to get better. Is 10k enough to start and what kind of percentage can I expect in return? I might be asking this wrong but I am just curious if I can beat Sports year in and year out and is 10k enough to try?
Not very easy. I think you can find more easy plays. Safer perhaps unless you know of a certain Fix. I like to watch the weather. That snowball game in Buffalo was pretty good to me for the Under but I have lost trying to do that before with rain or cold weather. Nice when it works.
The best quick overview is the FAQ post in the two plus two sports betting forum.
There are some good books. My friend "poker Joe" wrote one called Sharper.
That book is about handicapping which is hard. I prefer just looking for mistakes or off numbers and stuff like that especially in smaller markets.
Either way, make sure you have several different books and always get a good number.
Sign up bonuses are nice too.
Quote: IcheckraiseUI like to bet sports like most men and some women who watch sports. I am not good at it. I am wondering if anyone can direct me to information to get better. Is 10k enough to start and what kind of percentage can I expect in return? I might be asking this wrong but I am just curious if I can beat Sports year in and year out and is 10k enough to try?
Its tough to beat sports. That's whats makes it fun. Its unpredictable
Those tiny few that do don't reveal their secrets
They are known for crunching large amounts of data via computers looking for an edge
Expect a slight loss in the long run
10k is fine as long as you can afford to lose it
Don't trust anybody that sells picks. They will try to reel you in with a guaranteed free winner. To them, its 50/50. If their guaranteed wins, they will come on hard saying this proves they will make you rich as long as you pay them for winners.
If the sportsbooks have the Rockets as a seven point favorite, and we have no information that would give us any insight into which side would be a good bet, that must mean if we can find either -6 or +8, we have found a very good bet.
Quote: Rigondeaux10k is plenty to do it as a hobby.
The best quick overview is the FAQ post in the two plus two sports betting forum.
There are some good books. My friend "poker Joe" wrote one called Sharper.
That book is about handicapping which is hard. I prefer just looking for mistakes or off numbers and stuff like that especially in smaller markets.
Either way, make sure you have several different books and always get a good number.
Sign up bonuses are nice too.
No pictures 0/10
JK actually the book went over my head on the handicapping part but I did read it and will eventually use that knowledge for some phat loots
https://www.amazon.com/Sharper-Guide-Modern-Sports-Betting-ebook/dp/B01K5SDAKS/ref=mt_kindle?_encoding=UTF8&me=
I believe the little games are much easier to beat because there is much less attention paid to them by the management of the books.
I believe the lines of the little games are made by a bot or a computer or a human making calculations as he believes a bot or computer would.
For example tonight at 10:00 p.m. est in college basketball Valparaiso is at Santa Clara and the line is Valparaiso -1.5 or -2 depending on which book you go with.
I don't believe anybody at the major books knows much of anything about those two teams.
The reason a few (very few) of the little games are beatable is because they make the same calculations for each game assigning the same weight to each factor for each game.
In actuality, the various factors do not all carry the same weight for each game.
In some games a certain factor will carry much more weight than average.
And that can be taken advantage of.
Buy a lot of Tums, you need it in this game.
Quote: lilredroosterIt's very hard to beat big games because there is a human exercising judgement to make sure the lines are tight and to make sure the book is on the right side of the favorite/longshot bias.
I believe the little games are much easier to beat because there is much less attention paid to them by the management of the books.
I believe the lines of the little games are made by a bot or a computer or a human making calculations as he believes a bot or computer would.
For example tonight at 10:00 p.m. est in college basketball Valparaiso is at Santa Clara and the line is Valparaiso -1.5 or -2 depending on which book you go with.
I don't believe anybody at the major books knows much of anything about those two teams.
The reason a few (very few) of the little games are beatable is because they make the same calculations for each game assigning the same weight to each factor for each game.
In actuality, the various factors do not all carry the same weight for each game.
In some games a certain factor will carry much more weight than average.
And that can be taken advantage of.
Bookies dont care who wins or being on the 'right side'. That's a common misconception.
What they care about is balancing the action as much as possible and then taking the percentage vig. The lines put out are solely based on public perception and emotion. That's why sports can be beat even at a 5-10% disadvantage by default.
Quote: ZenKinG
What they care about is balancing the action as much as possible
You are mistaken. They frequently accept significantly more money on the favorite because they know that favorite lovers often push the line out of whack.
Quote: ZenKinGBookies dont care who wins or being on the 'right side'. That's a common misconception.
What they care about is balancing the action as much as possible and then taking the percentage vig. The lines put out are solely based on public perception and emotion. That's why sports can be beat even at a 5-10% disadvantage by default.
The misconception is you think they really book all games like that. Most games books take a side with the sharp money. Respected bettor bets Bears for example, they'll book to need Bears.
Oldest misconception in gambling is the books in Las Vegas are booking both sides equally.
Quote: ZenKinGWhat they care about is balancing the action as much as possible and then taking the percentage vig. The lines put out are solely based on public perception and emotion. That's why sports can be beat even at a 5-10% disadvantage by default.
With balanced action the sportsbook wins money before the bet is resolved. The sportsbooks may like that when it happens, especially for the highest volume events. But they understand and accept that it is a rarity for that to happen. They also understand and accept that they will lose money on a large percentage of games -- just as they lose money on a large percentage of roulette spins, dice throws, or hands of cards. If they want to take a position or shade a number, they have no problem doing it. Somewhat amazing is that Nevada sportsbooks typically hold over 6% each year when a blind monkey would only lose 4.5%
Quote: TomGWith balanced action the sportsbook wins money before the bet is resolved. The sportsbooks may like that when it happens, especially for the highest volume events. But they understand and accept that it is a rarity for that to happen. They also understand and accept that they will lose money on a large percentage of games -- just as they lose money on a large percentage of roulette spins, dice throws, or hands of cards. If they want to take a position or shade a number, they have no problem doing it. Somewhat amazing is that Nevada sportsbooks typically hold over 6% each year when a blind monkey would only lose 4.5%
Is that just on ML and Spread bets? If that 6% is including parlays, futures and other types of bets, of course they would hold more than 4.5%.
Quote: TomGEverything off the board (parlay cards have been as high as 20% some years). Parlays are obviously what gives the house the extra edge, but baseball and most money lines have less than 4.5% commission. And the customer has the advantage of being able to always bet the best price if we choose, which simply doing that would cut the edge much closer to zero.
I don't disagree that it is somewhat a matter of people selecting poor bets and/or lines, I was just suggestion that the deviation from 4.5%, especially given the HUGE sample size, is likely more attributable to those who select bets with a greater than 4.5% edge. As I understand it, the NFL, and football in the broader sense, gets the most action by far.
