smoothgrh
smoothgrh
Joined: Oct 26, 2011
  • Threads: 55
  • Posts: 521
January 22nd, 2020 at 3:00:24 PM permalink
Quote: gordonm888

This is the key point that refutes Ed Collins assertion about how the line is set to balance the public's wagers. If the betting is 90/10 than why didn't the books shift the line already???

What I observe is that each week there are several games in which the public's wagers are lopsided (on the spread, or less frequently on points.) The meaning of lopsided?? Maybe greater than 65/35 or > 70/30. Why do the books allow this to happen; i.e. why didn't they shift the line?

The answer is two fold.
1. The books pay attention to the "sharps" far more than to the general public. The wagering of the "sharps" is what principally drives shifts in the line.

2. If the books have a number of lines that the public is betting in a lopsided way then the side that the public is heavily wagering on had better lose with a frequency of 50% or more - otherwise the books will take a bath. This is especially true in the SB where wagering is so heavy.

If the books observe that 90% of the wagers are on OVER and 10% are on UNDER, don't you think that the books believe that UNDER is going to win >50%?? Because the vig won't help the books that much if the public is right and the points are over.



This probably answers the question I've had for years after reading that sports books lost big after a particular Super Bowl: how could they loseóaren't they supposed to balance the lines so they always make money?!
unJon
unJon
Joined: Jul 1, 2018
  • Threads: 12
  • Posts: 1481
January 22nd, 2020 at 3:05:08 PM permalink
Quote: gordonm888

This is the key point that refutes Ed Collins assertion about how the line is set to balance the public's wagers. If the betting is 90/10 than why didn't the books shift the line already???

What I observe is that each week there are several games in which the public's wagers are lopsided (on the spread, or less frequently on points.) The meaning of lopsided?? Maybe greater than 65/35 or > 70/30. Why do the books allow this to happen; i.e. why didn't they shift the line?

The answer is two fold.
1. The books pay attention to the "sharps" far more than to the general public. The wagering of the "sharps" is what principally drives shifts in the line.

2. If the books have a number of lines that the public is betting in a lopsided way then the side that the public is heavily wagering on had better lose with a frequency of 50% or more - otherwise the books will take a bath. This is especially true in the SB where wagering is so heavy.

If the books observe that 90% of the wagers are on OVER and 10% are on UNDER, don't you think that the books believe that UNDER is going to win >50%?? Because the vig won't help the books that much if the public is right and the points are over.



While I donít disagree with your points, I want to point out that the total opened at 51.5 and has moved to 54. Betting still lopsided.
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
Ayecarumba
Ayecarumba
Joined: Nov 17, 2009
  • Threads: 236
  • Posts: 6763
Thanks for this post from:
onenickelmiracle
January 22nd, 2020 at 3:20:56 PM permalink
Quote: gordonm888


...1. The books pay attention to the "sharps" far more than to the general public. The wagering of the "sharps" is what principally drives shifts in the line....



I think most bookmakers consider themselves "sharp", so maybe there is some ego built into the line. Alternately, the reports of 90% action on the over may be inaccurate, and perhaps even disinformation proffered by the books to encourage more squares to take the wrong side.
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
gordonm888
gordonm888
Joined: Feb 18, 2015
  • Threads: 36
  • Posts: 2247
January 22nd, 2020 at 3:42:00 PM permalink
Quote: unJon


While I donít disagree with your points, I want to point out that the total opened at 51.5 and has moved to 54. Betting still lopsided.



I interpret that early movement (and most movement does occur immediately after the line is posted) was based on action by the sharps.

I am not an expert on "sharps" but in general I believe they are professional bettors who are known to the bookies and who place large bets, in the neighborhood of $10K or more, when they see an opportunity. Some of these people are highly respected by the books and essentially serve as "peer review" on the lines.

Immediately after opening, I understand that 'sharps' place bets where they believe the lines are incorrect by a significant amount and the books tend to move the lines until the 'sharps' stop betting. Usually, the line does not move much afterwards unless there is new information on injuries/player availability or (rarely) weather.

There are some touts who recommend betting against the public when the public wagering is extremely lop-sided. Theoretically, I think this makes sense -but I have looked at this as a betting strategy and there appears to be significant variance; it's hard to tell what kind of edge (if any) this strategy provides. I don't know - I think that maybe the public has more sense than they are given credit for. What does everyone else think?
So many better men, a few of them friends, were dead. And a thousand thousand slimy things lived on, and so did I.
ThatDonGuy
ThatDonGuy
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
  • Threads: 90
  • Posts: 3929
Thanks for this post from:
smoothgrh
January 22nd, 2020 at 3:55:59 PM permalink
Quote: smoothgrh

This probably answers the question I've had for years after reading that sports books lost big after a particular Super Bowl: how could they loseóaren't they supposed to balance the lines so they always make money?!


The problem with balancing the lines is, you run the risk of getting a result between the original line and the ending one, and the books lose at both ends.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1298
  • Posts: 21233
Thanks for this post from:
Ayecarumbasmoothgrh
January 22nd, 2020 at 4:13:20 PM permalink
Quote: unJon

While I donít disagree with your points, I want to point out that the total opened at 51.5 and has moved to 54. Betting still lopsided.



I think the original number was about right or even on the high side. Why so much action is coming in on the over is what I want to understand. Everyone keeps talking about the great offenses of both teams, but I'm looking for some numbers or a more specific reason other quick one-liners. I should also say that I respect line movements and they are generally in the correct direction.

Quote: smoothgrh

This probably answers the question I've had for years after reading that sports books lost big after a particular Super Bowl: how could they loseóaren't they supposed to balance the lines so they always make money?!



Standford Wong once posted on his site that the "balance the action" philosophy is a myth and good sports book managers want to maximize EV, not minimize risk. However, I would respectfully disagree with him. I have known lots of sports book managers and assistant managers and their basic philosophy is to balance. In the gaming business there is a saying -- You're only as good as you were yesterday. The philosophy of most casino executives I've met is CYA in and out of the sports book. That was definitely the order of the day at one I used to work for, which shall remain nameless.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
Ayecarumba
Ayecarumba
Joined: Nov 17, 2009
  • Threads: 236
  • Posts: 6763
January 22nd, 2020 at 5:14:00 PM permalink
Quote: gordonm888

...I think that maybe the public has more sense than they are given credit for. What does everyone else think?



"Wisdom of the Crowd" is real. But so is "Groupthink". I generally recall that most years the books do really well on the Super Bowl, and a few where they got killed. Since the two teams are fairly evenly matched, the action should be balanced, but I expect that due to it's proximity to S.F., more 49ers than Chiefs supporters will be putting bets down in Nevada, so maybe the Las Vegas line skews a bit that way?

Is sports betting legal in Kansas or Missouri?
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
ThatDonGuy
ThatDonGuy
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
  • Threads: 90
  • Posts: 3929
January 22nd, 2020 at 5:38:31 PM permalink
Quote: Ayecarumba

Is sports betting legal in Kansas or Missouri?


From what I have read, no in both of those states. I think the nearest state that has it is Iowa. It's legal in Illinois, but I don't think anybody is up and running there yet.
gordonm888
gordonm888
Joined: Feb 18, 2015
  • Threads: 36
  • Posts: 2247
January 22nd, 2020 at 5:42:46 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard


Standford Wong once posted on his site that the "balance the action" philosophy is a myth and good sports book managers want to maximize EV, not minimize risk. However, I would respectfully disagree with him. I have known lots of sports book managers and assistant managers and their basic philosophy is to balance. In the gaming business there is a saying -- You're only as good as you were yesterday. The philosophy of most casino executives I've met is CYA in and out of the sports book. That was definitely the order of the day at one I used to work for, which shall remain nameless.



So, why don't they balance? Why do they not shift the line further when they first realize that bets are coming in at 9:1 on the OVER?

Each week, during the NFL season there are 1-4 games that the public bets 70/30 against the spread. If their goal is to balance, then why do they do such a poor job of balancing?

If this SB goes OVER, the books will lose about 70% of the total amount bet on the over/under line. How is that CYA? Its more like Lose Your Ass. Its a high variance way of managing the line.
So many better men, a few of them friends, were dead. And a thousand thousand slimy things lived on, and so did I.
michael99000
michael99000
Joined: Jul 10, 2010
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 1997
Thanks for this post from:
unJon
January 22nd, 2020 at 6:10:45 PM permalink
Quote: gordonm888

So, why don't they balance? Why do they not shift the line further when they first realize that bets are coming in at 9:1 on the OVER?.



Because then the line gets out of whack in relation to what the statistics say, and thatís when the Sharps, who were waiting for just that occurrence, jump in on the Under with large wagers.

And then the book sits there with a ton of public money on over 51/52 and a ton of sharp money on under 54/55, expiring them to a few results that everyone wins

  • Jump to: