[pavyracer]

If sharp money is always right and the books know who the sharp money is then why don’t they adjust the lines in reverse line to trick the public money betting against the sharp money?

So if sharp money bets a team down from +7.5 to +5.5 why they don’t post a line of +9.5 to trick the public. Is it because sharp money will keep hammering the bad line? Then if they adjust the line appropriately and the public doesn’t get tricked and they hammer the sharp money line then how do the books not get hammered all the time? And how do you know when and if the sharp money is in. What if no sharp money was involved and the book decided to drop the line with no reason trying to trick the public on thinking sharp money caused the move?

[big joe 1212]

I always wondered this myself!

I also wonder why Bookmaker would tell Loshak who the sharps are playing?

[tullamore]

Originally Posted by big joe 1212

I always wondered this myself!

I also wonder why Bookmaker would tell Loshak who the sharps are playing?

Because they want posters to make bets because of that info.

[BubbleBobble]

Originally Posted by pavyracer

Is it because sharp money will keep hammering the bad line?

yes?

[pokernut9999]

Sharps do not always win.

[pimike]

Pavy good question, however your example is not a good one. When the line is 7.5 NO SHARP would buy it to 5.5. #1 Betting rule is never buy to win only buy not to lose. 7.5 ok buy the hook. But a sharp would never buy two points to 5.5.
That is a waste of Juice money.

If you don't think the team will win by at least a td, they sharp wouldn't take that bet.

[tullamore]

Pavy if you think theres value in the line at +7.5, of course you bet it at +9.5.

The general public or squares dont need to be tricked. They already bet into bad lines, and will lose over time.

[big joe 1212]

Originally Posted by tullamore

Because they want posters to make bets because of that info.

It was a rhetorical question.

[raydog]

why change whats not broke? in your opinion, what % of sharp money wins?

i think you misread the question mike...he wasnt talking bout buying points

[pavyracer]

Originally Posted by pimike

Pavy good question, however your example is not a good one. When the line is 7.5 NO SHARP would buy it to 5.5. #1 Betting rule is never buy to win only buy not to lose. 7.5 ok buy the hook. But a sharp would never buy two points to 5.5.
That is a waste of Juice money.

If you don't think the team will win by at least a td, they sharp wouldn't take that bet.

I was thinking of NCAAB and the number 7 when I made this example, not football.

[BubbleBobble]

Books know what sharp money is, because they profile players...obviously.
Different type of books, different actions they take...while theGreek could care less about the amount of square money they get, a book like Bodog will always have weak lines for sharps.

[Capybara]

Mike, Pavy wasn't talking about buying points I don't think.

Pavy, I think you're thinking too hard. Like someone else said, if the sharps are on a bad line that's too high at -7.5, why wouldn't they destroy the books even more if they made it -9.5? Doesn't make any sense.

[GiveMeaBJ]

First off sharp money doesn't always. Sharps don't hit 80% like most think. It's closer to the 60% range. They don't move the line upwards for two reasons. Number one they give increased value on anyone who likes the sharp side including the sharps who can keep pounding numbers. Number 85% of people that bet don't even know what a sharp is or why the line moves.

[The Seer]

For one thing, the general public is clueless about sharps and sharp money. Most still think books get half of the betting on one side and half of the other. When you mention something about balancing sharp money vs square money, it blows their mind.

[BubbleBobble]

Sharp money isn't always against the public either.
They can hit a public team early if they like the line, and buy back on the dog later for a middle etc.
Books have to take all that into account, and it is often the reason for lots of line movement before games start.

[jjgold]

No such thing as sharp money, it really is called whale money. Nobody can predict outcomes of sporting events and predict bizarre pays, turnovers, etc.

[Sam Odom]

JJGold , a 10K bet may be a square one whereas a 500.00 one may be sharp. Depends on the bettor

[GiveMeaBJ]

JJ if that were the case books wouldn't waste time profiling the bettors they would just look at the biggest bets. It's possible for some rich guy to get his fix betting 10,000 a game and still be a square losing his ass. It's possible for a guy betting nickels and dimes to be sharp. They know who the winners and losers are it doesn't matter about the amount.

[MickChunky]

When I make it to SHARP status, I'll let you know the answer

[Matt Rain]

Originally Posted by GiveMeaBJ

First off sharp money doesn't always. Sharps don't hit 80% like most think. It's closer to the 60% range.

lolz. Nowhere close to 60, not in mainstream US sports anyway. Try 53-54% long term (10k+ bets).

[raydog]

i wish patty vendittoyo would come back...he would know all about it. he made it

[poker_dummy101]

I cannot answer this question. It will give too much info away. My whole basis is line movement

[20Four7]

Originally Posted by Matt Rain

lolz. Nowhere close to 60, not in mainstream US sports anyway. Try 53-54% long term (10k+ bets).

I would think it would be a point or two higher...... but nothing more than that

[GELATINOUS CUBE]

I'll do it for you. Poker Dumb follows the line movements and bets the late movement. No, I don't know. Some people do, its not a huge secret.

But it doesn't always work, because a book can move a line to funk with you. So guys like Dummy think it's the sharp side.

PI Mike, you should re-read the question. I don't think anyone here is talking about buying points. The topic was line movements.

But yeah, sometimes they adjust to the public, and sometimes they mess with you. I think?

[Matt Rain]

56% at -110, betting a flat 1k a game, would net someone 760k over 10k bets. I've placed that many bets in the last 3 years and I'm sure that many guys can do it well under a year. Show me the million-dollar-a-year guys.

[donjuan]

56% at -110, betting a flat 1k a game, would net someone 760k over 10k bets. I've placed that many bets in the last 3 years and I'm sure that many guys can do it well under a year. Show me the million-dollar-a-year guys.

Do you model? Anyone who steam chases is probably going to hit a lower percentage than one who models. Also depends on the market. Hitting 56% on NCAAB totals is pretty common for those who model NCAAB.

[Matt Rain]

I was 16 the last time I took a math class and my girlfriend did my homework. I'd put more trust in EA Sports sims than in anything I could come up with.

[smitch124]

Matty is semi-pro

[tacomax]

^ lolz

[jackpot269]

I always know when Ive made a sharp(smart) bet !!!!!!! WHEN I CASH THE FREAKING TICKIT!!!!!!!!!

[Fischnasty]

check jjgold's spreadsheet to see which side the sharp money is on

[roasthawg]

There's only two ways to go about this that make sense from the book's perspective... constantly move the line in an effort to get balanced action or establish the line at as close to 50% as possible and don't worry about which side the money is on- in the long run the books will win this way regardless.

[man3645]

Matt -
"56% at -110, betting a flat 1k a game, would net someone 760k over 10k bets. I've placed that many bets in the last 3 years and I'm sure that many guys can do it well under a year. Show me the million-dollar-a-year guys."

Problem is finding 10 thousand bets worth gambling on in a year I suppose...

[GELATINOUS CUBE]

WELL, I IMAGINE YOU CAN FIND 10 BETS A DAY TO GAMBLE ON. I FIND 30+. BUT WHO CAN BET 10k A DAY? MAYBE OBAMA. TOMMY MOTTOLA? THATS ABOUT IT.

[skrtelfan]

There are books who profile their bettors and adjust their lines accordingly, most notably Pinnacle. A limit bet from a bettor Pinnacle has identified as skilled will move the line more than the same limit bet from a bettor they haven't identified as skilled.