agree with Sammy, the public often does decent in the early season, IMO it's part of the 'plan'.
Wagerline is not always an accurate description of the public.
The public is generally better in college sports than in the professional ranks, one reason is many are privy to info that the books simply dont consider enough or have access to, and some of this info has a MUCH bigger affect on the outcome in NCAA than in professional leagues where backups are not really that big of a dropoff from a statisitical value standpoint.
A lot regarding this topic is highly debatable b/c "the public" is not easily definable and the number of events for a sample size to be significant is also another issue. My thoughts on this: a large sample size is not necessarily needed for something like this b/c the books already have the sample size from one hundred years of games which is what they basically use to determine their values. They also have a good idea about what money will go where on an offered spread and THIS has a large affect on the spread on some games. In other words the true odds are not always offered b/c the betting pattern would not be desirable on some events.
Most of my BIG wagers are based upon several angles lining up. Two of these are: the public going the opposite way, and a line being off enough to capture a key number. Not always but those are a couple of angles that historically win. It's not an exact science, the public does win sometimes, and the oddsmakers are really dumb sometimes. But I also think that the latter is purposeful on occasion to give the 'public' a taste of winning, if someone NEVER wins they wont bet, the books have a system with which they get the money in the end.
From what I have noticed, fading doesnt work as well until after week 4 of the NFL. In the NBA I think fading is even better, the public doesnt generally have a clue about what NBA numbers should be. They dont realize that there are key numbers in the NBA just as the 3 and 7 are important in football. I'll put it this way: for the last couple of months of the NBA regular season fading public money was a very, very good. This approach didnt work very well in the beginning of the playoffs, it cost me a little, I quickly ignored this angle and did my own thing with a lot better results. I'm not sure about fading in the playoffs, I usually dont pay attention so much to this angle during the playoffs as I feel I have strong enough numbers to outweigh the regular season angles.
Another thing to keep in mind is that some shops have a lot better numbers to base moves off of. A move at Pinnacle is more tell-tale than a move at SIA, for example.
I hope some of this makes sense, I think you are looking at something that works, the key is to divide it into subsets, and throw out the losing sets. Keep in mind that what works one season doesnt necessarily work the next, you have to be ready to switch gears quickly, the public has had winning seasons before. I feel it is very important to use MULTIPLE angles in evaluating the sports market. One year one angle works well, the next it might not as the books adjust and/or teams' playing styles change. The best angles are ones in which the value will almost certainly always be there b/c the money will almost certainly be going to the other side in a situation, year after year.
Posts: 3251 | From: AUSTIN | Registered: January 28, 2002
sammy the sage
Certifiably Crazy
posted October 06, 2003 07:44 AM
nice work.
Posts: 912 | From: florida | Registered: August 18, 2002
rscl31
Mildly Insane
posted October 06, 2003 07:51 AM
alsolutely makes sense, i do think that wagerline is a tad better of a representative than you give credit. Also, i think, correct me if i'm wrong, that Canbet is known for being the 'sharpest' book line movement wise. Right?
Posts: 25 | Registered: January 23, 2003
ATX
Certifiably Crazy
posted October 06, 2003 02:56 PM
I think wagerline may actually be a good representation, you may be correct with that assumption. I actually think that since it is a website that I imagine draws from many different regions it can be useful, action can vary significantly from region to region, and it is important to take this into consideration when looking at this from a market perspective. One of my main points is to not become too dependant on any one tool. Change is constant, and the one thing that will save you during drastic changes in the short term is money management.
Reason why wagerline may not be representative of the public: the public taps out. Every year the public bets on every sport and dont last half the season. Sure they re-up at times(reason they offer bonuses) but I am generalizing. There are actually multiple seasons in each sport. In the NFL appx the first 4 weeks is akin to the Wild West. In a lot of games the oddsmakers dont have a real good feel for the teams this early and it is common for public teams to win multiple games in a row ATS. As the season progresses the lines get sharper on many of the teams, this is b/c of several things. Obviously the more games that have been played the stronger the numbers that can be computed. But also keep in mind that the money that you are betting against late in the season is smarter, it has survived this long so it is a little wiser. This can get very complicated to try to explain and it differs by game in a lot of cases IMO. But the oddsmakers have done this for so long that they know how to adjust lines to compensate for changes in sharp vs. public money. The NFL has a LOT of public money being bet, but keep in mind that the BOOKS bet also, you dont hear about the amount of THEIR action, and this affects the line as well. Now as far as how does that affect wagerline's consensus? The people that pick at wagerline change as the season goes on. In week 2 you have different people than during week 14, a lot of people tap out and probably arent too worried about going to wagerline to share their losers. Also the number of people sharing decreases as the season wears on. I think this may be part of the reason why the consensus seemed to do well in the early NBA playoffs last year, maybe it was a fluke, I dunno. What I do know is that during the last couple of months of the NBA season prior to the playoffs the consensus was so consistently bad that I almost always checked it before placing a wager. A lot of times I stuck to a wager even though...What really sucked was getting down on a game early, then watching with horror as the public lined up behind me at the wagerline consensus hour by hour. You dont know how many times I wished a group of 500 people would walk in and choose the opposite team, it was like the kiss of death to have 60% on the same team. Just like anything else this is streaky, I have seen plenty of people try to use this strategy and give up. It's more about HOW you use it. I get info from other sources as well and fwiw it is generally on the same page as WL. Dont neglect totals, often public sides will go 4-2 but public totals will go 1-4, dont assume that fading will net you 60% winners, or that there wont be losing weeks or really bad days. Not that I think you dont know this, but I have seen a lot of people get hurt b/c of poor planning.
I'm not sure about why you assume that about Canbet. I am curious as to your thoughts on them, or where you heard that. Canbet is one of my favorite books. And it's not because of the orange color, customer service, limits, or reduced vig....
Posts: 3251 | From: AUSTIN | Registered: January 28, 2002
rscl31
Mildly Insane
posted October 06, 2003 05:04 PM
A guy who another forum which i wont' name has extensively followed line moves the past couple years and does so through Canbet. Firstly, the bigness of the book ensures that it needs extensive action to move lines slightly. Smaller books tend to move quicker i think because many times you have other books unloading their one sided action on them. He claims to have read stuff on the fact that Canbet is the book of choice of the 'smart money' in most sports. I was taking his word at face value and thought maybe someone else would have more input.
