In our determination to be a better loser, we have so far established these imperatives: 1) we will be honest with ourselves and understand what it is that compels us to bet in the first place; 2) we will identify those times when we are vulnerable to a let-down (for want of a better term) and have identified ways to protect ourselves from ourselves; 3) we have accepted that our bankroll as it stands now is all the money that we have to gamble, today, tomorrow, and next week; 4) our main goal in life as it relates to betting is to not see that bankroll hit zero; 5) we are going to treat that bankroll as though we are the managers of our own Mutual Fund Investment.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
fficeffice" /><o
></o>
We have a good set of objectives, but what we need is a solid plan of execution. Doyle Brunson once said that in order to become a good poker player one must first lose the equivalent of a brand new Cadillac. And then, as I believe his quote implies, one can start from scratch. I certainly understand and appreciate his words due to my own experiences. It takes experience in order to understand what plan of action will work for you. As I have stated in previous posts, my main intent is to be up front and honest in the hopes that I may help – if only a single person – to become a better loser. Therefore, these ideas are those that I have adopted for myself. No, these are not original ideas.<o></o>
First of all, imagine that your bankroll is tied up in the day to day workings of Wall Street. After all, since we know that we’re going to be bettors for the long-term, we better think of this thing that we do as an investment and take it seriously. Otherwise, we’re going to keep putting our hard earned money into the books at a rate that is unsustainable over the long haul. The next thing we must do is understand our risk tolerance and the timeline we expect to meet our objective. I don’t think there are many bettors who are willing to nurse a betting bankroll for twenty years as they might nurse their retirement fund, and I think most bettors would be willing to agree that they are willing to take a little more risk with their betting bankroll than they would with their actual investments. After all, is this not what we gamble for?<o></o>
Now, how do we manage our bankroll? Do we make one bet a day, three, five, shit, maybe ten bets? How much do I wager on each bet in relation to my bankroll? Should I follow a handicapper or play my own games? How do I read the lines to know which games offer the best value? What is the most realistic win percentage I can hope to achieve no matter which formula I use? What criteria do I use to make one play larger than the next? Is the public really as bad as the public thinks it is? What, exactly, does maximize my winnings and minimize my losses mean? Does Vegas really set traps, and if so, how do I recognize these games? Did I actually, at one point in my life, think that Angelina Jolie was one hot motherfucker? Thanks for ruining her for me Octo-Mom.<o></o>
Since it is fresh in my mind, I would like to concentrate the rest of this post on the next to last question above in regards to whether or not Vegas sets traps. Hopefully, the length of my posts – or the content – will not keep those who have different opinions from replying to my ideas. After all, there are plenty of folks on this site much smarter than me and I welcome your feedback. I will tackle the other questions at a later time. At this point, if you have heeded my words, you will still have a bankroll and give a shit when I do. So does Vegas set traps, and if so, what is a trap? Yes, I do believe that Vegas sets traps. Since I believe that, then what is a trap?
Again, as I have stated before I do not wish to insult anyone’s intelligence, but I am trying to lay the groundwork for my argument so please bear with me. A trap, in my opinion, is simply this: to manufacture a line with enough of a margin of error so that the public will bet heavily on one side and the books can adjust accordingly without risking its initial stance. In fact, a trap is set when the books can release a line that they can adjust to follow the public and be obvious about it when doing so! Remember folks, Vegas is no fool. The guys who set the lines know more and have many more resources at their disposal than you and me.<o></o>
The game that I want to use as my example is Oklahoma/Missouri. My initial thoughts, as a Sooner fan and someone who follows the Big 12, was that the line would be anywhere from a PK to -3 (for either side). When someone stated in the Service Plays forum that <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comffice:smarttags" /><st1:State w:st="on"><st1lace w:st="on">Missouri</st1lace></st1:State> was -5 I was all over OU. +5 for either side seemed like a gift. The next morning when my brother (not a bettor, just a fan) texted me and asked about the game, I was suddenly wondering what the hell was going on. I told him that I thought the public would have been all over OU at -1 to -3 (the public rarely backs home dawgs) and MU would have been reasonable to gain public support at -1 to -3, but why the hell were they -5? (My brother had no idea what I was talking about). It was obvious to me the world would back the Sooners at that price. When I got to my place I saw that 80% of the public was backing the Sooners, and not only that, it was the most heavily bet game of the day in relation to the number of bets placed. Then I saw that the price had dropped to 4 in most places; I texted my brother back and told him the line had moved too predictably in OU’s favor; again, he didn’t know what I was talking about and I think he might’ve gotten a little pissed off at my skepticism on OU winning the game. In closing: 1) an opening line that at first seemed too easy 2) the vast majority of the public felt the same 3) it was the most heavily bet game of the day in all sports 4) the line moved almost too easily in support of the public 5) the public, as evidenced in the joy of these forums on Monday and Tuesday, was due for a letdown. The only thing that made little sense to me was that it seemed most handicappers were on MU, yet the public percentages changed hardly at all. Usually, you can count on the public betting to mirror the handicappers the public follows. No, I did not lose money on the OU game because I don’t bet Sooner games due to superstition; hopefully my brother will answer my phone calls tomorrow.<o></o>
So how do we identify games that we might consider traps? Individually, we do not follow enough teams to have a legitimate feeling for very many games. We may think we do, but we don’t. Plus, it’s hard to go against our gut. And, as in my case, my strongest gut feelings are going to involve the game I am not willing to bet on one way or another. Since I doubt more than 50 people will read this post, let me make this suggestion: check out the forums for the posters who have names like soonerdawg who think they have stumbled upon a gem. Chances are they are reacting to a line they have put little thought into. Chances are they follow that conference closer than you. Chances are they are reacting to a line tailor made for them. Is it any wonder so many posters lose their big plays? Once you have identified these games (there are, no doubt, posters whose plays you respect; I am referencing those short term posters who pop up from out of nowhere), look at the public numbers. Is the public heavy on the same side? Has the line moved a half point to a point to accommodate the public betting? After doing your own research, does the initial Vegas line make sense to you? If the answers are all yes, then there’s a great chance that not only have you stumbled upon the trap, but you’ve been able to turn it against your enemy. There’s a little more to it than this, but I will get to that….<o></o>
fficeffice" /><o></o>We have a good set of objectives, but what we need is a solid plan of execution. Doyle Brunson once said that in order to become a good poker player one must first lose the equivalent of a brand new Cadillac. And then, as I believe his quote implies, one can start from scratch. I certainly understand and appreciate his words due to my own experiences. It takes experience in order to understand what plan of action will work for you. As I have stated in previous posts, my main intent is to be up front and honest in the hopes that I may help – if only a single person – to become a better loser. Therefore, these ideas are those that I have adopted for myself. No, these are not original ideas.<o
></o>First of all, imagine that your bankroll is tied up in the day to day workings of Wall Street. After all, since we know that we’re going to be bettors for the long-term, we better think of this thing that we do as an investment and take it seriously. Otherwise, we’re going to keep putting our hard earned money into the books at a rate that is unsustainable over the long haul. The next thing we must do is understand our risk tolerance and the timeline we expect to meet our objective. I don’t think there are many bettors who are willing to nurse a betting bankroll for twenty years as they might nurse their retirement fund, and I think most bettors would be willing to agree that they are willing to take a little more risk with their betting bankroll than they would with their actual investments. After all, is this not what we gamble for?<o
></o>Now, how do we manage our bankroll? Do we make one bet a day, three, five, shit, maybe ten bets? How much do I wager on each bet in relation to my bankroll? Should I follow a handicapper or play my own games? How do I read the lines to know which games offer the best value? What is the most realistic win percentage I can hope to achieve no matter which formula I use? What criteria do I use to make one play larger than the next? Is the public really as bad as the public thinks it is? What, exactly, does maximize my winnings and minimize my losses mean? Does Vegas really set traps, and if so, how do I recognize these games? Did I actually, at one point in my life, think that Angelina Jolie was one hot motherfucker? Thanks for ruining her for me Octo-Mom.<o
></o>Since it is fresh in my mind, I would like to concentrate the rest of this post on the next to last question above in regards to whether or not Vegas sets traps. Hopefully, the length of my posts – or the content – will not keep those who have different opinions from replying to my ideas. After all, there are plenty of folks on this site much smarter than me and I welcome your feedback. I will tackle the other questions at a later time. At this point, if you have heeded my words, you will still have a bankroll and give a shit when I do. So does Vegas set traps, and if so, what is a trap? Yes, I do believe that Vegas sets traps. Since I believe that, then what is a trap?
Again, as I have stated before I do not wish to insult anyone’s intelligence, but I am trying to lay the groundwork for my argument so please bear with me. A trap, in my opinion, is simply this: to manufacture a line with enough of a margin of error so that the public will bet heavily on one side and the books can adjust accordingly without risking its initial stance. In fact, a trap is set when the books can release a line that they can adjust to follow the public and be obvious about it when doing so! Remember folks, Vegas is no fool. The guys who set the lines know more and have many more resources at their disposal than you and me.<o
></o>The game that I want to use as my example is Oklahoma/Missouri. My initial thoughts, as a Sooner fan and someone who follows the Big 12, was that the line would be anywhere from a PK to -3 (for either side). When someone stated in the Service Plays forum that <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
ffice:smarttags" /><st1:State w:st="on"><st1lace w:st="on">Missouri</st1lace></st1:State> was -5 I was all over OU. +5 for either side seemed like a gift. The next morning when my brother (not a bettor, just a fan) texted me and asked about the game, I was suddenly wondering what the hell was going on. I told him that I thought the public would have been all over OU at -1 to -3 (the public rarely backs home dawgs) and MU would have been reasonable to gain public support at -1 to -3, but why the hell were they -5? (My brother had no idea what I was talking about). It was obvious to me the world would back the Sooners at that price. When I got to my place I saw that 80% of the public was backing the Sooners, and not only that, it was the most heavily bet game of the day in relation to the number of bets placed. Then I saw that the price had dropped to 4 in most places; I texted my brother back and told him the line had moved too predictably in OU’s favor; again, he didn’t know what I was talking about and I think he might’ve gotten a little pissed off at my skepticism on OU winning the game. In closing: 1) an opening line that at first seemed too easy 2) the vast majority of the public felt the same 3) it was the most heavily bet game of the day in all sports 4) the line moved almost too easily in support of the public 5) the public, as evidenced in the joy of these forums on Monday and Tuesday, was due for a letdown. The only thing that made little sense to me was that it seemed most handicappers were on MU, yet the public percentages changed hardly at all. Usually, you can count on the public betting to mirror the handicappers the public follows. No, I did not lose money on the OU game because I don’t bet Sooner games due to superstition; hopefully my brother will answer my phone calls tomorrow.<o></o>So how do we identify games that we might consider traps? Individually, we do not follow enough teams to have a legitimate feeling for very many games. We may think we do, but we don’t. Plus, it’s hard to go against our gut. And, as in my case, my strongest gut feelings are going to involve the game I am not willing to bet on one way or another. Since I doubt more than 50 people will read this post, let me make this suggestion: check out the forums for the posters who have names like soonerdawg who think they have stumbled upon a gem. Chances are they are reacting to a line they have put little thought into. Chances are they follow that conference closer than you. Chances are they are reacting to a line tailor made for them. Is it any wonder so many posters lose their big plays? Once you have identified these games (there are, no doubt, posters whose plays you respect; I am referencing those short term posters who pop up from out of nowhere), look at the public numbers. Is the public heavy on the same side? Has the line moved a half point to a point to accommodate the public betting? After doing your own research, does the initial Vegas line make sense to you? If the answers are all yes, then there’s a great chance that not only have you stumbled upon the trap, but you’ve been able to turn it against your enemy. There’s a little more to it than this, but I will get to that….<o
></o>
