rockaction
Footballguy
Bumping this back to the top. I think it can be a super interesting topic.
Especially as it relates to how we take the lines set by the books and predict the game outcome.
Heck of a bump.
Bumping this back to the top. I think it can be a super interesting topic.
Especially as it relates to how we take the lines set by the books and predict the game outcome.
I agree - it did throw me for a loop that it was from 2008, but it's an interesting subject that I'm forever fascinated by.No, I meant it. I read the thread and learned something. It's a nice primer.
it is almost as if vegas is financially incentivised to get the most accurate analysis they can of what they think the result of a game will be
Places are free to set their own linesit is almost as if vegas is financially incentivised to get the most accurate analysis they can of what they think the result of a game will be
To me, that was always the question. Who’s setting the lines across the board and what is to keep others from setting other lines?
Also one of the reasons most of us prefer contests (including FF) against other people instead of betting against the house.
Of course all books are free to set their own lines but most don't. In the sports betting world, just like in the stock market, there are market makers. There's a handful of large books that specialize in specific sports. There are different market makers for the NFL, College football, College basketball, soccer, professional darts, etc. Typically the way it works for the NFL, is the market makers will release their initial lines fpr the following week right after the 4:00 Sunday games but they'll just release them to a small number of high volume clients (with betting limits). Based on how those bets come in they will adjust their lines then release them to the rest of the world. The retail books will follow the market makers.Places are free to set their own linesit is almost as if vegas is financially incentivised to get the most accurate analysis they can of what they think the result of a game will be
To me, that was always the question. Who’s setting the lines across the board and what is to keep others from setting other lines?
Also one of the reasons most of us prefer contests (including FF) against other people instead of betting against the house.
Like playing blackjack vs playing poker.it is almost as if vegas is financially incentivised to get the most accurate analysis they can of what they think the result of a game will be
To me, that was always the question. Who’s setting the lines across the board and what is to keep others from setting other lines?
Also one of the reasons most of us prefer contests (including FF) against other people instead of betting against the house.
Even if it doesn't, they're still going to be way ahead on craps, roulette, the money wheel, slots, and blackjack.There have been years where the books took a beating on the super bowl but even that they know will even out over the long run.
I don't agree at all.Of course all books are free to set their own lines but most don't. In the sports betting world, just like in the stock market, there are market makers. There's a handful of large books that specialize in specific sports. There are different market makers for the NFL, College football, College basketball, soccer, professional darts, etc. Typically the way it works for the NFL, is the market makers will release their initial lines fpr the following week right after the 4:00 Sunday games but they'll just release them to a small number of high volume clients (with betting limits). Based on how those bets come in they will adjust their lines then release them to the rest of the world. The retail books will follow the market makers.Places are free to set their own linesit is almost as if vegas is financially incentivised to get the most accurate analysis they can of what they think the result of a game will be
To me, that was always the question. Who’s setting the lines across the board and what is to keep others from setting other lines?
Also one of the reasons most of us prefer contests (including FF) against other people instead of betting against the house.
The idea that they're always trying to get an equal number of bets on both sides of every game is not really correct. They're thinking long term. They know their process is correct. Some games they'll take a beating, some games they'll win big but they'll always collect the juice and over the long run the games will even out. About the only time they stress about it is the Super bowl. There have been years where the books took a beating on the super bowl but even that they know will even out over the long run.
I've done really well lately betting money lines in-game.
The KU Jayhawks are damn near a money machine - they are favored in a lot of games. But they have been known to go down 8-10 points early in a game, and when that happens the odds will flip and they will become dogs and I can get plus money for them
This weekend they were down at half by 15 and I got +340 on them. They were at Allen Field House and they ALWAYS go on a run in the second half. Which they did again and won.
But this works a lot in college basketball. Have had some good luck this year on that.
That's why Vegas loves gamblers. Farrrrr too many lose money cause they start betting more. They may win more bets than they lose, but always end up losing what they have.I've done really well lately betting money lines in-game.
The KU Jayhawks are damn near a money machine - they are favored in a lot of games. But they have been known to go down 8-10 points early in a game, and when that happens the odds will flip and they will become dogs and I can get plus money for them
This weekend they were down at half by 15 and I got +340 on them. They were at Allen Field House and they ALWAYS go on a run in the second half. Which they did again and won.
But this works a lot in college basketball. Have had some good luck this year on that.
The only problem with things like this is you have to be careful because you get more and more confident and the bets get larger and larger and then when the trend turns, it's usually when you have the largest bets in.
That's what happened to me this year with the Bucs and Brady. They went on that run where Brady just didn't bother showing up until the 4th quarter and the Bucs would have 3 points through the first 3 quarters and then mount some big comeback in the 4th. So made a little money on that, but then eventually got to a game where as usual they were down at halftime, threw in a bet, they fell further behind in the 3rd, kept adding more and more at better and better odds, and then that week the run never came and all the winnings were wrapped up in that game.
Yeah, definitely on both counts.That's why Vegas loves gamblers. Farrrrr too many lose money cause they start betting more. They may win more bets than they lose, but always end up losing what they have.I've done really well lately betting money lines in-game.
The KU Jayhawks are damn near a money machine - they are favored in a lot of games. But they have been known to go down 8-10 points early in a game, and when that happens the odds will flip and they will become dogs and I can get plus money for them
This weekend they were down at half by 15 and I got +340 on them. They were at Allen Field House and they ALWAYS go on a run in the second half. Which they did again and won.
But this works a lot in college basketball. Have had some good luck this year on that.
The only problem with things like this is you have to be careful because you get more and more confident and the bets get larger and larger and then when the trend turns, it's usually when you have the largest bets in.
That's what happened to me this year with the Bucs and Brady. They went on that run where Brady just didn't bother showing up until the 4th quarter and the Bucs would have 3 points through the first 3 quarters and then mount some big comeback in the 4th. So made a little money on that, but then eventually got to a game where as usual they were down at halftime, threw in a bet, they fell further behind in the 3rd, kept adding more and more at better and better odds, and then that week the run never came and all the winnings were wrapped up in that game.
Thats how addictions start. A small taste. For gambling an early win is the worst thing for you long term.Yeah, definitely on both counts.That's why Vegas loves gamblers. Farrrrr too many lose money cause they start betting more. They may win more bets than they lose, but always end up losing what they have.I've done really well lately betting money lines in-game.
The KU Jayhawks are damn near a money machine - they are favored in a lot of games. But they have been known to go down 8-10 points early in a game, and when that happens the odds will flip and they will become dogs and I can get plus money for them
This weekend they were down at half by 15 and I got +340 on them. They were at Allen Field House and they ALWAYS go on a run in the second half. Which they did again and won.
But this works a lot in college basketball. Have had some good luck this year on that.
The only problem with things like this is you have to be careful because you get more and more confident and the bets get larger and larger and then when the trend turns, it's usually when you have the largest bets in.
That's what happened to me this year with the Bucs and Brady. They went on that run where Brady just didn't bother showing up until the 4th quarter and the Bucs would have 3 points through the first 3 quarters and then mount some big comeback in the 4th. So made a little money on that, but then eventually got to a game where as usual they were down at halftime, threw in a bet, they fell further behind in the 3rd, kept adding more and more at better and better odds, and then that week the run never came and all the winnings were wrapped up in that game.
Most of my bets are small - $3 to $5. Kansas just got sports betting this last September, so I only put $50 in to try it out. So far I've more than doubled by money while learning how it all works.
If I ever lose my original stake I won't re-load - this is more for fun for me. I try to win small stakes to build the bankroll a few bucks at a time.
Heck of a bump.
Vegas doesn't like to lose money. There's more than one guy setting these lines. It's unlikely multiple guys will agree exactly how a game will go. However, I think they have a great chance to agree on how the public will bet, and set the line accordingly to try and guarantee that 5% rake of the total wagers placed.This always comes up in discussion for me to the question of: "Is Las Vegas trying to set the line so the money is as close to 50-50 as possible or are they setting the line to what they really think will happen?"
When you have super popular teams or very unpopular teams, I can see how they'd veer from what they think will actually happen if the goal was to keep it 50-50.
You're not really disagreeing with me. Of course they are trying to get as close to what they expect to be a 50/50 split when they set their initial lines. That's the reason for them opening it up to select regular clients early and adjusting the line accordingly. We also see lines get adjusted during the week but it takes a lot of money on one side for them to move the lines more than half a point or so. In the end there's almost always going to be more money on one side than the other especially since a high percentage of the money comes in on game day. Even in the Super Bowl this year there was more money bet on PHI so the books were happy when KC came back to win. If PHI would have covered, the books would have lost money. Sticking with their process is what makes them money over the long term.I don't agree at all.Of course all books are free to set their own lines but most don't. In the sports betting world, just like in the stock market, there are market makers. There's a handful of large books that specialize in specific sports. There are different market makers for the NFL, College football, College basketball, soccer, professional darts, etc. Typically the way it works for the NFL, is the market makers will release their initial lines fpr the following week right after the 4:00 Sunday games but they'll just release them to a small number of high volume clients (with betting limits). Based on how those bets come in they will adjust their lines then release them to the rest of the world. The retail books will follow the market makers.Places are free to set their own linesit is almost as if vegas is financially incentivised to get the most accurate analysis they can of what they think the result of a game will be
To me, that was always the question. Who’s setting the lines across the board and what is to keep others from setting other lines?
Also one of the reasons most of us prefer contests (including FF) against other people instead of betting against the house.
The idea that they're always trying to get an equal number of bets on both sides of every game is not really correct. They're thinking long term. They know their process is correct. Some games they'll take a beating, some games they'll win big but they'll always collect the juice and over the long run the games will even out. About the only time they stress about it is the Super bowl. There have been years where the books took a beating on the super bowl but even that they know will even out over the long run.
If every game resulted in the bookie making their 5% of the total amount wagered, they would be very, very happy.
Meaning, yeah, they set the lines hoping equal action on both sides, depending on moneyline odds and all that factored in
This always comes up in discussion for me to the question of: "Is Las Vegas trying to set the line so the money is as close to 50-50 as possible or are they setting the line to what they really think will happen?"
"Of course" they are trying to get as close to a 50/50 split?You're not really disagreeing with me. Of course they are trying to get as close to what they expect to be a 50/50 split when they set their initial lines. That's the reason for them opening it up to select regular clients early and adjusting the line accordingly. We also see lines get adjusted during the week but it takes a lot of money on one side for them to move the lines more than half a point or so. In the end there's almost always going to be more money on one side than the other especially since a high percentage of the money comes in on game day. Even in the Super Bowl this year there was more money bet on PHI so the books were happy when KC came back to win. If PHI would have covered, the books would have lost money. Sticking with their process is what makes them money over the long term.I don't agree at all.Of course all books are free to set their own lines but most don't. In the sports betting world, just like in the stock market, there are market makers. There's a handful of large books that specialize in specific sports. There are different market makers for the NFL, College football, College basketball, soccer, professional darts, etc. Typically the way it works for the NFL, is the market makers will release their initial lines fpr the following week right after the 4:00 Sunday games but they'll just release them to a small number of high volume clients (with betting limits). Based on how those bets come in they will adjust their lines then release them to the rest of the world. The retail books will follow the market makers.Places are free to set their own linesit is almost as if vegas is financially incentivised to get the most accurate analysis they can of what they think the result of a game will be
To me, that was always the question. Who’s setting the lines across the board and what is to keep others from setting other lines?
Also one of the reasons most of us prefer contests (including FF) against other people instead of betting against the house.
The idea that they're always trying to get an equal number of bets on both sides of every game is not really correct. They're thinking long term. They know their process is correct. Some games they'll take a beating, some games they'll win big but they'll always collect the juice and over the long run the games will even out. About the only time they stress about it is the Super bowl. There have been years where the books took a beating on the super bowl but even that they know will even out over the long run.
If every game resulted in the bookie making their 5% of the total amount wagered, they would be very, very happy.
Meaning, yeah, they set the lines hoping equal action on both sides, depending on moneyline odds and all that factored in
I imagine they do combine both, however, the line will more heavily favor towards what they think the public will bet rather than their own analysis."Of course" they are trying to get as close to a 50/50 split?You're not really disagreeing with me. Of course they are trying to get as close to what they expect to be a 50/50 split when they set their initial lines. That's the reason for them opening it up to select regular clients early and adjusting the line accordingly. We also see lines get adjusted during the week but it takes a lot of money on one side for them to move the lines more than half a point or so. In the end there's almost always going to be more money on one side than the other especially since a high percentage of the money comes in on game day. Even in the Super Bowl this year there was more money bet on PHI so the books were happy when KC came back to win. If PHI would have covered, the books would have lost money. Sticking with their process is what makes them money over the long term.I don't agree at all.Of course all books are free to set their own lines but most don't. In the sports betting world, just like in the stock market, there are market makers. There's a handful of large books that specialize in specific sports. There are different market makers for the NFL, College football, College basketball, soccer, professional darts, etc. Typically the way it works for the NFL, is the market makers will release their initial lines fpr the following week right after the 4:00 Sunday games but they'll just release them to a small number of high volume clients (with betting limits). Based on how those bets come in they will adjust their lines then release them to the rest of the world. The retail books will follow the market makers.Places are free to set their own linesit is almost as if vegas is financially incentivised to get the most accurate analysis they can of what they think the result of a game will be
To me, that was always the question. Who’s setting the lines across the board and what is to keep others from setting other lines?
Also one of the reasons most of us prefer contests (including FF) against other people instead of betting against the house.
The idea that they're always trying to get an equal number of bets on both sides of every game is not really correct. They're thinking long term. They know their process is correct. Some games they'll take a beating, some games they'll win big but they'll always collect the juice and over the long run the games will even out. About the only time they stress about it is the Super bowl. There have been years where the books took a beating on the super bowl but even that they know will even out over the long run.
If every game resulted in the bookie making their 5% of the total amount wagered, they would be very, very happy.
Meaning, yeah, they set the lines hoping equal action on both sides, depending on moneyline odds and all that factored in
Imagine you're the kind of guy (and I'm sure it's all guys) who decides to spend years doing big data analysis of game results and betting patterns so you can go be head oddsmaker for a huge Vegas casino. You run your model and it says that Detroit should be favored to beat Green Bay by 3 points, but to get 50/50 action you have to put the line at Detroit -5.
You're suggesting that the bookie is going to put the line at -5, which over time will lose him money (according to his model), because he's risk-averse and has a one-week time horizon?
That's hogwash.
Here's an analysis of Vegas lines on college games: The lines track the game results, which is not what you would expect if they're trying to balance wagering. (I assume that Vegas knows more about the game outcome probabilities than the general public.)
Vegas Always Knows? A Mathematical Deep Dive
People always say that "Vegas knows," but how does the spread really relate to the outcome of college football games?www.theonlycolors.com
“You know I'm born to loseThats how addictions start. A small taste. For gambling an early win is the worst thing for you long term.Yeah, definitely on both counts.That's why Vegas loves gamblers. Farrrrr too many lose money cause they start betting more. They may win more bets than they lose, but always end up losing what they have.I've done really well lately betting money lines in-game.
The KU Jayhawks are damn near a money machine - they are favored in a lot of games. But they have been known to go down 8-10 points early in a game, and when that happens the odds will flip and they will become dogs and I can get plus money for them
This weekend they were down at half by 15 and I got +340 on them. They were at Allen Field House and they ALWAYS go on a run in the second half. Which they did again and won.
But this works a lot in college basketball. Have had some good luck this year on that.
The only problem with things like this is you have to be careful because you get more and more confident and the bets get larger and larger and then when the trend turns, it's usually when you have the largest bets in.
That's what happened to me this year with the Bucs and Brady. They went on that run where Brady just didn't bother showing up until the 4th quarter and the Bucs would have 3 points through the first 3 quarters and then mount some big comeback in the 4th. So made a little money on that, but then eventually got to a game where as usual they were down at halftime, threw in a bet, they fell further behind in the 3rd, kept adding more and more at better and better odds, and then that week the run never came and all the winnings were wrapped up in that game.
Most of my bets are small - $3 to $5. Kansas just got sports betting this last September, so I only put $50 in to try it out. So far I've more than doubled by money while learning how it all works.
If I ever lose my original stake I won't re-load - this is more for fun for me. I try to win small stakes to build the bankroll a few bucks at a time.
I knew there was a reason I logged in today.A guy with a gambling problem walks into a butcher shop and says to the butcher, “I'll bet you $500 you can’t get that meat down from the top shelf without a ladder”
The butcher says, “I can’t take that bet, the steaks are too high".
AYou know I'm born to lose
And gambling's for fools
But that's the way I like it, baby
I don't want to live forever
And don't forget the joker
"Of course" they are trying to get as close to a 50/50 split?
Imagine you're the kind of guy (and I'm sure it's all guys) who decides to spend years doing big data analysis of game results and betting patterns so you can go be head oddsmaker for a huge Vegas casino. You run your model and it says that Detroit should be favored to beat Green Bay by 3 points, but to get 50/50 action you have to put the line at Detroit -5.
You're suggesting that the bookie is going to put the line at -5, which over time will lose him money (according to his model), because he's risk-averse and has a one-week time horizon?
That's hogwash.
Here's an analysis of Vegas lines on college games: The lines track the game results, which is not what you would expect if they're trying to balance wagering. (I assume that Vegas knows more about the game outcome probabilities than the general public.)
I think Vegas probably has a good idea of both how the game will go and how the public will bet. The 50/50 mythology asserts that, when they find a discrepancy between the two, that they set the line at what they think the public will bet, not how they think the game will go. For that to make logical sense you have to assume that that bookmaker in Vegas is worried that the public knows more than he does."Of course" they are trying to get as close to a 50/50 split?
Imagine you're the kind of guy (and I'm sure it's all guys) who decides to spend years doing big data analysis of game results and betting patterns so you can go be head oddsmaker for a huge Vegas casino. You run your model and it says that Detroit should be favored to beat Green Bay by 3 points, but to get 50/50 action you have to put the line at Detroit -5.
You're suggesting that the bookie is going to put the line at -5, which over time will lose him money (according to his model), because he's risk-averse and has a one-week time horizon?
That's hogwash.
Here's an analysis of Vegas lines on college games: The lines track the game results, which is not what you would expect if they're trying to balance wagering. (I assume that Vegas knows more about the game outcome probabilities than the general public.)
First, I find it's way more productive when discussing something, if discussion is the actual goal, to go super light on the "let's call the other sides's point 'hogwash' if we don't agree with it."
With that said, why do you think that? You think they have a better idea of how the game will go then they do how the public will bet?
Soooo, is the money wagered close to 50/50?I don't think there's evidence for the 50/50 mythology. And per the study I posted, Vegas lines (at least for college) track game results, which is not what you'd expect to see if they are setting lines to get 50/50 betting.
I think Vegas probably has a good idea of both how the game will go and how the public will bet. The 50/50 mythology asserts that, when they find a discrepancy between the two, that they set the line at what they think the public will bet, not how they think the game will go. For that to make logical sense you have to assume that that bookmaker in Vegas is worried that the public knows more than he does.
I don't think there's evidence for the 50/50 mythology. And per the study I posted, Vegas lines (at least for college) track game results, which is not what you'd expect to see if they are setting lines to get 50/50 betting.
Several very interesting questions result from this data. Does Vegas adjust the lines based on the known betting habits of certain fan bases? They almost certainly do, but I have never been able to detect any clear bias in the data. Also, it would certainly be very easy to do that for just a handful of games, and that data would just get swamped by all the other data. So, I just ignore this possibility. If I can’t measure it systematically, I don’t care about it.
Soooo, is the money wagered close to 50/50?I don't think there's evidence for the 50/50 mythology. And per the study I posted, Vegas lines (at least for college) track game results, which is not what you'd expect to see if they are setting lines to get 50/50 betting.
I realize that I kind of contradicted myself with the commercial break points. To clarify, always assume you are 30 seconds behind even if the reality is that it's less than that. Don't live bet when TV is coming out of a commercial break as the game has already restarted.As far as in game wagering goes, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER bet if the game is not at a commercial break, timeout etc. The books have live feeds, what we are seeing on TV or streaming is delayed and usually a play or two behind real time. Imagine you are watching on TV and the broadcast is coming back from a commercial break after an extra point. In real time the kickoff already happened and it was returned for a TD. You haven't seen that yet and live bet the team kicking off, you just got a line that's off by 7 points.
This is similar to race tracks.Another issue is the rake/vig that the book is taking depending on the bet type.
Sides/Totals are typically priced at -110 so the house make 5% on average
Teasers/parlays the house is taking a greater percentage, closer to 10%
Futures, the house has between a 30%-50% take. So if Mahomes is +300 to win the NFL MVP his "true" odds are around +$450