All Forums | College Basketball

Strong WTF Cali/Wyoming game

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 1702
Posts: 35
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2013
Posts: 120
Posted: #26
Quote Originally Posted by KiefferJDs1:

It may not be "fixed", but it is downright ridiculous how f*ckin sharp these linesmakers are, regardless of how bad they f*ck up the total.


But how sharp are they when the over under is 120 and the two teams score 87 total? I am telling you and I know everyone hates it but bet unders. I used to love betting overs and would watch my money disappear quick. I decided to say screw it and take unders 90 percent of the time and it's the best decision I ever made. The public eats overs up. Unders are hard to take and I get it but it seems to work well.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2013
Posts: 6354
Posted: #27
Nscfsu- I wasn't referring to other sports before, but from what I have seen, linesmakers of college basketball spreads seem to be much more 'on the money' than other linesmakers of spreads in other sports.     Yes somehow they f*cked that total up (that did drop 2 points or so against the public), with the spread opening at 4 and dropping to 3.5 against the public before tip. 
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2006
Posts: 1746
Posted: #28
Quote Originally Posted by KiefferJDs1:

Nscfsu- I wasn't referring to other sports before, but from what I have seen, linesmakers of college basketball spreads seem to be much more 'on the money' than other linesmakers of spreads in other sports.     Yes somehow they f*cked that total up (that did drop 2 points or so against the public), with the spread opening at 4 and dropping to 3.5 against the public before tip. 


No this is completely a myth.  Just look at the past 2 days....on Tuesday on 1 out of 18 games stayed within 3 points (1possession) of the spread.  And yesterday, only 3 out of 24 games stayed within 3 points.  It's not even close and its like this every week.

Just look at covers scoreboard, they show how much a team covered the spread by.  It's easy to check and verify.  Linesmakers aren't trying to predict the score, they're trying to predict a line that will produce as much balance of betting on both sides as possible.  That's all they care about.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2013
Posts: 120
Posted: #29
I don't think linesmakers are any better at predicting scores than we are. I mean the numbers I use missed the San Antonio-NY Knicks score by one point last night and generally are close in about 3 out of every eight or nine games. Linesmakers however as the previous poster said are good at getting us to question where the game will end. Like I said they aren't any better at predicting than most of us are, but man can they get us to question ourselves once they release a line.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 8308
Posted: #30
Quote Originally Posted by Nscfsu:



But how sharp are they when the over under is 120 and the two teams score 87 total? I am telling you and I know everyone hates it but bet unders. I used to love betting overs and would watch my money disappear quick. I decided to say screw it and take unders 90 percent of the time and it's the best decision I ever made. The public eats overs up. Unders are hard to take and I get it but it seems to work well.

Here's something I don't understand...

Overwhelming number of people love betting overs. No doubt about this. But what is the actual reason? Entertainment? Higher scoring equals a better game? Or is it wishful thinking?

I'm inclined to believe that many of these bettors "want" the game to be high-scoring and entertaining, and cannot divorce these desires when it comes time to objectively cap the game. It's almost unfathomable to me that someone consistently makes bets based on what they want to happen rather than viewing the game through an untainted perspective.

Someone clue me in here, because I've never been able to understand this phenomenon.



.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 8308
Posted: #31
Also, RE: accuracy of CBB lines.

This is a relatively new development in the last few years, and it coincides directly with the KenPom rankings. It is almost impossible now to find a number more than four or five points off from the KenPom projection.

While KenPom is an unvaluable that I use pretty much every day, it has become both a blessing a curse. A few years ago, the books would toss out some blatantly BAD numbers, particularly on totals. Sharp bettors would attack the crap out of these numbers, often resulting in massive line moves. I remember a Buffalo/South Dakota State total a few years ago that opened at like 135 or something. I and a few others were expecting something north of 150. That total climbed about 12 points in less than 5 minutes.

Each year, we're seeing less and less of this, and the amazing accuracy or KenPom is largely to blame.

 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2013
Posts: 199
Posted: #32
JFen, 

BINGO

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2013
Posts: 120
Posted: #33
Quote Originally Posted by JFen31:

Quote Originally Posted by Nscfsu:

But how sharp are they when the over under is 120 and the two teams score 87 total? I am telling you and I know everyone hates it but bet unders. I used to love betting overs and would watch my money disappear quick. I decided to say screw it and take unders 90 percent of the time and it's the best decision I ever made. The public eats overs up. Unders are hard to take and I get it but it seems to work well.
Here's something I don't understand...Overwhelming number of people love betting overs. No doubt about this. But what is the actual reason? Entertainment? Higher scoring equals a better game? Or is it wishful thinking?I'm inclined to believe that many of these bettors "want" the game to be high-scoring and entertaining, and cannot divorce these desires when it comes time to objectively cap the game. It's almost unfathomable to me that someone consistently makes bets based on what they want to happen rather than viewing the game through an untainted perspective.Someone clue me in here, because I've never been able to understand this phenomenon..


If I had to venture to guess I would say people don't generally like rooting for players to miss shots. At the same time as you mentioned low scoring games are inheritently boring and because of this people tend to take overs. Here is how I figure it. A lot of people think basketball is a fixed sport. Maybe it is maybe it isn't. We as public bettors will never know that. However in college basketball say the fix was to attain the over, well you are relying on less than stellar athletes in some cases who even if you call 55 fouls won't make enough free throws to cover the over.

It is for this reason and this reason alone that I stick to unders. Overs are fun but they have let me down in bunches where as unders have yet to lead me to a losing day regardless of what sport I choose to bet on.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2014
Posts: 432
Posted: #34
Quote Originally Posted by j-walk:

Quote Originally Posted by KiefferJDs1:

Nscfsu- I

wasn't referring to other sports before, but from what I have seen, linesmakers of college basketball spreads seem to be much more 'on the money' than other linesmakers of spreads in other sports.     Yes somehow they f*cked that total up (that did drop 2 points or so against the public), with the spread opening at 4 and dropping to 3.5 against the public before tip. 
No this is completely a myth.  Just look at the past 2 days....on Tuesday on 1 out of 18 games stayed within 3 points (1possession) of the spread.  And yesterday, only 3 out of 24 games stayed within 3 points.  It's not even close and its like this every week.Just look at covers scoreboard, they show how much a team covered the spread by.  It's easy to check and verify.  Linesmakers aren't trying to predict the score, they're trying to predict a line that will produce as much balance of betting on both sides as possible.  That's all they care about.


Just going off of this. That's not always true youbsee a line like 118 o/u they know something which means they set a line that's low and get 70% on a side they know will lose.

They try to get 50/50 most of the time but the 70/30 "rigged" games are where they make their money. Everyone please understand there is a story behind almost every betting line. Try to find it
 
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 8308
Posted: #35
Good discussion here.

OP, feel free to get involved. I promise that this will be more lucrative than making a bunch of threads every night lamenting your bad luck.

Here are the links I referenced on the previous page. Seth Davis is kind of a d*ckhead, but he raises a number of good points. The KenPom blog about the scoring decline is (I think) available to everyone, including non-subscribers. Kinda heavy on math, which is fine. The Clark Kellogg piece cuts more to the heart of the underlying issue. All are worthwhile reads.

https://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/the_slowest_season

https://www.si.com/college-basketball/2014/12/08/hoop-thoughts-zone-defense-ohio-state-njit-michigan

https://keepingscore.blogs.time.com/2013/03/13/why-is-college-basketball-scoring-in-decline-one-experts-take/





All Forums | College Basketball
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2024 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.