I hate these conversations but maybe I need to open my eyes. Fact: public money on Denver (can't deny) And then I see that Vegas has won 21 out of the last 23 SB straight up. So, is that enough to realize that Seattle should be the pick? I'm on Denver and will not back off, but I'm also not betting large. But I'm curious to hear other views. What are your thoughts. If you can't add anything of substance please refrain ftom posting anything negative or immature. Thanks.
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
I hate these conversations but maybe I need to open my eyes. Fact: public money on Denver (can't deny) And then I see that Vegas has won 21 out of the last 23 SB straight up. So, is that enough to realize that Seattle should be the pick? I'm on Denver and will not back off, but I'm also not betting large. But I'm curious to hear other views. What are your thoughts. If you can't add anything of substance please refrain ftom posting anything negative or immature. Thanks.
I think Vegas clearly knows who the public will bet on, especially the SB. The SB brings many many many betters to the table that probably have never bet on a game before and I would gather most of those newbies will be all over the media favorite, in this case Team Manning...or the Broncos.
In fact if you look at past SB 'a it seems the public favorite is usually the favorite in the big game.
0
I think Vegas clearly knows who the public will bet on, especially the SB. The SB brings many many many betters to the table that probably have never bet on a game before and I would gather most of those newbies will be all over the media favorite, in this case Team Manning...or the Broncos.
In fact if you look at past SB 'a it seems the public favorite is usually the favorite in the big game.
people on this forum think they way smarter than the public. why? because we're degenerate gamblers who post on a gambling forum? Vegas will make enough profit from prop bets, etc to still rake in a ton of $$. they don't NEED seattle to win. rest assured, Vegas will be okay regardless of the outcome. but I've noticed a lot of people on this forum are taking Seattle simply because that's where the "smart money" is and because they're fading the public. lot of Seattle backers claiming the hawks will be a pick em or even a slight favorite by game time. I guarantee that doesn't happen. and if fading the public worked every time or even more than half, then why not retire and make a living betting on the opposite side the public is on in every sporting event everyday of the week? it's just silly. bet who you think has the best chance to win or cover the game.
0
people on this forum think they way smarter than the public. why? because we're degenerate gamblers who post on a gambling forum? Vegas will make enough profit from prop bets, etc to still rake in a ton of $$. they don't NEED seattle to win. rest assured, Vegas will be okay regardless of the outcome. but I've noticed a lot of people on this forum are taking Seattle simply because that's where the "smart money" is and because they're fading the public. lot of Seattle backers claiming the hawks will be a pick em or even a slight favorite by game time. I guarantee that doesn't happen. and if fading the public worked every time or even more than half, then why not retire and make a living betting on the opposite side the public is on in every sporting event everyday of the week? it's just silly. bet who you think has the best chance to win or cover the game.
people on this forum think they way smarter than the public. why? because we're degenerate gamblers who post on a gambling forum? Vegas will make enough profit from prop bets, etc to still rake in a ton of $$. they don't NEED seattle to win. rest assured, Vegas will be okay regardless of the outcome. but I've noticed a lot of people on this forum are taking Seattle simply because that's where the "smart money" is and because they're fading the public. lot of Seattle backers claiming the hawks will be a pick em or even a slight favorite by game time. I guarantee that doesn't happen. and if fading the public worked every time or even more than half, then why not retire and make a living betting on the opposite side the public is on in every sporting event everyday of the week? it's just silly. bet who you think has the best chance to win or cover the game.
lol @ using logic!
0
Quote Originally Posted by Mangowoman:
people on this forum think they way smarter than the public. why? because we're degenerate gamblers who post on a gambling forum? Vegas will make enough profit from prop bets, etc to still rake in a ton of $$. they don't NEED seattle to win. rest assured, Vegas will be okay regardless of the outcome. but I've noticed a lot of people on this forum are taking Seattle simply because that's where the "smart money" is and because they're fading the public. lot of Seattle backers claiming the hawks will be a pick em or even a slight favorite by game time. I guarantee that doesn't happen. and if fading the public worked every time or even more than half, then why not retire and make a living betting on the opposite side the public is on in every sporting event everyday of the week? it's just silly. bet who you think has the best chance to win or cover the game.
Do you know why there are so many prop bets? Its because the HOLD on them is about 86%. To put it plainly...if thousands of people ran up to you giving you money for two weeks and you got to keep 86% without worrying who won what...you would be filthy rich my friend!!! this is a huge numbers game....Vegas Wins!
0
Do you know why there are so many prop bets? Its because the HOLD on them is about 86%. To put it plainly...if thousands of people ran up to you giving you money for two weeks and you got to keep 86% without worrying who won what...you would be filthy rich my friend!!! this is a huge numbers game....Vegas Wins!
Thanks guys, I truly hate this conversation myself, as the public does win more than occasionally, so in turn that would make them sharps, lol...which makes no sense.
Anyway, the part that got me was Vegas winning 21of 23.
I guess i need to research that to see if it is true.
I read it on the internet so it has to be true, lol.
Thanks guys, I truly hate this conversation myself, as the public does win more than occasionally, so in turn that would make them sharps, lol...which makes no sense.
Anyway, the part that got me was Vegas winning 21of 23.
I guess i need to research that to see if it is true.
I read it on the internet so it has to be true, lol.
TONYROMO the house ALWAYS WIN IN THE END.FACT...........BUT LIKE YOU IVE BEEN SAYIN DENVER SINCE WEEK 10 ISH?DENVER WILL WIN.....THE NAMMATH QUOTE...EXCEPT ITS THE RCW SAYIN..GOODLUCK 2 EVERY1
0
TONYROMO the house ALWAYS WIN IN THE END.FACT...........BUT LIKE YOU IVE BEEN SAYIN DENVER SINCE WEEK 10 ISH?DENVER WILL WIN.....THE NAMMATH QUOTE...EXCEPT ITS THE RCW SAYIN..GOODLUCK 2 EVERY1
I agree with all of the above comments for the most part. First and foremost...yes Vegas cleans up on the props - no doubt, so essentially no big deal who wins. But that doesn't mean Vegas always has even close to even money on both sides for various reasons. I would also clarify that there are three parties here...BOOK, SHARPS, and PUBLIC. None of the three parties have uniform beliefs but there usually is a consensus from each. Based on opening line and movements to date...I'm guessing the consensus from each is BOOK = EVEN, SHARPS = SEA -2, PUBLIC = DEN -3+. Denver could win by 3 TDs, who knows.
But to the previous comment from Mangowoman (who shared some good stuff & I am too a fellow degen)..."and if fading the public worked every time or even more than half, then why not retire and make a living betting on the opposite side the public is on in every sporting event everyday of the week? it's just silly. bet who you think has the best chance to win or cover the game."
IMHO I think that's a little extreme. Good betters, even the pros or sharps, lose a lot obviously. But the name of the game is about getting value. For example, Gronk getting injured (which is a regular thing these days) affects the line by 1/2 point by the pros & books. But the public would likely put a much larger premium on that. Also the public tends to put a recency bias on what they saw last week, over-value the QB position & still positions, undervalue the line play, etc.
If you get a point or two of value in your bets, then you theoretically should win more than half most of the time at least over the course of a season. It just takes 52.5% to breakeven, right?
I am taking Seattle simply because I think there is some value there, because that's the pro side. I have found no better system to fall back on. But it has to be done with consistancy. Best rule of thumb- take the side that you can best live with WHEN you lose....
0
I agree with all of the above comments for the most part. First and foremost...yes Vegas cleans up on the props - no doubt, so essentially no big deal who wins. But that doesn't mean Vegas always has even close to even money on both sides for various reasons. I would also clarify that there are three parties here...BOOK, SHARPS, and PUBLIC. None of the three parties have uniform beliefs but there usually is a consensus from each. Based on opening line and movements to date...I'm guessing the consensus from each is BOOK = EVEN, SHARPS = SEA -2, PUBLIC = DEN -3+. Denver could win by 3 TDs, who knows.
But to the previous comment from Mangowoman (who shared some good stuff & I am too a fellow degen)..."and if fading the public worked every time or even more than half, then why not retire and make a living betting on the opposite side the public is on in every sporting event everyday of the week? it's just silly. bet who you think has the best chance to win or cover the game."
IMHO I think that's a little extreme. Good betters, even the pros or sharps, lose a lot obviously. But the name of the game is about getting value. For example, Gronk getting injured (which is a regular thing these days) affects the line by 1/2 point by the pros & books. But the public would likely put a much larger premium on that. Also the public tends to put a recency bias on what they saw last week, over-value the QB position & still positions, undervalue the line play, etc.
If you get a point or two of value in your bets, then you theoretically should win more than half most of the time at least over the course of a season. It just takes 52.5% to breakeven, right?
I am taking Seattle simply because I think there is some value there, because that's the pro side. I have found no better system to fall back on. But it has to be done with consistancy. Best rule of thumb- take the side that you can best live with WHEN you lose....
I guess sports interaction is getting hammered by a Hawks backers at +3 so they moved it to Den -2.5 again. That goes to show that Den is not a public team...Hawks backers going to open the floodgate closer to game day cause they are waiting for the right value. There's still a garbage load of $ sitting offshore and these sites know their inventory.
They know exactly what they are doing with the spread...and who knows, once the final bet is accumulated, Hawks may be a public team lol
0
I guess sports interaction is getting hammered by a Hawks backers at +3 so they moved it to Den -2.5 again. That goes to show that Den is not a public team...Hawks backers going to open the floodgate closer to game day cause they are waiting for the right value. There's still a garbage load of $ sitting offshore and these sites know their inventory.
They know exactly what they are doing with the spread...and who knows, once the final bet is accumulated, Hawks may be a public team lol
interesting article.. thanks for sharing. not sure I buy this... “It’s the only line that we make for the entire year that is geared towards the betting public,” said Jay Kornegay, the director of the sports book at LVH — Las Vegas Hotel and Casino. “Most of the betting public are just your average Joes that are just fans and doing it for entertainment on a weekly basis. They will overrun any type of sharp money that we will take on the Super Bowl.”
so all the other lines they make aren't for the betting public???
0
interesting article.. thanks for sharing. not sure I buy this... “It’s the only line that we make for the entire year that is geared towards the betting public,” said Jay Kornegay, the director of the sports book at LVH — Las Vegas Hotel and Casino. “Most of the betting public are just your average Joes that are just fans and doing it for entertainment on a weekly basis. They will overrun any type of sharp money that we will take on the Super Bowl.”
so all the other lines they make aren't for the betting public???
Its the only game that the public has significanlty more money to offer than the pros. The pros don't care about this game anymore than the basketball game on earlier that day. If there's perceived value, they take it. On the other extreme when Rutgers plays Syracuse at noon on a Saturday, the public can't come close to the professional money- if the pros like that game.
0
Its the only game that the public has significanlty more money to offer than the pros. The pros don't care about this game anymore than the basketball game on earlier that day. If there's perceived value, they take it. On the other extreme when Rutgers plays Syracuse at noon on a Saturday, the public can't come close to the professional money- if the pros like that game.
"Vegas has won 21 out of the last 23 SB straight up".
*what they meant to say is that Vegas has won money in 21 of last 23 ...as far as 'picking the winner' .... they're 33-14 SU...but have only hit 6 of last 12.....(if that's what you were talking about)
note: based on closing lines...couldn't find openers...but the same in most every case
The impediment to action advances action - what stands in the way becomes the way.
0
"Vegas has won 21 out of the last 23 SB straight up".
*what they meant to say is that Vegas has won money in 21 of last 23 ...as far as 'picking the winner' .... they're 33-14 SU...but have only hit 6 of last 12.....(if that's what you were talking about)
note: based on closing lines...couldn't find openers...but the same in most every case
Thanks guys, I truly hate this conversation myself, as the public does win more than occasionally, so in turn that would make them sharps, lol...which makes no sense.
Anyway, the part that got me was Vegas winning 21of 23.
I guess i need to research that to see if it is true.
I read it on the internet so it has to be true, lol.
Winning in 21 of 23 I'm pretty sure that is overall, including props and such, not just the games.
The house got buried on GB VS Pats in 97, the line opened GB -13.5 and some books opened Pats +15.
The line closed on 14 so the books lost every-which way.
The books lost on Rams opening at -7.5 VS Titans and closing at 7, all those Titans players won while everyone else pushed.
I was in Vegas for those championship and SB's.
The money also came-in on Denver VS GB when Denver won outright.
Vegas has lost on the game before so they must be referring to overall take.
0
Quote Originally Posted by tonyrome:
Thanks guys, I truly hate this conversation myself, as the public does win more than occasionally, so in turn that would make them sharps, lol...which makes no sense.
Anyway, the part that got me was Vegas winning 21of 23.
I guess i need to research that to see if it is true.
I read it on the internet so it has to be true, lol.
Public and Sharp play was Denver at pick. It wasn't until the line hit 3 that Seahawks started seeing action. Public may be all over Denver, but that doesn't mean the money is on Denver.
We could definitely see 70% of the public betting on Denver, but 70% of the money on Seattle.
If you ask me, it was a serious miscalculation when the line opened at pick.
Everyone and their mother knew that Denver was the play at pick. Now at three points, they started convincing people to play the Seahawks? Seems odd to me.
My opinion, this game should be at 7 in favor of the Broncos.
0
Public and Sharp play was Denver at pick. It wasn't until the line hit 3 that Seahawks started seeing action. Public may be all over Denver, but that doesn't mean the money is on Denver.
We could definitely see 70% of the public betting on Denver, but 70% of the money on Seattle.
If you ask me, it was a serious miscalculation when the line opened at pick.
Everyone and their mother knew that Denver was the play at pick. Now at three points, they started convincing people to play the Seahawks? Seems odd to me.
My opinion, this game should be at 7 in favor of the Broncos.
Public and Sharp play was Denver at pick. It wasn't until the line hit 3 that Seahawks started seeing action. Public may be all over Denver, but that doesn't mean the money is on Denver.
We could definitely see 70% of the public betting on Denver, but 70% of the money on Seattle.
If you ask me, it was a serious miscalculation when the line opened at pick.
Everyone and their mother knew that Denver was the play at pick. Now at three points, they started convincing people to play the Seahawks? Seems odd to me.
My opinion, this game should be at 7 in favor of the Broncos.
Not sure what you are basing the 7 point line on. With all due respect, smart money would empty their bank accounts with anything over 3. Anything can happen in a game that is probably close to a coin flip, but it doesn't sound like you are being objective.
And you are wrong about smart and public jumped on the early line. It was all public -- which is actually public information. The sharps laid off the line because they knew they would get more value when bettors like yourself jumped on it and it rose to 2.5.
Again remember there is A LOT more public money on MOST super bowls. This is just another game to the Sharps. They care just as much about the Cavs-Nets game in the afternoon. They seek value/opportunity. But the public sees this as the big game that they have to bet. Therefore there is a lot more influence by the public -- especially so far.
0
Quote Originally Posted by FadeThisXen:
Public and Sharp play was Denver at pick. It wasn't until the line hit 3 that Seahawks started seeing action. Public may be all over Denver, but that doesn't mean the money is on Denver.
We could definitely see 70% of the public betting on Denver, but 70% of the money on Seattle.
If you ask me, it was a serious miscalculation when the line opened at pick.
Everyone and their mother knew that Denver was the play at pick. Now at three points, they started convincing people to play the Seahawks? Seems odd to me.
My opinion, this game should be at 7 in favor of the Broncos.
Not sure what you are basing the 7 point line on. With all due respect, smart money would empty their bank accounts with anything over 3. Anything can happen in a game that is probably close to a coin flip, but it doesn't sound like you are being objective.
And you are wrong about smart and public jumped on the early line. It was all public -- which is actually public information. The sharps laid off the line because they knew they would get more value when bettors like yourself jumped on it and it rose to 2.5.
Again remember there is A LOT more public money on MOST super bowls. This is just another game to the Sharps. They care just as much about the Cavs-Nets game in the afternoon. They seek value/opportunity. But the public sees this as the big game that they have to bet. Therefore there is a lot more influence by the public -- especially so far.
Leafs to believe this will be a very tight Super Bowl.. Tons of money on broncos definitely outweighing hawks money, yet line wont move to 3... Interesting to say the least
0
Leafs to believe this will be a very tight Super Bowl.. Tons of money on broncos definitely outweighing hawks money, yet line wont move to 3... Interesting to say the least
This Line opened at Seattle -1 @ Mirage!! As soon as it opened, Billy Walters played 250,000 on Denver +1 and completely swung the line around. So Far, the books are 2-1 money high on Denver but haven't wanted to move from 2.5 because they know late Seattle Money is coming no matter what. That's why its Denver -2.5 -120, -115 depending on where you get it. Good Luck folks
0
This Line opened at Seattle -1 @ Mirage!! As soon as it opened, Billy Walters played 250,000 on Denver +1 and completely swung the line around. So Far, the books are 2-1 money high on Denver but haven't wanted to move from 2.5 because they know late Seattle Money is coming no matter what. That's why its Denver -2.5 -120, -115 depending on where you get it. Good Luck folks
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.
Hot Forum Topics
