When this many dogs are wining straight up it means the book makers are way off on picking the winner of these games it makes teaser and money parlays probable losers and sucker bets.
You have to adjust the way you bet according to result ,the way its going so far you'll have a better chance making a profit betting individual games ATS .
GL
You come to the right conclusion through some faulty logic.
"Bookmakers" dont make the lines. Yes, they put out an initial line - but money makes the lines. It is the ultimate crowdsource. So bookmakers aren't off when a big favorite loses outright, the betting public is way off.
For the average bettor - you are always going to be better off betting straight bets rather than parlays and teasers. It is hard enough for the average bettor to know things like house hold on straights - for parlays and teasers it is just masked better and the average bettor has no clue they are paying way too much.
@Silverstones
Its always more profitable long term betting ATS. Sadly (myself included) betting teasers and/or parlays seem like better odds and safer (teasers) bets. But you are 100% right. Love to get Van to weigh in on this. I bet he has statistics going back a decade or more backing up exactly what you are saying.
Haha speak of the devil!
The lines are made on power rankings which change each week that's where the lines come from.and then the money moves the lines .
Just think If the lines were accurate all the time you could bet a 6 point teaser within a game and bet both teams in teasers on sides . and both the under and over on totals with teasers and win every time.. the books make more money when they are off like they have been so far.
Tonight's a good example how many ML parlays and teasers went down with Cincinnati.
Buffalo wins by 37 points line never comes into play no teasers going to help you with Jacksonville.
Cincinnati was # 1 pk in Circa survivor the 3rd week in a row the top pick went down.
Books cleaned up on ML parlays and teasers using Bengals tonight.
Not surprised with the Bengals if the Patriots with Brisett and that crap offense can beat them at home Jayden Daniels certainly can too.
Every weekend for years, i have been putting in a 100 parlays on Sundays, 3 biggest money lines dogs,parlay. Have posted this.
It has hit at least 2X a year for last 15 years?
I hit 2X this year so far.
i for +K
1 for 3+K
I will be up min 8+K this year
respectfully disagree with respect to 2 team 6pt teasers. Wong was ahead of the curve and books have been beaten hugely by those who know that,hence a big
increase in the vig.............................gl
There are holes in the market that can be exploited... Evidence: According to my database, nearly 20 percent of all NFL regular season games, from 2021 through 2023, have an ATS winner margin of victory of 17 or more (158 times in 815 regular season games).
Why and who's inefficient is a combination of both. The Public plays a much larger role both directly and indirectly. From the wagers they place to the linemakers exploitation of their biases, the Public plays a role. The linemakers exploitation of the "Public" is one of their weaknesses for the savvy investor. Simultaneously, it is the smart, profitable business decision for the books.
Week 3 in a 17 week season You are jumping to conclusions
The sharps I follow use power ratings which measure team strength and their lines are very close to the books line sometimes off by only 1 pt. The sharp will back that 1 point difference.
I think the score being way off the line most of the time is just how football goes. Sometimes teams are better or worse then anyone could perceive, including books or sharps.
Books have to protect against sharp money because they will throw 1000's on a game if the line is way off.
They do fade lines based on big Public teams but the line being shaded is not all that much. It is not like 5.5 pts so shading the line is not responsible for these big upsets or even smaller dogs winning.
It is just the way football goes sometimes.
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
