They try to win as much money as possible. To win the most money possible they want more money bet on the team that loses against the spread. How many games do you think are even close to 50/50?

 

So when the line is placed... are they predicting the outcome of the game? What?

So when the line is placed... are they predicting the outcome of the game? What?

 

Partly. I read an article a while back that for NCAA football games the company that sets the lines ranks the 22 starters and a few special teams players w/ a number. All of the numbers are added up, home field and weather are factored and then they set the line. It comes out to somehting like 260-250 and the spread on a nuetral field w/ good weather would be 10. They do also look at what they think the bettors will bet and how much at what lines. It's really an interesting article, but I can't find it for the life of me.

From my understanding, they place the line to where they think they will get equal play on both sides. Why else would they move the line when people are betting heavily on one side?

From my understanding, they place the line to where they think they will get equal play on both sides. Why else would they move the line when people are betting heavily on one side?

 

Exactly. The juice is where the books are making their cabbage.

From my understanding, they place the line to where they think they will get equal play on both sides. Why else would they move the line when people are betting heavily on one side?

 

A lot of people think that and it is partly the case, but they rarely get equal play. Very rarely. They win more than they lose though.

Exactly. The juice is where the books are making their cabbage.

 

I'll ask you the same question I've asked others. How many times do you think they get equal play?

I'll ask you the same question I've asked others. How many times do you think they get equal play?

 

I don't know and I doubt that information is public. However, as was noted, if the books weren't trying to balance the ledger on both sides, why would point spreads ever be adjusted?

I'll ask you the same question I've asked others. How many times do you think they get equal play?

 

But they TRY to get equal play is the point.

I don't know and I doubt that information is public. However, as was noted, if the books weren't trying to balance the ledger on both sides, why would point spreads ever be adjusted?

 

B/c they get them wrong. The LVRJ has a lot of good articles about sports betting. Some of that info is public. I know that on the first 4 days of the NCAA tourney last year Harrah's in Vegas had their worst 4 days in the sports books history. At least that's what I was told by the manager when every favorite was covering and the games were going over.

I don't know and I doubt that information is public. However, as was noted, if the books weren't trying to balance the ledger on both sides, why would point spreads ever be adjusted?

 

:thumb:

But they TRY to get equal play is the point.

 

That's your opinion. I've researched this b/c of my "side job" and that just isn't the case.

B/c they get them wrong.

 

Nope. It's to cover their backside.

I have the same opinion on the Bengals as I do the Broncos... and that is I don't believe what I'm seeing. Consistency is what I'm looking for from the Bengals and if they continue compete and beat the big boys then they will make me a believer.

Nope. It's to cover their backside.

 

That's part of it, but it's delusional to think they don't try to make as much money as possible. Do they make more money collecting juice or if 60% of the bets are on the team that doesn't cover the spread?

No they aren't. What % of games do you think come close to 50/50?

 

The line is in place to get equal amounts of bettors on each side. Of course that doesn't always work out and that is why the line moves.