The Vegas Take

[OUSKINS]

First of all, by no means am I claiming to have any inside info here. But I've always enjoyed the Vegas side of sports and if you listen to the right people it can often provide insight. The public money is wrong more than right and the sharp money is right more than wrong. NEITHER is a sure bet or a "lock" and that's why it's called gambling. But whenever any of my teams in any sport is playing a big game I like to try to find out where the sharp money is going and how heavy.

And if it's a really low spread like our game with the Aggies then being on the right side of the spread more or less means the difference between an outright win or loss. I do know that a number of sharps liked OU has a value bet to win it all before the tourney given their odds.

However, sounds as if the sharp money is going on the Aggies for Thursday. It does NOT sound like this is a game they've pegged as a heavy play-- more of a "lean," but there does seem to be a consensus that the lean is to Texas A+M.

At OU -1.5, betting on the Aggies is obviously virtually betting on them to win the game. I wouldn't think anyone is placing their bet with the belief that OU will win by exactly one point.

Even the sharpest of sharps loses at least 35% of the time (probably more despite their claims) so this may not mean much of anything, but thought I'd share.

 

[MNsooner]

Interesting to know. I looked at some of the computer models which are favoring OU (as does the Vegas line). I think it'll close.

I'd certainly rather hear the insiders were leaning to OU, but at least it's not a heavy consensus. That being said, I think OU has rarely beat the spread this season. If I were a better I'd avoid betting on OU except in a game like this with a close spread.

 

[colston15]

Interesting indeed. I think it's truly a toss-up game. As does most of the Vegas community.

A 'lean' is just that. They don't risk money on leans.

 

[WTSooner]

Of course it's a toss up, we were seeded what, 4-5 teams apart? Shouldn't be a lot of difference when that is the case, most of the time.

And neither team will have a home court advantage out West either.

 

[Sooner McGavin]

Line is now -2.5 and 146 total.

On the Season OU is...

12-20 ATS
15-17 O/U

FWIW TAMU is...

15-13-3 ATS
14-17 O/U

 

[usedtobe1]

I think a key to the game is how closely it's officiated. They're bigger and stronger, but aren't particularly quick or a good shooting team. We need for Lattin to stay out of foul trouble. With no AK, McNeace just isn't strong enough to play much post defense.

On the other hand, I don't know who is quick enough to chase Buddy around the perimeter out of their starters. Caruso?

It should be an interesting game.

 

[AdaSooner]

I think a key to the game is how closely it's officiated. They're bigger and stronger, but aren't particularly quick or a good shooting team. We need for Lattin to stay out of foul trouble. With no AK, McNeace just isn't strong enough to play much post defense.

On the other hand, I don't know who is quick enough to chase Buddy around the perimeter out of their starters. Caruso?

It should be an interesting game.

Players who chase the "Energizer Buddy" also have to be in great shape. I think that's why some teams assign multiple players to key on him. He never stops moving and he never gets tired. Teams that put one player on Buddy, usually do so at their peril.

 

[mardaddy51]

Doesn't the sharp money usually show closer to game day, like Wednesday night or Thursday morning?

 

[WaymanFan]

I believe we've only covered the point spread on 6 of the 23 games we've played this calendar year. Heck, let's just make it an easy percentage to remember - 25, which means OU will win by 1 point.

 

[sperry]

Doesn't the sharp money usually show closer to game day, like Wednesday night or Thursday morning?

Only if they think the line will move in a direction they like. Otherwise, they get on it when they see a number with value before it moves.

 

[Crimson King]

On the Season OU is...

12-20 ATS
15-17 O/U

If anyone keeps track, that must be the lowest ATS % of any team with a record such as OUrs ever, either sport.

So the $ has come in on OU since open....

Spread story: an out-of-state friend texted me Friday "OU cover -14.5?" I told him no, then attended the nailbiter that was UCSB, at least until the last 2 minutes. Won 82-68 and texted him "told ya!"

 

[DenverSooner]

I think OU is going to control this game and win by about 9-10 points. By that I mean OU gets a lead early and maintains a lead most of the game but it is competitive.

A&M used up all of their Bball luck for a couple years on Sunday.

 

[garyeb2]

The existence of Las Vegas Sports books is evidence that there is no such thing as "smart money".

 

[OUSKINS]

The existence of Las Vegas Sports books is evidence that there is no such thing as "smart money".

Oh, there is smart money, just a lot more dumb money.

For example, I read an article where the books love the first two rounds because the public just goes bananas and bets with their hearts a lot. In the Sweet 16 they get more of the pros-- then the public comes back hard for the Final Four.

I definitely agree that the "touts" are never as good as they say they are. If a guy like The Fat Jack really crushed it like he says he does, there would be no need for him to run a service-- why waste your time? Just use your crazy winning percentage to build a house on the beach in Maui and call it a career. There is no earnings cap to gambling, so if you can honestly hit 80% of your plays then you should be one of the richest men in America.

To me, the truly "smart" guys are the ones that win about 55-60% of the time. That still means you are losing too often to risk TOO much. I know there are a handful of guys out there that the books don't like to see at the window-- they've managed to work the percentages better than most and have the cash to make it hurt if they keep coming. There are certain gamblers that have been banned from certain books simply for winning too often.

Of course, for every dude that works the books like that, there are probably a thousand hacks that do it more for entertainment-- and those are the people the books roll up and smoke. Most people gamble for fun... to increase their enjoyment level of events and have something to do with their buddies. They wager what they can afford to lose. They bet the games they WANT to bet. The pros bet only the games they think will win.

I have a buddy is insanely disciplined. College football is his things... he dabbles in other stuff for fun, but college football is his wheelhouse. He studies up all summer and enacts a highly disciplined routine each year. He tracks it all on a spreadsheet.... over the course of about 10 years now he's been able to sock away a nice cache' of savings from it. Nothing crazy, but nothing to scoff at either. As good as he is and as disciplined as he is, over that course of time, he's still only won somewhere a little above the 55-58% or so range-- but through his calculations and discipline he has genuinely made money. He has the stomach to lose-- that's the key. He sticks to his system and doesn't panic even when on a bad streak. Stays with his system. Never chases losses. It's interesting. I could never do it

Anyway, in general, you are exactly right-- there is a reason there are billion dollar casinos throughout Vegas and it isn't because they lose more than they win. But there are guys out there who know more than others--- or are at least more disciplined and researched than others.

 

[garyeb2]

Oh, there is smart money, just a lot more dumb money.

For example, I read an article where the books love the first two rounds because the public just goes bananas and bets with their hearts a lot. In the Sweet 16 they get more of the pros-- then the public comes back hard for the Final Four.

I definitely agree that the "touts" are never as good as they say they are. If a guy like The Fat Jack really crushed it like he says he does, there would be no need for him to run a service-- why waste your time? Just use your crazy winning percentage to build a house on the beach in Maui and call it a career. There is no earnings cap to gambling, so if you can honestly hit 80% of your plays then you should be one of the richest men in America.

To me, the truly "smart" guys are the ones that win about 55-60% of the time. That still means you are losing too often to risk TOO much. I know there are a handful of guys out there that the books don't like to see at the window-- they've managed to work the percentages better than most and have the cash to make it hurt if they keep coming. There are certain gamblers that have been banned from certain books simply for winning too often.

Of course, for every dude that works the books like that, there are probably a thousand hacks that do it more for entertainment-- and those are the people the books roll up and smoke. Most people gamble for fun... to increase their enjoyment level of events and have something to do with their buddies. They wager what they can afford to lose. They bet the games they WANT to bet. The pros bet only the games they think will win.

I have a buddy is insanely disciplined. College football is his things... he dabbles in other stuff for fun, but college football is his wheelhouse. He studies up all summer and enacts a highly disciplined routine each year. He tracks it all on a spreadsheet.... over the course of about 10 years now he's been able to sock away a nice cache' of savings from it. Nothing crazy, but nothing to scoff at either. As good as he is and as disciplined as he is, over that course of time, he's still only won somewhere a little above the 55-58% or so range-- but through his calculations and discipline he has genuinely made money. He has the stomach to lose-- that's the key. He sticks to his system and doesn't panic even when on a bad streak. Stays with his system. Never chases losses. It's interesting. I could never do it

Anyway, in general, you are exactly right-- there is a reason there are billion dollar casinos throughout Vegas and it isn't because they lose more than they win. But there are guys out there who know more than others--- or are at least more disciplined and researched than others.

Your buddy needs to move to Las Vegas. There only a handful of people in the world that can beat sports over the course of time. But, you are not far off and you make a reasonable arguement. Those decent prize pool season long handicapping contest that run every season at most all the books are usually taken down by a 55% picker.

Even the smartest of them don't know which of the games they pick will compromise the 55% winners. But, I am with you 100% on
Fat Jack.

 

[WTSooner]

Your buddy needs to move to Las Vegas. There only a handful of people in the world that can beat sports over the course of time. But, you are not far off and you make a reasonable arguement. Those decent prize pool season long handicapping contest that run every season at most all the books are usually taken down by a 55% picker.

Even the smartest of them don't know which of the games they pick will compromise the 55% winners. But, I am with you 100% on
Fat Jack.

Might not be a lot, but more than handful.

I did pretty well when I had time to watch and study games. Now I do it for fun, b/c I don't have that time. The thing that gets people in trouble is greed. Betting games they shouldn't. Increasing bets to sizes they shouldn't. Stuff like that. If you can stay true to a game plan, and only bet the games that you cap a certain way, I have no doubt you can make money. Problem is, there aren't a lot of people with that kind of self control.

 

[campbest]

A&M is going to take the air out of the ball, FWIW.

 

[garyeb2]

Might not be a lot, but more than handful.

I did pretty well when I had time to watch and study games. Now I do it for fun, b/c I don't have that time. The thing that gets people in trouble is greed. Betting games they shouldn't. Increasing bets to sizes they shouldn't. Stuff like that. If you can stay true to a game plan, and only bet the games that you cap a certain way, I have no doubt you can make money. Problem is, there aren't a lot of people with that kind of self control.

Anytime a sports bettor or poker player tell me they make money, my first impulse is always that either their record keeping or recollection is faulty. I suspicion that would be the case with you.

 

[OUSKINS]

Anytime a sports bettor or poker player tell me they make money, my first impulse is always that either their record keeping or recollection is faulty. I suspicion that would be the case with you.

Every year a few buddies and myself (11 total) participate in a season-long football contest picking ATS. Each week you pick 7 games (3 college, 2 NFL, and 2 wild card). It gets adjusted for week one when it's all college and the last 4 weeks when it's NFL and bowl games. But you get the gist. We all put in money to a big pool and then the top three (as determined by winning %) win $$$. Obviously first wins the biggest cut, then second and third. I started this as a way to still have some action without dealing with bookies or offshore shady stuff, etc. It's all friends and we basically create our own "house." The idea was that you could still go below .500 and win. But interestingly enough, the results have been pretty good. The following are the results from this season (names have been removed to protect the not-so innocent).

For the record, 4th place (the absolute worst place you could finish) belongs to me......for the second year in a row. I choked at the end of the season.

I wonder if part of the reason we do fairly well as a group is because the system dictates discipline-- you pick the games and once it's 11am on Saturday, it locks...that's it. You can't get mad at your Saturday and go all-in on Hawaii vs. San Jose at midnight (not that I've ever done that). Anyway, thought some of you might find this interesting.

And yes, I'd like to officially claim the "Thread Derailer of the Year Award" as well.

1. 57.8 69-50-3
2. 56.1 68-53-1
3. 54.1 65-55-2
4. 52.0 62-57-3
5. 50.0 60-60-2
6. 49.2 58-60-4
7. 48.8 59-62-1
7. 48.8 59-62-1
9. 45.9 55-65-2
10. 42.2 50-69-3 1
11. 40.9 46-67-2 2

 

[garyeb2]

That is peachy. But, factoring in the juice, one would have to pick 52.5%-53% just to break even. That is month after month, year after year, decade after decade to lay claim as a winning sports better. Plus, you have to get the amounts right.

The opportunity for long term profits betting sports is only available to a very few. And even at that, the margins are slim. If someone is capable of that, they should learn horses. In that game, sometimes, you can be a little and win a lot.