Villanova line

[MilliniumPrince]

Seems like they want money to pour in on Nova. That line has to be a tease.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

I remember when my friend said that as long as there's a line, every game is interesting. Our conversation at the time was about his Gamblers Anonymous meetings and some of the inconveniences of life without a checking account.

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

No favorite team of mine is sacred. If there's an opportunity, because I know my team better than Vegas does, I'll bet it and sometimes bet big (I bet $200 against the UConn women at +195 when they were playing at Maryland down 2 starters and should never have been favored in the first place -- I knew something Vegas didn't).

Sometimes I lose (and don't mind too much), but overall I'm up a good percentage on these bets.

Yeah on the CFB side I’m a Michigan fan. I think they were one of the best against the spread this year too so it’s been a good year. Lol

Wish I took our Big East champs and Final Four odds earlier.

 

[Waquoit]

I remember when my friend said that as long as there's a line, every game is interesting.

Or as Lisa Simpson said "Gambling makes a good thing even better!"

 

[kobebeanbryant]

No favorite team of mine is sacred. If there's an opportunity, because I know my team better than Vegas does, I'll bet it and sometimes bet big.

I agree. Maybe I am naive, but I think that college basketball (especially early season before we really know what’s what) offer a unique opportunity to find an edge.

I don’t bet often (once or twice a year), but tend to wait for unique opportunities like that.

Eg I think it was clear from the oregon game that this team was something special. Took a while for the lines to catch up to that.

My best return was on the UConn / Florida final four game. We were getting something like +7 before that game which made absolutely no sense. Hammered the spread and moneyline hard. Needless to say that was a great night.

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

Down all the way to 11.5 now. Almost playable if you think we keep up our streak of winning by double digits.

 

[The Yakk]

Bingo. You seem to be one of the few people that understands this. Then Vegas profits off of the vig/commission.

LOL.

This is actually a common belief--sorry to say, gsmooth, you are not one of the few geniuses who understands this--but it is a myth.

Sports books absolutely take positions on the games, and they are on the right side most of the time. It is part of their strategy. Simply taking the vig on an evenly distributed bet does not make money fast enough for them.

You want proof? Think of the proposition bets. In 2006 you could get 10 to 1 odds on Tiger Woods winning all 4 majors. A horrible price, but here's the thing: you COULD NOT TAKE THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT BET. The books were taking a position that Tiger would not win all 4, at a price very favorable for them.

I promise they do the same thing on the money line, and the spread, and the over/under, and everything else.

Of course they would like you all to believe they are just taking rent on the bets, but in truth they are betting against the public. And mostly winning.

 

[The Yakk]

I agree. Maybe I am naive, but I think that college basketball (especially early season before we really know what’s what) offer a unique opportunity to find an edge.

Yes, but you have to do your research and your decisions have to be ice cold and pitiless.

Fan bias will ruin you. The sports books are counting on that.

 

[Rico444]

LOL.

This is actually a common belief--sorry to say, gsmooth, you are not one of the few geniuses who understands this--but it is a myth.

Sports books absolutely take positions on the games, and they are on the right side most of the time. It is part of their strategy. Simply taking the vig on an evenly distributed bet does not make money fast enough for them.

You want proof? Think of the proposition bets. In 2006 you could get 10 to 1 odds on Tiger Woods winning all 4 majors. A horrible price, but here's the thing: you COULD NOT TAKE THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT BET. The books were taking a position that Tiger would not win all 4, at a price very favorable for them.

I promise they do the same thing on the money line, and the spread, and the over/under, and everything else.

Of course they would like you all to believe they are just taking rent on the bets, but in truth they are betting against the public. And mostly winning.

So what happened here? Fans are hammering Villanova and the line is dropping. Were the sportsbooks wrong in this case?

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

So what happened here? Fans are hammering Villanova and the line is dropping. Were the sportsbooks wrong in this case?

Vegas thinks UConn is gonna roll. No other way to spin it.

 

[The Yakk]

So what happened here? Fans are hammering Villanova and the line is dropping. Were the sportsbooks wrong in this case?

"Taking a position" does not mean a sports book is willing to have unlimited exposure on one side of a bet. And they do make mistakes.

They are a business with real capital at risk. Exactly like a trading operation, and risk management is an important part of that.

You are probably correct here; they miscalculated the initial line and need to manage their position down to where they need it to be.

 

[The Yakk]

Vegas thinks UConn is gonna roll. No other way to spin it.

LOL probably. It sure seems like they wanted the public money to be on Nova. But when the position gets too big, they have to fix it.

 

[YearoftheHusky]

When I gamble on my teams, I always think to myself - How much would I pay to see a victory? And then I take that money and put it on the other team’s money line. I made quite a bit in the tournament last year. Certainly never rooted against our team, but it’s not a bad consolation prize if they were going to lose anyway. And no, it doesn’t kill the mojo because I have paid quite a bit for UConn victories as well.

 

[UConn Esq]

So what happened here? Fans are hammering Villanova and the line is dropping. Were the sportsbooks wrong in this case?

A sports book job is not to find an even line in terms of score but a line that will end up evenly distributed monetarily. In truth, a point spread is not the predicted outcome of the game, it is the predicted outcome of how the money will be wagered in order to achieve an even split.

 

[HeGotGame]

It is early but percentages are as one sided in terms of handle as you will see in a game.

64% of bets and 84% of handle on Nova.

 

[NJHusky]

It is early but percentages are as one sided in terms of handle as you will see in a game.

64% of bets and 84% of handle on Nova.

Interesting….how do you find this out? Is it by casino/site or total?

 

[HeGotGame]

Interesting….how do you find this out? Is it by casino/site or total?

I use VSiN which tracks DraftKings market. There are other sites that use FanDuel or Caesars, but VSiN is considered to be the most accurate and up to date.

Home-2

Discover a winning edge at VSiN! Gain expert insights, exclusive tips, betting splits, real-time odds, and live broadcasts. Join the action!

www.vsin.com

 

[The Yakk]

A sports book job is not to find an even line in terms of score but a line that will end up evenly distributed monetarily. In truth, a point spread is not the predicted outcome of the game, it is the predicted outcome of how the money will be wagered in order to achieve an even split.

Lol, and here it is again.

One thing you can never say, UConn Esq, is that you haven't been told.

 

[JCSuperstar]

One thing you can never say, UConn Esq, is that you haven't been told.

Thanks, Dr. Krakower

 

[HeGotGame]

That is an insane seeming line. Are we an NBA team? People have gotten carried away. Now if all shots are falling OK but that’s just crazy, I saw Nova’s last game.

Why is anyone suprised by the line? We were -23 against Gtown, that puts Nova at the current line -11 against Gtown on a neutral which makes perfect sense.

And if you say but we didn't cover against Gtown then you have no idea how this stuff works.

Do we cover? Who knows, but the line is not surprising given what we have seen with the previous lines.

 

[gsmooth]

LOL.

This is actually a common belief--sorry to say, gsmooth, you are not one of the few geniuses who understands this--but it is a myth.

Sports books absolutely take positions on the games, and they are on the right side most of the time. It is part of their strategy. Simply taking the vig on an evenly distributed bet does not make money fast enough for them.

You want proof? Think of the proposition bets. In 2006 you could get 10 to 1 odds on Tiger Woods winning all 4 majors. A horrible price, but here's the thing: you COULD NOT TAKE THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT BET. The books were taking a position that Tiger would not win all 4, at a price very favorable for them.

I promise they do the same thing on the money line, and the spread, and the over/under, and everything else.

Of course they would like you all to believe they are just taking rent on the bets, but in truth they are betting against the public. And mostly winning.

Sportsbooks do take positions for sure and I wasn't talking about prop bets, parlays, and teasers. I get the Tiger Woods bet because if public took the other side of that bet they are only getting 10 cents on the dollar and in the likely hood of that not happening the sportsbook would get the entire dollar.

But on the spread they are trying to get the action to even out or come close to even and they usually determine the line based on the sharp bets that come in early and then adjust accordingly to attract the public that isn't in the know or at least that's what I have read in several publications-I don't know if that is outdated. They certainly don't want to be overexposed to one team too much. An example is when favorites win in a given week in the NFL the sportsbooks usually lose because the public usually likes to take the favorites or involve them in mulitple bets. But the point of the original post I was responding to, which I should have made more clear, is that spread is not a prediction of what sportsbooks think will be in the actual outcome of the game.

 

[The Yakk]

Sportsbooks do take positions for sure and I wasn't talking about prop bets, parlays, and teasers. I get the Tiger Woods bet because if public took the other side of that bet they are only getting 10 cents on the dollar and in the likely hood of that not happening the sportsbook would get the entire dollar.

But on the spread they are trying to get the action to even out or come close to even and they usually determine the line based on the sharp bets that come in early and then adjust accordingly to attract the public that isn't in the know or at least that's what I have read in several publications-I don't know if that is outdated. They certainly don't want to be overexposed to one team too much. An example is when favorites win in a given week in the NFL the sportsbooks usually lose because the public usually likes to take the favorites or involve them in mulitple bets. But the point of the original post I was responding to, which I should have made more clear, is that spread is not a prediction of what sportsbooks think will be in the actual outcome of the game.

Last sentence is very true, and I agree that is the heart of the issue.

If you can get away from the idea that "Vegas wants an equal amount bet on both sides so they can profit from the vig" and think of it more like "Vegas wants amounts bet that optimize the outcome of their risk/reward analysis, which is not necessarily an equal amount bet on both sides", then I think your analysis would be spot on.

 

[auror]

Let's pound the Public tonight.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

lol, -14.5

Vegas screwed the pooch.

 

[ValleyGuy]

Is UConn playing at a wake? Too many suits in the crowd.