How much have you lost betting sports ?

[redietz]

Redietz has kindly stuck to his word and is napping it out from this forum.

A little birdy gave me a GF link. Micky correcting Redietz and Redietz making up a ton of shit strawment.

He seems to think everyone is claiming bonus whoring lasts forever. He also seems to think that APs claim they can beat any book. He has no clue. He claims people are claiming shit I've never seen anyone claiming.

Anyone I consider a sharp guy on here is not claiming they can beat any book. We are claiming that with enough bonuses or weak lines then the book can be beat. If the there are no bonuses to use and the lines are too tight then there is no shot. The lesser the sum of these 2 things the lower the EV and the less reason any sharp bettor would fuck with it. Mickey is right, redietz is a buffoon.

Oh well maybe a Hollywood producer will come across his posts LMAO.

Good to know there are "weak" lines and "strong" lines. I didn't know weightlifting was part of the AP portfolio.

Good to know that some folks can figure out EV on lines that are designed to balance opinion as opposed to being mathematically grounded vis-a-vis coinflips.

The world of APs is a wondrous one.

I wonder if the "weak" lines have an asterisk next to them. "Hey, bettor, look at me -- I'm a weak line!"

Or maybe the "weak" lines are printed with special ink and they hand out different 3-D glasses at the sports books. One kind for "sharps" and one kind for "squares." Only the "sharps" can spot the "weak" lines. Makes sense.

It's the club, man. The AP Club. It's like Fight Club, except there are no losers. The members are too smart to be losers. Or to use their actual names. Or show their sports book lifetime records. Or have their wins/losses publicly charted.

It's like Mensa, except for cool guys.

I'm not sure what to even say if you can't grasp what weak lines are. You do handicapping, right? Or claim to at least.... So lets say your handicapping is better than anyone's and the book's line was set at that exactly what your handicapping suggests. Not to balance action - the book just has the same lines as the best handicapper in the world. That would NOT be a weak line. A weak line would be some book that doesn't attempt to balance action and shades their line against their customer's biggest position. (Not sure how to describe it so wtfever) This would provide value on the other side and "sharps" would get that. They don't need to know handicapping - all they need to need to know is how to find outliers and figure out how much of an outlier it needs to be to beat vig. If the line is sharp and not weak, these opportunities will never present themselves. IIRC Sports Interaction was known for weak lines and people cleaned up nicely. Who knows, maybe SIA made more.

I don't fuck with sports betting, but I apparently know more about it that Redietz.

BTW you're AGAIN doing the same shit I called you out for doing. You used quotes on the word strong. As if I actually used that word. Lol. Pathetic.

No, strong is in quotes because there is no such thing and, as Grammarly says, "the author doesn't agree with the use of the term." That applies to "weak." When a person says "weak" lines, the implication is that there are other kinds of lines in contrast to the weak. Or why use the word "weak?"

Your jargon isn't even correct, except perhaps among AP's and "sharps."

Yeah, how exactly do you find outliers? LOL. I love you guys. "All they need to know is how to find outliers." That's beautiful. Is that "all they need to know?"

Do you have any idea how naive and flat out ridiculous that is in 2022? Is that all you need to do? All I need to do is win the lottery and hypnotize Megan Fox for next Saturday night's date.

Five years ago, a team of programmers was whacking college hoops and totals every day. The lines moved a minimum of a point and a half, often two to three points every game they took. I have a dozen offshore accounts and was physically present at the sports book that was allowing them to wager, while others delayed opening lines so other books would take the hit. Not only that, for more than a week, I was getting the games directly leaked to me a maximum of ten minutes after they were chosen, and sometimes two to three minutes after they had been chosen. It was still too slow. The lines had moved the majority of what they were going to move.

Now, can you find "weak" lines (I assume you mean slow or soft, which was the usual term) for props, especially regular season props? Yes, and good luck with that. Nothing wrong, as I always say, with free lunches and free dinners, if it's worth having well into five digits at a dozen or more books for those dinners. If lunch is free, you never go hungry, and I do it myself. But to present it as some kind of gambling strategy for serious betting is silly. You're dealing with prop limits and boutique offshores to try to snag the outliers.

I purposefully lived behind the Stardust for years because, back then, lines moved because of money. In fact, and someone like Jimmy Vacarro would probably know this off the top of his head but I do not, I believe it was a regulation (if not a law) for years that money was needed to move numbers. The Stardust, because it took large bets and had faith in its numbers, was often one of the last to move. It was like a time warp exploitation, which worked great for weather. Today, anyone can move a number for any reason. Money is not required. So there are very few "weak" or slow or delayed numbers out there anywhere, except occasionally at offshore boutique sports books.

Now I just laid out specific concrete examples of why this AP idea of exploiting "weak" numbers is immensely exaggerated. Weather is worth attacking like this, but unless it's December and football, you're pretty much out of luck.

There is one other issue. The numbers moves have to be correct for these allegedly "weak" numbers to be exploited. There is this presumption that moves are correct in some significant-edge way. That is a presumption. I do not know the numbers for sports other than football, so I'm not going to fake that I do. I think with Covid and the NBA sitting people out, Dan has the right approach for the NBA if you're lightning fast. But in football, non-weather line moves are barely an edge. As in very narrow marginally and varying immensely year-to-year. And again, to even attempt to attack slow numbers, which in football is a questionable and possibly non-existent edge, you need well into five digits scattered in a dozen places.

Go ahead, check the sides moves and totals moves in the NFL this year or for the last five years and see just how "weak" those allegedly weak numbers have been.