Professional Sportsbetting

[accountinquestion]

so what are you supposed to bet? The opening line underdog, the Vikings, or the current underdog, the Bears?

this has already been discussed

the data is based on the closing line most common to most of the books

if a bettor doesn't get the exact line from closing it may hurt him or it may help him - and even more likely it didn't matter at all - no way to tell and not at all likely to make any real difference in the long run

but everybody gets it - you don't like the strategy - that's cool - when it comes to betting sports everybody won't agree on everything

btw for what it's worth - based on the comments from you that I've read - I do think you know a great deal about handicapping, particularly football -

I also agree with mickey's points that computer modeling (such as what Billy Walters has done) is superior to what any individual can accomplish, even a very informed individual, betting or recommending bets based on his opinion

computer modeling combined with the vast amounts of statistical data that was compiled and analyzed easily identified a great many more plays than any well informed individual could possible uncover


.

With the proper resoruces and computer training, you could train models off of existing video footage and get far more detail. There are tons of little statistics that a human can't really take all in but if broken up properly and fed to an AI/LLM algo then it might take the modeling to the next level and find weak spots in lines. Kinda like how having a finer granularity on horse racing was used at some point to get an edge on the existing bettors of the time. With football though there are far more variables one could plot/measure via a video footage.. (as compared to horses)

Anyway, just a thought.

[accountinquestion]

Discussing this stuff with you guys is senseless. You simply have no lay of the actual land. You do realize Playbook has been doing ongoing 24/7 comprehensive data base stat searches for literally 40 years? And Marc Lawrence Jr. trained specifically for this and is a programmer?

Very excellent point.

Lets not forget tipsters and hipsters while we are at it.

But they had an actual real live programmer... wow.. There are only like 100 of them in the US.

[AxelWolf]

some won and some pushed.

That is going to happen. Like HS says might work for you. Might work against. .

That makes zero sense. How can line shopping ever "might work against" you? You are either going to get a better number or the same number as everywhere else, unless you are line shopping for a worse number for some odd reason.

[coach belly]

That makes zero sense.

That doesn't matter to tewlj.

He'll say anything, whether it makes sense or not.

[Half Smoke]

some won and some pushed.

That is going to happen. Like HS says might work for you. Might work against. .

That makes zero sense. You are either going to get a better number or the same number as everywhere else, unless you are line shopping for a worse number for some odd reason.

what he meant and what I meant was:

if you try to get the best line as late as possible and you got +3.5 but the line closed at 3 and the fave won by 3 you were helped even though you didn't get the closing line (when betting on the underdog)

if you got the best latest line you could at + 2.5 but it closed at 3 and the fave won by 3 you were hurt by not getting the final closing line (when betting on the underdog)

this stuff doesn't happen that often, and should even out in the long run, and shouldn't affect the long term viability of the play -

i.e. - the first 2 games of this season it didn't matter if you got the best closing line or not


line shopping is a great strategy, but it the bettor is shopping on a Saturday for a Sunday game he can't know that he wouldn't have gotten a better line if he had waited

line shopping as close as possible to gametime for underdogs (if you want to bet the underdog) is imo the best strategy

for betting the fave, the google AI stuff that I posted indicated that sharps look for soft lines on faves very early - when the betting opens

there is a downside to that - they may not have all the info that will later become available - again, that could hurt them or help them - and it will prolly even out in the long run

.

[Don Perignom]

Looking in on prediction markets, this is Robinhood brokerage:



I think sports are sourced from Kalshi.

You're looking at Denver Broncos for tomorrow's game. Robinhood assesses a 2% commission on the payout, and a bid-ask spread on the unit price which is the probability.

Running the math, I calculated -456 (American) odds on the YES bet as shown. Betting the NO, my odds would be +317 after imposed costs.

Another example, Indianapolis is a toss-up against Miami. The Indy YES bet carries -108 odds, and the NO is -113.

In summary, the house edge is just as bad as the state-regulated sportsbooks. And you can only bet full-game moneylines, plus futures such as Super Bowl winner.

This is not a recipe for success using my tactics.

[kewlJ]

That makes zero sense. How can line shopping ever "might work against" you? You are either going to get a better number or the same number as everywhere else, unless you are line shopping for a worse number for some odd reason.

What I was saying is that there were 2 games last year that fell on or close to the line, 1/2 point depending. I benefited by one, winning some bets and pushing some, and the other the opposite, losing some bets and pushing on others. Sure, had I the time to be running around line shopping I may have won both. But I didn't have that time. I was more concerned with getting down the overflow amounts (more than I could bet at my sports books) and was running around trying to do that.

[kewlJ]

Coach Belly...fuck off. You knew exactly what I was saying.

Eiether you are showing your stupidity or showing what a little nit-picking asshole-ish troll you are.....AGAIN. You tell us?

Don't bother...everyone knows.

[mickeycrimm]

Dietz, you are so hell bent on trying to discredit and put down anyone doing things differently that you.

Get over it!

There are many ways to gain an edge in sports betting. Many ways to skin the cat.

Programmers have been doing analyses of handicapping trends for 50 years. Welcome to 1975.

If they've been doing it for 50 years since 1975, welcome to 2025. But yes, you ARE stuck in 1975.

[coach belly]

You knew exactly what I was saying.

Not possible...I didn't even read your post.

I replied to this post...

That makes zero sense.

My remarks were a reflection upon your posting history in general.

The little guy commented that your latest notion made zero sense...which is typical of anything you write, including the quote at the top of this reply that you are reading right now.

[AxelWolf]

What I'm saying is that I bet at locations where I was picking up free play or along the way at places that had convinces far as parking and EZ access to the sports book. I didn't look online and find the locations with the best line(LINE SHOPPING) iE.. I made a few bets on key numbers where I could have gotten an extra half point if I would have just looked online and went to a different casino and bet it. LiNE SHOPPING =FINDING THE BEST LINE POSSIBLE. 7 and most books but one place has it at 7.5 therfore you go to the place thats giving you 7.5 instead of taking only 7 point's. = LINE SHOPPING.

[accountinquestion]

I was once chastised for replying to coach belly by a regular on here. It was valid criticism.

Do better.

[mickeycrimm]

You are kind of missing the point with Billy Walters. He hired literally dozens of handicappers over time, some with competing and different programs and some without. If the models don't agree, and they usually do not, then what do you do?

In his book Billy Walters published the one and only computer model he used to bet football games. He showed in great detail every kind of statistic that they collected. And he told where the computer model came from and how successful it was for 40 years. He never said anything about other computer models, just the one he started with.

[mickeycrimm]

Krack is talking about the 100K entry fee Circa Grandissimo that he and Randy McKay are playing. Randy has come a long way from the Laughlin days in the late 90's. He was betting sports back then. I don't know how well he did in sports then but he's taken it to the top of the sports betting world:

[redietz]

You are kind of missing the point with Billy Walters. He hired literally dozens of handicappers over time, some with competing and different programs and some without. If the models don't agree, and they usually do not, then what do you do?

In his book Billy Walters published the one and only computer model he used to bet football games. He showed in great detail every kind of statistic that they collected. And he told where the computer model came from and how successful it was for 40 years. He never said anything about other computer models, just the one he started with.

You should try actually reading the book sometime. Just a suggestion.

Mickey has, for some reason, started bullshitting. Don't take my word for it. Read the book. All of mickey's paraphrasing is wrong at best and purposefully misleading at worst. And mickey being wrong here is not some secret. Anybody who talked with/worked with Mr. Walters at all would completely disagree with what mickey just wrote.

I think even Mr. Walters would chuckle at mickey's paraphrasing.

[mickeycrimm]

You are kind of missing the point with Billy Walters. He hired literally dozens of handicappers over time, some with competing and different programs and some without. If the models don't agree, and they usually do not, then what do you do?

In his book Billy Walters published the one and only computer model he used to bet football games. He showed in great detail every kind of statistic that they collected. And he told where the computer model came from and how successful it was for 40 years. He never said anything about other computer models, just the one he started with.

You should try actually reading the book sometime. Just a suggestion.

Mickey has, for some reason, started bullshitting. Don't take my word for it. Read the book. All of mickey's paraphrasing is wrong at best and purposefully misleading at worst. And mickey being wrong here is not some secret. Anybody who talked with/worked with Mr. Walters at all would completely disagree with what mickey just wrote.

I think even Mr. Walters would chuckle at mickey's paraphrasing.

In a recent episode of Unscripted, Krackomberger was asked who the most successful handicapper of all time was. He named Michael Kent’s computer as the best of all time, having made hundreds of millions of dollars. Of course, Kent was the inventor. That’s the computer Billy Walters used.

[redietz]

In his book Billy Walters published the one and only computer model he used to bet football games. He showed in great detail every kind of statistic that they collected. And he told where the computer model came from and how successful it was for 40 years. He never said anything about other computer models, just the one he started with.

You should try actually reading the book sometime. Just a suggestion.

Mickey has, for some reason, started bullshitting. Don't take my word for it. Read the book. All of mickey's paraphrasing is wrong at best and purposefully misleading at worst. And mickey being wrong here is not some secret. Anybody who talked with/worked with Mr. Walters at all would completely disagree with what mickey just wrote.

I think even Mr. Walters would chuckle at mickey's paraphrasing.

In a recent episode of Unscripted, Krackomberger was asked who the most successful handicapper of all time was. He named Michael Kent’s computer as the best of all time, having made hundreds of millions of dollars. Of course, Kent was the inventor. That’s the computer Billy Walters used.

That's the "series of programs" Walters used at the time. If the programs had continued to work, he would have continued using them. Instead, he went out and assembled round tables of experts for each sport, the majority of whom (but by no means all) were programmers with their own programs and emphases.

Walters does NOT state in the book which sport at which he was most successful. Each sport would have its own experts, programs, and programmers. Instead, Walters mentions how much he bet on NFL, not which sports or sports yielded the most profit or best ROI. There are reasons certain info is presented as it is, and which info is absent. Anyone with a little common sense can figure out the reasons.

[mickeycrimm]

You should try actually reading the book sometime. Just a suggestion.

Mickey has, for some reason, started bullshitting. Don't take my word for it. Read the book. All of mickey's paraphrasing is wrong at best and purposefully misleading at worst. And mickey being wrong here is not some secret. Anybody who talked with/worked with Mr. Walters at all would completely disagree with what mickey just wrote.

I think even Mr. Walters would chuckle at mickey's paraphrasing.

In a recent episode of Unscripted, Krackomberger was asked who the most successful handicapper of all time was. He named Michael Kent’s computer as the best of all time, having made hundreds of millions of dollars. Of course, Kent was the inventor. That’s the computer Billy Walters used.

That's the "series of programs" Walters used at the time. If the programs had continued to work, he would have continued using them. Instead, he went out and assembled round tables of experts for each sport, the majority of whom (but by no means all) were programmers with their own programs and emphases.

Walters does NOT state in the book which sport at which he was most successful. Each sport would have its own experts, programs, and programmers. Instead, Walters mentions how much he bet on NFL, not which sports or sports yielded the most profit or best ROI. There are reasons certain info is presented as it is, and which info is absent. Anyone with a little common sense can figure out the reasons.

Your shit don't fly, ditz. You're just a pompous arrogant small time bettor with an outsized ego. My friend, Randy McKay, is playing the 100K buy-in Circa Grandissimo. That's what the real sportsbettors are doing while you try to knock off another low roller contest.

[accountinquestion]

In a recent episode of Unscripted, Krackomberger was asked who the most successful handicapper of all time was. He named Michael Kent’s computer as the best of all time, having made hundreds of millions of dollars. Of course, Kent was the inventor. That’s the computer Billy Walters used.

That's the "series of programs" Walters used at the time. If the programs had continued to work, he would have continued using them. Instead, he went out and assembled round tables of experts for each sport, the majority of whom (but by no means all) were programmers with their own programs and emphases.

Walters does NOT state in the book which sport at which he was most successful. Each sport would have its own experts, programs, and programmers. Instead, Walters mentions how much he bet on NFL, not which sports or sports yielded the most profit or best ROI. There are reasons certain info is presented as it is, and which info is absent. Anyone with a little common sense can figure out the reasons.

Your shit don't fly, ditz. You're just a pompous arrogant small time bettor with an outsized ego. My friend, Randy McKay, is playing the 100K buy-in Circa Grandissimo. That's what the real sportsbettors are doing while you try to knock off another low roller contest.

Exactly.

He's always trying to play it off like he is the smart one in the room when he doesn't even appear to be in the top half.

[redietz]

That's the "series of programs" Walters used at the time. If the programs had continued to work, he would have continued using them. Instead, he went out and assembled round tables of experts for each sport, the majority of whom (but by no means all) were programmers with their own programs and emphases.

Walters does NOT state in the book which sport at which he was most successful. Each sport would have its own experts, programs, and programmers. Instead, Walters mentions how much he bet on NFL, not which sports or sports yielded the most profit or best ROI. There are reasons certain info is presented as it is, and which info is absent. Anyone with a little common sense can figure out the reasons.

Your shit don't fly, ditz. You're just a pompous arrogant small time bettor with an outsized ego. My friend, Randy McKay, is playing the 100K buy-in Circa Grandissimo. That's what the real sportsbettors are doing while you try to knock off another low roller contest.

Exactly.

He's always trying to play it off like he is the smart one in the room when he doesn't even appear to be in the top half.

Sorry, gentlemen. I'm obviously telling it exactly like it is. Ask anyone who has hung out with Mr. Walters, or ask Mr. Walters himself.

For people who know nothing, you guys have remarkable opinions.