docdekay....I knew some math major was going to comment on my posting....
I realize that most bettors shy away from lines approaching the mid-hundreds or higher because of the increased vig correlates into forcing a winning percentage in the mid 60's....
'shark made the comment that the book seemed pissed about him "beating them to the number", which seems like a lame excuse when the price of the moneyline has little to do with the outcome of the game......moneyline is win/lose......it seems to me that pointspreads are something more worthy of trying to get the best price for the position a bettor wants on the game...."beating the book to the number" on a moneyline bet doesn't change the outcome of the game......The book would have paid 'shark had he bet the Mariners at -103 or -140, because the Mariners won....maybe the book wouldn't have had that lame excuse had 'shark bet it at a higher moneyline....goes back to the saying "you don't pay juice when you win"...
Yeah, it's nice to pay -103 instead of -115 on a moneyline wager.....
...but if the pointspread moves a point or two in a basketball game, now there is a possibility of losing the wager although the straightup or moneyline winner stays the same...
So, if the book posts a number a week in advance, as a lot of sportsbooks do around football season, and someone jumps on a line of -3....then three days later it's -6....is that "beating the book to the number" because the early number was in the bettors favor? What if the number moves against the bettor? He gets in at -3 and then the line goes to -1? Is the bettor supposed to know which way the line is going to move?
Bottom line....if the book doesn't want action at that number then don't offer it, plain and simple.....why post a number if you, as a bookie, doesn't want it bet?
I realize that most bettors shy away from lines approaching the mid-hundreds or higher because of the increased vig correlates into forcing a winning percentage in the mid 60's....
'shark made the comment that the book seemed pissed about him "beating them to the number", which seems like a lame excuse when the price of the moneyline has little to do with the outcome of the game......moneyline is win/lose......it seems to me that pointspreads are something more worthy of trying to get the best price for the position a bettor wants on the game...."beating the book to the number" on a moneyline bet doesn't change the outcome of the game......The book would have paid 'shark had he bet the Mariners at -103 or -140, because the Mariners won....maybe the book wouldn't have had that lame excuse had 'shark bet it at a higher moneyline....goes back to the saying "you don't pay juice when you win"...
Yeah, it's nice to pay -103 instead of -115 on a moneyline wager.....
...but if the pointspread moves a point or two in a basketball game, now there is a possibility of losing the wager although the straightup or moneyline winner stays the same...
So, if the book posts a number a week in advance, as a lot of sportsbooks do around football season, and someone jumps on a line of -3....then three days later it's -6....is that "beating the book to the number" because the early number was in the bettors favor? What if the number moves against the bettor? He gets in at -3 and then the line goes to -1? Is the bettor supposed to know which way the line is going to move?
Bottom line....if the book doesn't want action at that number then don't offer it, plain and simple.....why post a number if you, as a bookie, doesn't want it bet?
