I'll repeat my speech once more for those who have not heard it before.
Think about it. If you were a book, would you offer to let people buy 1/2 point off 3 and 7 unless the juice you made them pay was in your advanage? In other words it is not in your best interest to buy 1/2 point off those numbers as the books' juice will cost you more than the advantage in the long run.
Think about it. If you were a book, would you offer to let people buy 1/2 point off 3 and 7 unless the juice you made them pay was in your advanage? In other words it is not in your best interest to buy 1/2 point off those numbers as the books' juice will cost you more than the advantage in the long run.
QL I love ya man and this is a lesson that came hard for me but there are times when it is mathematically correct to buy off of the 3 or the 7... more times the 3 than the 7 and I don't have the numbers right now tho I will try to dig them out.
This is a lesson from Stanford Wong not some forum douche.
If you notice some books will not even let you buy off of the 3 in the NFL and there is a reason for that.
Buying off of 3 in NFL is NOT allowed at betcris.com.
This is a lesson from Stanford Wong not some forum douche.
If you notice some books will not even let you buy off of the 3 in the NFL and there is a reason for that.
Buying off of 3 in NFL is NOT allowed at betcris.com.
no i don't wanna bet except considering you are from OK i like my chances.
you might be right.. hopefully you would argue the price that is paid today compared to '02 is substantially increased making in -EV and without doing some homework which i am too lazy for, i will concede that argument.
it is also possible that you could argue that Wong's book was written based off of data that is no longer applicable because more/less points are scored and the amount of games decided by 3, 7, 10, 14 is much different today than it was in the past.
what you cannot argue is that you can blindly say this is a bad move when it was in deed, when i used to educate myself, the correct move if it was priced correctly.
the point is that there are situations that you can rule out as sucker bets or bad moves (ie teasers in the NFL) and be making a mistake.
OU SUCKS.
you might be right.. hopefully you would argue the price that is paid today compared to '02 is substantially increased making in -EV and without doing some homework which i am too lazy for, i will concede that argument.
it is also possible that you could argue that Wong's book was written based off of data that is no longer applicable because more/less points are scored and the amount of games decided by 3, 7, 10, 14 is much different today than it was in the past.
what you cannot argue is that you can blindly say this is a bad move when it was in deed, when i used to educate myself, the correct move if it was priced correctly.
the point is that there are situations that you can rule out as sucker bets or bad moves (ie teasers in the NFL) and be making a mistake.
OU SUCKS.
I was basing my statement on Wong's book "Sharp Sports Betting". I was at the gambler's bookstore in Vegas this last weekend and noticed he has updated his information up to the 2005 season.
I'll give you this, there may be some square sportsbooks that make it worth your while to buy off key numbers. I do know there are some books that still take square teaser action. If you can find them you have found real money.
Thanks for the good input.
:howdy:
