I've rarely seen a line off this much!

[ClipJoint]

Clip..if you don't mind me answering...I think they are in cahoots with each other...theres no doubt about it.

I have two barber shops in my home town and they all agree to close on monday and keep the same hours during the week...same logic.

Also, I tend to agree with tulsa on this discussion....that does not make you wrong.

I have a lot of experience when it comes to the way things work offshore and it always interests me when people use the "trap line theory".

Books do not set lines together...there are the copycat books that use some of the other opening lines to set their lines, but the true odds makers are not working together to set the lines. They each have their own opinions and methods for setting the line.

I enjoy the discussions...I am not worried about being right or wrong. I enjoy hearing other opinions as well as sharing mine.

 

[SqueezePlay]

I really don't believe in the trap line theory simply because there are too many shops and too many linesmakers.

Let me ask you this...and I am not arguing, I would just like to know your opinion since you have said you believe in the theory:

How could every linesmaker have the same opinion about one game?

I agonize over threads like this one. The outcome of this game really means nothing about the debate here. I too have a problem believing in the Trap theory. I saw two 45-1 shots win a horse race yesterday. Stuff happens. All the time. Nomo beats Randy in April. Trap? No, a major upset.

Having said all that, there were plenty of fundamental handicapping reasons to like the Cincy side tonight. Hell, I even liked the Royals because Sabathia was 1-4 at home coming into tonight and listed as a ridiculous favorite. CC has burned a lot of cash at Jacobs Field in 2005. That is not over but Cleveland is in trouble. That's what this forum is for. The exchange of opinions. I have benefitted tremendously by floating possible plays only to be talked out of them by those who knew things that I did not know.

 

[PatPatriot]

This line was inflated (similar to how Yankees lines are inflated because of public opinion) because Wood was starting and the public backs Wood and Prior. I don't see how this could be called a trap when the line was off the opposite way.<!-- / message -->

I agree...but this was also set up by the linesmakers by having Cubs huge fav lines on them the previous 2 games, and then the Cubs winning easily.

The public perception on the Cubs was an illusion to most of the public...I believe....had the Cubs won I still would have believed it.

 

[ClipJoint]

I agonize over threads like this one. The outcome of this game really means nothing about the debate here. I too have a problem believing in the Trap theory. I saw two 45-1 shots win a horse race yesterday. Stuff happens. All the time. Nomo beats Randy in April. Trap? No, a major upset.

Having said all that, there were plenty of fundamental handicapping reasons to like the Cincy side tonight. Hell, I even liked the Royals because Sabathia was 1-4 at home coming into tonight and listed as a ridiculous favorite. CC has burned a lot of cash at Jacobs Field in 2005. That is not over but Cleveland is in trouble. That's what this forum is for. The exchange of opinions. I have benefitted tremendously by floating possible plays only to be talked out of them by those who knew things that I did not know.

I agree with you 100%.

The outcome of this game means absolutely nothing to me as far as my opinion on trap lines. That was just an interesting topic that came about in this thread.

I also had the Royals tonight as there was just too much value to pass up. That didn't mean they should win the game, but it is looking like they will. It is in my picks thread and will complete a nice 3-0 day for me. Time to fade myself! LOL

 

[Tulsa]

I really don't believe in the trap line theory simply because there are too many shops and too many linesmakers.

Let me ask you this...and I am not arguing, I would just like to know your opinion since you have said you believe in the theory:

How could every linesmaker have the same opinion about one game?

OK....here is what I believe to be true. There aren't that many linesmakers out there (odds makers.) I believe that most books follow a base group and don't pay for any odds makers' salaries in house. NOW, the books then use line movers, not makers (in house) to make adjustments to the line, but most books rely on VERY FEW odds makers from other books to come up with a line.

In short, I do not believe that each book has oddsmakers setting their own lines for the games. I believe they base their line very directly on the lines set by very few other books. They may adjust the lines to generate business or to balance play AFTER they take the early, established (by someone else) line. So, the act of collusion doesn't even need to happen if the sources for 90% of all the industry's lines are the same three or four books. The trap is built in and passed along to all the books that follow even if they adjust a few cents one way or the other. tulsa

 

[Tulsa]

And by the way, I believe that there is probably some sort of collusion regarding the two or three books that set the industry lines for the day..... tulsa

 

[ClipJoint]

OK....here is what I believe to be true. There aren't that many linesmakers out there (odds makers.) I believe that most books follow a base group and don't pay for any odds makers' salaries in house. NOW, the books then use line movers, not makers (in house) to make adjustments to the line, but most books rely on VERY FEW odds makers from other books to come up with a line.

In short, I do not believe that each book has oddsmakers setting their own lines for the games. I believe they base their line very directly on the lines set by very few other books. They may adjust the lines to generate business or to balance play AFTER they take the early, established (by someone else) line. So, the act of colusion doesn't even need to happen if the sources for 90% of all the industry's lines are the same three or four books. The trap is built in and passed along to all the books that follow even if they adjust a few cents one way or the other. tulsa

So you are saying there are only 3 or 4 linesmakers offshore and in Vegas? I can assure you that is not the case.

Let's even say there are only 5 linesmakers for the sake of argument...you think all 5 have the same opinion on what game to make a "trap line" on every time it happens?

Again...not arguing with you...you are one of my favorite posters. I just find the theory interesting when it comes up.

 

[Tulsa]

Alright, I don't mind argument by the way. Look, you may have more knowledge of the industry than I do. I am going by 'experiential' occurances that may or may not lead to the truth. I do not know anyone in the offshore industry but I do know economics and am a fairly bright person. Does that mean I am right? Not at all, I am only trying to scratch out an understanding of how things work.

Now, that being said, are you sure the offshore linesmakers as you refer to them are not line MOVERS versus line MAKERS? If I were any book, ANY but the largest couple I would use the lines from the largest two or three to give me an edge against them (I don't have to pay 30 accountants to figure out the lines.) By the way, what if I paid for linesmakers and they came up with lines that were vastly different than those of the 'establishement' of which I speak? Well, I might get too much business on a particular game then and I can't afford that!!! I actually have to be careful of volume and hence it is within my interest to stay close to the 'established' lines. I would pay a couple of lines movers that can understand the math and reasoning of why my book wants to move the lines one way or the other given demand and to balance play, but not the type of money or the number of folks involved in the line origination business.

FURTHER, I do believe there is collusion that occurs between the fellows that make the lines for the top books. I may be wrong, but why would you not consider what the other guy's lines are when deciding what your lines are? This is all just reasoning and I may be way off track, but I see very often the circumstances when I believe a trap is occuring.

You, yourself said the following: "I think only true squares would think Wood on the road against Cincinnati and Harang would be a -160 line." Well, there is a little square in everyone and most of the money the industry makes is on the many, many square thinking people out there. They are greedy and when they see a line that is FAR out of what they think is reasonable they lay an unjustifiable amount on the game and lose it.

Please, tell me how you think the many, many books set their lines? To repeat, I don't necessarily believe that I'M PERFECTLY CORRECT! I just think the economics of the situation points to a few heavy $ books (maybe Vegas books....maybe not) setting the basic lines for everyone and folks working from those, thus allowing the trap to radiate from the very few and maintaining it's trappishness even as others use the line. Help me out if you understand/know things differently. tulsa

 

[ClipJoint]

A couple things that jump out at me from the financial aspect:

1- If you use cloned lines, how would you expect to get business from the established, reputable shops that are setting these lines. Wouldn't everyone just play there? Certainly you don't want to leave yourself hung out to dry with bad lines, but if you have nothing else to offer, how do you obtain enough volume?

You, yourself said the following: "I think only true squares would think Wood on the road against Cincinnati and Harang would be a -160 line." Well, there is a little square in everyone and most of the money the industry makes is on the many, many square thinking people out there. They are greedy and when they see a line that is FAR out of what they think is reasonable they lay an unjustifiable amount on the game and lose it.


2- Squares unloading and a wise guy unloading are 2 different situations. Books will not leave themself open for the sharps to kick their butts simply to get a few square bettors unloading (their unloading is very small in comparison...). That was the case today. You saw a TON of square action on the Cubs, but that couldn't even offset the sharp money coming in on Cincinnati.

70% of the bets came in on the Cubs...30% came in on Cincinnati...yet the line dropped 20 cents. From a financial standpoint, who do you think made money today. I'll give you a hint...it wasn't squares and it wasn't books.

 

[ClipJoint]

Tulsa...I am heading out, but email me. It is a fun discussion and I'd like to discuss a couple other things with you.

 

[Tulsa]

Today may be a picture of lines moving differently from a trap situation (not that you agree that traps even exist.) You say the line dropped precipitously despite that the volume seemed to be on Chicago which means that the money and that money with few (relative) wagers was on Cinci indicating sharps were in the water.

Now, that may be the case this time. I am not saying that this game fits my 'trap' scenario. My trap scenario matches more when the line seems too good to be true and regardless of volume seems to remain fixed (or very nearly so) and refuses to budge.

Whether you think this game had a trap line, which I assume you believe it didn't, I understand that you believe the trap line to be an 'urban' legend. Convince me of that and I will be indebted to you. I have seen nothing stated here that dissuades me from believing that the lines, not nearly always but often enough, are 'shaded' to draw money to the wrong side. tulsa

I will email you first thing tomorrow, if that's not a problem. tulsa

 

[ClipJoint]

Check your email bro...it's been a fun discussion.

 

[Tulsa]

You too! And I will check it now. tulsa

 

[silver7]

Tulsa

Tend to somewhat lean to "the trap" side of the argument. I`m a relative neophyte when it comes to MLB, but I HAVE seen it in FB, and now believe it does in fact exist. Whether this is collusion or just a naturally occurring phenomenon generated by "Joe Public" I don`t know. An unusual and possibly great "value" situation is todays KC/Clev.gm. KC winning 3 in a row on the rd?

 

[Tulsa]

silver7, you hit that one right on the head! Great job. I avoided playing any today...may this evening, but I avoided playing any today because I was in such a bad mood after losing the Washington, Cleveland games last night. I may even step back for a longer period to clear my head. tulsa