what happens when the whole world becomes sharp?

[RobFunk]

Every year it seems the ratio of square to sharp players closes in closer to the sharpies.

Right now, I believe a really sharp player can just use his noggin at will and be succesful at his near liesure.

But what happens when over 60% of the players know whats going on with line moves and injurys and solid/bad plays?

Do we see more books fold? Or do they find a way to thrive in that enviroment? Do the sharper players have to work even harder at the desktop, to beat out other sharp players? ie; he has to catch the other players sleeping more and not just the books?

what would it be like to have a sports gambling world dominated by 'know- it- alls'? what would take place?

 

[NICKYTHEFISH]

Will never ever happen.You are forgetting how many true blue squares are out there and have no idea on betting sports.And even if people wised up to capping and using all resources out there it still will not matter for one simple fact...GREED!

 

[sherman]

if everyone became sharp, i'd probably be the bookie...

 

[RobFunk]

yes but look at how much info is at everyones finger tips. it just seems to get easier for more people every year. bad play at the books always seems to be a result of lazyness and over confidence.

 

[newbie666]

Searches done in August 2004
Count Search Term
116200 sports betting
64111 sport book

let's say the lastones were
squares. that's, 180,311

and this ones, are the "sharpies"

540 sports betting bonus
304 internet sport book review
12440 score odds

= 13284

from a total of:

193595

6% are sharpies.
94% are squares.

if within a month
the squares growth 5%,
and it takes almost, 2 years,
to grow 5% sharpies. by that time
squares had growth 5% * 24



*google.

 

[Journeyman]

This may have something to with one heavy poster giving out picks at 8;55 on MNF....Can you imagine the whole site having the same play lol?

We ought to do that once !

HEADLINES "Rx Forum all on GREEN BAY under, levels FOur Books"

 

[RobFunk]

holy crap Journeyman, that is quite a thought you just had. Imagine if the RX was a sydnicate?! and all the sharpest cappers were networking together to come up with plays, delegating which ones were best for the entire board to move on? wow. that would be some power.

 

[THE SHRINK]

I LOVE IT GUYS!!!

 

[Fishhead]

Bookmakers that know how to book could care less.

 

[RobFunk]

probably fish, the line moves would get faster and furious and more intricate. but youd have to be better than ever to run a book.

 

[bigperm+]

will never happen

 

[jwblue]

I don't think it is unrealistic.

IS

 

[drunkguy]

not geting that many more sharps

you are seeing more and more what Fezzik likes to call "square sharps" (or was it "sharp squares"?)... that have some knowledge but not enough to be successful on a regular basis

the number of people successfully wagering on sports is still very small relative to the number of players

 

[daringly]

The dynamic of squares versus sharps is definitely changing. In the past, square money would always overpower sharp money on big public games. That is no longer true. 3 examples from this season:

New England, the superbowl champion, opened at -3x. Superbowl champs always get bet up, until this year. Sharps moved in, and the line closed at -3.

USC, NCAA national champion. The line opened at +17x (or close to it), and closed about +15. Again, sharp money overpowered the public.

And, Monday night's game. Carolina -3x, moved towards -3. Since when has sharp money belittled the squares on Monday night football?

Now, there are just as many squares out there as always. But the VOLUME from sharps has probably grown.

What does this mean? In NFL, sharps won't make as much, and squares have a better chance.

 

[bigperm+]

What does this mean? In NFL, sharps won't make as much, and squares have a better chance. You are completely off base it is actually the complete opposite everyone bets football there is always tons of value out there

 

[bigperm+]

I was adressing Daringlys post as you can tell I am both mentally and computer challenged

 

[DarrylParsons]

Beatable blackjack games can still be found despite the winning method being known for over 35 years. I'm not particulary worried. And blackjack can pretty much be completely analysed, while sports betting cannot.

 

[daringly]

I disagree, Big Perm.

On the VaTech game (or any other game where the line is badly off), a big player used to be able to bet as much as he wanted. He was only limited by his own bankroll and risk tolerance. Every dollar he threw at VaTech would be opposed by 2 square dollars, which kept the bad line inflated.

That is no longer the case. With sharp money dominating public games, Joe Sharp is much more limited. He sees VaTech+18, and it moves to 17x after 10 dimes of combined wagering. Another wave of betting, and it is at 17. If I'm the only one eating from the pie, it doesn't matter. But the sharps are moving the line more than the squares, and all eating form the same pie. The obvious plays will be scarcer, and the value own't linger as long.

 

[bigperm+]

it isnt the amount bet as much as who is laying the bet

 

[THE SHRINK]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by big perm:

it isnt the amount bet as much as who is laying the bet <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

BINGO...