Hooligans Plays Baccarat

ATTN Sharps (warning: sports betting related material)

  • Start date •
  • Replies
    27 Replies •
  • Views 1,954 Views
Follow
maybe the props are less efficient, when they first come out. I would think that the spread and totals would be way more efficient due to it being the highest bet game of the year.


but being that the volume consists of way more public and square bets, that sort of drown out the sharper bets. Maybe it is a bit less efficient and more just a reflection of public sentiment and random joe blow's making a rare large bet.

Also, doesn't vegas occasionally have to cover their ass with the futures involved from pre-season bets? like when the Cards or Rams were on the superbowl in recent years?
 
There are much higher limits on the side and total of the Super Bowl matchup than regular season games, though. I wouldn't necessarily say that sharp action is drowned out. How many people do you know that only bet the Super Bowl and not other games throughout the season or postseason? I don't know anyone that would fall into that category. I don't think futures effect the lines of any single event. I'll ask a few linesmen tomorrow, but I'm pretty sure it's not a factor. Chances are that they would typically have futures pending for both participants anyway. I'd be willing to bet that they would rather let any exposure from those wagers play out rather than create a situation where they get hit hard with an off number anyway.

There are definitely inefficiencies in Super Bowl props when they open. No question there.
 
how much higher are the limits for the side and total? I was thinking about that while I was in the shower. I've only been betting on sports for 3 super bowls. So I don't have much of a sample size to draw from.


but it seems as if they line for the superbowl will only move .5 to 1 point during the 2 weeks it is out. Is the opener that extra sharp, and the 2 way action that close. or are the linesmakers afraid to move it too much in fear of getting middled. I also vaguely recall some pretty obscene amounts being bet on the super bowl by non-professional "stars" such as that one boxer.

I also remember reading that most sharps don't treat the super bowl any different than any other event and just bet it accordingly, but I can recall hearing conversely that Billy Walters group had some HUGE bets on the super bowl.
 
It's pretty rare for any NFL side to move much, honestly. They do a pretty good job with openers for NFL. Most Vegas shops will take $100k on a SB side gameday without batting an eyelash. Some casinos have windows dedicated to $50k+ wagers. It depends who you are in the weeks beforehand. It's far easier for sharps to get their fill on an event like the Superbowl. Normally, if you have a bankroll in the millions of dollars, you have a really hard time finding enough outs to fill your appropriate stake size. The books usually don't have a huge amount of exposure on either side. They're more than happy with the vig in an event with so much volume. They have very few losing years. In fact, I think they lost on the Giants/Pats Superbowl for the first time in a long time. And I believe the public was heavily favoring the Patriots...
 
Pinny has been taking $100k all year on sides. Don't remember their limits last year, but a few days before the conference championship games the money lines and super bowl futures at pinny implied AFC winning 53% of the time, both favorites won the conference championship games, yet the Colts closed at 65% in the super bowl. So either pinny was severely wrong two weeks before, something occurred to cause the move, or the super bowl line was shaded. I really don't know.
 
Greek opens most NFL lines first, but bookmaker and pinny come up right after.

The line of thought is that there is more square money bet on the super bowl than any other game and that can drive the line off. I don't really buy that. I mean there were 7 and even 7.5's all over the place at square shops on gameday 2 years ago between Pit/Az but pinny never came close to moving to 7. If I'm gonna bet the side/total it will be because some square shop is hanging an arb v the sharp books.

The other thing that's talked about is the ml getting out of whack with the spread. I'm not sure if this is really an inefficiency caused by square money (for some reason recently squares have allegedly been playing money line dogs on the super bowl --- many pros i know had a shitload of patriots and steelers money line (and I guess we heard of big "pros/touts" with big colts ml positions). There were good arb/middle ops with az +7.5 and pit -200 available at the same book! (sia/bodog don't bet them both at the same book!)

Pinny's sb limit in recent years was 100k, but nfl sides were only 30, playoffs 50, they've had 50std and a bunch rasied to 100 this year so maybe they'll be taking more. They've had 100k on most bowl games, and 250k on world cup final. Must be nice to have that kind of roll.
 
There is a dramatic increase in recreational wagers on the Super Bowl but the number of sharp bets stays the same. You don't all of a sudden have a high volume of sharp wagers come from out of nowhere to offset the recreational wagers.

I could be wrong. I used to feel the same way as Fischy on this subject but I've since changed my thinking.
 
There really is no such thing as sharp or square money, it's just money.

I meant to mention in my last post that people talk about the ml/spread sometimes being off in relation to one another on the super bowl. I wonder if this is not an inefficiency but rather something peculiar to the way teams approach super bowls. There's obviously not nearly enough data to draw any conclusions, but the 25 or so lined games suggest there might be, but it's probably just noise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.