Opponents not looking great of late

[TSmith34, Inc.]

They weren’t able to take a winning shot in .5 like last week.....which is humanely impossible as so rated by the scientists at Scoop?

But it is viciously possible thanks to Savage Sam.

[Lennys Tap]

They weren’t able to take a winning shot in .5 like last week.....which is humanely impossible as so rated by the scientists at Scoop?

Said nobody here ever.

[Marcus92]

You're wrong.

I hate this kind of post on Scoop. Want to disagree? Fine. But "you're wrong" is not discussion. It's barely above "I know you are but what am I?" Offer something, anything, worth considering.

[Lennys Tap]

I hate this kind of post on Scoop. Want to disagree? Fine. But "you're wrong" is not discussion. It's barely above "I know you are but what am I?" Offer something, anything, worth considering.

If you read this thread you know that I posted several time facts about how and why   Vegas does their business and why Chico was incorrect on this matter. Sometimes his obstinance on this (and other) matters where he is factually/provably wrong frustrates.

[Cheeks]

If you read this thread you know that I posted several time facts about how and why   Vegas does their business and why Chico was incorrect on this matter. Sometimes his obstinance on this (and other) matters where he is factually/provably wrong frustrates.

I'm not wrong on it, unless the books are incorrectly talking about their business to the leagues, and entertainment conglomerates.  They aren't, by the way.  I provided you with information, as well.  To each their own.  The purpose of the line is to draw betting on both sides, repeated AGAIN just in the last two weeks by those setting the line for tomorrow's fight and Sunday's NFL games.  They need to make money, and adjusting risk is how they do it.  No one has said they aren't using data, of course they are.  They are using that data to make even better choices on what the lines will be, but the end result is to preserve as much of the VIG as they can for themselves.  If the betting is too one sided, they are exposed and it is how they lose.  I don't understand how you don't recognize that yes, to your point, they use the data to determine who they think is going to win, but the ultimate line is set to balance the betting. 

A classic example was given to us by one of their experts. If their data says the Packers are going to win by 3 points, they would adjust the line even further because so many Packer fans pour money onto the team by betting with their hearts.  They mentioned probably 10 teams just off the cuff they have to do this every time, and if they don't it would put too much money on one side even though the data tells them to set the line at 3 points.

[Cheeks]

Said nobody here ever.

Actually, with movement people made various claims about what was possible.  .3 for tip in, mostly because that is a rule.  Then there were other opinions about what was and was not possible.

"There is absolutely no way someone can catch a ball at the top of their jump, come down from that jump to the ground, jump again and release a shot in .8 seconds. It's impossible."

The UTEP player made several moves, the clock may have needed to start earlier, who knows.  All I know is humans can do a lot of things that others say is impossible.

[avid1010]

I'm not wrong on it, unless the books are incorrectly talking about their business to the leagues, and entertainment conglomerates.  They aren't, by the way.  I provided you with information, as well.  To each their own.  The purpose of the line is to draw betting on both sides, repeated AGAIN just in the last two weeks by those setting the line for tomorrow's fight and Sunday's NFL games.  They need to make money, and adjusting risk is how they do it.  No one has said they aren't using data, of course they are.  They are using that data to make even better choices on what the lines will be, but the end result is to preserve as much of the VIG as they can for themselves.  If the betting is too one sided, they are exposed and it is how they lose.  I don't understand how you don't recognize that yes, to your point, they use the data to determine who they think is going to win, but the ultimate line is set to balance the betting. 

A classic example was given to us by one of their experts. If their data says the Packers are going to win by 3 points, they would adjust the line even further because so many Packer fans pour money onto the team by betting with their hearts.  They mentioned probably 10 teams just off the cuff they have to do this every time, and if they don't it would put too much money on one side even though the data tells them to set the line at 3 points.

I've watched documentaries where they talk with the guys that set the lines at various casinos who have said the opposite of this.  If there are 10 teams they have to take points from those 10 teams would fail to cover at a higher percentage each and every year.  If you look at the data how teams cover...it doesnt paint that picture.  If it did...it would be the easiest $ in the world.  They can set a line for 3pts...watch it move because a bunch of fans bet and watch it come back as the real betters take advantage.  There are betters that purposely bet to move the line on a low profile game and then bet against their initial bet as it's a better deal then buying points.

In additon...they said they will hold a line at times if they believe it's a good bet for them.  Taking the 5%, or whatever it is, is not the only way they choose to make $...legally it has to be a game of luck so it's an interesting predicament. 

[MU82]

Actually,

My son used to have a know-it-all friend who began every other sentence with, "Actually ... "

It was his way of letting the rest of the world know that he knew more than they did on pretty much every subject.

He was only 12, though, so at least he had an excuse.

[UWW2MU]

At first I was rather annoyed that this was no longer a convenient place to see how past opponents were doing... but now I find myself impressed with some posters ability to take pretty much any comment on topic and spin it to some wild off topic conversation. 

I really thought my UTEP update was a solid post to put things on track.

Scoop amazes again!  I'm not even mad.

[Lennys Tap]

A classic example was given to us by one of their experts. If their data says the Packers are going to win by 3 points, they would adjust the line even further because so many Packer fans pour money onto the team by betting with their hearts.  They mentioned probably 10 teams just off the cuff they have to do this every time, and if they don't it would put too much money on one side even though the data tells them to set the line at 3 points.

So you think that when their numbers/data say Packers -3 makes the game a coin flip they're going to put the game out at Packers -6 because they fear bets from Packer fans. Now the game is no longer a true coin flip. Instead of both teams being 50/50 to cover, the team who deserves to be +3 but is now +6 is a big (maybe 57-43%) favorite. Every professional gambler (they use the same data as Vegas to handicap games) would bet heavily on them because of that edge - their bets would dwarf "Packer fans" bets and instead of having a lopsided bet on a 50/50 proposition getting 11/10 odds, Vegas would be stuck with a 43% chance to win a bet getting 11/10 odds. Do the former enough times and you become billionaires. Do the latter enough and you go broke.

I don't want to waste any more of the boards time on this.  Anyone who wants to discuss this can PM me. I don't know if you can't grasp these rather rudimentary concepts or are just stubborn but I don't care anymore.

[Marcus92]

If you read this thread you know that I posted several time facts about how and why   Vegas does their business and why Chico was incorrect on this matter. Sometimes his obstinance on this (and other) matters where he is factually/provably wrong frustrates.

Sorry, must have missed your earlier post.

[Cheeks]

I've watched documentaries where they talk with the guys that set the lines at various casinos who have said the opposite of this.  If there are 10 teams they have to take points from those 10 teams would fail to cover at a higher percentage each and every year.  If you look at the data how teams cover...it doesnt paint that picture.  If it did...it would be the easiest $ in the world.  They can set a line for 3pts...watch it move because a bunch of fans bet and watch it come back as the real betters take advantage.  There are betters that purposely bet to move the line on a low profile game and then bet against their initial bet as it's a better deal then buying points.

In additon...they said they will hold a line at times if they believe it's a good bet for them.  Taking the 5%, or whatever it is, is not the only way they choose to make $...legally it has to be a game of luck so it's an interesting predicament.

Avid

I don’t know how to say this differently.  Literally, going on right now, in the sports industry are detailed discussions with the major betting houses, the leagues, integrity data companies (I.e. Sport Radar, etc) distributors of sports content....this is no surprise, very public.  As a part of those discussions have been a number of 101 presentations on how best ting is done, how data is used, what the data is used for (you can imagine the data privacy issues question for a company like Apple, Amazon, AT&T, Google, etc are enormous), along with latency questions since 82% of all bets in UK occur after the game starts....they are prop bets and where much of the money is made.

That being said, for wager line establishment and how those are set, it could it have been more iron clad crystal clear in writing how and why lines are set.  To get equal money on both sides as best as they can possibly do to minimize the risk to them and get the juice / or Vig, which is about 6 to 8%.   A lot of things go into the analysis of that line, more data than ever before, but the purpose remains the same....create a line which attempts to draw equal money on both sides as that is how the books make the most money with the least amount of risk.

[THRILLHO]

Avid

I don’t know how to say this differently.  Literally, going on right now, in the sports industry are detailed discussions with the major betting houses, the leagues, integrity data companies (I.e. Sport Radar, etc) distributors of sports content....this is no surprise, very public.  As a part of those discussions have been a number of 101 presentations on how best ting is done, how data is used, what the data is used for (you can imagine the data privacy issues question for a company like Apple, Amazon, AT&T, Google, etc are enormous), along with latency questions since 82% of all bets in UK occur after the game starts....they are prop bets and where much of the money is made.

That being said, for wager line establishment and how those are set, it could it have been more iron clad crystal clear in writing how and why lines are set.  To get equal money on both sides as best as they can possibly do to minimize the risk to them and get the juice / or Vig, which is about 6 to 8%.   A lot of things go into the analysis of that line, more data than ever before, but the purpose remains the same....create a line which attempts to draw equal money on both sides as that is how the books make the most money with the least amount of risk.

How about you guys just exchange phone numbers and figure it out yourselves instead of on an unrelated thread?

[Cheeks]

Wisconsin looking pretty good, could give Michigan their first loss of the year.

[forgetful]

Wisconsin looking pretty good, could give Michigan their first loss of the year.

A little home cooking, or as I call it the Madison Special, to help them on their cause.

[jsglow]

A little home cooking, or as I call it the Madison Special, to help them on their cause.

There's no 'home cooking'.  Wisconsin is playing like their season depends on it.  And Michigan simply isn't.

[Cheeks]

A little home cooking, or as I call it the Madison Special, to help them on their cause.

Michigan sloppy. 15 turnovers has been the key.  Uw-madison extension with only 9.  UM only shooting 25% from 3, and 42% for the game....not very good efficiency.

I don't see any home cooking.

[rocket surgeon]

  so does our win over UW become big again?

[4everwarriors]

Huge W four Bucky, hey?

[GooooMarquette]

  so does our win over UW become big again?

Bucky sucks.

[Cheeks]

  so does our win over UW become big again?

It looks better.  I'm guessing MU82's prediction that they are toast becomes a little less crispy, too.  Top high school player in the state at the game, too.  Some people think with their heart, not their brains, aye?

[tower912]

Good.  Nothing more arrogant and entitled than a self righteous Michigan fan.  Time for them to lose.

[🏀]

Sweet rush.

[CountryRoads]

Congrats to the badgers on their super bowl win. Crowd storm and all...

[rocket surgeon]

  fire beilein, eyn'a?