Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkview_Pirate
Many of us go through life in a state of delusion, but that's irrelevant for those who maintain accurate records. When it comes to sports betting, I would venture to say that it's tougher than it was 30 years ago, in part due to the amount of information that's more readily available. The lines are sharper, and line movements not nearly as telling (IMHO) as they once were. In spite of that, I can count the number of winning horseplayers I've ever met on one hand, while even today I continue to run into new acquaintances, often younger, who crush the man in sports.
What you seem to be hinting at though is something else, and it's unclear to me what "changes" are taking place. Are the sports books sharing pools now? Do they have the inside scoop on drugged up or injured players and fixed games, offering sucker juicy lines on the wrong side? Perhaps a shady timekeeper with a slow hand providing an edge to the over? I can see one edge of analyzing the wagers made, and fading the losers. But that's easy enough to do from the player's side.
How does not using numerous accounts/books reduce any additional risk if we're just talking juice?
As for variance, some of us are well aware of the statistics involved. I also know that I'd never have a sample size large enough to bet on a game for another 400 or 500 years of results in the database, so I've decided to gamble on my gut instinct. I can live with being "lucky" with a positive balance, and still sleep at night.
And out of curiosity, what game are these "sensible" players displaying their sensibility? Poker? The stock market? Bonds?
|
You actually are getting at the major sources of the delusion. I am glad you realize the things that 99 percent of my sports betting friends do not.
No, sports books are not generally trading on inside information. But they are no longer fully balancing the action in the events that draw the biggest hamdle. Using computer modeling, they can position themselves to make some more money.
