That surprises me. I thought Vegas set the lines to get it closer to 50/50.70% of the bets are on TCU to cover so I’m assuming UGA will cover easily.
I think there's a lot of misinformation that gets put out about betting trends. Las Vegas doesn't make big bets, it makes sure bets and the sure bet is to get the money close to 50/50. Since 1992, Vegas has made 5.17% on football bets, with the percent by year ranging from about 3% to 8%.That surprises me. I thought Vegas set the lines to get it closer to 50/50.
This is from one of the data guys at MGMI think there's a lot of misinformation that gets put out about betting trends. Las Vegas doesn't make big bets, it makes sure bets and the sure bet is to get the money close to 50/50. Since 1992, Vegas has made 5.17% on football bets, with the percent by year ranging from about 3% to 8%.
This is from one of the data guys at MGM
He’s just reporting the wagering data that he has access to as an employee of MGM. He reports all types of betting data on his twitter feed.Are these kinds of statements regulated or audited?
So MGM voluntarily lets an employee publish proprietary betting information to the world? How do you know the information he reports is accurate? Is it audited, regulated, or otherwise independently verified?He’s just reporting the wagering data that he has access to as an employee of MGM. He reports all types of betting data on his twitter feed.
Well yes they allow him to publish this data as you can see he does it regularly and hasn’t been fired.So MGM voluntarily lets an employee publish proprietary betting information to the world? How do you know the information he reports is accurate? Is it audited, regulated, or otherwise independently verified?
So which is more likely. MGM voluntarily allows an employee to publish proprietary information or it has an employee who publishes what MGM wants its potential customers to hear? If Vegas is allowing bets on big games to be skewed so heavily (70/30), how is its gross profit on football so consistent from year to year staying within 1% of a 5.17% gross profit in almost all years? Shouldn't it have some big years and some lean years?Well yes they allow him to publish this data as you can see he does it regularly and hasn’t been fired.
As far as your question on third party verification, I’m not sure that this rises to that level of scrutiny. You don’t have to believe him if you don’t want to.
So which is more likely. MGM voluntarily allows an employee to publish proprietary information or it has an employee who publishes what MGM wants its potential customers to hear? If Vegas is allowing bets on big games to be skewed so heavily (70/30), how is its gross profit on football so consistent from year to year staying within 1% of a 5.17% gross profit in almost all years? Shouldn't it have some big years and some lean years?
Well as you can see in the first line of the tweet he says that the line moved from -12.5 to -13 which is what they do in order to adjust discrepancies in betting on one side of the line.So which is more likely. MGM voluntarily allows an employee to publish proprietary information or it has an employee who publishes what MGM wants its potential customers to hear? If Vegas is allowing bets on big games to be skewed so heavily (70/30), how is its gross profit on football so consistent from year to year staying within 1% of a 5.17% gross profit in almost all years? Shouldn't it have some big years and some lean years?
Yep, SEC blue blood talent is going to take over. TCU is capable in a one-game scenario, but in multiple games back to back, their odds drastically decrease. They shot their wad against Michigan.Just have a feeling the clock hits midnight on Cinderella.
No doubt the line moves to get the bets closer to 50-50. But 70-30 is a HUGE imbalance that would lead to massive gains or losses for Vegas depending on the game results. I'm not buying that without knowing how it's been independently verified.Well as you can see in the first line of the tweet he says that the line moved from -12.5 to -13 which is what they do in order to adjust discrepancies in betting on one side of the line.
No doubt the line moves to get the bets closer to 50-50. But 70-30 is a HUGE imbalance that would lead to massive gains or losses for Vegas depending on the game results. I'm not buying that without knowing how it's been independently verified.
Also, the spread moved in the OPPOSITE direction of how it would move if 70% of the money was on TCU. Moving it from 12.5 to 13 would entice even more money to be bet on TCU.
He doesn’t say 70% of the money is on TCU. He said 70% of the bets are on TCU. Which means the 30% on UGA are a larger percentage of the total money wagered. That’s why the line moved in UGAs favorAlso, the spread moved in the OPPOSITE direction of how it would move if 70% of the money was on TCU. Moving it from 12.5 to 13 would entice even more money to be bet on TCU.
That's possible then. Still seems like a pretty huge imbalance but could be true. If it is true, it means that the big bettors are betting very heavily on Georgia.He doesn’t say 70% of the money is on TCU. He said 70% of the bets are on TCU. Which means the 30% on UGA are a larger percentage of the total money wagered. That’s why the line moved in UGAs favor
Yes. I know. That’s the point.That's possible then. Still seems like a pretty huge imbalance but could be true. If it is true, it means that the big bettors are betting very heavily on Georgia.
They do want the money close to 50/50. 10 people in line - 7 bet TCU for $100 each - 3 bet GA $250 each. 70% bet TCU but more money on GA, the line moves toward GA. Small sample, but, you get the picture.That surprises me. I thought Vegas set the lines to get it closer to 50/50.
Gotcha. So the bottom line money part still close to 50 / 50 I reckon,They do want the money close to 50/50. 10 people in line - 7 bet TCU for $100 each - 3 bet GA $250 each. 70% bet TCU but more money on GA, the line moves toward GA. Small sample, but, you get the picture.