The Vegas 2 Step

[Packnut]

Once in a while, Vegas comes out with a spread so out of whack, that the public is salavating to bet on it. I've seen this game before my friends. The Bears laying 3.5 to a team with no O line and 2 rookie LB's look's like the lock of the century.

On paper, this one is'nt even close. The Bear D should man-handle our run game forcing Brett to go 3 and out or take chances and the turnovers begin. This game should'nt even be close.

The real clue is that the Public is chomping at the bit betting on the Bears and yet the line stays the same, or only moved a half point.

Take heart Packer fans. Vegas does'nt give money away. We've been hit over the head for the last month with the constant barrage from the experts at how bad we are, yet we are only a 3.5-4 point dog? Something stinks here and it ain't my dog's breath!

[GrnBay007]

I agree. I was surprised by the 3.5. But then again when u figure in the homefield advantage, which is usually 3pts. you are in essence looking at a 6.5 spread (not on paper). Make sense?

[Packnut]

I agree. I was surprised by the 3.5. But then again when u figure in the homefield advantage, which is usually 3pts. you are in essence looking at a 6.5 spread (not on paper). Make sense?

The HFA is already factored into the spread before it comes out. That's what I mean about this line. If you place a value of 3 points on the HFA,(which could be debated do the the Lambeau mystique being gone), they are saying the bears are a 1/2 point better than the Pack.

They are trying to entice the betting public to take the bears.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I agree. I was surprised by the 3.5. But then again when u figure in the homefield advantage, which is usually 3pts. you are in essence looking at a 6.5 spread (not on paper). Make sense?

The HFA is already factored into the spread before it comes out. That's what I mean about this line. If you place a value of 3 points on the HFA,(which could be debated do the the Lambeau mystique being gone), they are saying the bears are a 1/2 point better than the Pack.

They are trying to entice the betting public to take the bears.

Actually, they are saying the Bears are 6.5 points better than the Pack. If the game was in Chicago, they would be saying the Bears are 0.5 points better than the Pack.

[packrulz]

I was suprised but maybe Favre is an intangible that lowers the odds. He's carved up the Bears many times before.

[gbpackfan]

NFC North games are usually very close games. Both sides REALLY want to win. The Bears offense is junk. That probably helps the Pack in the odds. We will know a lot more about both teams on Sunday night.

[pbmax]

I agree. I was surprised by the 3.5. But then again when u figure in the homefield advantage, which is usually 3pts. you are in essence looking at a 6.5 spread (not on paper). Make sense?

The HFA is already factored into the spread before it comes out. That's what I mean about this line. If you place a value of 3 points on the HFA,(which could be debated do the the Lambeau mystique being gone), they are saying the bears are a 1/2 point better than the Pack.

They are trying to entice the betting public to take the bears.

Actually, they are saying the Bears are 6.5 points better than the Pack. If the game was in Chicago, they would be saying the Bears are 0.5 points better than the Pack.
Harvey, I think someone switched your plus and minus keys.

In Green Bay, Bears are 3.5 better
Neutral Site, Bears are 6.5 better
In Chicago, Bears are 9.5 better

And I confess that this line looked out of whack to me. Maybe counting on emotion in division game at home with new coach.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Harvey, I think someone switched your plus and minus keys.

In Green Bay, Bears are 3.5 better
Neutral Site, Bears are 6.5 better
In Chicago, Bears are 9.5 better

And I confess that this line looked out of whack to me. Maybe counting on emotion in division game at home with new coach.

No, packnut stated that the oddsmakers are saying the Bears are only 0.5 points better than the Pack. I told him that they are saying the Bears are 6.5 points better than the Pack (backed up by your post). If the line was 3.5 and the game was in Chicago, then his assertion would be correct.

[pbmax]

Harvey, I think someone switched your plus and minus keys.

In Green Bay, Bears are 3.5 better
Neutral Site, Bears are 6.5 better
In Chicago, Bears are 9.5 better

And I confess that this line looked out of whack to me. Maybe counting on emotion in division game at home with new coach.

No, packnut stated that the oddsmakers are saying the Bears are only 0.5 points better than the Pack. I told him that they are saying the Bears are 6.5 points better than the Pack (backed up by your post). If the line was 3.5 and the game was in Chicago, then his assertion would be correct.
Gotcha. My bad jumping the gun.

[FavreChild]

Something stinks here and it ain't my dog's breath!

As Jimmy Masterlock always says....RUN TO THE SMELL!

[gbgary]

bookmakers want half the betting public betting on each side so they move the spread to accomplish this. in other words 50% betting on the Pack and 50% betting on the bears. it's not a true indication of how good a team is but it's their interpretation of how they believe the public will go when they set the odds...then they move it accordingly.

[Scott Campbell]

bookmakers want half the betting public betting on each side so they move the spread to accomplish this. in other words 50% betting on the Pack and 50% betting on the bears. it's not a true indication of how good a team is but it's their interpretation of how they believe the public will go when they set the odds...then they move it accordingly.


That's a damn fine explanation Gary.

[pbmax]

bookmakers want half the betting public betting on each side so they move the spread to accomplish this. in other words 50% betting on the Pack and 50% betting on the bears. it's not a true indication of how good a team is but it's their interpretation of how they believe the public will go when they set the odds...then they move it accordingly.
There was a University study done about this very question, and while this was true in general, they found that Vegas maximized their return by means OTHER than having equal money on both sides.

I will now attempt to find the link.

[cheesner]

Too elaborate a little further, the books don't make money by the bets themselves, they charge a 10% fee on all winning bets. Therefore, they don't care where the line is, just so the bettors are 50-50.

The line does not reflect what Vegas thinks will be the outcome, but what Vegas thinks the public thinks will be the outcome.

I agree it is out of whack - must be a lot of rich Packer fans with those green and gold goggles on.

[falco]

The whole point of the small spread is that both teams have anemic offenses...vegas thinks it will be a low scoring affair.

[gbgary]

bookmakers want half the betting public betting on each side so they move the spread to accomplish this. in other words 50% betting on the Pack and 50% betting on the bears. it's not a true indication of how good a team is but it's their interpretation of how they believe the public will go when they set the odds...then they move it accordingly.
There was a University study done about this very question, and while this was true in general, they found that Vegas maximized their return by means OTHER than having equal money on both sides.

I will now attempt to find the link.

i was speaking (typing) in general terms. lol




That's a damn fine explanation Gary.

thanks.



The whole point of the small spread is that both teams have anemic offenses...vegas thinks it will be a low scoring affair.

what is the over-and-under?

[KYPack]

Too elaborate a little further, the books don't make money by the bets themselves, they charge a 10% fee on all winning bets. Therefore, they don't care where the line is, just so the bettors are 50-50.

The line does not reflect what Vegas thinks will be the outcome, but what Vegas thinks the public thinks will be the outcome.

I agree it is out of whack - must be a lot of rich Packer fans with those green and gold goggles on.

It's actually 11 - 10 or roughly 9%.

It's called the vig & ya gotta pay it or some guy that looks like Mike Tice comes to your house to collect.

An old bookie taught me a valuable lesson. Let's say the Texans are made a 2 pt fav over the Steelers, with the Steelers at home (before Rberger had the medical problem). Bet on the Texans. It's called "follow the smart money" That kinda line means something is up.

I never had the balls to "follow the smart money", so I never won big.

[Packnut]

Some very nieve thinking here when it comes to vegas and the lines. There are several places online where the public money flow on bets is posted. The bears are avg about 75% of the bets yet the line has'nt moved. All that stuff about Vegas wanting even action is fairy tale crap.

The game is played on the field but this is a very curious line non-the-less.

[Guiness]

Some very nieve thinking here when it comes to vegas and the lines. There are several places online where the public money flow on bets is posted. The bears are avg about 75% of the bets yet the line has'nt moved. All that stuff about Vegas wanting even action is fairy tale crap.

The game is played on the field but this is a very curious line non-the-less.

That is odd - I wonder how they determine where the public money is going? I think betting houses guard that pretty closely.

As others have mentioned above, bookmakers wants a guaranteed return, which means they want even money on each side. I can't remember how it works exactly, but essentially they collect two $10 bets (one on each side) and pay the winner $19. They keep the $1 - that's their profit.

oops - a google search found me this:

It is standard for point spread bets in most sports that you wager $110 to win $100.

[Packnut]

Some very nieve thinking here when it comes to vegas and the lines. There are several places online where the public money flow on bets is posted. The bears are avg about 75% of the bets yet the line has'nt moved. All that stuff about Vegas wanting even action is fairy tale crap.

The game is played on the field but this is a very curious line non-the-less.

That is odd - I wonder how they determine where the public money is going? I think betting houses guard that pretty closely.

As others have mentioned above, bookmakers wants a guaranteed return, which means they want even money on each side. I can't remember how it works exactly, but essentially they collect two $10 bets (one on each side) and pay the winner $19. They keep the $1 - that's their profit.

There are a few online sportsbooks who post them if you have an account with them. There are also several football forums that members make picks and the percentages and line moves are listed.

[Fosco33]

what is the over-and-under?

35