Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyFondue
I forgot to check this thread the last few days, I'm surprised to see the total so far Off from the projected total. It looks like the public bet a lot on the over as well ( 70% ish it looks like) and I remember someone saying when the public heavily sides one way they are usually wrong for whatever reason.
Now that we've seen the outcome of game one you are switching to the under. Does it seem obvious now that the under was a good bet or was it just something that was too unpredictable ?
yes in game 1 the public was on over, & they have hit it now and then. the bottomline is the booker is in business to make money & they will set the line for public to choose, in ideal situation for them is to set a 50/50 proposition for gambler to choose. The perception is smart money is on the booker's side, & astute bettor do monitor the line moment & make deduction accordingly where the public is siding, but be warned that it had been know that the booker themselves do inflated the line moment to confuse people in general, & yes they're the winner in the long run.
Ability to side with the booker is just a factor, the other important one is to pick the winner with in depth of understanding the game through capping using information of key match up, game data etc, look for favorable spot > 60% probability of success factor, but even with the very best proven capper, the rate of success is >50% & 60% <, bases per season record.
Why it is so off, the explanation i can think of is:
seeing Dal came of a decent shooting against LA, Mem & OKC. Also seeing Miami put >188 pt at home against stingy PA Boston & would expect a slight below regular scoring game but not a super low like this one,
but it turned out in game 1, it's very rare to see both teams shots below 40% FG in 1st game of any opening series, also understandable that this is 2nd rank shooting defensive team vs a top 5 defense team with excellent jump shooting ability.
Last edited by kobstopa; 06-01-2011 at 04:47 AM.