I just posted this column on my page. Figured I'd post it here as well. Enjoy.
PUBLIC SAFETY
by Nick Douglas
nick_douglas@mac.com
Fact: A large percentage of sports gamblers lose money. Fact: Many of these sports gamblers post their picks on message boards or are part of consensus reports. Fact: Betting against these losing gamblers or consensus reports is a good way to handicap. Or maybe not.
It is a maddening part of handicapping. As a seasoned handicapper it is common knowledge that sportsbooks are raking in money from square gamblers. Knowing this fact and knowing many of the plays that these losing gamblers are betting, there just has to be a way to skim some of those profits off the top of the sportsbooks. There is, but it?s probably not by straight contrarian handicapping.
Novice handicappers do lose a lot of money, but they aren?t necessarily bad at picking games. Novice handicappers tend to beat themselves. They go ?on tilt?, as poker players say, and lose control of their money management. It is this malady -- betting too much money on make-up games -- that ends up resulting in sportsbook profits most of the time. In fact it is quite common to find players who win over 50% of their games but lose every penny they fund to sportsbooks.
Fading consensus reports and losing handicappers is not only a suspect long term strategy, but it can become severely damaging to a person?s own handicapping. Reading consensus reports or fade-worthy posts before handicapping often gives a distorted view of a play. If a handicapper knows that a square handicapper is betting one way, every bit of research that turns up a reason to bet the opposite way will become that much stronger. A play that might have otherwise been too soft to make a wager on could end up being played because of this askew view. Likewise, a consensus report or a novice gambler backing the same play that a handicapper is backing can often lead to one sloughing off a quality play. Research done through methods proven to produce long term profits may be thrown away, and for what? Because some square just happened to find an acorn on that day? Remember the principle of opportunity cost: Money not earned is the same thing as money lost.
If every player hits 50% of their plays, sportsbooks will eventually win everything and players will eventually lose everything. Assuming the line is -110, that same principle applies all the way up to players hitting 52% of their plays. To find a truly valuable fade, plays must come in at about 46% or less. That leaves a startling 8% gap between losses and wins. Even truly terrible handicappers will rarely fall at or below these numbers when figuring raw percentages.
This is not to say that contrarian handicapping is truly worthless. Only that it must be balanced with raw research. Contrarian handicapping probably works best with the specific combination of watching line movement. Often times certain novices or consensus reports can be good indications of where money is flowing. When line movement at certain sportsbooks matches up in a certain way with said novices, a fade could be in order. Truly profiting from this idea requires an extensive time commitment and the knowledge of how to read line movement. It must also be noted that more money is probably lost on watching line movement than any other handicapping method. One must be extremely sharp because there are so many other line watchers out there competing for the precious few soft numbers.
As with any other use of the information posted on Mad Jack?s, contrarian handicapping of unsuccessful gamblers and consensus reports must be carefully sifted through. Successful handicapping is not a lazy man?s game. Simply identifying poor gamblers and fading them will likely result in long term losses. For no matter how stupid certain segments of the gambling public appear to be, it is money management that usually kills their bankroll, not the inability to pick games.
PUBLIC SAFETY
by Nick Douglas
nick_douglas@mac.com
Fact: A large percentage of sports gamblers lose money. Fact: Many of these sports gamblers post their picks on message boards or are part of consensus reports. Fact: Betting against these losing gamblers or consensus reports is a good way to handicap. Or maybe not.
It is a maddening part of handicapping. As a seasoned handicapper it is common knowledge that sportsbooks are raking in money from square gamblers. Knowing this fact and knowing many of the plays that these losing gamblers are betting, there just has to be a way to skim some of those profits off the top of the sportsbooks. There is, but it?s probably not by straight contrarian handicapping.
Novice handicappers do lose a lot of money, but they aren?t necessarily bad at picking games. Novice handicappers tend to beat themselves. They go ?on tilt?, as poker players say, and lose control of their money management. It is this malady -- betting too much money on make-up games -- that ends up resulting in sportsbook profits most of the time. In fact it is quite common to find players who win over 50% of their games but lose every penny they fund to sportsbooks.
Fading consensus reports and losing handicappers is not only a suspect long term strategy, but it can become severely damaging to a person?s own handicapping. Reading consensus reports or fade-worthy posts before handicapping often gives a distorted view of a play. If a handicapper knows that a square handicapper is betting one way, every bit of research that turns up a reason to bet the opposite way will become that much stronger. A play that might have otherwise been too soft to make a wager on could end up being played because of this askew view. Likewise, a consensus report or a novice gambler backing the same play that a handicapper is backing can often lead to one sloughing off a quality play. Research done through methods proven to produce long term profits may be thrown away, and for what? Because some square just happened to find an acorn on that day? Remember the principle of opportunity cost: Money not earned is the same thing as money lost.
If every player hits 50% of their plays, sportsbooks will eventually win everything and players will eventually lose everything. Assuming the line is -110, that same principle applies all the way up to players hitting 52% of their plays. To find a truly valuable fade, plays must come in at about 46% or less. That leaves a startling 8% gap between losses and wins. Even truly terrible handicappers will rarely fall at or below these numbers when figuring raw percentages.
This is not to say that contrarian handicapping is truly worthless. Only that it must be balanced with raw research. Contrarian handicapping probably works best with the specific combination of watching line movement. Often times certain novices or consensus reports can be good indications of where money is flowing. When line movement at certain sportsbooks matches up in a certain way with said novices, a fade could be in order. Truly profiting from this idea requires an extensive time commitment and the knowledge of how to read line movement. It must also be noted that more money is probably lost on watching line movement than any other handicapping method. One must be extremely sharp because there are so many other line watchers out there competing for the precious few soft numbers.
As with any other use of the information posted on Mad Jack?s, contrarian handicapping of unsuccessful gamblers and consensus reports must be carefully sifted through. Successful handicapping is not a lazy man?s game. Simply identifying poor gamblers and fading them will likely result in long term losses. For no matter how stupid certain segments of the gambling public appear to be, it is money management that usually kills their bankroll, not the inability to pick games.
