How does a book "identify" a sharp player?
- Thread starter buddy
- Start date
Pinnacle Pulse
The inside line from PinnacleSports.com by Simon Noble
In our last few articles, we have talked quite a bit about "sharp? money. A sharp or professional player is one we expect will win in the long-term. How can we tell if any given player will be a consistent winner going forward? The most accurate way we have found is to compare the line a player received when they made their bet in relation to our closing line.
If a player consistently beats our closing price at Pinnacle Sports, he is likely to be a long-term winner ? period. Interestingly, we have found that this test is more reflective of a player?s future winning potential than their historical win/loss record with the company.
For example, if our closing price on the Eagles was -3 -104 and a customer played -3 +105 earlier in the week - that was a sharp bet. When a player can anticipate the line movement and does this consistently over a series of 100 bets or more, that player is conclusively sharp and will be up substantially in the long run.
What?s the quickest way to identify a player that needs to adjust their style of betting? One who pays a bad price. If other online sports books offer the Eagles at -3 -120 and a player wagers there instead when a better price was available elsewhere such as -3 -104 at Pinnacle Sports, he is almost certainly not sharp. Even if he has been winning thus far, that player will probably lose over time.
------------------------------------
Knowing what percent of bets a sharp wins will not tell you much ? a player could easily win 55% of the time in baseball and still be a long-term loser. Alternatively, they could win 15% of the time and be a winner depending on the odds and the prices they play.
At Pinnacle Sports betting when we evaluate players and handicappers we look at two things: their win/loss record and whether they consistently get the best of the number (the market moves agree with their selections). A handicapper who is 55-45 on the year, but is always on the right side of line moves is far more dangerous than a capper at 15-5 with no market agreement.
Despite what many handicappers claim, on major league sports no one person ever consistently holds more than 5-6% long-term, although syndicates can do slightly better than this. Only a small fraction of players are sharp and even they do not win every year. Outside the major pro sports, some of our best players hold 15%.
As to playing high volume or being very selective, different players use different approaches. The full-time professionals tend to be volume players, whereas the ?weekend warrior? sharps with normal 40-hour jobs are more selective.
----------------------
The inside line from PinnacleSports.com by Simon Noble
In our last few articles, we have talked quite a bit about "sharp? money. A sharp or professional player is one we expect will win in the long-term. How can we tell if any given player will be a consistent winner going forward? The most accurate way we have found is to compare the line a player received when they made their bet in relation to our closing line.
If a player consistently beats our closing price at Pinnacle Sports, he is likely to be a long-term winner ? period. Interestingly, we have found that this test is more reflective of a player?s future winning potential than their historical win/loss record with the company.
For example, if our closing price on the Eagles was -3 -104 and a customer played -3 +105 earlier in the week - that was a sharp bet. When a player can anticipate the line movement and does this consistently over a series of 100 bets or more, that player is conclusively sharp and will be up substantially in the long run.
What?s the quickest way to identify a player that needs to adjust their style of betting? One who pays a bad price. If other online sports books offer the Eagles at -3 -120 and a player wagers there instead when a better price was available elsewhere such as -3 -104 at Pinnacle Sports, he is almost certainly not sharp. Even if he has been winning thus far, that player will probably lose over time.
------------------------------------
Knowing what percent of bets a sharp wins will not tell you much ? a player could easily win 55% of the time in baseball and still be a long-term loser. Alternatively, they could win 15% of the time and be a winner depending on the odds and the prices they play.
At Pinnacle Sports betting when we evaluate players and handicappers we look at two things: their win/loss record and whether they consistently get the best of the number (the market moves agree with their selections). A handicapper who is 55-45 on the year, but is always on the right side of line moves is far more dangerous than a capper at 15-5 with no market agreement.
Despite what many handicappers claim, on major league sports no one person ever consistently holds more than 5-6% long-term, although syndicates can do slightly better than this. Only a small fraction of players are sharp and even they do not win every year. Outside the major pro sports, some of our best players hold 15%.
As to playing high volume or being very selective, different players use different approaches. The full-time professionals tend to be volume players, whereas the ?weekend warrior? sharps with normal 40-hour jobs are more selective.
----------------------
How 'bout a college football bettor who hits two, consecutive 7 team parlays? The first wager for $5, the second for $505.
One of most interesting articles I seen in a while IE--thanks
Amazing how reality is often diff than perceived notions.
Amazing how reality is often diff than perceived notions.
the article doesn't mention if they penalize that 'sharp' player. does pinnacle do that? I"m nowhere close to being that level but was wondering about it, alllegedly pinnacle doesn't do that, but if they are looking for them it's got to be a reason for it.
Might add great question Buddy--thank you also
I would assume on "penalizing" it would depend entirely on amount wagered--would appear to be 2 edged sword.Would be common sense to me to limit the hard hitters and welcome those that wager modestly and flag their accounts for line adjustments.
I would assume on "penalizing" it would depend entirely on amount wagered--would appear to be 2 edged sword.Would be common sense to me to limit the hard hitters and welcome those that wager modestly and flag their accounts for line adjustments.
i don't know how a book ids a sharp player,but i don't like books giving different lines to different people....that seems " not kosher" to me.
if a book ids a sharp player they should either take his action (maybe at higher juice) or not take his action altogether.
however, if you spot it early you can take advantage of the non-kosher lines as i did with a book this past football season.
if a book ids a sharp player they should either take his action (maybe at higher juice) or not take his action altogether.
however, if you spot it early you can take advantage of the non-kosher lines as i did with a book this past football season.
Who's to say Mr. Noble is telling the truth?
Wouldn't surprise me in the least if we are told one thing (which seems reasonable) yet they use something entirely different to "spot" those players who have found an Achilles Heel.
This is the world of eleven to ten. We want what they have and they don't want us to take it. They have ways to protect their interests. These "ways" are time-tested and proven true. One is by telling the naieve and the gullible something that "seems" reasonable, but in truth, it's several mountain peaks apart from the way things are actually done.
The sportsbooks are the growers and the bettors are the mushrooms.
Mushrooms are best grown by keeping them in the dark and feeding them bullshit.
Wouldn't surprise me in the least if we are told one thing (which seems reasonable) yet they use something entirely different to "spot" those players who have found an Achilles Heel.
This is the world of eleven to ten. We want what they have and they don't want us to take it. They have ways to protect their interests. These "ways" are time-tested and proven true. One is by telling the naieve and the gullible something that "seems" reasonable, but in truth, it's several mountain peaks apart from the way things are actually done.
The sportsbooks are the growers and the bettors are the mushrooms.
Mushrooms are best grown by keeping them in the dark and feeding them bullshit.
buddy said:
very cynical way of looking at things, buddy.
but i agree that's why i usually "take with a grain of salt" what books have to say.
