OT - How to bet against the public

[psuasskicker]

In NFL sports betting, one of the best and most profitable strategies to use is to find games that the public loves, and bet on the other side of them. You do this typically close to game-time because the public for the most part tends to increase their action closer to game-time, although this can be somewhat risky at times as public action can come in earlier (such as in the first week of the season when everyone's dying to get money on games) and late money could be sharps pushing the lines late.

There is a contingent of people out there that have begun calling this "BSP betting" or "BSP games" or some version of "BSP" in general. It stands for "bar stool pundit," and in general it means that if you walk up to any avg Joe in a bar and say "Who do you like?" then he gives you a completely unobjective diatribe about why [public fav] will crush the [spread] / [team] / [over/under]. The sharp then goes out and puts his money on the other side.

The value created can be two-fold. First, Vegas shades the line on games where they know they'll get heavy public action on one side. If Vegas thinks the line should be -3, but knows BSPs will go crazy on that, maybe they'll put it at -4 so they don't take such a beating if the BSP wins. Second, BSPs push the line themselves with their action, because BSP money will pretty much always outweigh sharp money.

A terrific recent example of this was the Patriots / Giants Superbowl. The Pats were certainly favorites to win this game. However, the Pats had not looked as dominant toward the end of the season, and the Giants had both played them tough as well as run through some very good NFC teams in the playoffs to make that game, so starting off as two TD favorites was clearly out of whack. The BSPs pushed the line another I think two to three points that year and if I remember correctly the line closed at 16.5 (though I might not be remembering perfectly). Either way, every sharp was on the Giants with points and moneyline, and I know several that absolutely cleaned house that game.

A good example from this week is the Ravens -13. OTB at -9 it opened at -10 and has since pushed to a whopping -13. This three points isn't as big a move as say going from -4 to -7, but it's still a pretty sizable move. I've taken my lumps here for calling this game out, so I won't bother rehashing.

However, one other game as a particularly striking example should be called out here. It's probably a bigger BSP play than Ravens -13. It's Vikings/Browns, which right now resides Browns +4. The BSPs are out on Favre, the playoff Vikings, and the fact that the Brownies can't possibly win this game cause they suck so badly. In a perfect demonstration of this, I point to the "Pick 5 ATS" thread.

In that thread, not including myself, 33 people have picked their five. 16 picked on the Vikings -4 @ Cleveland game. Of those 16, 15 picked Minnesota laying the points. It is the very definition of public betting.

The sharp side is Clev +4, and if it goes to 4.5 I'll probably hit that line as hard as I'm hitting the Chiefs.

- C -

DISCLAIMER - BSP betting is profitable, but not perfect. There is no such thing as a "lock" in sports betting. BSP picks (against the spread) will still win 40% or so of the time.

[52decleetzu]

In NFL sports betting, one of the best and most profitable strategies to use is to find games that the public loves, and bet on the other side of them. You do this typically close to game-time because the public for the most part tends to increase their action closer to game-time, although this can be somewhat risky at times as public action can come in earlier (such as in the first week of the season when everyone's dying to get money on games) and late money could be sharps pushing the lines late.

There is a contingent of people out there that have begun calling this "BSP betting" or "BSP games" or some version of "BSP" in general. It stands for "bar stool pundit," and in general it means that if you walk up to any avg Joe in a bar and say "Who do you like?" then he gives you a completely unobjective diatribe about why [public fav] will crush the [spread] / [team] / [over/under]. The sharp then goes out and puts his money on the other side.

The value created can be two-fold. First, Vegas shades the line on games where they know they'll get heavy public action on one side. If Vegas thinks the line should be -3, but knows BSPs will go crazy on that, maybe they'll put it at -4 so they don't take such a beating if the BSP wins. Second, BSPs push the line themselves with their action, because BSP money will pretty much always outweigh sharp money.

A terrific recent example of this was the Patriots / Giants Superbowl. The Pats were certainly favorites to win this game. However, the Pats had not looked as dominant toward the end of the season, and the Giants had both played them tough as well as run through some very good NFC teams in the playoffs to make that game, so starting off as two TD favorites was clearly out of whack. The BSPs pushed the line another I think two to three points that year and if I remember correctly the line closed at 16.5 (though I might not be remembering perfectly). Either way, every sharp was on the Giants with points and moneyline, and I know several that absolutely cleaned house that game.

A good example from this week is the Ravens -13. OTB at -9 it opened at -10 and has since pushed to a whopping -13. This three points isn't as big a move as say going from -4 to -7, but it's still a pretty sizable move. I've taken my lumps here for calling this game out, so I won't bother rehashing.

However, one other game as a particularly striking example should be called out here. It's probably a bigger BSP play than Ravens -13. It's Vikings/Browns, which right now resides Browns +4. The BSPs are out on Favre, the playoff Vikings, and the fact that the Brownies can't possibly win this game cause they suck so badly. In a perfect demonstration of this, I point to the "Pick 5 ATS" thread.

In that thread, not including myself, 33 people have picked their five. 16 picked on the Vikings -4 @ Cleveland game. Of those 16, 15 picked Minnesota laying the points. It is the very definition of public betting.

The sharp side is Clev +4, and if it goes to 4.5 I'll probably hit that line as hard as I'm hitting the Chiefs.

- C -

DISCLAIMER - BSP betting is profitable, but not perfect. There is no such thing as a "lock" in sports betting. BSP picks (against the spread) will still win 40% or so of the time.

The Vikings will crush the Browns and it has little to do with Farve. All he has to do is not turn the ball over and hand it off to Peterson 25 times.

Their defense is great (The Williams boys have been cleared to play) and Adrian Peterson is going to run roughshot over the Cleveland run defense which is terrrible (28th last year. I know it means nothing...of course)

Call it whatever the hell you want but it has zero to do with the public or anyone else, it has to do with the 2 teams on the field playing.

I know everyone but yourself is a member of the "stupid public" sitting on a "bar stool" though so I'm sure I am completely wrong about everything I said.

[Ravenswarrior19]

Like I said in the 1st thread on the matter ... looks like the "pick vs the spread" contest is gonna be extra juicy this year.

For the 2 games in question-
I am staying away from Ravens -13 because, while we glided up and down the field in the preseason, we didn't exactly glide into the endzone.

Redzone offense has always been our bugaboo. I could see a final of 16-6 (1TD 3FG - 2FG), and a KC cover.

I think I will take Vikings -4, cuz I AM Johnnie Q. Public and the Browns are gonna suck. The Vikings D will break Brady Queen, and force 3 fumbles. May be a shutout.

[Greg]

. . .

However, one other game as a particularly striking example should be called out here. It's probably a bigger BSP play than Ravens -13. It's Vikings/Browns, which right now resides Browns +4. The BSPs are out on Favre, the playoff Vikings, and the fact that the Brownies can't possibly win this game cause they suck so badly. In a perfect demonstration of this, I point to the "Pick 5 ATS" thread.

In that thread, not including myself, 33 people have picked their five. 16 picked on the Vikings -4 @ Cleveland game. Of those 16, 15 picked Minnesota laying the points. It is the very definition of public betting.

The sharp side is Clev +4, and if it goes to 4.5 I'll probably hit that line as hard as I'm hitting the Chiefs.

- C -

DISCLAIMER - BSP betting is profitable, but not perfect. There is no such thing as a "lock" in sports betting. BSP picks (against the spread) will still win 40% or so of the time.

I used to work at a place where we had a pool. We would pick every game and put in $5 each and the guy who got the most right would win the cash. There were about 14-15 regulars in the pool. Almost every week there would be 1-3 games we would have near or complete unanimous agreement on. These games probably won 85% of the time.

This goes against your BSP betting. The key, if the people picking the games pay close attention as we did and as I suspect those on this board do, they might be subconciously spotting a line that is a BSP line.

In any case, the first week of the season is too early to make a call because the pundit and the BSP don't know much yet.

I don't see the Clowns doing much against the Vikings defense and I could QB the team to a win over them just by handing Peterson the rock 35 times.

[psuasskicker]

The Vikings will crush the Browns and it has little to do with Farve. All he has to do is not turn the ball over and hand it off to Peterson 25 times.

Their defense is great (The Williams boys have been cleared to play) and Adrian Peterson is going to run roughshot over the Cleveland run defense which is terrrible (28th last year. I know it means nothing...of course)

Call it whatever the hell you want but it has zero to do with the public or anyone else, it has to do with the 2 teams on the field playing.

Thanks for demonstrating my point perfectly.

It's not an issue about me vs. everyone else. I know a lot of sharps who are on that game in a big way. I don't care if I'm "right" or "wrong" in a one-game sample size. Maybe you're right and the Vikings will in fact crush the Browns. I'm certainly going to be wrong at times through this year.

But the part you're missing is that there are arguments on the other side of the coin. They were 4-4 on the road. Favre is TWO WEEKS into his tenure. He's old and coming off an injury that caused him to play horribly after sustaining it. Peterson had a ton of work last year and could perform worse this year. Quinn played pretty well last year. Braylon will probably play better this year. The Browns added talent this off-season. Mangini is a better coach than Childress. The Vikings are historically a slow-starting team. And the Browns are playing at home.

There are always arguments to be made on the other side of the coin. In games like these though, the general public refuses to see them. They think exactly what you do, and then they put their money on the Vikings "Cause man I'd love them even if they were touchdown favorites! They're gonna kill that team!!!"

You can learn from this or not, your choice. I'm not posting this to tell you how right I am and how wrong you are. I'm posting it as an educational piece. Take from it whatever you want.

- C -

[psuasskicker]

I used to work at a place where we had a pool. We would pick every game and put in $5 each and the guy who got the most right would win the cash. There were about 14-15 regulars in the pool. Almost every week there would be 1-3 games we would have near or complete unanimous agreement on. These games probably won 85% of the time.

This goes against your BSP betting. The key, if the people picking the games pay close attention as we did and as I suspect those on this board do, they might be subconciously spotting a line that is a BSP line.

In any case, the first week of the season is too early to make a call because the pundit and the BSP don't know much yet.

I don't see the Clowns doing much against the Vikings defense and I could QB the team to a win over them just by handing Peterson the rock 35 times.

Picking ATS or just winners? I'm not arguing Clev is more likely to win the game. I'm arguing Clev +4 is the right side of the line cause it should prolly be +2.5 or +3 (which it was set at before the public moved it).

The pundit vs. BSP part is the point though. We do know some things, but this isn't about which team is more likely to win. It's about how likely they are to win. The spread is simply a derivation of the moneyline. The public likes Minny to win more than they probably should, which pushes the line, which creates a profitable betting situation.

That's sort of the point. A bunch of people pick the same thing, you should move money the other way. But only if there's inequitable value there. If you're a great handicapper and you have Browns +3 as the fair line and the public is all saying "Vikings RULEZ!!!" but the line never moves, then there's no point betting.

But if you have Browns +3 as fair and the public pushes the line to +4 or the line opens at +4 (due likely to anticipated public action), you should be hammering the Browns.

- C -

[Greg]

Picking ATS or just winners? I'm not arguing Clev is more likely to win the game. I'm arguing Clev +4 is the right side of the line cause it should prolly be +2.5 or +3 (which it was set at before the public moved it).

The pundit vs. BSP part is the point though. We do know some things, but this isn't about which team is more likely to win. It's about how likely they are to win. The spread is simply a derivation of the moneyline. The public likes Minny to win more than they probably should, which pushes the line, which creates a profitable betting situation.

That's sort of the point. A bunch of people pick the same thing, you should move money the other way. But only if there's inequitable value there. If you're a great handicapper and you have Browns +3 as the fair line and the public is all saying "Vikings RULEZ!!!" but the line never moves, then there's no point betting.

But if you have Browns +3 as fair and the public pushes the line to +4 or the line opens at +4 (due likely to anticipated public action), you should be hammering the Browns.

- C -

We picked against the spread. I do know that difference.

I understand the point of your post and movement of the line. Frankly, I think the Chiefs plus the points is better than the Browns plus, but I think it takes 2-3 weeks before I pick with confidence.

That said, you used the ATS game here to make the point. I would say the posters here pay closer attention than your average bettor who tossed $25 on "their" team (which is why teams like the Packers and Steelers are almost always a point or two off from where they should be). Then again, given the number of players on the game here it is possible, especially in week one with no trends established and many posters participating who won't hang long term, that this week would be one to bet against the public trend.

[willy72480]

Picking ATS or just winners? I'm not arguing Clev is more likely to win the game. I'm arguing Clev +4 is the right side of the line cause it should prolly be +2.5 or +3 (which it was set at before the public moved it).

The pundit vs. BSP part is the point though. We do know some things, but this isn't about which team is more likely to win. It's about how likely they are to win. The spread is simply a derivation of the moneyline. The public likes Minny to win more than they probably should, which pushes the line, which creates a profitable betting situation.

That's sort of the point. A bunch of people pick the same thing, you should move money the other way. But only if there's inequitable value there. If you're a great handicapper and you have Browns +3 as the fair line and the public is all saying "Vikings RULEZ!!!" but the line never moves, then there's no point betting.

But if you have Browns +3 as fair and the public pushes the line to +4 or the line opens at +4 (due likely to anticipated public action), you should be hammering the Browns.

- C -

I have to agree with this 100%. Betting is never an exact science, but in these situations you're dealing with perception, not actual reality. I don't think betting the Browns here is such a bad thing. I'd too like to see it move to +4.5 or higher, but even at +4 it's a good deal. The Chiefs +13 is a spectacular deal.

I was one of the lucky ones to clean house on the Giants Super Bowl victory two seasons ago :happyanim

[Greg]

I don't see the Browns run defense as being good enough against Peterson and Chester and I don't see the Browns offense as running well or giving Quinn enough time to get deep with Edwards against the DL Minny has. Beyond that, Quinn doesn't have the arm to go deep. I don't think the Browns offer much as else as weapons.

If the Browns hit a few deep balls they could jump out to a lead and take away the running game. That is their best shot, IMHO. But I doubt the Vikes would abandon the running game until late anyway.

[psuasskicker]

Then again, given the number of players on the game here it is possible, especially in week one with no trends established and many posters participating who won't hang long term, that this week would be one to bet against the public trend.

I think the beauty of this method is that you can talk to people and get a good sense of it yourself. Just ask friends that watch football or whatever about any game (but NOT a game involving a team they root for since they'll have a natural bias). Most people will look at both sides and can find arguments for either side.

But occasional games you'll find that pretty much everyone is way on one side of the line. This is one of those games, with the exact arguments you made. "Peterson will chew up that awful run defense! The Browns will get eaten alive by the Vikings defense! The Vikings are gonna KILL 'em!" They suddenly forget all the arguments - like the ones I made for the Browns - on the flip side.

Another great example was the year the Colts won the Superbowl, the over/under on their game with the Chiefs. Some actual quotes I heard... "That could be the highest scoring playoff game in history." "Last team that gets the ball wins." "The punters may as well stay home." "I'd bet the over if it was 70!"

FWIW Willy, Chiefs +13 looks like a great deal to me if they've got Cassel. If it's Croyle, I don't think that line's nearly as sharp and probably moves to a no-bet for me. With the Chiefs keeping Cassel at "questionable" I'm only putting a unit on it. If they announce later this weekend he's in and the line holds at 13 (or I catch it before the move), I'll probably add another unit or two on the line.

I'm also not sure it'll hold at +13 if he's declared in. That price may partially bake in the odds he doesn't play. But it's too far there...+13 should probably be the line if he doesn't play.

- C -

I wanna say the o/u opened at 56, which was already two or three points too high, and then it moved up to 59 by close to game time. I was in the Caribbean on vacation at the time and couldn't get to the guy I'd bet with, but I wanted that line pretty badly. Total for the game was 31...coulda been three more TDs in that game by either team and STILL not covered.

[psuasskicker]

BTW, 19 out of 20 now in the Pick 5 thread on Minny.

- C -

[52decleetzu]

One other note...the injury report.

For the Browns it includes Eric Wright and Shaun Rogers...both the best players at their positions and both dinged up listed as questionable. Also Jerome Harrison who for all intense and purposes is their starting RB is also listed as questionable.

Berrian for the Vikings is the only one of note and he is expected to play with a hamstring he has been resting for a couple weeks now. The release of Bobby Wade should tell you all you need to know about how serious it is, if it was an issue there is no way they would release him now with a bunch of young unproven guys filling out the roster at WR.

But the Vikings are a "BSP" pick ,so take all that with a grain of salt.