[ML4L]

[ QUOTE ]
I wish I knew...I expected this line to be near two touchdowns. I've tried to figure out why it only moved from an opening of -5 to -7.

[/ QUOTE ]

This post got out of hand, so skip to the last paragraph for the short version...

Your posts regarding this subject seem to indicate a philosophy that is somewhat similar to what mine has traditionally been. When you see a match-up that you really like, you incorporate those things into what you think the line "should" be. This also manifests itself in the form of "predictions" of what the score "should" be, similar to what iggymcfly seems to be fond of doing.

The reality is that (and posters who are in the know, feel free to correct me if I am way off-base here) the lines generally do not incorporate all but the most blatantly obvious match-up issues. Most lines are a product of a "power rating" context. That is, tOSU is probably the best team in the country right now, or certainly in the top 3, generating a rating of X. Meanwhile, Iowa is perceived to be in the top 15, generating a rating of Y. If you look at how many points an elite team is generally better than a very good team, the answer is around 8-10. Throw in 3 for homefield, and you have your line. I'm certain that it gets a little bit more involved than that, particularly on big games that are sure to have a lot of action, but it's pretty easy to get close to 95% of lines by using that methodology strictly.

Some people handicap this way. They worry more about "value" from the line than anything that they expect to happen on the field. If you are good at this method of handicapping, you will hit 55% and grind out a profit.

My approach has always been that, if you want to beat sports betting, you have to find games where specific player vs. player and unit vs. unit match-ups are going to cause the power rating approach to be inaccurate. It is my personal opinion that this approach will allow you to find games where the line is "off" by a touchdown or more. That is, if Iowa were hosting tOSU, USC, and Auburn, they would probably be a 5-7 point dog in each game. But, hypothetically, maybe they should be a 13 point dog to tOSU and a pk with Auburn...? It is also my personal opinion that a handicapper who is good at identifying spots where specific match-ups skew a line greatly can hit 60% over the long-term.

But, the key is that, if you choose to take the "match-up" approach, you have to be aware that "value" is what drives the line in most cases. From a value perspective, the line for this game is right on the money or, if anything, skewed toward tOSU. Hence, people who do not share your opinion about the match-up issues don't mind taking Iowa here.

So, if you choose to take a "match-up" approach, you have to look at lines in two ways:

1) What do I think that the line should be in the "value" context, since that will help me get the best price on the game and predict line moves?

2) Do I think that this is a game where specific attributes about a player/team will have a major bearing on how the game plays out?

This manifests itself along the lines of: I think the line will be -7, but I really like the side of Team X. The first part is a value perspective, the second part is the match-up perspective.

In the past, I have been fairly oblivious to part 1. I would guess that a line was going to come at -3, it would actually come -7, and I'd play it anyway because I thought that the match-ups dictated a line of -10. And, this approach has worked well for me for the past two seasons.

But, then I started to get more involved in the "math" side of sports betting. Scalping, middling, the way that books work, etc. It seemed as though nobody else on this forum thought about handicapping the way that I did. So, this year, I decided that I would be more committed to incorporating "value" into my handicapping, and I've been amazed at how much "sharper" it makes me feel. I used to be AWFUL at getting good numbers on games; now, I feel like I am usually on the right side of line moves...

The ironic thing is that, the more focused that I've been on value, the worse my picks have looked... But, as I mentioned in my own thread this week, I think things are going to start coming around soon.

Anyway, sorry for the semi-hijack. Here is the synopsis of what I was trying to say:

Given the way that you handicap, you are likely going to be frequently surprised by lines and line moves. But, if you are good at what you are doing, my opinion is that you will continue to be a winner, probably a bigger winner than someone who is better at pricing games but who knows less about football, even though you are not always getting the best of the line.

ML4L