Rob Crowne

PROFESSIONAL BASEBALL BETTING

Rob Crowne — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:39:00 GMT

Rule: To maximize your win you must risk more on the better bets and less on the worse bets and nothing on the bad bets.   You cannot expect to win by risking larger sums on poorer bets, and lesser sums on better bets.

Most bettors bet baseball by risking whatever is necessary to return their normal win amount. For example, if a bettor normally bets $110 to win $100 in sports with a point line, he will bet to win the same $100 when quoted a baseball money line. Thus, when the bettor believes the favorite will win against the money line in baseball, he will risk $125 to win $100 on a -125 favorite, $150 to win $100 on a -150 favorite, and $200 to win $100 on a -200 favorite.

Why do most bettors bet in this way? The common answer is, "That's the way everybody does it." Unfortunately, most people lose, and doing things the way "everybody" does them is not a prescription for winning.

When a bettor risks varying amounts based only on the line quoted by the bookmaker, the bettor is letting the bookmaker control the amount at risk. The bookmaker, however, does not have the best interest of the bettor in mind.

Let's use the Braves/Giants game played on August 18, 2008, as an example. The overnight odds on Atlanta were posted at -185. By the morning, the odds had moved up to -210. About an hour before game time, the odds varied from -230 to -240. Most $100 bettors who believed Atlanta would win risked $185 if they bet Atlanta overnight.   If they bet Atlanta in the morning, they risked $210 to win the same $100. If they waited until an hour before game time to bet, then they risked $230, or possibly as much as $240, to win the same $100.

Let's pretend that we calculated Atlanta to have a 70% probability of winning the game against the Giants. The breakeven money line for a 70% proposition is -233.    Atlanta would be a profitable bet at odds below -233, and a bad bet with negative expectation at odds above -233 or above. The farther below -233 that the line on Atlanta is set, the better the bet becomes. The higher above -233 that the line is set, the worse the bet gets. If we can lay odds of -185 on a 70% probability, we will win much more money over time than if we lay odds of -230.

The odds overnight were set at -185. The breakeven at odds of -185 is 65%. Since we calculated Atlanta to have a 70% probability of winning, the overnight bettor would have a 5% cushion and can expect a nice profit over time.

At the odds that existed in the morning of -210, the breakeven probability is 68%. Since the probability that Atlanta will win is 70%, the bettor's advantage in the morning is cut to just 2%, which is 3% less than the 5% cushion enjoyed by the overnight bettor. That may not sound like much of a difference, but it is a 60% decrease in the bettor's advantage on the bet. Despite the huge decrease in the edge, the morning bettor risks $210, which is 13.5 % more than he would have risked if he bet overnight.

The breakeven win percentage at odds of -230 is 69.7%. That is barely profitable for a team with a 70% probability of winning. Nevertheless, most late bettors will risk $230, which is 24% more than the same bettor would have risked if he played overnight at odds of -185. Betting 24% more when you have a barely profitable 0.3 % edge, than you would have bet if you had a very profitable 5.0% edge makes little logical sense for the bettor, but is great for the bookmaker.

The worse the bet gets, the more money most bettors will risk based on the money line. If the line moves from high to low instead, most bettors will risk less money as the bet gets better.   As for the poor bettor who gets a line of -235 or -240, he will bet the most on a bet with odds that are higher than the probability that Atlanta will win, and therefore on a bet that has a negative expectation and no long term probability of winning. Then bettors wonder why they always end up losing money over the course of each baseball season.

If you bet baseball like "everybody," you are in serious danger of losing money while betting the same games that make money for the professional who controls his own risk.

To control your own risk, decide on the value of the selection, and then divide that risk by the posted money line. If you normally would risk $100 per game, you would risk the same $100 in baseball to win whatever the comeback may be at the odds. For example, if the money line on Atlanta is
-200, you would risk $100 to win $50, and NOT $200 to win $100. If the odds on Atlanta go up to -220, you would risk the same $100 to win $100 divided by 2.20 = $45.

If you are able to accurately calculate probabilities with your handicapping method, you should seek to reduce the amount you place at risk as the odds get worse, and increase the amount you place at risk as the odds get better. Thus, if you would risk $100 at odds of -200, you would risk only $90 to win $41 if the odds are -220, and $110 to win $61 if the odds are -180.

If you can't accurately calculate probabilities, then you must either keep your risk the same, or obtain the services of a handicapper who can calculate the probabilities for you. Whatever you do, DO NOT bet "like everybody else."

To get baseball selections rated based on amazingly accurate probabilities calculated for you, go to Rob Crowne's page by CLICKING HERE TO WIN.

WHEN IS A WINNER NOT A WINNER

Rob Crowne — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 23:48:00 GMT

Casey Stengel said, "Never make predictions, especially about the future." That's good advice from Casey, but he should have added, " . . .. especially when predictions about the future are based on won/lost records from the past."

Most sports bettors and handicappers look at coaching records when making preseason selections. It is well known that some coaches, like Jacksonville's Jack Del Rio, New England's Bill Belichick, Caronlina's John Fox, Denver's Mike Shanahan, Cleveland's Romeo Crennel, KC's Herm Edwards, the Giants Tom Coughlin, Tampa Bay's John Gruden, and Chicago's Lovie Smith have winning records above 58% in preseason play. Those coaches are thought to have their excellent winning records becuase they approach preseason games with the desire to win.

Other coaches such as Arizona's Ken Whisenhut, Buffalo's Dick Jauron, the Colts' Tony Dungy, and Philadelphia's Andy Reid have lost more than 58% of the games that their teams have played in preseason. It is thought these coaches lose because they don't care about winning in the preseason, and they don't have their teams trying to win in the preseason.

What could be easier for the sports bettor? Simply bet on the coaches who try to win in the preseason, and bet against the coaches who don't. When you have a winning coach matched against a losing coach, sell your spouse and kids into slavery and bet the winning coach. With a simple winning system like that, why aren't more people coming out of the preseason rich? I decided to do some research to find out.

For my experiment, I made a list of every coach who had a meaningful winning or losing record before the start of the 2007 preseason, and I tracked the results in 2007 for an imaginary bettor placing $110 to win $100 on each winning coach and against each losing coach in every preseason game. I eliminated any game in which two coaches with winning records or two coaches with losing records were matched against each other. I did not double up on games in which a winning coach met a losing coach. I simply made a $110 to win $100 bet on the winning coach, which was also, of course, a bet against the losing coach in the same game.

I considered a meaningful winning or losing record to be a 100% record won or lost for coaches with a 4 or 5 game lifetime record with their current team, an 80% record won or lost for a coach with 8 -10 games with their current team, and a 58% record won or lost for coaches who had more than 10 games in their record with their current ream.

All the winning coaches on my list had a combined straight-up record of 62% wins. All the losing coaches had a combined straight-up losing record of 63.5% losses. I expected that betting on the winning coaches and betting against the losing coaches would have produced a nice profit for 2007. To my amazement, betting on the winners and against the losers would have resulted in a LOSS of $550 in 2007 for my imaginary bettor.

At first, I thought that the problem was the line. Most bettors know which coaches have winning preseason records and which coaches don't. The linemakers take well-known trends into account when formulating the line, and the line is skewed against such trends.

"Perhaps," I conjectured, "the linemakers have adjusted the lines to a point at which the winning coaches will lose against the spread and the losing coaches will win against the spread."

I checked the against the spread (ATS) records for each coach and found that, in fact, the lines were skewed against the coaching trends. However, the lines were not skewed enough to stop bettors from winning. Betting on the winning coaches over their history with their current teams produced a combined 57.6% win rate against the spread (ATS). Betting against the losing coaches over their history with their current teams produced a combined 54% win rate ATS. The combined ATS results were 232 wins - 178 losses, which translates to a profitable 56.5%.

Obviously, the losses encountered in 2007 were not caused by the linemaker skewing the lines. Next, I theorized that maybe 2007 was an aberration. I checked back for two more years to 2005. Those years also produced losses for the coaching trends.

As I checked more years, however, I noticed that the reason that betting on long term coaching trends did not result in predicting winners lay in the trends themselves. What appeared to be winning trends were not winning trends anymore. Suddenly, Casey Stengel's statement at the beginning of this article made sense. Long term trends should should never be used to make predictions about the future, because they merely record the past.

Any coach can change his philosophy and methods at any time. When a coach changes his attitude toward the preseason, that might be apparent in his pronouncements to the media before each game, but it can take a long time for the change to be reflected in the overall record.

For example, I found that, even though Bill Belichick still had a long term SU record of 31-22 and an ATS record of 30-18-4 when 2008 kicked off,. the New England Patriots have not had a winning preseason for the past 3 years. It could take as many as 5 more years of losing preseasons before Belichick's long-term record stops looking profitable. It is obvious, however, that Belichick's attitude to the preseason changed three years ago.

Even though Herm Edwards' record was 16-9 ATS (64%) at the start of the 2007 season, and was still 16-13 ATS at the start of this season, his ATS record for the past three years has been a horrifying 2-10. John Fox still has a 14-9 ATS record, but his record for the past 3 years ATS is an awful 4-8. For the past 2 years, Mike Shanahan is 4-4 ATS.

The attitudes of all these coaches has changed, but the change is not apparent from simply looking at their long term won/lost records. It's not a question of being too late to win with these trends either. Most of the coaches' extreme records were a result of only one or two years in which they were 4-0. With most you could not predict they would be 4-0 because their preseason record was nothing special before that. They simply wanted to win for some reason in the one or two seasons that produced a perfect record. Sometimes, the extreme record was produced in years in which the coach was new with his team. His attitude in the first year could be completely different from his attitude in later years.

For those of you who think the answer is to use 3-year trends instead of lifetime-with-the-team records, the question is: How do you know the coaches' attitudes won't change again this year? The answer is: You don't. Won/lost records of any length should never be used to make predictions, especially about the future. They can only be used to describe the past in very general terms.

The secret to winning in the preseason is to read all the local newspapers and monitor local radio and TV interviews with the coaches of each team. That has become easier to do thanks to the internet, but it is still time consuming. If you don't have the time to do it yourself, Pregame provides selections for you from handicappers who, for a small fee, have done the work for you.

To get my preseason winners in the NFL for tonight, for Monday, or, better yet, for the rest of August, CLICK HERE.

INTERPRETING PRESEASON COACH-SPEAK

Rob Crowne — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 19:19:00 GMT

Success in selecting Preseason NFL winners requires extensive research each week into news stories and coach interviews to assess player rotations and coaching intentions, as well as to ascertain which positions on each team might be open to competition. .

During the NFL Preseason, many coaches will announce their intentions for the game, the player rotations, the playing time for the starters and each subsequest group of players, and sometimes even their game plan, if any, for the upcoming game. Coaches who want to win in the preseason usually will win if up against a team that is simply mailing in the game. Interpreting the statements of coaches is a bit like poker, you often must look for tells and buzz words.

The following phrases, or anything similar, usually indicate a coach who will be trying to win:

"We've got to do better and establish a winning attitude." [Establishing a "winning attitude" can only be done by winning].

"I'm unhappy with our play. I'm going to keep the starters in until they get it right." [Indicates a coach who is telling his players to treat the preseason game more seriously. The longer the starters will be in the game, the stronger the desire of the coach to win.]

"We may bring the starters back in toward the end of the game." [The only reason for a coach to do this is because the game is close and he wants to win.]

"We'll be practicing some blitzes." [Blitzing is rarely done in the preseason and most teams are not prepared for it. Any coach who blitzes will normally win, and announcing in advance that he will blitz or have an aggressive defense is an indication of the desire to win.]

"We're going to let the offense open it up and see what they've got." [Obviously an indication that the team will not be simply trying to avoid injury.]

"We'll be trying to stir up the fans a little." [Indicates a need to spur flagging ticket sales with a win.]

"We'll be creating and practicing a game plan for this weekend." [Most teams don't form any game plan for the opponent or study game films in the preseason. If they do, it is a strong indication they intend to win.]

"We'll be treating this game like the real thing." [This means what it says. In "real" games the team tries its best to win.]

The following phrases indicate a coach whose team will simply be going through the motions:

"I'm not gong to keep my starters in for more than just a warm up." [Remember, the longer the time for the starters, the greater the desire of the coach to win. Also, an indication that the starters will treat their appearance as a "warm-up" is an indication they will not be going all out.]

"Above all, we want to keep the team healthy. Winning is important but we must avoid injury." [It doesn't matter whether the coach mentions winning or not, the key words here are "healthy," and "avoid injury."]

"We're using this game to get a better look at some of our 3rd and 4th stringers." [This is the primary intent and not the score.]

"We're using this game to become more familiar with the new playbook."

In addition to interpreting coaching intentions, the handicapper needs to search for an indication that any position is up for grabs. Sometimes you can find this information directly. Sometimes you must read into the player rotation. For instance, if a team does not have a well-established quarterback, giving two prospects equal time with the starters is often an indication that the starting quarterback role is not secure.

When players are competing for the sole remaining spot on a team, or for the starting position, they will be playing their best no matter what the intention of the coach. The other players on the team are aware of the competition and, particularly when a starting position is involved, unless one of the competitors is disliked, the other team members will try to help both of the competitors to look good. When the starting position at QB is open, for example, each competitor, the front line, and the receivers will all play their best while either competitor in on the field. Knowing that a group of players will be playing at their top level for an extended period is a huge advantage in handicapping Presason NFL winners.

Researching the necessary information and staying current on it each week takes hours. You can do it yourself if you have the time, or you can hire someone who devotes full time to it professionally. I know how to paint my house, but I hired painters because I simply have better ways to spend my time. It is also true that professional painters will be more knowldegable and do better work simply because they have more experience. I've watched my mechanic change my oil over 100 times. I know how to do it, but I simply don't have the inclination. I still take the car in for an oil change. It's the same when it comes to handicapping. You may know how to do it, but you may not have the time to do all that is necessary, or your lack of experience may cause you to miss something that a more experienced professional handicapper will pick up.

To get full 7-day or 30-day access to all of Rob Crowne's Preseason and Baseball selections CLICK FOR WINNERS.

Also to get Rob's TOP BASEBALL BET FOR SUNDAY, CLICK HERE UNTIL 4:00 P.M.. Eastern Time.

ROB CROWNE NFL FREEBIE

Rob Crowne — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 23:45:00 GMT

I promised a pick package play in the NFL today, but all I had until very late were small plays. When selling individual plays I donn't like to put up anything but stronger plays. I put up on Pregame's free pick page a play on Tennessee -3, and here is the late play from the Wall Street Bankers Syndicate - take Tennessee to go over 33.

Tennesseee will be playing Vince YOUng and the starters into the second quarter. When that happens in the first game of the season, its a clear indication that the coach wants to win. In Preseason play the coach that wants to win usually will win. St Louis coach Linehan is only 3-5 SU in preseason play, and that includes a 1-3 in his first season with St. Louis -- a situation in which most coaches want to win.

St Louis has a new offensive coordinator, Al Saunders, who has a history of coaching high scoring offenses at Kansas City, with an emphasis on passing. The 3rd stringers, Berlin and Gradkowski are in a competion for the #3 spot. Whichever one goes tonight will be playing hard in the 3rd and 4th quarter. Comnbine that with the starters and QB Vince Young being in the game for most of the first half for Tennessee, and we should see the game sail over the low 33 point total.

The best way to be sure to get all the Crowne Club winners is to subscribe for a week or for one month. CLICK HERE TO WIN

A PRESEASON WARNING

Rob Crowne — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 01:59:00 GMT

Preseason football is in full swing, and I've got another warning for you. Beware of early selections made in newsletters and by services trying to capture your business early in the week. Most newsletters are written on Sunday for distribution by Monday or Tuesday. Preseason is a time when accurate picks simply cannot be made in weekly newsletters or on Tuesday for the following weekend.

The intentions of the coach, the rotation of the QB's and the starters, and final decisions about the ranking of players are extremely important to preseason NFL success. If you follow news reports from the various NFL cities carefully., you can find announcements about most of the QB rotations. You can also find many coaches declaring their intentions and strategy for the upcoming game. It takes work to gather all the information, but without it no one can win in the preseason. If you can't do the work yourself, then you need to hire a sports consultant to do it for you. Before you do, however, you should make sure the analyst is doing the necessary work. Regularly producing picks many days before a game is sure sign that the analyst is not gathering the information necessary to win in the preseason.

Anyone can make picks based on coaching trends or by guessing at a coach's intentions. But such selections will never be as certain, or win as often, as selections made after the coach has actually declared his intentions and game plan.

Some coaches almost always try to win, while others treat the preseason with disdain, but you can't rely on those tendencies to be followed in every game. The most intense coach sometimes instructs his team to simply avoid injury, or uses a game to get a last look at players being cut. Coaches who pay the least attention in the preseason will sometimes have pressure placed on them by management to win in order to spur ticket sales, or they may seek to win if they believe the team needs a win to instill confidence.

Information directly from the mouth of the coaches is available for a majority of the games each week, but such information is rarely, if ever, available or announced more than 24 hours before game time.

When you pay for selections made before any coaching announcements, you are NOT hiring a sports service, you are hiring a sports DISservice. He is acting as sports disservice. In the preseason beware of selections regularly put out more than 24 hours in advance, and avoid the newsletters entirely.

To get the latest information and selections for this weekend's NFL action from Rob Crowne CLICK HERE after 1:00 P.M. Eastern on Saturday.

LATE FRIDAY NFL FREEBEE FROM ROB CROWNE

Rob Crowne — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 01:48:00 GMT

You'll have to be quick, but if you can still get in play SF +1 in the late game tonight against Oakland. Neither head coach normally puts any emphasis on winning in the preseason, but SF has a new offensive coordinator by the name of Mike Martz. Our information out of SF is that Martz wants to get his new job off on the right foot. To assure that he has given J.Y O'Sullivan the starting QB spot tonight, with Alex Smith coming into the game in the 2nd Q and possibly playing into the 3rd Q. The advantage held by O'Sullivan is that he played under Martz in Detroit and is familiar with Martz' schemes. Expect the offense to show off a bit and attempt to grab a big lead before the 3rd stringers come in.

For Rob's NFL selections on Saturday Night, CLICK HERE AFTER 1:00 PM Eastern time on Saturday.

WHY I WANT TO BE RICH

Rob Crowne — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 18:39:00 GMT

DOUBLE HEADER - A POEM
DOUBLE YOUR PLEASURE,
DOUBLE YOUR FUN,
GETTING HEAD FROM TWO
IS BETTER THAN ONE.

When I was young, a good friend and I would discuss why we wanted to be rich and how rich we wanted to be. The one reason to be rich that our mid-20's glands caused us to agree on was that being rich meant having a huge $250,000 yacht. We could dock our yachts at resorts around the world and sit on the deck waiting for beautiful women in groups of two or more to walk wearing almost non-existent swim suits, stilleto heels and perhaps a gold chain around their waistw, long earings, and tongue studs. They would ask if they could come on board for a ride and a bit of a double header. In our young minds nothing beat double headers from two gorgeous ladies while sitting on our yacht. It was our main reason for wanting to be rich.

To the tell the truth, now that I'm old, that fantasy still doesn't sound so bad. Being a dirty old man is still the best incentive I know for being a rich old man. Unfortunately, the $250,000 yacht now costs $750,000, docking fees are about $5000 per month, gas costs a year's income per tank, and hiring even a sekeleton crew is out of the question.

But experience has now taught me that just because I can't hope to get the yacht doesn't mean I can't get pleasure from a double header, and we've got one of those going today between Washington and Colorado. The first game is scheduled to begin at 3:05 P.M. Eastern time and the second at about 6:15 P.M. Eastern time. This double header will put me one step closer to the other kind.

TO GET YOUR DOUBLE HEADER FOR JUST $10 CLICK HERE

HALL OF FAME GAME OF THE YEAR

Rob Crowne — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 23:08:00 GMT

"A Tony Dungheap by any other name would smell as foul." - Rob "Shakespeare" Crowne, circa today from the play "Tonio and Zorniette."

"It was the best of games, it was the worst of games." Charles Dickens Crowne, from a "Tale of Two QB's."

Every handicapper and tout in creation has his Hall of Fame Game of the Year today. Can the line in this Hall of Fame Game be that far off? It can be, but it's NOT! All the Hall of Fame Games of the Year are about "Tout Speak."

"Tout speak" is the very special language of handicappers, sports consultants and just plain touts throughout the land. Below is the "New Crowne Dictionary of Tout Speak" subcategory definition of "HALL OF FAME GAME OF THE YEAR" within the main category of "GAME OF THE YEAR."

GAME OF THE YEAR, n. The best bet the game analyst will see all year. Denotes a pick of greater value than an ordinary selection, and for which bettors will pony up more money more easily. The term "Game of the Year" is usually modified by a another noun or nouns used as adjectives to describe a category and limit the general term Game of the Year. e.g. - Hall of Fame Game of the Year.

-- HALL OF FAME GAME OF THE YEAR - A phrase in which the proper name, "Hall of Fame Game," is used to modify "Game of the Year." The "Hall of Fame Game of the Year" is the best bet the sports analyst will see in the Hall of Fame Game this year.

usage and etymology:
As with all "Game of the Year" phrases, the term "Hall of Fame Game of the Year" connotes greater value than other selectioins. If further modified by the adjective "side" or the adjective "totals," the entire phrase means the best play on a side in the Hall of Fame Game or on the total in the Hall of Fame Game that the sports analyst will see all year. .

Since, however, there is only one Hall of Fame Game all Year, any play on it is the best play the analyst will see in the Hall of Fame Game this Year and therefore may be termed the "Hall of Fame Game of the Year."

Historially, some people have thought such usage to be dishonest, but that ignores tout syllogistic logic when used to form the language of "tout speak." Consider the following logic string:

There is only one Hall of Fame Game all year,
The tout will have only one side play in the only Hall of Fame game,
Ergo, the tout's only side play in the Hall of Fame Game is the best side play the tout will have in the category of Hall of Fame Side Plays.

Now we take the logical conclusion above and use it as the basis for our second syllogism:

The tout's only side play in the Hall of Fame Game is the best side play the tout will have in the category of Hall of Fame Side Plays.
A Game of the Year is the best play that the tout will have this season in a given category,
The Hall of Fame Side Play Game of the Year is the best play the tout will have all year in the category of Hall of Fame Side Plays.
Ergo, a tout's only side play in the Hall of Fame Game must be the HALL OF FAME GAME OF THE YEAR!

And finally we use the second logical conslusion to produce the third logical conslusion:

A tout's only side play in the Hall of Fame game is the Hall of Fame Game of the Year,
Games of the Year are more valuable than other selections,
Ergo, all Hall of Fame Game single side selections are more valuable than other selections.

See, the tout is being perfectly honest when he gives the customer the impression that his only side selection in the Hall of Fame Game is more valubale than other plays. It can be proven by syllogistic reasoning to be more valuable.

A designation of Hall of Fame Game of the Year is also handy in cases in which the tout runs more than service under more than one name and hands out opposite sides on the Hall of Fame Game. In that case, the use of the term "Hall of Fame Game of the Year" becomes dishonest only if the tout uses it to describe both selections. If he uses it to describe only one of his two opposite sides, he is honestly designating to the public the side he likes best of the two he is selling.

To give credit where credit is due, I did not formulate the above logic strings myself. They were taught to me by the head of one of those "protectors of the public interest" called sports monitors.

Of course some of you may note that a tout's only pick in the Hall of Fame Game can also be his worst pick, but then it couldn't be his Game of the Year which is, by definiton his BEST pick, could it?

When in Rome, etc., etc., etc. For MY 2008 HALL OF FAME GAME TOTAL OF THE YEAR CLICK HERE

ROB CROWNE FREE PICK FOR SUNDAY JULY 27

Rob Crowne — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 19:34:00 GMT

The WNBA is particularly easy pickings for the professional handicapper for many of the same reasons that I wrote about in my article regarding Arena Football.

Linemakers set the line based on a desire to split the public action. The linemaker does not base the line on his opinion of the final game result. When you bet any lined sport, you are not competing against the bookmaker, you are competing against the other bettors.

That competition is much harder when there are many big-money pros and gambling syndicates betting into the line. If the bookmaker expects alot of wiseguy betting on a game, he must set the line much closer to the actual handicapped outcome in order to avoid a flood of one-sided action from the smart money. When there is little wiseguy action expected on a game, the linemaker will set the line based on fan action and new hype rather than a reasoned statistical analysis of the outcome.

The WNBA is not a popular betting sport. As a consequence, the action is very thin. When there is little betting action to balance big-money bets, the effect of any large bet on the line is magnified. The big-money gambling syndicates cannot place enough action on thinly bet games to interest them without moving the line too far to make the game playable. The result is that there is very little big-money betting on the WNBA. Without the pros as competition, small to medium sized bettors can find opportunities that rarely exist in the more heavily bet sports.

This afternoon we have a play on the Detroit Shock -1 1/2 over San Antonio. Detroit played San Antonio to a tie in regulation before losing in OT in the matchup this season at San Antonio.
This game is being played at Detroit. The home to road turnaround for these two teams is 15 points. Expect Detroit to Shock San Antonio with a win by 8+ points.

Our Happy Ending game tonight is a strong WNBA Double Play.
END YOUR WEEK RIGHT
WITH THE HAPPY ENDING PLAY TONIGHT
CLICK HERE!

GUYS WHO LIVE IN VEGAS SHOULDN'T GET MARRIED

Rob Crowne — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 22:00:00 GMT

If you've been to Vegas in the past week you've probably noticed a few of the showgirls in your favorite headress and hooter parade with tears smearing their masquera. Las Vegas' most eligible bachelor since Bugsy Siegel, our fearless leader, RJ "Wedding" Bell, has tolled. There's nary a dry eye in a Las Vegas dressing room now that RJ has been removed from circulation..

Oh to be young, single, rich, and living in Las Vegas. From the tourists to the dancers, Las Vegas is filled with gorgeous, sexy women -- and gorgeous sexy men too if your proclivities tend that way. Why would any young, red-blooded male want to get tied down?

Maybe it was stress. Being stalked by all those showgirls and having to keep up one's ladiesman rep creates more pressure than you'd imagine. Who can blame RJ for opting for the rest cure? When RJ gets back from his honeymoon, we'll be sending him to a stress specialist for examination.

Until then, the days of fun and games are over. Have you noticed that all those contests involving pictures of your girlfriend, and all those photos of RJ and the staff partying with the ladies of Vegas have disappeared from Pregame lately?

RJ is off on a Frank Sinatra honeymoon in sunny southern Secaucus by way of Chicago, Chicago, That Wonderful Town. When you live everyday in Las Vegas you can't very well honeymoon there, and Lake Tahoe is mundane. When you live in Las Vegas, you don't honeymoon in some hot southern locale or at some spectacular sight like Niagra Falls, or the Chichen Itza pyramids, or the Eiffel Tower. You don't cruise past the Arctic glaciers, ski in the mountains of southern Argentina, watch the cliff divers in Acapulco, or float through Venice in a gondola with the tenor boatman singing Santa Lucia. Those honeymoons are for the squares who live in more boring places than Las Vegas.

When you live in Las Vegas, you get plenty of heat, Mardi Gras at the Rio, the New York skyline and steaming streets, parrot jungles at the MGM, the Eiffel Tower and Paris nights, dinner in a Japanese rain storm with fireworks at the Hilton, Venetian gondolas, the fountains of Rome at The Bellagio, a pyramid at the Luxor, battles with pirates on the high seas at Treasure Island, winter in the summer on top of Mt. Charleston, the red light districts of Germany and Holland just out of town, the Folies Bergere, the Moulin Rouge, flamenco dancers, waterfalls, tropical volcanos erupting at the Mirage, circus acts, rides and carnie games at Circus, Circus and knights jounsting at the Excalibur everyday of the week.

Denizens of Las Vegas long to honeymoon in restful places like Chicago and Secauscus. Besides, Niagra Falls is much too close to Buffalo for comfort.

Our heartfelt congratulations to RJ's new bride on winning out over all those other beautiful competitors, and our warmest congratulations to RJ on convincing the prettiest and most desireable woman in all Las Vegas to make him the most envied man in town. We at the Crowne Club wish them both a wonderful time touring Al Capone's hometown and Frank Sinatra's birthplace, and a long lifetime of happy years together.

THE ONLY WAY TO PARLAY + ROB CROWNE FREEBIE

Rob Crowne — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 17:54:00 GMT

I don't know how many times I've said and written, "parlays are sucker bets." Normally, they are, but not always.

To understand why parlays are sucker bets, you first must understand the nature of a parlay. A parlay is a single bet on one proposition, and, if it wins, all the money won plus the original bet is placed on the second proposition. In essence, it's a single bet on one game with a double bet on the other.

Before bookmakers created what they call a "parlay bet," when games started at the same time, you couldn't parlay. Bookmakers cured this problem by creating the bookmaker "parlay bet." In the bookmaker "parlay bet," the bookmaker runs the parlay for you by creating the fiction that one game starts and ends before the other.

How do we know which game to pretend went off first? In any sport bet against a spread, it doesn't matter. If one team loses and one team wins, the bookmaker assumes either the loser is the first team in which case you have no bet on the winner and lose everything, or the bookmaker assumes the winner is the first team bet, in which case you have the double bet on the loser and still lose everything. The only time you win is when both teams win. But when both teams win in any sport that is bet against a spread, the bookmaker pays you off at fixed odds which are less than what a true parlay that you run yourself would pay.

"Parlay bets" from your bookmaker are sucker bets for three reasons:

First, the odds offered by most Vegas and off-shore bookmakers on two-team "parlay bets" are 13-5. The 13-5 fixed odds parlay bet has a higher built-in bookmaker edge than the vig on straight bets. As a result, you will win $5 less on a $110 parlay bet as a bookmaker "parlay bet" than you would win if you bet the same two teams and ran the $110 parlay yourself. The $5 difference may not sound like much, but it is 4.5% of the $110 you bet and 2.6% of your parlay winnings if you run a parlay on your own as two straight bets. Gifts like that keep your bookmaker driving fancy cars, and turn bettors into brokesters. Betting one parlay per day, the difference for a 57% handicapper is almost $600 per year paid in extra vig. That's about two tanks of gas nowadays, or in other words, a lot of money.

Second, a "parlay bet" adds an element of luck that shouldn't be there. Whether to make a bet on a team should be determined by whether you have an edge on the play, NOT by the luck of whether some other game wins or loses.

Third, a "parlay bet" causes bad money management. A play should become a double bet because it has twice the normal probability of winning, and it should be a no-bet whenever you have no edge on the game. With parlays, whether you have a double bet or no bet on the second game is determined by whether the first game wins, and not by the probability of winning the second game. Basing the amount you bet on factors that are irrelevant to winning is the worst imaginable money management.

So when does it make sense to parlay?

First, a parlay makes sense only when you can eliminate the extra vig of the bookmaker by running the parlay yourself. For you to do that, the second game must start after the first game is complete.

Second, a parlay makes sense only when whether your second bet is not determined by the result of the first bet. That can occur only when you control whether the second bet is made. If the first bet loses, you must still play the second bet for whatever amount it merits.

Third, a parlay only makes sense when the second bet actually has twice the win probability of the first bet. This eliminates the money management problem. If the first team wins you bet twice the amount on the second team in the parlay not because the first team won, but because the second team has twice the probability of winning.

Here are the two simple rules to follow when betting a parlay on lined teams:

RULE 1: Only combine teams separated sufficiently in time so that you can run your own parlay on them. Never make a bookmaker "parlay bet."

RULE 2: Only parlay when the probability that the second team will win is twice the probability that the first team will win.

I call a parlay that combines the two rules above a "NATURAL PARLAY."

Today, we have our Independence Weekend Fireworks Natural Parlay on two WNBA games. The first tips off in the afternoon between Imus' favorite ladies team, Ho-uston playing against Sacramento. It's rated one-star. We also have a selection going off tonight in the WNBA rated as a double 2-star play. The games are far enough apart in time for you to run your own parlay in compliance with Rule 1, and the second selection is twice as strong as the first, in compliance with Rule 2.

To get you started on your Natural Parlay, here's the first half for you as a ROB CROWNE INDEPENDENCE FREEBIE. To get the second half CLICK HERE.

This weekend we celebrate our independence from the monarchs of England, so how could we do anything but bet against the Monarchs of Sacramento? For those of you for whom such terrific reasoning just isn't enough, consider the following:

The Sacred Tomatoes beat Houston 73-66 this season playing in Sacramento, but the home to road turn around for these two is 15 points in favor of Houston playing in Texas. That gives us Houston by 8, which is exactly what we get from a handicap based on home and road numbers without considering the prior game. Houston scores more points offensively and allows fewer points defensively at home than Sacramento on the road, and Houston also rebounds better. Revenge will be sweet tonight for Imus' favorite ladies from Ho-uston. To get you started on your NATURAL DAY/NIGHT PARLAY make a 3/4 unit bet on Houston -3.

To get the bigger play to finish up your parlay tonight, CLICK HERE, for Rob Crowne's INDEPENDENCE WEEKEND FIRECRACKER WNBA play.

While you're there, take a look at the Afternoon ESPN Side and Total in Arena Football. Drinking a cold brew and watching football on T.V. is the best way I know to relax after he festivities fo the 4th.

Also CLICK HERE after 4:00 PM Eastern for my Saturday Night Arena Football and baseball selections.

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE WNBA? + A FREEBEE

Rob Crowne — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 19:43:00 GMT

Okay, unlike my recent article asking why Arena Football wasn't as popular as the NFL, I know why no one likes the WNBA. Last week one of the ladies in the WNBA actually managed to dunk the ball and it made front page headlines and the highlight films on every sports broadcast.

If there was ever a reason to dislike ladies baskets its that women, white or black, don't even jump as well as white men and we all know most white men can't jump.

But the fact that the players can't dunk the ball and that they dribble like girls doesn't mean you can't make money betting the sport. In fact, women's baskets is far more predictable than the NBA for many of the same reasons that Arena Football is more predictable than the NFL.

The betting is thin, and that keeps the big-money wiseguys and syndicates on the sidelines when it comes to the WNBA. The lack of smart money betting makes for lines that are farther away from being an accurate prediction of the game result.

The women don't have the same "I am the greatest" over-inflated egos that NBA players all seem to develop. That means that even though they can't jump, the ladies can shoot a free throw. Unlike the men, the women usually don't feel they are so great they need to practice something as basic and mundane as sinikng a charity shot.

In addition, unlike the men, the ladies attend to business and less to showboating which makes their performances far more predictable. There is less worry than when one team gets out to big lead they will get lazy, blow the lead, and allow a back-door cover as you so often see in the NBA.

Finally, there is less parity between players and teams in the WNBA, making selections easier.

You don't need to like watching the game to make money betting it, and making money is what sports betting is all about. In fact, not wanting to watch the game is like having one of those no-show construction jobs that Tony Soprano and his crew loved so much. You get to collect the mney and you don't need to put in the time. Your spouse will be happier, the kids will be happier, and you'll soon learn to love the exta money coming in without the aggravation of worry during the game.

Besides, if you decide to watch, you'll be amazed at how exciting even a girl dribbling a basketball can be when she has your money riding on her.

Also consider that the WNBA is played during baseball season, and nothing, not even the WNBA, is more deadly-boring to watch than baseball.

To get you started with some of those no show winners, or to give you a a new and less boring sport to watch for the summer, I've got a Happy Ending Winner going of you in the WNBA tonight. You can get it by CLICKING HERE.

FREEBEE: You'll have to hurry, but take the Giants/A's game to go over 7 1/2 runs. These two pitchers allow 25 hits & walks per game combined and that spells over the low total.

BETTING BASEBALL UNDERDOGS

Rob Crowne — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 16:11:00 GMT

Most underdog bets in baseball are based on the line being too high. You handicap the favorite to be the probable winner, but the probability that the favorite will win is less than the odds you must lay, and so you take the underdog as the value play.

Sometimes you find an underdog that looks like a toss up to win the game. Whenever you can get plus odds on a pick'em coin toss grab it. Getting +120 when the comes up heads and losing only even money when it lands on tails will eventually make you rich.

Rarely do you find an underdog that handicaps to be the better team based on all factors both offensive and defensive. When and if you do, you have an uncommon opportunity and should bet accordingly.

Such an uncommon opportunity exists with Atlanta today. Atlanta has been posted as the underdog because the linemaker tries to split public opinion, and the public bets based on team and pitcher won-lost records as their primary handicapping factor.

I have such a rare find in one of the early games today. You can get it by CLICKING HERE!

FREE PICK: Better late than never. Today's free pick is a total on a game starting at 4:00 PM Eastern time. Take the San Francisco/Oakland game to go over the total of 7 1/2 runs. These two pitchers average over 25 hits and walks per 9 innings, and that spells over this low total.

TO GET MY TV HAPPY ENDING PLAY TO INVEST YOUR WINNINGS FROM THE FREE PICK CLICK HERE.

Stock and Baseball FREEBEES FROM ROB CROWNE

Rob Crowne — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:24:00 GMT

Tonight the Yankees are on the road against Pittsburgh. If you want to make money in the stock market, go with the Steelmen.

The demand for steel from the developing nations in the Middle East, as well as China and India, and the demand for oil drilling rigs, has given the steel companies pricing power. The recent price increase in steel should substantially increase the earnings of Pittsburgh-based US Steel (X).

Better yet, buy Nucor Steel with doesn't come from Pittsburgh but which currently represents a better value at only 14.5 times current earnings and 9.5 times predicted earnings for 2009 without taking into account more price increases. Those low valuations still exist despite the fact that Nucor has doubled from its low in the past year. I expect it to double again over he next 12-18 months.

Today's down market has taken Nucor (NUE) and US Steel (X) down with it providing an excellent buying opportunity.

If,on the other hand, you want to make money in the sports book, go against the Steelmen tonight and take the Yankees -140.

The Pitcher for Pittsburgh, may be Malholm Boy, but Rob Crowne's Home Boy is Mussina for the Bronx Bombers. Furrther, the Pirates are obviously confused. Hasn't anybody told them in Pittshburgh that they're landlocked? What does being a Pirate have to do with Steel, unless it's those Pirate cutlasses they're thinking of? Expect the Yanks to take advantage of the Pirates' confusion and bomb 'em even in Pittsburgh.

For those of you for whom the above brilliant reasoning just isn't enough, here are some numbers. Mussina allows an average of just 3.33 runs on the road and 4.2 runs in Night games, compared to 3.6 runs per game allowed at home by Maholm and 4.6 runs in home games.

Those numbers don't represent huge differentials, but Mussina does have the edge. Add to that a small hitting edge for the Yankees with an average of .270 on the road vs. lefties while the Pirates hit .263 at home vs. righties.

The biggest edge for the Yankees, however, is in the bull pen. The Yankees available bull pen is significantly better in both hits and walks per 9 and ERA.

Take the Yankees -140 but don't pay up for it, and take Nucor up to $75 per share, but don't pay up for that either.

And if you want to double your money without waiting a year for Nucor to get there, then go to my Pick Page and click on my Best Baseball Play of the Day going off tonight. The pick and analysis is just $15.

DISCLOSURE: At the time of this writing the author owns common stock and options in Nucor and has no position in US Steel. The author has also previously bet the Yankees -140. These stock and game selections and analyses are for educational purposes only, they have not been tailored to your individual situation or financial condition, they do not constitute investment recommendations or advice, and you are strongly cautioned to do your own analysis and seek advice from your own financial advisor before making any investment decisions. All securities opinions are made without compensation of any kind.

The AFL IS EASY PICKINGS - Part 2

Rob Crowne — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 20:10:00 GMT

In "The AFL IS EASY PICKINGS - Part 1" we discussed the reasons that Arena Football provides a higher degree of handicapping predictability than the NFL. Forecast accuracy is only part of the story, however

If the lines are set to reflect the handicapper's forecasted result, no matter how accurate that handicapper may be, he cannot gain any advantage. For a handicapper to achieve wagering success, the sport must not only be predictable, but the lines must be inaccurate from a handicapping standpoint. The win percentage will increase with the accuracy of the predictions and with the distance of the lines from those predictions.

Most NFL lines are kept very close to the probable handicapped result because of the professional betting action. The big-money professionals and syndicate groups like to bet the NFL because the large public betting pools allow them to wager large sums without greatly influencing the line. These professional groups tend to be very accurate in their handicapping. To prevent and compensate for the large sums of money that the professional groups will bet on one side of the game, the line-makers must set lines and move the lines to closely reflect the predicted results of the professional bettors.

AFL betting, on the other hand, is very thin. Betting very large sums into a small betting pool can move a line as much as 7 points. The professional gambling syndicates simply can't get enough money down on AFL games to interest them.

Linemakers do not set lines to be an accurate prediction of the game result. They set lines to split betting action between the two sides of the game. In the absence of the smart-money betting syndicates, the line-maker must worry only about the betting action of the amateurs. As a result, AFL lines are set at points that have more to do with hype, home-town fans, and won-lost records than with accurate handicapping.

For the above reasons, lines in the AFL have less correlation to the forecast of skilled handicappers than lines in the NFL. This lack of an accurate line in the AFL combined with the high predictability of game results has created unusually high win percentages and a very lucrative betting opportunity for the knowledgeable football handicapper who is seeking to bet no more than a maximum of $1000 to $2000 per game

At the Crowne Club we are maintaining AFL results close to 70%. Tonight we have a top-rated 3-star selection on the Monday Night Game being televised on ESPN-2. The game kicks off at 10:00 PM Eastern. Our record on top plays this season has been above 80% for all the reasons discussed in Parts 1 and 2. To get tonights very high probability winning selection CLICK HERE.

Rob Crowne's Biography