Forums

Forums
Where sports bettors talk!

PB: Where the Hell was the Buyback? (9-2-14)

Thread Starter PB: Where the Hell was the Buyback? (9-2-14)
David Malinsky
Joined: 08/11/2014
Posts: 109
Jr. College
Not Ranked

Point Blank – September 2

Where the Hell was the Buyback? 

Yesterday in this space there was the first edition of what will be the weekly Monday focus on taking a deeper look inside the NCAA results (http://pregame.com/pregame-forums/f/14/t/1025327.aspx). But some of the most interesting action this time around happened at betting windows, over telephones, and via apps. As is so often the case, there were major line moves for the opening college week, with that card being one of the biggest challenges of the sports calendar year for the oddsmakers. But there were a couple of catches this time. 

First, there was much more money wagered on underdogs than any opening week I can recall, over three decades worth of memory banks. That was confirmed when the usual reaching out for added info took place, after seeing the screen black out time after time. For some of us, studying the marketplace is every bit as important as evaluating the teams themselves, so that we can anticipate the fluctuations ahead. The unusual flow meant time to contact Bob Scucci, Race and Sports Director of Boyd Gaming, who has been on the front lines since the old Stardust days (Bob is the “George Harrison of Bookmakers”, a theme that will be developed here over time). 

From Scooch – “Yes, I was surprised at the action on the underdogs.  My assistant Jake and I had started calling the first Saturday of college football “sacrificial lamb Saturday” because all the top teams would play cupcakes, and lay 20, 30, 40 points!  The last few years were not good to us as many of those games ran a little bit, and covered on top of it.  That may be partially why we got some more dog play, though, as many of the favorites were inflated.”

So how do both Bettors and Bookmakers react to a shift in the market patterns? By tracing the source of the money. This was not “public” action – the parlay cards had their usual ratio of chalk circled, and the Nevada books were able to use their shredders for the overwhelming majority of those cards this weekend. But there was some sharp straight money in play, from a group that had a plan. More Scooch – “It did not appear like the money was coming in from all directions.  It seemed like it came from the same small group.” 

There is some tangible method behind that madness, which was discussed here on Friday (http://pregame.com/pregame-forums/f/14/t/1022330.aspx) - under the new Playoff format, incentive has been greatly reduced for the prime contenders to aim for early style points. But that only explains part of it – there was also a lot of underdog money played into favorites that will not be a part of the Championship discussion in any way. While the numbers can bounce around in the higher pointspread tiers without the action being all that major, when key numbers get crossed in the lower ranges it can be a headache for Scucci and his brethren; it brings the fear of “Buyback”, and the potential of being middled. But that was the biggest fascination of this weekend - the Buyback was not there.

It started on Thursday night, when Vanderbilt went from an opener of -17, and a genuine settle-out of -14.5 a week prior to kickoff, all the way to -7.5 at post vs. Temple. On Saturday how about Purdue, which opened at -13 vs. Western Michigan, getting knocked down to -7, without those 7’s being turned back around? On Sunday night, Tennessee was reduced from -6.5 all the way to -3 vs. Utah State, again without much of anyone stepping in near kickoff to buy low on the favorite. 

This was extremely unusual to see. In two of the instances there was significant money wagered on teams from lower-tier conferences (Temple and Utah State), on the road against SEC opponents. Naturally the public does not do that. But what did happen were public followers joining those bandwagons and tacking on, even at the worst of it. Someone was still betting Temple +8 in the moments leading up to kickoff. There were takers for Western Michigan at +8, despite the 13’s that existed earlier. Bettors were still willing to take Utah State at +4 and at +3.5, after the best of that line had disappeared. That created opportunities for someone to trust the oddsmakers and play “pong” to the “ping”, but there was precious little of that money entered into evidence. 

When the counting was completed, the Sports Books came out OK. The Purdue game falling on nine would have been much more damaging in the past, but the late chalk money was not there (although LSU landing on four Saturday night did them no favors), and enough big favorites covered against the moves (Auburn, Notre Dame, USC, Baylor, etc.) to keep things relatively balanced. Meanwhile the one major power that drew the money, Florida State, never threatened the spread. 

Now time to turn the page to the next chapter. Was this underdog money purely a Week #1 phenomenon, or will we see it again? That becomes a big part of the thought processes as the early board takes shape this week. If you have a favorite that you want to play, do you hold back to see if that money shows again, so that you can lay a cheaper price? If you want a big underdog, do you lock in now? There is so much more to this endeavor than stats and power ratings…

The Texas Offense: Sifting through the “Ashes”

What is certain is that David Ash will not be the QB for Texas this week vs. Brigham Young. What is not known is whether or not Ash will ever play again – this may be one head injury too many. So now time for the Sports Books to readjust, after the Longhorns were a painted -3.5 when the Ash news was announced. We have to readjust as well, but under the radar may be the fact that the QB position was not the only one burned for the Longhorns on Saturday, so there needs to be a close look at those remaining ashes. 

First, Texas will be fine at QB eventually, though perhaps not this week. Tyronne Swoopes is a 6-4/245 playmaker with significant upside, bringing a run dimension to the attack that it did not have with Ash. Swoopes played in six games as a freshman LY, and got a lot of practice work with the first-team offense in spring and fall because Ash was handled carefully. 

But here is the problem that Swoopes faces immediately – also being lost on Saturday was C Dominic Espinosa, the veteran mainstay of a precocious OL. The win over North Texas was his 40th career start, while the other four members of the unit combined had only 14 entering the game. He was replaced by red-shirt freshman Jake Raulerson, who subsequently had two miss-handled snap exchanges with Ash. The Espinosa injury may be the more important of the two this week. 

Now Swoopes and that OL get little time to develop. Under Bronco Mendenhall, BYU runs some of the most complex defensive packages in college football, taking full advantage of the fact that because of their Mormon missions, he often has players that are a year or two older than their counterparts at other schools. Mendenhall can be counted on to have many tricks up his sleeve to confuse both Swoopes, and that young blocking corps. Texas can counter that with some simple ground-and-pound, behind that depth at RB, and that will be the starting point for the handicap when this game hits the board again.

In the Sights…

Last week there was a discussion here about how those +1.5’s on the Run Line could be more valuable than usual this September, given that the top teams in the pennant races have been more pitching-heavy than in the past, lacking the punch at the plate to get many margins. But it was difficult to envision that there would be a chance to actually back one of those contenders as the Play-On team for such a setting.

You can purchase the Nationals at +1.5 -140 in Los Angeles tonight (though you should not go any higher), and having that run to work with looms substantial with a Total sitting at 6 Under -125 (the first 5.5 is already out there). It shows the power of Clayton Kershaw’s name for such a line to be generated, but it is a classic example of the difference between winning the game, and getting a margin. The Dodgers are 18-4 in Kershaw’s starts this season, but just 12-10 as -1.5, and over the past five seasons it has been 100-53 behind their ace, but only 69-84 when a -1.5 is attached.

The Nationals are 33-10 as +1.5 since the All Star break, and 15-5 in that role behind Doug Fister this season. Fister continues to lack a certain “sex appeal” in the marketplace but he keeps his team in games, having allowed two runs or less in 14 of 20 starts, and he also turned a 24-8 as +1.5 in 2013 with the Tigers. The Washington bullpen does not bring any fatigue issues, so we can dare the Dodger offense to produce in this setting.

LetItRide123
Joined: 10/17/2013
Posts: 996
Professional
Not Ranked

Excellent thread Dave!  

LetItRide123
Joined: 10/17/2013
Posts: 996
Professional
Not Ranked

Hankman

but the bottom line is, thank you for your second post. It is refreshing to read your work, and I find it extremely informative and helpful. I am sure as time goes on, as you post, posters and community members who read you, will certainly learn and in turn, enhance their chances to earn. Thank you.

Well said. 

fortunaught
Joined: 04/05/2013
Posts: 506
College Varsity
Not Ranked

Great topic for discussion, and certainly one that should be ongoing,  Here are my two cents for what they are worth, though time constraints require me to be more brief than I'd like to be able to make this argument in full. And I can't account for why there wouldn't be any sharp, large fish buy back across such large chasms and key numbers, as those are waters I don't swim in, but it will certainly be worth monitoring to see if that is a trend that continues as the season unfolds.  Was that simply because it was week one, and nobody was inclined to become needlessly overextended playing on unknown entities? Or was it perhaps something else; something that caught my eye in more than a few games over the course of the opening weekend, and somewhat extends from observations made last season, and calls to mind a college basketball analogy.  

Could it possibly be that we are seeing the early stages, and noticing the infancy of a more genuine parody across college football?  It was not that long ago, let's call it a decade, that if you were rooting for upsets in the SEC during conference play, such that other teams might have a shot to ascend in the rankings, that no matter what the score was at halftime, or even heading into the 4th quarter with a competitive dog,(Usually 13-10/17-13, yawn) the better/higher ranked team nearly always found a way to emerge, and not solely with the aide of officiating.  I think it was more a case of what Dave shrewdly pointed out the other day as it still relates to SEC teams playing out of conference games these days with regards to late game attrition, and that is that depth and talent wear down the lesser version of such, and tend to prove victorious more times than not.

But with the way that football is evolving in general across the board, from 7 on 7's in high school in the offeseason, to offensive philosophical changes in the college and pro game, to the way it's officiated in the name of safety, and scoring encouragement; I think that the days of simply recruiting and lining up the best tacklers to put a stop to scoring has been diluted across the board.  That along with the fact that TV exposure means that you can make a college program sexy regardless of location, (looking at you Waco), mean that any coach can take any job, virtually anywhere in America, and make it at least frisky if not competitive. You're an old retread coach who's been around the block a few times? There's a school in New Mexico or west Texas for you.  You're an up and coming coach with a unique scheme to try out? Perhaps you'd prefer one of our Florida schools with initials, or maybe Arkansas St?  

And the one thing that is still in place for football, that basketball is losing, much to it's detriment, is the built in structure of high school football, such that kids from anywhere in America, not just the Rust Belt, Texas or Florida, can play at a program that can prepare them for D-1 football. I'm not suggesting that we will soon see the evaporation of games lined in the three and four TD range, because that doesn't appear to be around the corner, and there are still over 120 of these programs across the country.  And it may never approach the parody of leagues with salary cap impositions, that regulate the flow of talent.  But again, I call back to the college basketball analogy that we are seeing more and more as the years go by, that on any given day... And maybe that will serve the betterment of the sport, and make the potential bite of the dogs just a touch more potent with each passing season.  Certainly a 'too be determined' conversation, but one that is worth following going forward.

And on a side note, I am hoping that the home field keeps that Longhorn line in the -1/pick em range, because I very much agree that the Espinosa injury is probably more important than the Ash absence anyway.  You put Swoopes in a pressure cooker first start, in front of potentially restless natives, with an inexperienced O-line, against older kids coached by Bronco, and a BYU team that gets back 5 key starters that will be chomping at the bit, and I think you'd have to make the line Cougs -3 before I became tepid about playing them in that one, regardless of environment.  Thanks as always David for the great springboard.  

Have a pleasant and profitable day.

Teddy Covers
Joined: 08/04/2014
Posts: 335
Jr. College
Not Ranked

Week 1 was a classic example of the 'always adjusting' betting marketplace.  What worked last year (laying the chalk across the board in Week 1) didn't work this year in college football, one of the dangers of focusing too much on looking back at longer term trends and angles.  When the books get beat, they adjust.  When the syndicates and betting groups get beat, they adjust or get out of the business.

That's what makes sportsbetting so exciting and challenging -- the marketplace is always shifting.  One thing a Malinsky column does every day is to put some of those 'morphing' market conditions under the spotlight.  

taylorb
Joined: 11/17/2010
Posts: 636
Pro Draft Prospect
Not Ranked

Your insight is fascinating David. Loving the reads so far.

ShayMonue
Joined: 03/24/2014
Posts: 1716
All Pro
Top 500 Contributor

Could this just have been a syndicate who rides value and doesn't buy back? The fact no one bought back suggests that their early move was ultra sharp and buying back would lessen their expected margin.

Great topic.

SportWinsLossesTiesWin %$ Won
MLB91106246.19300.00
NFL14020.00-335.00
NHL0100.00-100.00
Rate This
  • 7 replies
  • 1 subscriber
  • Posted1 month ago