Vinny Rombi said:
Now this thread is very instructive of the difference between a PRO and an amateur. The PRO has 22 years of experience so he's learned to identify a TRAP. If he thought KC should be more of a favorite, he's smart enough and experienced enough to know that Vegas knows more! So he realizes this particular line of his was in error, so he changes gears and is sharp enough to see that COLORADO is the right side.
To the critics here, I point out that Tony George has 22 years of experience as a pro and is a long term documented winner. Where is your resume? Its one thing to debate the ins and outs of a game but most of this thread seems like baseless bashing. You should be thanking Tony for the winner and for the free lesson in teaching you how to identify a trap line. Every experienced bettor knows there are times Vegas lays the trap and this one was one of them!
Vinny,
-I'd love to see Tony's long term record because I've never seen it posted. Please point me in the direction that shows this documentation you speak of
-Vegas (and it's not actually Vegas, it's offshore) has absolutely nothing to do with this. The game opened offshore -125/+115 yesterday. The betting market drove it to where it ended up today.
Even though you all collectively frustrate the hell out of me sometime, I really do want to help, so please believe me when I say that you need to stop judging whether something is good or bad based on one game. I see it constantly. If KC had won I first would have been upset because I bet Colorado +112 (unfortunately for me on the 5 inning line), but I can promise you there would have been no chest thumping from me, and I hope there wouldn't be any from Shay either.
The idea of a trap line is a theory. In order to determine whether a theory is correct, you need a very large sample size. Right now everyone is thinking "22 years is a huge sample size". Has he kept a record of these trap games? What exactly constitutes a trap game? You have to put specific parameters around something and then record the results to determine if something is good or bad. I know he says he's made a shitload of money playing these, but especially in gambling, people often overestimate their ability, or the effectiveness of something if they are keeping a loose tally in their head.
Here's a simple example:
You walk up to a roulette table with your friend and see that black has hit 8 times in a row. Friend thinks, "I've seen this so many times, it's going to start going red. Every time I go a casino I do this and I win". You disagree and tell him it makes no difference how many times it's landed black, the chance for red has not changed and it's still a -EV game.
Friend places a red bet, wins, and stands up and tells his friend "I told you so!"
The obvious difference in this is that it's definitive that friend A is incorrect. There is 0% chance he is right. Sports betting is not an exact science and although I highly doubt oddsmakers send out numbers to try and trick bettors (which didn't even happen in this instance) it certainly isn't a 100% scenario.
I'd never route for anyone to lose so I'm glad the Rockies backers won. But for people to say "This particular game won, so this entire theory is correct" is not very bright.