ESPN Tournament Challenge Group -- All Tourney Talk Here

[Drizzle]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

The light was clearly on. But it really had no bearing on the game result. Who cares if any bookies took it on the chin anyhow?

The spread was 10.5 points. Vegas didn't care either

[Mark Padgett]

Guys, since we're on the subject, let me quickly explain to you why bookies don't care who wins. This was explained to me when I was just a wee lad by my grandfather, who at one time worked for Al Capone in the gambling "bidness" back in Chicago (and no - I am not making that up, he really did - and then he moved to Tahoe then Vegas to finish out his career). The bookies set the point spread based on what spread they think will get an equal amount of money bet on each team. As the money comes in, if it is heavy on one team, they will move the spread to encourage more to be bet on the other team. When you place a bet with a real bookie, you in effect pay a service charge. That's why they want to eliminate their risk by having an equal amount bet on each team - they make their money on the service charge (sometimes inaccurately referred to as the "vig" - that's something else entirely). If, during the betting process, they have a surplus bet on one team, they will lay off a lot of that with other bookies to get themselves back into a "balanced" position.

So the next time there is a major upset and you hear someone say that the bookies took it in the shorts, you can just laugh because you know it's not true.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Guys, since we're on the subject, let me quickly explain to you why bookies don't care who wins. This was explained to me when I was just a wee lad by my grandfather, who at one time worked for Al Capone in the gambling "bidness" back in Chicago (and no - I am not making that up, he really did - and then he moved to Tahoe then Vegas to finish out his career). The bookies set the point spread based on what spread they think will get an equal amount of money bet on each team. As the money comes in, if it is heavy on one team, they will move the spread to encourage more to be bet on the other team. When you place a bet with a real bookie, you in effect pay a service charge. That's why they want to eliminate their risk by having an equal amount bet on each team - they make their money on the service charge (sometimes inaccurately referred to as the "vig" - that's something else entirely). If, during the betting process, they have a surplus bet on one team, they will lay off a lot of that with other bookies to get themselves back into a "balanced" position.

So the next time there is a major upset and you hear someone say that the bookies took it in the shorts, you can just laugh because you know it's not true.

So in summary: the house always win, right?

[Raymond]

NORFOLK - Of all the ways Old Dominion had messed things up in its string of five straight one-and-dones from the NCAA tournament, this one was bound for infamy. Because freshman Jasmine Parker's name was left off the official scorebook, the Lady Monarchs were assessed a technical foul before tipoff.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

NORFOLK - Of all the ways Old Dominion had messed things up in its string of five straight one-and-dones from the NCAA tournament, this one was bound for infamy. Because freshman Jasmine Parker's name was left off the official scorebook, the Lady Monarchs were assessed a technical foul before tipoff.

This one had me wondering - in NFHS, we'd only assess the T when (and if) the sub came into the game and we added them to the scorebook then. I looked through the NCAA rulebook, and thought it was a bit vague on this regard. Is there an actual requirement that everyone be listed at the beginning of the game?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

This one had me wondering - in NFHS, we'd only assess the T when (and if) the sub came into the game and we added them to the scorebook then. I looked through the NCAA rulebook, and thought it was a bit vague on this regard. Is there an actual requirement that everyone be listed at the beginning of the game?

Mark, in NFHS we don't 'T' immediately when the name is added?

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Mark, in NFHS we don't 'T' immediately when the name is added?

We do, but the team has the option of not adding the person's name to the book. If it's some JV player who never gets into the varsity game, the team might be better off leaving them out of the book and not getting the T.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

So in summary: the house always win, right?

That's why bookies have been around for thousands of years. I remember placing bets on the Roman chariot races.

Damn that Ben-Hur. I dropped a bundle on him.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Damn that Ben-Hur. I dropped a bundle on him.

If Ben-Hur was a male, his name would be Ben-Him.

Silly (sexist) monkey!

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Guys, since we're on the subject, let me quickly explain to you why bookies don't care who wins. This was explained to me when I was just a wee lad by my grandfather, who at one time worked for Al Capone in the gambling "bidness" back in Chicago (and no - I am not making that up, he really did - and then he moved to Tahoe then Vegas to finish out his career). The bookies set the point spread based on what spread they think will get an equal amount of money bet on each team. As the money comes in, if it is heavy on one team, they will move the spread to encourage more to be bet on the other team. When you place a bet with a real bookie, you in effect pay a service charge. That's why they want to eliminate their risk by having an equal amount bet on each team - they make their money on the service charge (sometimes inaccurately referred to as the "vig" - that's something else entirely). If, during the betting process, they have a surplus bet on one team, they will lay off a lot of that with other bookies to get themselves back into a "balanced" position.

So the next time there is a major upset and you hear someone say that the bookies took it in the shorts, you can just laugh because you know it's not true.

So the next time there is a major upset and you hear someone say that the bookies took it in the shorts, you can just laugh because you know it's not true.[/QUOTE]

Not quite true........you're assuming that their 'network' of books allows them to layoff. For example, if everyone jumps on a team, as a book you would want to lay that off. Your other book may not want or take any more action on said team. This is not a problem usually in Vegas but with small time bookies in smaller towns they do take it in the shorts. Also consider if the action is heavy one way and the line goes up or down, you could lose both ways.