Now that question sounds pretty strange ... of course they gamble! But do they ever want to have a TON on only one side of a game and NOT A PENNY on the other ...
I always thought books wanted two way action, maybe being forced a little heavy on the dog side by sqaure action.
But Olympic, a top book, is obviously wanting only dog money on a tennis matchup today. They have Vicente/Enqvist at +250/-400. Most other books (WSEX, Carib, etc) have it +210/-270.
Now obviously Olympic is going to get all dog bets at +250 and absolutely no favorite money at -400.
In effect "the Greek" is "taking all bets on the dog at +250" - this is pure gambling.
But is there anything wrong in that - can't the Greek offer the +250 to customers rather than bet the -270 at a dozen other books himself?
Do books gamble ... I know the answer now.
I always thought books wanted two way action, maybe being forced a little heavy on the dog side by sqaure action.
But Olympic, a top book, is obviously wanting only dog money on a tennis matchup today. They have Vicente/Enqvist at +250/-400. Most other books (WSEX, Carib, etc) have it +210/-270.
Now obviously Olympic is going to get all dog bets at +250 and absolutely no favorite money at -400.
In effect "the Greek" is "taking all bets on the dog at +250" - this is pure gambling.
But is there anything wrong in that - can't the Greek offer the +250 to customers rather than bet the -270 at a dozen other books himself?
Do books gamble ... I know the answer now.
Comment