Is a strict """public fading""" based strategy the way to go ?

[cuse_man]

Simple question really...

In your opinion is a strict "anti-public" approach a good strategy when it comes to wagering on sports ?

A simple yes or no is all that is really needed (there is no middle ground to this Q), but feel free to add your thoughts if you feel strongly one way or another.

Encourage all mallers to take part in this poll..

[FalconFreak]

so depending on who gets the most votes, is the other answer the right one? just a thought

[justdonating]

Any strategy that solely relies on one factor is bound to run into obstacles, so I'd say the answer is no. In the 06-07 NBA season, I won closely to 70% of the time strictly fading the public. I tried the same thing the following season and barely won 50%. Linesmakers are so sharp and wouldn't make winning as easy as relying on one factor. Just my 2 cents.

[teekay209]

too many variables go into handicapping a game, therefore strict public fading as you call it is not a very good approach IMO (not saying it can't be effective over a given amount of time)

[markd]

strictly fading me work work much better
I'll try to post more plays

[Romanowski]

define the public

[cuse_man]

Originally Posted by Romanowski

define the public

This is a good question.. I think you know what I am asking, but at least it brings about a chance for me to explain for others, because clearly there are a few that don't understand as they voted "no" while they clearly use this strategy.. which brings up another good Q, but we can wait.
This is what I am talking about guys...

You look at the game(s)... Do whatever you do to cap the game.

A. Does the thought of which side (In your opinion of course) the majority of bettors are taking cross your mind ? If so...

B. How much of an influence does this have on your decision of who to take. Whether that means reducing your bet, upgrading your bet, and finally deciding which side to take all together.

C. If you had to break this down into a percentage.. I would say if this accounts for 40% or more of your decision... You are betting on a "public fade" based strategy.

[Classic Rock]

How do you know what the public is betting? It's a guessing game. Most people wait until game time to place bets

[Deck]

No.

[Gobbler's Knob]

Used to think this way but after years of betting I learned a few things.

1. If you like it bet it, first instincts are rarely wrong if you are an experienced gambler.

2. If it looks too good to be true, it is

3. Systems are like fads they come and go.

4. A very small percentage make money at this gig overall and you should always have fun with it .

[mikkii10]

fading works only for a small amount of time and fading does depend on what sports or betting on

[JDSilk]

If its me vs someone else. Id take the opposite every time. They may win that time, but eventually they will psychologically beat them self.

Diversification and not placing your eggs in one basket is the common adage with portfolio investing. However, this can be applied to anything in life. Some people will try to work things to a science but I feel being able to be dynamic and knowing how to control things on a macro level will carry you further in the grand scheme of things. Therefore you should work many different angles and learn when its okay to be on the side of the public, when its alright to not always take a home team, when its okay to take a west coast team traveling east, and just being able to break habits one may develop.

[smitch124]

No, the public only loses long term due to the vig (and over staking in some cases), not because they are any better or worse than flipping a coin.

[patswin]

No public wins sometimes too

[unload]

we are the public!!!