09/03/2008 -
Cincinnati, OH (Sportsbook Betting Lines) - University of Cincinnati quarterback Ben
Mauk had his request for reconsideration on his original waiver for a sixth
year of eligibility denied for the final time by the NCAA on Wednesday.
The NCAA reinstatement committee upheld the NCAA staff decision.
"Our review of the facts as presented and possible mitigating factors for this
eligibility request was extensive and thorough, exhausting all avenues in the
administrative procedures and ensuring a fair process for this student-
athlete," said Carol Iwaoka, NCAA Division I Student-Athlete reinstatement
committee chair and associate commissioner of the Big Ten Conference. "Even
after reviewing the latest information, the committee was unable to identify
compelling factors that might be viewed as beyond the control of the student-
athlete and the University of Cincinnati."
NCAA rules indicate that a Division I student-athlete can complete his or her
four seasons within five years from initial full-time enrollment.
An original request for reconsideration was based on new information submitted
regarding a foot injury Mauk suffered during his high school career. Prior to
enrolling at Wake Forest University, Mauk required an additional operation on
the foot in the spring of 2003.
The student-athlete reinstatement committee is a panel of athletics directors,
faculty representatives, and conference commissioners who has the authority to
determine all matters pertaining to the policies and procedures for the
reinstatement of eligibility for a student-athlete.
In January of 2008, Mauk first attempted to regain the year he lost in 2003
when he sat out the season at Wake Forest.
Mauk spent four years with the Demon Deacons before graduating and
transferring to Cincinnati for the 2007-08 academic year. He sat out the
2003 season as a redshirt and played in 18 games for Wake Forest from
2004-06. He broke his right arm and dislocated his shoulder in the first game
of the 2006 season at Wake Forest, and missed the entire season.
Mauk played in 12 of 13 games with Cincinnati during the 2007 season, and set
a program record with 31 passing touchdowns. He helped lead UC to 10-3 record
including a victory in the Papajohns.com Bowl.
The graduate-transfer ended the year completing 235-of-386 passes for 3,121
yards.
Sportsbooks to bet on football
Recently I had an email debate with an angry reader who said I did not understand "the science of oddsmaking", as he called it.
He said I was wrong for suggesting oddsmakers care about who wins or loses games.
"Oddsmakers only care about splitting the betting public 50/50 on both sides of the line and keeping the commission (a.k.a. juice)," he wrote.
He might have been right about not understanding "the science of oddsmaking". After all, I'm not an oddsmaker. That said, I stick to my assertion that oddsmakers (a.k.a. sportbooks) often do care about who wins games.
Granted, as a general rule, sportsbooks try to balance their action so that they're not exposed to big losses. However, there are times when this is difficult to pull off, regardless of how much a line has moved. There are also times when that general rule is ignored and a book pursues risk.
Generally speaking, it's safe to say the books in Vegas are risk-adverse. Unlike in the past when the wise guys ruled the town, Vegas is now corporate and the goal of most casinos is to make as much money as possible with as little risk as possible.
Thus, Vegas sportsbooks try everything in their power to balance the action. They're satisfied simply collecting the juice. But these profits are small, especially compared to the take from other casino games, namely slot machines.
Because the profits at Vegas sportsbooks are so small, you could argue that many casinos operate sportsbooks simply as a novelty to keep the tourists happy.
With a growing aversion to risk, it should come as no surprise that Vegas bookmakers have been panicking this NFL season.
Despite huge pointspreads, a disproportionate percentage of bettors are still laying their money on favorites like the Eagles, Colts, Pats and Vikings rather than the dogs (a common trend for the largely recreational bettors that visit Vegas).
And much to the dismay of the books, those favorites are finding ways to cover the thick chalk. In fact, prior to Week 7, the four teams listed above are a combined 16-2-2 (88 percent) against the spread. (The tables turned dramatically in Week 7, but more on that later.)
The result has been an early-season beating for the books, and a bonanza for bettors.
While Vegas increasingly hates risk, it's no longer a major player in the sports betting world. Most of the betting action now takes place offshore where sportsbooks are not as obsessed about balance. In fact, some books encourage exposure to risk because the rewards can be so much bigger.
Consider MySportsbook.com. On its website, the book has odds pages which actually display the amount of action it's getting on games. In other words, you can see how much action the book is taking on both sides of a pointspread, moneyline or over/under.
One look at these numbers and it's obvious MySportsbook.com does not balance every game. In fact, far from it.
Take last weekend's matchup between St. Louis and Miami. By game time on Sunday, 83 percent of the betting action at MySportsbook.com was on the Rams; only 17 percent was on Miami.
What's interesting is that MySportsbook.com opened the pointspread with Miami at +6 1/2. By game time, the spread had lowered to +5.
That goes contrary to the balancing theory. If MySportsbook.com had wanted to balance the action, it would have given Miami more points; instead, it took away 1 1/2.
MySportsbook.com exposed itself to even more to risk, and rolled the dice on the underdog Dolphins. Why? I contacted a representative with the book to find out. His answer was simple.
"The line moved early based on 'smart money' from sharp players," said Jeff Gilroy, a spokesperson for the book. "We also knew from early in the week that we would need Miami, therefore (we dropped) the spread to encourage Rams money.
"At the end of the day, we liked the home team."
So the conclusion is this: MySportsbook.com respected the sharp action, and gambled that the sharp bettors had a better take on the game than the recreational bettors, who were hammering the visiting Rams.
In the end, the gamble paid off. Miami, desperate for a win in front of its home fans, pounded the overrated Rams, who are terrible on the road and even worse on grass. Final score: 31-14 Fish.
MySportsbook.com was also heavily exposed on numerous favorites in Week 7, including Philadelphia, Seattle and Denver. All three failed to cover.
The fact that sportsbooks are exposed to risk on certain games is really nothing new. The fact, that Sportsbook.com is willing to show the public where it's exposed is intriguing.
Armed with this type of information, bettors can make more educated wagers. They can get an idea where the sharp money is going and conversely where the public money is headed.
MySportsbook.com is opening up its cashbox, letting bettors look inside and challenging them to take their best shot at grabbing the cash.
To visit this online sportsbook got to MySportsbook.com for all your football betting odds needs. Mysportsbook.com online sportsbook accepts Visa and Mastercard credit cards.
