Fezzik writes:
Last week I referenced "Dr. Bob" in the Fezzik Friday answer without an explanation of who he is. Dr. Bob (drbobsports.com) was the first handicapper to make a big name for himself, sans marketing hyperbole and boiler-room sales tactics. Dr. Bob built a huge following with a simple business model: Winning.
Big-name touts were buying time all over the airwaves, screaming about "lock games" and how their 100-star Battlestar-Galactica plays were so strong you could "bet your children's kids on it." Meanwhile, Dr. Bob crunched his math models and gave out winning picks at a rate of 55%-56%. Year after year. College football, NFL, NBA, CBB. Fifty-five percent. Quietly and without hype, Dr. Bob got it done.
From 2005 to 2007, Dr. Bob got hit with a perfect storm of very bad luck. He had a monster 2005 CFB year, and I mean monster. Suddenly, he was no longer under the radar. Everyone knew who he was, especially after a Wall Street Journal article came out describing how his followers were pounding the bookies. At about the same time the offshore betting world became a minefield, with the biggest books exiting the US markets, and the great recession struck. Video killed the radio star, and this whammy of events killed a bunch of winning handicappers, overwhelming their stellar past results-including mine and Dr. Bob's.
Suddenly, the soft lines in the NFL that were created by so much dead money in the business weren't there anymore. The only guys betting big were sharps, and they were betting earlier in the week, pounding mistakes in the line as soon as they came out.
Further, many players reverse-engineered the good Doctor, finding situations he typically bet on and betting them before he did. Bob would still land on them, but now he was getting +7 on best bets that he would have gotten +8 on before.
The biggest frustration many have with Dr. Bob in 2012 is that he appears to be falling into the category of old-school fossil handicappers that simply don't get that their methods need to be updated, and that their five-year negative results are not an aberration. These guys continue to put out the tired, "I've won doing this that last 20 years, why won't it work the next 20," while not realizing that the game in 2012 is so much different than it was even in 2009.
In my opinion, a 20-year winning record is irrelevant in this business. How you do over the past few years is what matters. For myself, in 2012 I completely changed my methods based on a horrible year in 2011. But even with full dedication to the NFL and getting the very best of the number with early releases, I've struggled.
Look no farther than "Edward" at RAS (Right Angle Sports), whose results are phenomenal, to see how to win betting sports. Edward does one sport at a time. Yup. Just one. And he picks the softest sport available to pound. He does it 24/7 and he has a team helping him. Further, if he spots a weak CBB line at 8 a.m., he releases it then and there. No waiting around for other sharps to maybe get at his play. So it's not unusual for Edward to give out, say, Cal Northridge +8, leaving the Dr. Bob's of the world with +6-or-pass later in the day.
Will Dr. Bob rebound? Some say yes, but I'm not optimistic. I would love him to prove me wrong. Will RAS continue to win? Most say yes, but the Golden Goose is hard to come by. You literally have five seconds to bet his stuff after release -- better hope the guy in line in front of you isn't playing a parlay.
