Jaguars money line
September 22nd, 2013 at 11:19:49 PM
permalink
I bet through a local cash agent and he said he took more bets on 2nd half Seattle -7 than he did on Seattle -20 for the game. (Line actually jumped to 21 right before kickoff)
So he actually made money on the game because Seattle didnt cover that -7. Overall it was a great day for most books as 4 of the top 5 public plays lost. Giants, packers, falcons,
And San Fran all had heavy action on them. And not only did they not cover...they all lost their games outright. So moneyline bettors and teaser bettors all got absolutely crushed.
The only heavily bet team that went the bettors way was dallas.
So he actually made money on the game because Seattle didnt cover that -7. Overall it was a great day for most books as 4 of the top 5 public plays lost. Giants, packers, falcons,
And San Fran all had heavy action on them. And not only did they not cover...they all lost their games outright. So moneyline bettors and teaser bettors all got absolutely crushed.
The only heavily bet team that went the bettors way was dallas.
September 23rd, 2013 at 2:45:15 AM
permalink
I just don't see how the Jaguars could win that game once out of 50 times. They made Tavaris Jackson look like a superstar. The Colts are -7.5 @ Jacksonville next week. How can the Jaguars cover that? Looking at their schedule I have a hard time finding a game they will even be favored in. Maybe vs Buffalo or Arizona?
We may see the largest spread in history when they play @ Denver in a few weeks. I am not sure what the spread would have to be for me to touch them there, +27 maybe?
We may see the largest spread in history when they play @ Denver in a few weeks. I am not sure what the spread would have to be for me to touch them there, +27 maybe?
September 23rd, 2013 at 3:13:50 AM
permalink
Quote: IbeatyouracesSo Seattle win by 28. Who won what on their bets?
I obviously lost that one, but had Cleveland ML at +270 and Indy at +425. Wish me ... positive variance ... on Oakland tonight.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 23rd, 2013 at 3:23:09 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardI obviously lost that one, but had Cleveland ML at +270 and Indy at +425. Wish me ... positive variance ... on Oakland tonight.
I think OAK + 15.5 is a huge +EV bet. It is not often you get a division dog like that. I assume you got OAK +1000 or so. That is +EV too IMO. In 2009, the 4-9 Raiders upset the Broncos as 13.5 pt dogs.
As for this week, the top 3 public spread bets lost (MN, NYG and GB) and 4 of the top 5 MLs lost. Only the Saints won out of the top 5 (MN, NO, GB, SF and ATL). The Vikings had 97% of the ML action. The books cleaned up, especially if you consider the number of teasers and parlays that lost too.
September 23rd, 2013 at 3:31:23 AM
permalink
Quote: PokeraddictI assume you got OAK +1000 or so.
I got exactly that. A buddy bested me with +1200 at William Hill.
Quote:The books cleaned up, especially if you consider the number of teasers and parlays that lost too.
I know at least a couple friends who bet the Wong teasers this week. There were lots of qualifying games. However, as far as I know, only Jerry's Nugget pays the good odds anymore (+180 on pick-3 and +300 on pick-4). It is too far out of the way to bother going there.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 23rd, 2013 at 4:21:28 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardI obviously lost that one, but had Cleveland ML at +270 and Indy at +425. Wish me ... positive variance ... on Oakland tonight.
Positive Variance to you! Go Raiders!
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
September 23rd, 2013 at 9:13:53 PM
permalink
Denver fumbles while running out the clock and the raiders get a last minute TD for the miracle backdoor cover. Anyone who bet Denver early in the week 14.5 still won,
But the line was 16 or 16.5 all day today.
But the line was 16 or 16.5 all day today.
September 25th, 2013 at 8:03:55 PM
permalink
Quote: KeyserSozeClearly the biggest upset was Rocky Balboa's TKO victory against Ivan Drago, in Moscow.[
Uz didn't care much for me! Quite franky, I didn't care for uz much eitha!
September 29th, 2013 at 3:43:07 PM
permalink
Jaguars are +13 @ STL which should make the ML around +750. I'll be taking that and betting the points. There is no way the Rams should be more than -7 here. It opened at 10.5 and has run 2.5 pts in an hour.
September 29th, 2013 at 9:23:03 PM
permalink
Indications are that Broncos will be 28 pt favorites in 2 weeks. That would be the largest point spread in NFL history. What would the money line be there?
October 6th, 2013 at 8:10:33 PM
permalink
Quote: PokeraddictIndications are that Broncos will be 28 pt favorites in 2 weeks. That would be the largest point spread in NFL history. What would the money line be there?
Looks like it's around 26 right now, but still the largest in recorded history:
http://linemakers.sportingnews.com/nfl/2013-10-02/broncos-vs-jaguars-point-spread-nfl-week-6-lines-vegas-odds-saints-patriots
I wonder if the Wiz will go for the Jags again. I still think my 0-16 parlay from week 1 would be profitable!
October 6th, 2013 at 8:31:32 PM
permalink
Quote: PokeraddictJaguars are +13 @ STL which should make the ML around +750. I'll be taking that and betting the points. There is no way the Rams should be more than -7 here. It opened at 10.5 and has run 2.5 pts in an hour.
Oops. Handicappers/betting market were close...again. When I was in Vegas, I bet on the Rams since I am from there. I lost by 1 or 2 points while the Rams won the game. Same went for Mizzou that week. :-\
October 6th, 2013 at 8:46:58 PM
permalink
Quote: tringlomaneOops. Handicappers/betting market were close...again. When I was in Vegas, I bet on the Rams since I am from there. I lost by 1 or 2 points while the Rams won the game. Same went for Mizzou that week. :-\
Yeah I lost on that one. Going to chase them next week @ DEN. I got +28 at Will Hill.
October 8th, 2013 at 7:17:19 AM
permalink
Jacksonville at
Denver
4:05 pm ET
+$3000 Jacksonville on a $100.usd wager
-$7000 Denver to win $100.usd
Denver
4:05 pm ET
+$3000 Jacksonville on a $100.usd wager
-$7000 Denver to win $100.usd
October 9th, 2013 at 1:00:35 AM
permalink
betting a game like this on the moneyline for jacksonville to me is silly.
It cant be compared to the 10 point win of atlanta. Atlanta has shown nothing all year, so big deal if the jets win outright. Atlanta already lost at home this year so it wasnt surprising.
In a superbowl NE was 14 pt dogs to the high powered offensive rams...and won outright. Not surprising, NE was a superbowl team afterall.Not a crap team. And a good defensive team.
But to bet a one sided game such as this for the dog to win outright is just silly. Even if you think its "good value"....whatever that means.
If you keep chasing "good value" like that....you are destined to continually lose
Lets say you were given the chance to buy a 100 ticket package of 1 dollar powerball tickets for 25 cents on the dollar. So its a 25 dollar bet. Its a "good deal" and for most folks you can take that "deal" every week of your life and lose 50k.....but it was a great deal/
do longshots come in? sure. But I would bet a longshot only if I could suggest a set of positives for the team or horse to win.So far I have not seen anyone post a matchup where jacksonville could exploit denver and get a win. All I hear about is "value". Well value has to be paired with reality, with ability, with matchups. Especially in a game like football where there are alot of moving parts, and one player going down may not be enough to cause an unexpected win
Big dogs winning in baseball or hockey at 2.5-1 is about as good as you get. Because the games depend on a goalie or pitcher that may just have a bad night....and that single player has a big influence on the final result.
But in football, you can win a game with a qb, with special teams, with defense. or a combinaton of all 3. One single player may affect a cover, but less likely to effect the win in a pwer vs big dog game.
It cant be compared to the 10 point win of atlanta. Atlanta has shown nothing all year, so big deal if the jets win outright. Atlanta already lost at home this year so it wasnt surprising.
In a superbowl NE was 14 pt dogs to the high powered offensive rams...and won outright. Not surprising, NE was a superbowl team afterall.Not a crap team. And a good defensive team.
But to bet a one sided game such as this for the dog to win outright is just silly. Even if you think its "good value"....whatever that means.
If you keep chasing "good value" like that....you are destined to continually lose
Lets say you were given the chance to buy a 100 ticket package of 1 dollar powerball tickets for 25 cents on the dollar. So its a 25 dollar bet. Its a "good deal" and for most folks you can take that "deal" every week of your life and lose 50k.....but it was a great deal/
do longshots come in? sure. But I would bet a longshot only if I could suggest a set of positives for the team or horse to win.So far I have not seen anyone post a matchup where jacksonville could exploit denver and get a win. All I hear about is "value". Well value has to be paired with reality, with ability, with matchups. Especially in a game like football where there are alot of moving parts, and one player going down may not be enough to cause an unexpected win
Big dogs winning in baseball or hockey at 2.5-1 is about as good as you get. Because the games depend on a goalie or pitcher that may just have a bad night....and that single player has a big influence on the final result.
But in football, you can win a game with a qb, with special teams, with defense. or a combinaton of all 3. One single player may affect a cover, but less likely to effect the win in a pwer vs big dog game.
October 9th, 2013 at 3:55:44 AM
permalink
Quote: LarrySbetting a game like this on the moneyline for jacksonville to me is silly.
But to bet a one sided game such as this for the dog to win outright is just silly. Even if you think its "good value"....whatever that means.
If you keep chasing "good value" like that....you are destined to continually lose
Lets say you were given the chance to buy a 100 ticket package of 1 dollar powerball tickets for 25 cents on the dollar. So its a 25 dollar bet. Its a "good deal" and for most folks you can take that "deal" every week of your life and lose 50k.....but it was a great deal/
But in football, you can win a game with a qb, with special teams, with defense. or a combinaton of all 3. One single player may affect a cover, but less likely to effect the win in a pwer vs big dog game.
I guess you do not understand the concept of EV. If you are getting 30-1 odds on your dollar and will win only 4 of 100 such games, you will win money. You will 'continually lose', with those 4 exceptions! You are correct in saying that such games are not a guarantee, and slight changes in variance (luck) will either bite you (only 3 of 100 win) or work great for you (5 of a 100 win). Funny you should mention all the moving parts of a football team, specifically mentioniing defense. So you are saying the team with the WORST defensive showing of week 5 is the guaranteed lock to win for week 6? The first team in Tony Romo's career that allowed him to throw for 500 yards?
So if Peyton gets injured during the game, does that change your mind? Having watched the Bills Browns game, where BOTH starters were lost to injury, it can happen.
And if you are THAT sure, I believe that The Wiz has said he would bet the game if he got 40-1 odds. So put up your $4000 to make your free and easy $100.
October 9th, 2013 at 10:47:59 AM
permalink
does anyone think that with the talent going against each other , jacksonville can win 4 out of 100 games?
If the elderly george foreman went up against a 13 year old girl, and you got something of "value"....would you bet on the game? It could happen that foreman gets a stroke as soon as the bell rings to start the match. Other than that you are betting on talent.. You have to be able to point to a scenario where the girlscout can win. Its not the spin of a wheel or the roll of a die. Its a matchup of talent.
oh yeah, and dener has the advantage over all visitors in being used to playing in the thin air of mile high stadium the venue has great betting advantage for the homr team on topof the talent angle.
an example..abiut 10 years ago the Belmont had a 70-1 hirse Sarava in an outside post. I did analysis and based on it felt the horse had a chance to come in third. I bet a 6 horse trifecta box including this horse. War emblem the overwhelming fave stumbles out of the gate, and sarava wins....I collect 10k. But that was based on a sound analysis of the reality of the talent. I just didnt look at the field and say "let met bet the 70-1 cause I can win alot"....that would be just throwing money away.
betting on talent matchups in sports is far more lucrative than betting on " value" ...I would rather win a bet and get a little less than I probably should....then to bet unrealiztic matchups to win and get "great value".....but lose.
If the elderly george foreman went up against a 13 year old girl, and you got something of "value"....would you bet on the game? It could happen that foreman gets a stroke as soon as the bell rings to start the match. Other than that you are betting on talent.. You have to be able to point to a scenario where the girlscout can win. Its not the spin of a wheel or the roll of a die. Its a matchup of talent.
oh yeah, and dener has the advantage over all visitors in being used to playing in the thin air of mile high stadium the venue has great betting advantage for the homr team on topof the talent angle.
an example..abiut 10 years ago the Belmont had a 70-1 hirse Sarava in an outside post. I did analysis and based on it felt the horse had a chance to come in third. I bet a 6 horse trifecta box including this horse. War emblem the overwhelming fave stumbles out of the gate, and sarava wins....I collect 10k. But that was based on a sound analysis of the reality of the talent. I just didnt look at the field and say "let met bet the 70-1 cause I can win alot"....that would be just throwing money away.
betting on talent matchups in sports is far more lucrative than betting on " value" ...I would rather win a bet and get a little less than I probably should....then to bet unrealiztic matchups to win and get "great value".....but lose.
October 9th, 2013 at 11:05:17 AM
permalink
Quote: LarrySdoes anyone think that with the talent going against each other , jacksonville can win 4 out of 100 games?
I sure do. I would expect Peyton to get injured occasionally and the Jaguars chances would increase exponentially.
At my age, a "Life In Prison" sentence is not much of a deterrent.
October 9th, 2013 at 11:40:01 AM
permalink
Quote: PokeraddictIndications are that Broncos will be 28 pt favorites in 2 weeks. That would be the largest point spread in NFL history. What would the money line be there?
According to The Gold Sheet, a sports-betting publication that has been tracking point spreads since the 1950s, that number ties the highest spread of all time, set by the Baltimore Colts over the expansion Atlanta Falcons in 1966. The Falcons covered.Shed not for her the bitter tear Nor give the heart to vain regret Tis but the casket that lies here, The gem that filled it Sparkles yet
October 9th, 2013 at 12:19:30 PM
permalink
Quote: DRichI sure do. I would expect Peyton to get injured occasionally and the Jaguars chances would increase exponentially.
like I said, football isnt like baseball or hockey, where a pitcher or goalie alone can determine an outcome.
goSo what if manning got injured. The jags are so bad that most second string QBs would beat them. If manning oges down, the jags still dont match up in many other categories. If manny got injured in practice, and was announced today that he will not play....the jags will still be double digit dogs. The jags like many other teams will be spent by the end of the 3rd qtr due to the thin air.
jags winning 4 out of 100 games IN DENVER with htis exsisting team in my opinion is improbable and a bad assumption...and therefore throwing money away. Jags get injuries as well. Denver is deeper to handle injuries. However we are dealing with TODAYS team.Not with a team that supposedly played 55 games and has injuries. The question is not whter payton may be injured one day....the question is if THIS TEAM as is....played 100 times AS IS.....would the jags win 4 times.
Its a hypothetical. Sure we can suppose 10 players on denver can die on a boat accident before a game. But I dont make bets TODAY based on that type of scenario happening in a hypothetical series of 100 games. All you can do is look at TODAY and make a judgement of talent TODAY.
