Losing with Style

I just had a great idea. Instead of saying I did this right or that right, I will lay out my worst bets of the previous week after the fact, so people can appreciate the horrors of sports betting.

So I will skip all winners and just post regarding the worst kick-ass losses of the previous week. That should be fun. Kind of the opposite of MDawg. I just post the losers. Let's see if I can get a streak going. LOL. Gomez Addams would be proud.

Okay, first candidate: I had the Over of the Jets/Buffalo game in a teaser. It won. It was teased/partnered with the Over 34 of the Tennessee/Denver game. Gostkowski was a gem. Set a personal record with three missed FGs and a missed PAT. Throw in a goal line stand and you get a 16-14 final, and a loser. The only saving grace: faced with Gostkowski's miss before halftime, I took the second half Under 21 for half the price of the teaser. So I lost half a bet overall. But it was the sheer inanity of Gostkowski spraying the ball all over on a field where 45-yarders are basically chip shots due to altitude that made it fun.

Runnerup: Took the Colts to win the SB at long odds. Nothing like watching them self destruct against the Jaguars as seven-point faves in the opener. Rivers threw for a ton, but tossed some bad picks. They outgained Jags by 200 yards, but Minshew made them look silly running around. Colts linemen better get some aerobics work in because they look like a walrus could beat them sideline to sideline. Real bad future wager at this point in time.

The Colts losing reminded me of one of my favorite futures wagers of all time. I had the SD Chargers quite a few years ago (will look up the year at some point) to win the AFC and SB. Get this: they led the league both in offense (yards) and defense (yards surrendered). I kid you not. They led the NFL in both categories...and did not make the playoffs! It was amazing. They were amazing. Never happened before and will never happen again. They were a real clustermuck, and their special teams were indeed very special, setting incompetency records on a weekly basis.

More next week!

This has nothing to do with actual betting, but my Fanduel golf team today deserves a mention. You have six golfers, salary cap style. So I have Justin Thomas (leader) on the team.

Anyway, after two holes Phil Mickelson is -2 and my team is in the top hundred out of 35,000, and I'm winning some real money. Two hours later, Phil is +9, he's swinging with one arm, basically, and his Fanduel score is a negative, which is damned near impossible as you get points for finishing holes.

I am proudly winning seven dollars at the moment.

So hats off to Phil, who just kept muttering, "Is this fun? This isn't fun" on the peacock live feed.

Well, this doesn't really belong in Losing with Style, but if anyone is in or follows the Northbet or Heritage Sports contests, I head into the Monday night game tied with five other players at Northbet for the top weekly. In Heritage, which uses totals to round its no spread contest up to 20 weekly plays, I head into the Monday night game 18-0 and need the Saints and Under 51 1/2.

Anyone with accounts at either can check them out.

Back to your regularly scheduled losing stories tomorrow.

Quote: redietz

Well, this doesn't really belong in Losing with Style, but if anyone is in or follows the Northbet or Heritage Sports contests, I head into the Monday night game tied with five other players at Northbet for the top weekly. In Heritage, which uses totals to round its no spread contest up to 20 weekly plays, I head into the Monday night game 18-0 and need the Saints and Under 51 1/2.

Anyone with accounts at either can check them out.

Back to your regularly scheduled losing stories tomorrow.

Good luck tonight! Nice closing line value on the under.

Quote: unJon

Good luck tonight! Nice closing line value on the under.

Thanks!

Just checked and four people (out of a couple thousand most years)) are 18-0 heading into tonight. I can't see what teams the others have prior to the game, so I could screw it up if I try to hedge a bit, but I do feel like I should put at least a few bucks on Over 48 as a middle shot hedge.

Maybe steakhouse dinner money on the Over shot. One never knows, though. I assume everybody has the Saints as they are popular, but I could be wrong. It's an interesting gambling question. If you try to middle just the total, you could conceivably lose both the wager and the weekly contest if the Raiders win outright. Another thought: tease the Raiders with the Over.

Quote: redietz

Thanks!

Just checked and four people (out of a couple thousand most years)) are 18-0 heading into tonight. I can't see what teams the others have prior to the game, so I could screw it up if I try to hedge a bit, but I do feel like I should put at least a few bucks on Over 48 as a middle shot hedge.

Maybe steakhouse dinner money on the Over shot. One never knows, though. I assume everybody has the Saints as they are popular, but I could be wrong. It's an interesting gambling question. If you try to middle just the total, you could conceivably lose both the wager and the weekly contest if the Raiders win outright. Another thought: tease the Raiders with the Over.

Teaser leaves you open also if one leg way off (say Raiders outright but way under).

Given how the week went, I’m assuming all the 18-0 folk played all favorites (Rams aside). So I would assume that all four are on Saints. And 3 or 4 on under given CLV.

If you really wanted to lock in some value (which I am not recommending) you could by betting Raiders ML (+195 or +200) and the over in an appropriate ratio. Again, I am against hedging on principal, but if you wanted to do it, you could lock in a bit and have some upside if you middle the over.

My girlfriend, who has helmed very big sports gambling "groups," says, and I quote, "Hedging is for weenies." LOL

She's referring to me. Anyway, I will probably pass on the moneyline, as I likely lose nothing contest standings-wise if the Raiders win and nobody has them. The middle shot is almost too good to pass up with those particular numbers, so I'll probably do Vic and Anthony's steak hedging and that's about it.

The total matters because right now, after two weeks, I'm 53rd in the season-long out of a couple thousand, and if I get in the top 50, I'll be a royal pain to everyone else all year because I know how to play these things. The total represents a swing of probably a hundred positions if I lose, so it might be a big deal.

I did squint at next week's card, and it's minefield impossible, so anything I managed this week could go out the window next week pretty quickly.

Well, enjoy the steak dinner!

Quote: unJon

Well, enjoy the steak dinner!

I made a couple hundred hedging the Heritage, partly with live betting the first half. It turned out that you were correct regarding the Raiders. Quite a few people had them. When the smoked cleared for the Heritage contest, I wound up in 10th for the week and 90-something overall. In Northbet, none of the leaders had the Raiders, but a bevy of second place people did. So 15 people all wound up tied for first place, me included.

See, this did turn out to be properly filed under "Losing with Style."

Well, not all Dietz's were losers this last week. The nephew had a touchdown reception on the last play of the half and two interceptions for beloved North Schuylkill versus Pine Grove in Pennsylvania football. Wish he'd been playing for the Saints.

The first loser of the week is tonight and me.

Trying to pick an outright winner between Miami and Jacksonville is like trying to decide who to vote for in 2016 between Hilary and the Donald. No matter who I take, it will go horribly wrong, and I will feel dramatically stupid. Unfortunately, forced choice contests require an opinion.

Hunter Thompson would drop some acid and throw darts. I asked my girlfriend.

I really liked Minshew at East Carolina. He took a lickin' and kept on tickin' most games. Fitzpatrick cost me 4K in a similar pick the pros contest many moons ago when he threw a particularly horrible pick with the lead and four minutes to go, so I remember him for that. He does owe me.

In the land of sanity, I did play the college game tonight. To paraphrase Henry Higgins, "Why can't NFL be more like FBS? Collegiates are such honorable chaps. Ready to help you through any mishaps."

Quote: redietz

I really liked Minshew at East Carolina. He took a lickin' and kept on tickin' most games.

Most people don't remember that he won a national championship the year before he transferred to East Carolina.

I’m partial to over 49 tonight.

Quote: unJon

I’m partial to over 49 tonight.

I have UAB -6.5. The line is currently -7.5 at William Hill so at least I appear to be on the right side.

Quote: unJon

I’m partial to over 49 tonight.

Lost with style!

Managed to get out of last night with UAB (Pick) in an open teaser and Miami +10 with an open teaser. Meanwhile, in contests, I lost with JVille in one contest and had Miami (on the girlfriend's recommendation to "take who I like, not who's favored" ) and the Under in the other.

Thought the line would move more on tonight's game, so I will be stuck with a lame middle attempt getting +8 (-130) and laying -6 (-120). Sort of a donation, but such is life. Tonight's game is interesting in that MTSU is so far off from what they figured to be that it's tempting to take them. The game has the same resonance as the Tulane/Navy game last week. Navy looked so damned bad previously versus BYU that the Tulane/Navy line was literally 12-13 points off the preseason evaluation. This line, preseason-wise, figured to have MTSU as a significant favorite. But they looked so damned bad through two games that the current UTSA -7 now seems quite appropriate.

What I think has happened to MTSU is that the defense was stripped so badly that teams can hold the ball effortlessly against them, so the fact that MTSU actually has a decent offense has not come to light. That would usually lead one to an Over conclusion, but the total is high and the teams lack speed, so tough to take it, even as a teaser.

Lame middle shot is what I have, and I guess I will live with it.

And it turns out the game belonged in the Losing with Style column because I had the game sided (win one; push one) until MTSU mounted a final drive and, down eight, scored with a minute to play. A two-point conversion would have sent the game into overtime and given me another chance to middle or side the game, but two receivers ran the same pattern on the MTSU two-point try, more or less running into each other and botching the play.

Yesterday, my loss was a Losing with Style one. I teased the Under of Kansas State/Oklahoma. Under 68. Sooners returning eight defensive starters from last season. At halftime, I thought I had a winner. It was 21-7, and the only question was whether the Sooners had any motivation to try to run it up. I figured with a brand spanking new QB and since KState had beaten them the prior year, the Sooners would play it conservatively and control the game.

Well, if you're going to lose with style, that Under was the way to do it. Oklahoma flat out blew about six long-yardage coverages, and came apart like the proverbial cheap suit. KState's defense eventually timed out the Sooner snap count, and a comeback for the ages ensued.

I'm still shaking my head. The only reason the game wasn't lower scoring at half was because the Sooners, up 14-0, busted a 3rd-and-18 coverage late in the second quarter, and allowed a 40-yard TD pass. Then the Sooners responded by driving the length of the field to score before half. After busting a 3rd-and-18, how likely was it they would continually muck up long yardage coverages? Well, as it turns out, pretty damned likely.

And after all the mess, it was a five-point loser.

Coaches just cannot lose games like that. It was a once-in-a-lifetime kind of loss, and every year the Sooners manage one. Sooner HC is an offensive genius except in a close game. And he's a defensive idiot. Add it all up, and he's just an average joe getting paid a lot to fail.

So today's story. I know nothing about baseball; absolutely nothing. But I have made quite a bit on futures over the years, so some people might think I really know what I'm doing. They would be wrong.

Anyway, there are afternoon playoff games. I wasn't even sure who was playing who, but since I had some DFS discussion on another thread, I thought, what the heck, I'll throw a team or two on Fanduel. But I'm too cheap to put $9 on something I know nothing about. Now let me put that in perspective. I'll plunk down a couple thousand on a college football future in a heartbeat. But baseball fantasy? Yeah, nine bucks is too rich for me. So I played $2 contests. As in two whole dollars.

So I go to pick up dinner at ChikFilA, come back, and I'd forgotten about the games. I check. Pitcher has a perfect game after six. Other players, except one, have multiple hits with long balls. My teams are in third place out of 300 people in both contests, and I have more innings to play than the people ahead of me. LOL. If they stay there, I'll make enough for ChikFilA for the rest of the week, and that's about it.

I'm not sure I should be proud or embarrassed.

It's not nearly as much fun posting these after a losing day. Well, here's what happened. I was an ass overall.

So I have Texas Tech teased to +9 yesterday versus Kansas State. The TTech QB bites the dust late first quarter. When a run-and-shoot QB bites the dust, it's tough to plug in the backup during a game. It's as if I had a menage with Ron Jeremy and his girlfriend, and halfway through, he tags me and tells me to take over. Probably not going to work out great for all parties. Anyway, after a few series, the backup QB finally makes some plays. TTech leads 24-21 in the fourth. KState scores to take the lead. KState gets the ball back and, with two minutes left, has the ball at their own 30, third-and-five. TTech has no timeouts. Exactly two minutes to play. So, of course, TTech comes with a full blitz -- and gives KState a chance to do exactly what they want to do, which is throw a five-yard A&B route to their stud back, who breaks a tackle and goes 70 yards for the TD.

Miracle loss. Hurts. Any play other than that, and it's a winner.

So it was my first losing Saturday of the year. Had Under 69 for Texas/TCU second half of a teaser, so it won. Had A&M +18 straight vs. Alabama -- their all-veteran secondary got seriously abused, so it lost. Won with the first leg of a teaser -- Navy/AF Over. And lost the miracle teaser with TTech.

The miracle loss messed up my head and had me backing off Southern Miss + as a teaser late. I backed off because I missed the best number mid-day while mesmerized by my loss.

And that is losing with style. Not only did I lose a miracle game; it cost me a leg of a teaser late. That's why I'm an ass.

The problem with teasers is the extra vig. When you lose it takes more to recover your money on future bets.

See you don't understand baseball and win...you understand college football and you lose. Luck plays a big part.

Quote: vegas

. Luck plays a big part.

Yèah, and some guys dô not have any!
And then there are guysc like me who are akin to that cartoon character with no vowels and a dark rain cloud directly and solely over is head. We should ñot have gambling as a hobby.

I wôuld rathér WIN wîth style!

Quote: vegas

The problem with teasers is the extra vig. When you lose it takes more to recover your money on future bets.

See you don't understand baseball and win...you understand college football and you lose. Luck plays a big part.

I have this odd kind of bias. I flip out and curse and whine when somebody's AJ cracks my KK in poker. I say it's not right and the whole tournament is decided on nonsense and blah, blah. Yet, when it comes to college football, I always say, "Games you deserve to win, you win about 70% of the time. Games you deserve to lose, you win about 30% of the time." And for some reason I'm completely good with that.

The vig with teasers is not as bad as one might think at some of the boutique offshores. The other key aspect is that if you're a shop 'til you drop guy, as I am, timing the teasers is critical is college football because of the large line moves. Now I cost myself a win Saturday because North Texas briefly (maybe 40-50 minutes) went to -3 vs. Southern Miss. A few minutes later it was -1 1/2 and then went to -1. So, being an idiot, when it went to -3 I thought there was an avalanche of money (or a covid-19 report) fueling the line move and there was no hurry. I was wrong. So I passed on the wager, and it was a winner.

The teaser game I miraculously lost, TTech +9, I was waiting for the +2 1/2 lines to go to +3. They never did. In fact, they started moving the other way. By the time I pulled the trigger, I used a seven point teaser and then lost by a point. I can state that, surveying a dozen offshores, there were no +3's at any time in my sample. So I didn't screw that up, anyway.

Quick rant on teaser vig. Teasers were a better value before the alleged "Wong teasers" became public knowledge. I say alleged because serious gamblers knew about the "Wong teaser" range advantage decades before "Wong" somehow attached his name to the concept. I have always been amused and perturbed by those who are expert in other subfields of gambling who decide they have "discovered" something as it pertains to sports betting. About 99% of the time, they are "discovering" something that is well known to experts. In that sense, it's like any other specialty subfield when outsiders come to play, I suppose.

I figure I'd add this -- I have San Jose State +10 tonight versus San Diego State. Well, the QB lasted four plays. Now I have a run-and-shoot offense and a backup running QB. LOL.

Like Trump winning the election, I'm going to need an act of God to win this game.

Quote: redietz

I figure I'd add this -- I have San Jose State +10 tonight versus San Diego State. Well, the QB lasted four plays. Now I have a run-and-shoot offense and a backup running QB. LOL.

Like Trump winning the election, I'm going to need an act of God to win this game.

Easy win for the Spartans. Good bet

Quote: Dave2121

Robert E Dietz is a long term scammer from the 80’s Follow him at your own risk.

He is always hustling for a buck.

Whoa really!!!!!!!!??!?!?

Quote: mcallister3200

Whoa really!!!!!!!!??!?!?

I think Boz meant "Scanner from the 80's," as in the movies of the same name. I'm so expert, I blow people's minds. If you haven't seen the original sci-fi film (1981), I think it's Canadian, check it out.

I'm gonna assume Dave2121 is The (anonymous) Boz. I could be wrong, of course. it might be one of The Boz's friends. So Boz has been making these comments since he and I diverged opinions, shall we say, on the pandemic and the Prez. Boz and I were respectful friends, or at least online acquaintances, before that. Boz actually knows quite a lot about the history of sports handicapping and the biggest scam artists in the business from way back, like Mike Warren (aka Laskey) and Dan Sheridan and so on.

So he also knows my reputation is absolutely pristine, which is why he never actually provides a single fact. I have run an outfit with the sappy but lovely moniker "Integrity Sports" since 1979 precisely because I operated in such an aboveboard, anti-scamdicapper fashion. About 12 years ago, I shifted into being completely private, but I'm still "Integrity Sports."

I have a bunch of stuff I could post here -- op eds, a piece in The Humanist, blurbs and summaries from Mike McCusker's annual report from the 80's and 90's called "Tipsters or Gypsters?" and my bio from "Who's Who in Sports Gambling" and so on. If I get some time and figure out how to do it, I will ask Shackleford for permission. It has some historical value, and nobody can buy anything from me (I ain't selling anything), so it's not like anything bad can happen from my posting it.

Anyway, thanks, Boz. I had Biden at -130, and The Wiz's analysis motivated me to bet some more at -193. Good luck with all that "pandemic is a scam" stuff. Boz seems to have a problem figuring out what is a scam and what is not.