NFL Week #12
November 30th, 2010 at 11:35:55 PM
permalink
Joking aside elsewhere :
Chicago -3.5 (+100) at the Station Casinos
Yeah there playing away, but a divisional rival that's not got a fit QB (The Lions) or a secondary that's capable of stopping the vertical game or sealing the edge.
I won't actually be betting it, as I can't get anything on it from here, but that's my one for the week :)
Chicago -3.5 (+100) at the Station Casinos
Yeah there playing away, but a divisional rival that's not got a fit QB (The Lions) or a secondary that's capable of stopping the vertical game or sealing the edge.
I won't actually be betting it, as I can't get anything on it from here, but that's my one for the week :)
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
December 1st, 2010 at 1:46:38 AM
permalink
It's week 13.
The Chi bet seems fair. There doesn't seem to be an edge either way.
I think taking the under of Denver/KC of 48.5 is a good bet. That's seven touchdowns so I think that 48.5 might be a bit of a stretch for these two teams.
The Chi bet seems fair. There doesn't seem to be an edge either way.
I think taking the under of Denver/KC of 48.5 is a good bet. That's seven touchdowns so I think that 48.5 might be a bit of a stretch for these two teams.
December 1st, 2010 at 10:30:32 AM
permalink
Thanks for picking this up again cesspit.
Denver +9.0 (110), 2 units, Sportsbook.com
This game should be fun, and much closer than two scores. Denver receiver, Brandon Lloyd will be the gamebreaker.
Oakland +13.5 (110), 2 units, Caesars
Hopefully, the Raiders will keep it closer than two touchdowns. If the Raiders can get any kind of passing game going, the Chargers will have trouble with Darren McFadden.
NY Jets, +3.5 (105), 2 units, Leroys
Not sure how this is going to go, but I wanted to have a rooting interest in the game. Should be fun.
Denver +9.0 (110), 2 units, Sportsbook.com
This game should be fun, and much closer than two scores. Denver receiver, Brandon Lloyd will be the gamebreaker.
Oakland +13.5 (110), 2 units, Caesars
Hopefully, the Raiders will keep it closer than two touchdowns. If the Raiders can get any kind of passing game going, the Chargers will have trouble with Darren McFadden.
NY Jets, +3.5 (105), 2 units, Leroys
Not sure how this is going to go, but I wanted to have a rooting interest in the game. Should be fun.
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
December 1st, 2010 at 10:30:59 AM
permalink
I knew that it was week 13, honest :)
I think Chicago are bigger favourites than 3.5 points. I don't see it as 1 touchdown game for the Bears. The Lions score well in the first half, but their second half normally leads to the Defensive line being exhausted and outside contain coverage being blown. The Mike Martz offence should be able to exploit it, as long as the tissue paper thick Chicago O-line stands up.
On the other side, Hill has a finger cast on his throwing arm, Stafford is still out, and Drew Stanton doesn't have the football brains to manage the offence efficiently. The Lions have a 3rd string RB core. They do have the Megatron, but that's one player. I'm not saying they won't score, but they won't score enough to keep this 3.5 points close down the 4th quarter.
That's why I see an edge. I'm a Lions fan, and watch most of the Lions and NFC North games in general.
Course, I'd prefer -3.
I think Chicago are bigger favourites than 3.5 points. I don't see it as 1 touchdown game for the Bears. The Lions score well in the first half, but their second half normally leads to the Defensive line being exhausted and outside contain coverage being blown. The Mike Martz offence should be able to exploit it, as long as the tissue paper thick Chicago O-line stands up.
On the other side, Hill has a finger cast on his throwing arm, Stafford is still out, and Drew Stanton doesn't have the football brains to manage the offence efficiently. The Lions have a 3rd string RB core. They do have the Megatron, but that's one player. I'm not saying they won't score, but they won't score enough to keep this 3.5 points close down the 4th quarter.
That's why I see an edge. I'm a Lions fan, and watch most of the Lions and NFC North games in general.
Course, I'd prefer -3.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
December 1st, 2010 at 2:33:31 PM
permalink
I gave up handicapping right after I discovered that I sucked at it. It's why I like the money line - no points involved.
For example - take the Oakland - San Diego game - you can get 4.5 to 1 on Oakland. I can make a case for Oakland winning this game straight up just based on their win/loss record vs San Diego's win/loss record. Thus a bet on Oakland at 4.5 to 1 seems in be in order.
For example - take the Oakland - San Diego game - you can get 4.5 to 1 on Oakland. I can make a case for Oakland winning this game straight up just based on their win/loss record vs San Diego's win/loss record. Thus a bet on Oakland at 4.5 to 1 seems in be in order.
December 1st, 2010 at 3:51:00 PM
permalink
I am not sure of what that case could be....I think I would have to lay on San Diego.
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes." ~ William Gibson
December 1st, 2010 at 4:18:33 PM
permalink
Disagreement is why we bet.
Oakland is a 5 and 6 team, San Diego is a 6 and 5 team. Why is a 6 and 5 team a 13 point favorite? They probably should be about a 6 point favorite - And that would be about 2 to 1. Consequently if you can 4.5 to 1 on a 2 to 1 shot you should take the 4.5. It's not science - it's just guessing. When you are getting the long end of the money you don't have to be right very often.
Clear?
Oakland is a 5 and 6 team, San Diego is a 6 and 5 team. Why is a 6 and 5 team a 13 point favorite? They probably should be about a 6 point favorite - And that would be about 2 to 1. Consequently if you can 4.5 to 1 on a 2 to 1 shot you should take the 4.5. It's not science - it's just guessing. When you are getting the long end of the money you don't have to be right very often.
Clear?
December 1st, 2010 at 5:07:55 PM
permalink
Not really...
SD is 6-5 trending upwards on a 4 game winning streak against a 1st place schedule.
Oakland is 5-6 trending downward, getting thumped two games in a row, against a 3rd place schedule.
SD has a top 3 QB, the best TE in the league, and starting to solidify their defense.
Oakland is starting Gratkowski, doent have a top 10 skill player, and their D is a mess.
I think the line should actually be bigger than 13 with SD at home and eyeing another division title.
I think a better play would be a $100 midnight. Longer odds and a higher probability of hitting.
SD is 6-5 trending upwards on a 4 game winning streak against a 1st place schedule.
Oakland is 5-6 trending downward, getting thumped two games in a row, against a 3rd place schedule.
SD has a top 3 QB, the best TE in the league, and starting to solidify their defense.
Oakland is starting Gratkowski, doent have a top 10 skill player, and their D is a mess.
I think the line should actually be bigger than 13 with SD at home and eyeing another division title.
I think a better play would be a $100 midnight. Longer odds and a higher probability of hitting.
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes." ~ William Gibson
December 1st, 2010 at 5:20:58 PM
permalink
A closer look reveals real QB and O line problems, in Oakland. Without protection and a decent running threat, it is hard for even top QB's (reference P. Manning's tough go last week), to get anything going. It will be a long day for Oakland RB, D.McFadden, since they will be keying in on him, but hopefully play action will open up some opportunities to throw the ball. The problem is, the Raiders don't have anyone who can really be considered a fair QB. I can't see the moneyline being an outstanding value on this game. Alot of things would have to go right for the Raiders and wrong for SD to win it outright.
Is the moneyline available on cesspit's NFL reference site?
Is the moneyline available on cesspit's NFL reference site?
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
December 1st, 2010 at 5:30:03 PM
permalink
Dont know about cesspits site, but a quick check on the books and I see anywhere from +450 to +525.
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes." ~ William Gibson
December 1st, 2010 at 11:35:03 PM
permalink
Money Lines here : http://www.vegasinsider.com/nfl/odds/las-vegas/money/
Stanton has been confirmed as starter for the Lions. Line has moved from -3.5 to -4.5 Bears. I now look like a genius, right?
Stanton has been confirmed as starter for the Lions. Line has moved from -3.5 to -4.5 Bears. I now look like a genius, right?
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:45:05 AM
permalink
Didn't really want to get into a contest with anyone and I don't think I asked you to bet on the game so what part of "guessing" don't you understand? I like betting against teams on a streak - and contrary to my signature - I'm a contrarian - I've seen some of the best teams of all times lay down against a weak dog and get beat - I still think the money line should be 2 to 1 and if I can get 4.5 to 1 then that's the way I'll bet.
December 5th, 2010 at 12:48:47 PM
permalink
Quote: thecesspitJoking aside elsewhere :
Chicago -3.5 (+100) at the Station Casinos
Yeah there playing away, but a divisional rival that's not got a fit QB (The Lions) or a secondary that's capable of stopping the vertical game or sealing the edge.
I won't actually be betting it, as I can't get anything on it from here, but that's my one for the week :)
There we go... was good at -3.5, not as the line went further out due to the QB injuries.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
December 5th, 2010 at 1:17:05 PM
permalink
I know, 2 picks in 2 weeks for me like that. Chi today, abd Arizona/Oregon moved down to 19 before I got it.
Good play when you made it...congrats!!!
Good play when you made it...congrats!!!
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes." ~ William Gibson
December 5th, 2010 at 2:35:31 PM
permalink
Yeah, nice get on Chicago. Looks like they set that line just about perfectly.
"Dice, verily, are armed with goads and driving-hooks, deceiving and tormenting, causing grievous woe." -Rig Veda 10.34.4
December 6th, 2010 at 12:43:53 AM
permalink
Quote: MartinIt's week 13.
The Chi bet seems fair. There doesn't seem to be an edge either way.
I think taking the under of Denver/KC of 48.5 is a good bet. That's seven touchdowns so I think that 48.5 might be a bit of a stretch for these two teams.
Chicago by 4 points beats the -3.5 and loses to the -5.5 at the end of the week. As I said - a fair bet.
The under was a good bet as well.
December 6th, 2010 at 12:52:50 AM
permalink
Quote: MartinDidn't really want to get into a contest with anyone and I don't think I asked you to bet on the game so what part of "guessing" don't you understand? I like betting against teams on a streak - and contrary to my signature - I'm a contrarian - I've seen some of the best teams of all times lay down against a weak dog and get beat - I still think the money line should be 2 to 1 and if I can get 4.5 to 1 then that's the way I'll bet.
I guess it was a good "guess." It's why I don't handicap - I'm lousy at it. If I had handicapped that game I would have come to the same conclusion as others on the thread and would have missed a good bet.
December 6th, 2010 at 5:05:22 AM
permalink
And a very good guess at that Martin, I stand corrected, and apologize if I sounded like a jerk.
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes." ~ William Gibson
