Sports betting chatter
Quote: DRichSoopoo, I need a same game NBA parlay tonight as I have a free bet for it. I barely watch or follow any NBA so I will default to your expertise.
link to original post
Try this. Lakers ML/ James over assists total/Davis double-double. I have no access to my accounts but I think it should pay around 4-1 or so. I’d surmise James assist number is 6.5?
And of course, I really don’t have ‘expertise’ at these bets.
Quote: billryanThere is an article on Yahoo News about a guy who hit three big-money parleys on the NHL and the casino tried to cancel the bets.
It talks about how books keep 20% of the handle on parley bets compared to 5% on straight bets.
I can't link it, but I thought it did a good job of explaining the complexity of these types of bets to non-gamblers.
A person bet that eight players would be held scoreless and one team had to win. It happened and it should have paid well over $100,000. The casino, in Tennessee, refused to pay and then offered him $25,000 for this and two other parleys he hit. The casino claimed they made a "fat finger" mistake on the tickets. He went to the Control board and the casino paid, while claiming they weren't told to.
link to original post
‘Well over 100k’ doesn’t mean much to me if I don’t know how big the bet was.
In hockey, betting on a player to be scoreless is usually a heavy favorite, as there are around 6-7 goals a game. And a single player may have 2 or 3 of them.
I’ve made some similar bets like this recently. The Winnipeg Jets are on some amazing defensive streak. When I last checked they were rarely giving up more than two goals in any game.
Without the details it’s hard to say what actually happened. If they gave odds as if the ‘no goal’ for one team’s players wasn’t correlated with the other team winning then the bettor could have easily taken advantage of that.
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: billryanThere is an article on Yahoo News about a guy who hit three big-money parleys on the NHL and the casino tried to cancel the bets.
It talks about how books keep 20% of the handle on parley bets compared to 5% on straight bets.
I can't link it, but I thought it did a good job of explaining the complexity of these types of bets to non-gamblers.
A person bet that eight players would be held scoreless and one team had to win. It happened and it should have paid well over $100,000. The casino, in Tennessee, refused to pay and then offered him $25,000 for this and two other parleys he hit. The casino claimed they made a "fat finger" mistake on the tickets. He went to the Control board and the casino paid, while claiming they weren't told to.
link to original post
‘Well over 100k’ doesn’t mean much to me if I don’t know how big the bet was.
In hockey, betting on a player to be scoreless is usually a heavy favorite, as there are around 6-7 goals a game. And a single player may have 2 or 3 of them.
I’ve made some similar bets like this recently. The Winnipeg Jets are on some amazing defensive streak. When I last checked they were rarely giving up more than two goals in any game.
Without the details it’s hard to say what actually happened. If they gave odds as if the ‘no goal’ for one team’s players wasn’t correlated with the other team winning then the bettor could have easily taken advantage of that.
link to original post
You could have googled the article in less time than it took you to post this, SOOPOO.
It’s WaPo.
Article says it was a 200:1 parlay for one of his three bets ($300) and that the other two were “similar”.
Quote: unJonQuote: SOOPOOQuote: billryanThere is an article on Yahoo News about a guy who hit three big-money parleys on the NHL and the casino tried to cancel the bets.
It talks about how books keep 20% of the handle on parley bets compared to 5% on straight bets.
I can't link it, but I thought it did a good job of explaining the complexity of these types of bets to non-gamblers.
A person bet that eight players would be held scoreless and one team had to win. It happened and it should have paid well over $100,000. The casino, in Tennessee, refused to pay and then offered him $25,000 for this and two other parleys he hit. The casino claimed they made a "fat finger" mistake on the tickets. He went to the Control board and the casino paid, while claiming they weren't told to.
link to original post
‘Well over 100k’ doesn’t mean much to me if I don’t know how big the bet was.
In hockey, betting on a player to be scoreless is usually a heavy favorite, as there are around 6-7 goals a game. And a single player may have 2 or 3 of them.
I’ve made some similar bets like this recently. The Winnipeg Jets are on some amazing defensive streak. When I last checked they were rarely giving up more than two goals in any game.
Without the details it’s hard to say what actually happened. If they gave odds as if the ‘no goal’ for one team’s players wasn’t correlated with the other team winning then the bettor could have easily taken advantage of that.
link to original post
You could have googled the article in less time than it took you to post this, SOOPOO.
It’s WaPo.
Article says it was a 200:1 parlay for one of his three bets ($300) and that the other two were “similar”.
link to original post
I could have. But I didn’t. That’s a great find the bettor had. I’m glad he got paid.
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: DRichSoopoo, I need a same game NBA parlay tonight as I have a free bet for it. I barely watch or follow any NBA so I will default to your expertise.
link to original post
Try this. Lakers ML/ James over assists total/Davis double-double. I have no access to my accounts but I think it should pay around 4-1 or so. I’d surmise James assist number is 6.5?
And of course, I really don’t have ‘expertise’ at these bets.
link to original post
Thanks, I did Lakers ML and James over 8.5 assists. I was limited to two legs.
Quote: DRichQuote: SOOPOOQuote: DRichSoopoo, I need a same game NBA parlay tonight as I have a free bet for it. I barely watch or follow any NBA so I will default to your expertise.
link to original post
Try this. Lakers ML/ James over assists total/Davis double-double. I have no access to my accounts but I think it should pay around 4-1 or so. I’d surmise James assist number is 6.5?
And of course, I really don’t have ‘expertise’ at these bets.
link to original post
Thanks, I did Lakers ML and James over 8.5 assists. I was limited to two legs.
link to original post
Looks like you will lose. AD easy double double. Lakers easy win. But LBJ with 8 assists and won’t play final 5 minutes. He had streak of 3 consecutive trips where he made passes for easy assists. But one player missed ‘a bunny’ and the other two were fouled but should have finished anyway. I like my over 6.5 assists better…..
I don't bet any more - I still enjoy making a pick now and then
right now per covers.com several books have the Packers as 9.5 point dogs to the 9ers
that line seems off to me
any time I see a line like that that seems off to me I wonder if I'm missing something - if I am - I don't know what it is
the Pack's qb Jordan Love has been great the last few games
he's thrown only 1 pick in the last 9 games
the 9ers were beaten by the Ravens by 14 on Dec. 25
my pick - Pakcers +9.5
.
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: DRichQuote: SOOPOOQuote: DRichSoopoo, I need a same game NBA parlay tonight as I have a free bet for it. I barely watch or follow any NBA so I will default to your expertise.
link to original post
Try this. Lakers ML/ James over assists total/Davis double-double. I have no access to my accounts but I think it should pay around 4-1 or so. I’d surmise James assist number is 6.5?
And of course, I really don’t have ‘expertise’ at these bets.
link to original post
Thanks, I did Lakers ML and James over 8.5 assists. I was limited to two legs.
link to original post
Looks like you will lose. AD easy double double. Lakers easy win. But LBJ with 8 assists and won’t play final 5 minutes. He had streak of 3 consecutive trips where he made passes for easy assists. But one player missed ‘a bunny’ and the other two were fouled but should have finished anyway. I like my over 6.5 assists better…..
link to original post
Damn you! I was counting on that money to buy a box of Corn Flakes for breakfast. I guess I will just go hungry again.
Quote: lilredrooster.
I don't bet any more - I still enjoy making a pick now and then
right now per covers.com several books have the Packers as 9.5 point dogs to the 9ers
that line seems off to me
any time I see a line like that that seems off to me I wonder if I'm missing something - if I am - I don't know what it is
the Pack's qb Jordan Love has been great the last few games
he's thrown only 1 pick in the last 9 games
the 9ers were beaten by the Ravens by 14 on Dec. 25
my pick - Pakcers +9.5
.
link to original post
Bad news for you. I like the Packers +9.5 as well.
But…. Last 5 49ers home games WORST result is 16 point win.
49ers just seem better than everyone. I do think the line is a little high. My prediction was 7.5.
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: lilredrooster.
I don't bet any more - I still enjoy making a pick now and then
right now per covers.com several books have the Packers as 9.5 point dogs to the 9ers
that line seems off to me
any time I see a line like that that seems off to me I wonder if I'm missing something - if I am - I don't know what it is
the Pack's qb Jordan Love has been great the last few games
he's thrown only 1 pick in the last 9 games
the 9ers were beaten by the Ravens by 14 on Dec. 25
my pick - Pakcers +9.5
.
link to original post
Bad news for you. I like the Packers +9.5 as well.
But…. Last 5 49ers home games WORST result is 16 point win.
49ers just seem better than everyone. I do think the line is a little high. My prediction was 7.5.
link to original post
Boys were 8-0 at home when the Pack crushed them in Dallas
the Pack were 7 point dogs
9ers are 5-3 at home
again - 9ers got beat at home by the Ravens by 14 3 games ago - Purdy threw 4 picks in that game
their last game they got beat at home by the Rams - although they played their scrubs
they got beat at home by the Bengals by 14 10 games ago - or 5 home games ago
imho your bet is a good one
.
Quote: AZDuffmanJust heard that in 83% of NFL games the spread does not matter. IOW, 83% of the time the spread is covered or the underdog wins outright.
link to original post
you heard wrong
that is way, way off
linked is the Wizard's tracking of over 3,000 point spread bets
all underdogs won 52.08% of the time
https://wizardofodds.com/games/sports-betting/nfl/
.
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: AZDuffmanJust heard that in 83% of NFL games the spread does not matter. IOW, 83% of the time the spread is covered or the underdog wins outright.
link to original post
you heard wrong
that is way, way off
linked is the Wizard's tracking of over 3,000 point spread bets
all underdogs won 52.08% of the time
https://wizardofodds.com/games/sports-betting/nfl/
.
link to original post
Those numbers are 5 years old.
Quote: AZDuffmanQuote: lilredroosterQuote: AZDuffmanJust heard that in 83% of NFL games the spread does not matter. IOW, 83% of the time the spread is covered or the underdog wins outright.
link to original post
you heard wrong
that is way, way off
linked is the Wizard's tracking of over 3,000 point spread bets
all underdogs won 52.08% of the time
https://wizardofodds.com/games/sports-betting/nfl/
.
link to original post
Those numbers are 5 years old.
link to original post
come on - seriously
you don't really think it's gone to 83% in five years__________?
you can easily track all the dogs from this year at the link and you will see that you're wrong
if only it were that easy to win - millions would be crushing the books -
the link is set for week 1 of the current season - all the weeks are there as well as the playoffs
https://www.covers.com/sports/nfl/matchups?selectedDate=2023-09-07
.
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: AZDuffmanQuote: lilredroosterQuote: AZDuffmanJust heard that in 83% of NFL games the spread does not matter. IOW, 83% of the time the spread is covered or the underdog wins outright.
link to original post
you heard wrong
that is way, way off
linked is the Wizard's tracking of over 3,000 point spread bets
all underdogs won 52.08% of the time
https://wizardofodds.com/games/sports-betting/nfl/
.
link to original post
Those numbers are 5 years old.
link to original post
come on - seriously
you don't really think it's gone to 83% in five years__________?
you can easily track all the dogs from this year at the link and you will see that you're wrong
if only it were that easy to win - millions would be crushing the books -
the link is set for week 1 of the current season - all the weeks are there as well as the playoffs
https://www.covers.com/sports/nfl/matchups?selectedDate=2023-09-07
.
link to original post
You need to read what I said more careful. Let me reverse it. Only 17% of the time will a dog cover the spread but not win. The other 83% either the favorite covers or the dog wins outright.
Quote: AZDuffmanJust heard that in 83% of NFL games the spread does not matter. IOW, 83% of the time the spread is covered or the underdog wins outright. Knowing this, when would you play the moneyline vs taking the points?
link to original post
That’s not unexpectedly high and doesn’t mean the ML is a better wager than the points on the dog.
50% of the time favorite covers.
17% of the time favorite wins and dog covers.
33% of the time the dog wins.
(Ignoring some underdog bias that means maybe dogs should add to 51-2% instead of 50%).
Quote: AZDuffmanQuote: lilredroosterQuote: AZDuffmanQuote: lilredroosterQuote: AZDuffmanJust heard that in 83% of NFL games the spread does not matter. IOW, 83% of the time the spread is covered or the underdog wins outright.
link to original post
you heard wrong
that is way, way off
linked is the Wizard's tracking of over 3,000 point spread bets
all underdogs won 52.08% of the time
https://wizardofodds.com/games/sports-betting/nfl/
.
link to original post
Those numbers are 5 years old.
link to original post
come on - seriously
you don't really think it's gone to 83% in five years__________?
you can easily track all the dogs from this year at the link and you will see that you're wrong
if only it were that easy to win - millions would be crushing the books -
the link is set for week 1 of the current season - all the weeks are there as well as the playoffs
https://www.covers.com/sports/nfl/matchups?selectedDate=2023-09-07
.
link to original post
You need to read what I said more careful. Let me reverse it. Only 17% of the time will a dog cover the spread but not win. The other 83% either the favorite covers or the dog wins outright.
link to original post
okay - my bad - I did read it wrong
I got it wrong because you only mentioned the underdog in your OP - I thought you meant the underdog covering the spread
that is pretty interesting
I wonder if and how that could be exploited
it would take one of those stats superstars to figure it out I guess
according to these 2 links from MGM underdogs have won 33.8% of the games since 2013
and over the past 10 season faves have covered the spread 48% of the time
https://www.google.com/search?q=how+often+does+underdog+win+in+nfl&oq=how+often+does+underdog+win&aqs=chrome.0.0i512j69i57j0i22i30l8.6880j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
https://www.google.com/search?q=how+often+does+fave+cover+the+spread+in+the+nfl&oq=how+often+does+fave+cover+the+spread+in+the+nfl&aqs=chrome..69i57j33i10i160l2j33i10i299l3.7544j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
.
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: AZDuffmanQuote: lilredroosterQuote: AZDuffmanQuote: lilredroosterQuote: AZDuffmanJust heard that in 83% of NFL games the spread does not matter. IOW, 83% of the time the spread is covered or the underdog wins outright.
link to original post
you heard wrong
that is way, way off
linked is the Wizard's tracking of over 3,000 point spread bets
all underdogs won 52.08% of the time
https://wizardofodds.com/games/sports-betting/nfl/
.
link to original post
Those numbers are 5 years old.
link to original post
come on - seriously
you don't really think it's gone to 83% in five years__________?
you can easily track all the dogs from this year at the link and you will see that you're wrong
if only it were that easy to win - millions would be crushing the books -
the link is set for week 1 of the current season - all the weeks are there as well as the playoffs
https://www.covers.com/sports/nfl/matchups?selectedDate=2023-09-07
.
link to original post
You need to read what I said more careful. Let me reverse it. Only 17% of the time will a dog cover the spread but not win. The other 83% either the favorite covers or the dog wins outright.
link to original post
okay - my bad - I did read it wrong
that is pretty interesting
No worries, Saul Goodman.
Quote:I wonder if and how that could be exploited
it would take one of those stats superstars to figure it out I guess
according to these 2 links from MGM underdogs have won 33.8% of the games since 2013
and over the past 10 season faves have covered the spread 48% of the time
I am not sure how much time they were saying on the podcast, possibly just this season. You have to be careful with older numbers here as the game is evolving a lot the past few years. Mainly by coaches going for it on 4th down more and more. Figuring that why not go for it as losing by 3 is the same as losing by 10. One could say that evens out, but I think it matters somewhere, probably helping the dogs.
First thing on the math is it seems to only matter if you take the dog. If you are believing the number of 83%, and lets do so for the point of discussion, then there is next to zero benefit taking the moneyline on the favorite as an individual bet. (NOTE: If you are taking the moneyline on a big favorite to juice up a parlay you would still do so.) With only a 1 in 5 chance of winning but not covering we are talking what, it only makes sense at -113-118 or so? Narrow band there.
So you have to take the underdog a couple ways. if the spread is less than 3 just take the dog I would figure. Erase the -110 vig and get maybe even +100 or even money for those of you in Rio Linda. Instead of -6.5 we are talking some real value swing. +115?
Move thru the key number of 7 and now we have a choice again IMHO. That is a real upset and more rare.
NOTE: The pod said this is regular season, does not carry to playoffs.
Quote: AZDuffmanQuote: lilredroosterQuote: AZDuffmanQuote: lilredroosterQuote: AZDuffmanQuote: lilredroosterQuote: AZDuffmanJust heard that in 83% of NFL games the spread does not matter. IOW, 83% of the time the spread is covered or the underdog wins outright.
link to original post
you heard wrong
that is way, way off
linked is the Wizard's tracking of over 3,000 point spread bets
all underdogs won 52.08% of the time
https://wizardofodds.com/games/sports-betting/nfl/
.
link to original post
Those numbers are 5 years old.
link to original post
come on - seriously
you don't really think it's gone to 83% in five years__________?
you can easily track all the dogs from this year at the link and you will see that you're wrong
if only it were that easy to win - millions would be crushing the books -
the link is set for week 1 of the current season - all the weeks are there as well as the playoffs
https://www.covers.com/sports/nfl/matchups?selectedDate=2023-09-07
.
link to original post
You need to read what I said more careful. Let me reverse it. Only 17% of the time will a dog cover the spread but not win. The other 83% either the favorite covers or the dog wins outright.
link to original post
okay - my bad - I did read it wrong
that is pretty interesting
No worries, Saul Goodman.Quote:I wonder if and how that could be exploited
it would take one of those stats superstars to figure it out I guess
according to these 2 links from MGM underdogs have won 33.8% of the games since 2013
and over the past 10 season faves have covered the spread 48% of the time
I am not sure how much time they were saying on the podcast, possibly just this season. You have to be careful with older numbers here as the game is evolving a lot the past few years. Mainly by coaches going for it on 4th down more and more. Figuring that why not go for it as losing by 3 is the same as losing by 10. One could say that evens out, but I think it matters somewhere, probably helping the dogs.
First thing on the math is it seems to only matter if you take the dog. If you are believing the number of 83%, and lets do so for the point of discussion, then there is next to zero benefit taking the moneyline on the favorite as an individual bet. (NOTE: If you are taking the moneyline on a big favorite to juice up a parlay you would still do so.) With only a 1 in 5 chance of winning but not covering we are talking what, it only makes sense at -113-118 or so? Narrow band there.
So you have to take the underdog a couple ways. if the spread is less than 3 just take the dog I would figure. Erase the -110 vig and get maybe even +100 or even money for those of you in Rio Linda. Instead of -6.5 we are talking some real value swing. +115?
Move thru the key number of 7 and now we have a choice again IMHO. That is a real upset and more rare.
NOTE: The pod said this is regular season, does not carry to playoffs.
link to original post
None of that makes sense. See my post above.
Nothing strange in:
Fav covers 50%
Dog wins 33%
Dog loses but covers 17%
All that means is on average dogs are +200 MLs (on a fair line so probably +180)
I’ve been on a very good streak recently. I’ve hit my last two BR 100% profit boost parlays. Embarrassingly, I don’t even remember what I did to ‘earn’ them. And they were $50 maximum bet, not my usual $25. Still have one more unused.
Bad beat this morning. Sort of. Had Alcaraz to win less than 18.5 games. +140. He was huge favorite. Essentially I’m betting he wins in straight sets all 6-4 or better. He won first two 6-1, 6-1, up 1-0 in 3rd. Opponent ‘retires’ so bet is voided.
I have a bunch of pre-season / intra season Super Bowl bets. Total only $170. I got various free bets/boosts for making those bets as well.
All 4 are still active.
Chiefs. $603. Win 433
49ers. $500. Win 330
Bills. $375. Win 205
Ravens. $43. Lose 127
Lions. $0. Lose 170
Bucs. $0. Lose 170
Quote: EvenBobBig day in Michigan, the Detroit Lions are in their second playoff game. Last time they did this it was the 90s. I have absolutely no faith they are going to win, I gave up on them around 1970. I'll watch the game just for the novelty and be shocked if they win but there's no way anybody's going to beat San Francisco.
link to original post
You must not have watched the San Francisco game yesterday. They looked very vulnerable and probably should have lost.
Another great game. Result to be determined.
Go Bills.
Quote: SOOPOOThree quarters in the book. Knox hasn’t had a ball thrown his way. Vegas is smarter than me!
Another great game. Result to be determined.
Go Bills.
link to original post
Looking like the Bills will end the game hoping the ghost of Scott Norwood has been exorcised. This one will be won by who scores last it is looking.
per the link - to win SB - the best line on each -
9ers +150
Ravens +190
Chiefs +440
Lions +750
the line seems to me to be very high on Chiefs and a good deal
9ers seem to me to be much overrated - not worth the smallish payout
also like the Lions about +275 to beat the 9ers straight up
the Lions, who are not considered a real contender by many are now 14-5 and were 12-5 in the regular season
only the Ravens had a better record
.
.https://www.vegasinsider.com/nfl/odds/futures/
I edited out much of my op because I realized my idea for a hedge was not a good one
.
DK had a glitch preventing using a SGP boost for NCAA. They gave me $10 free bet as a ‘sorry’. Good customer service.
BetMGM had a great Lions Boost yesterday. Wemby 20/ Holmgren 15 was +175. Both average a few points higher than those numbers, and I also thought in this ‘Rookie of the Year’ matchup, both would be featured more than usual. Bingo. Even though both were pulled around halfway through the 4th quarter due to a blowout, it was an easy cover. I wish I could figure out how/why, but I was limited to $57.13 bet so made around $100.
The money train on Embiid 30 is drying up. Now have to lay -600 tonight! There is one boost tonight on Embiid 30/ Curry 4 ‘3’s at +120. So I’m in on that one.
Quote: lilredrooster.
per the link - to win SB - the best line on each -
9ers +150
Ravens +190
Chiefs +440
Lions +750
the line seems to me to be very high on Chiefs and a good deal
I agree, Chiefs a little higher than I would have expected.
If the expected point total is 51 then I think anything can happen. Detroit wants this really really bad, this is old news for the 49ers. The 49ers have won five Super Bowl titles (1982, 1985, 1989, 1990, and 1995) and Detroit has never won it.
Quote: SOOPOO
The money train on Embiid 30 is drying up. Now have to lay -600 tonight! There is one boost tonight on Embiid 30/ Curry 4 ‘3’s at +120. So I’m in on that one.
link to original post
Free money. 76ers were being annihilated but left Embiid in until he had 30. Curry hit his 4 three pointers in the first 9 minutes.
I’m glad I didn’t post all my other bets tonight (LOSERS!)
I noticed I’ve been downgraded at DK to silver from gold.
Will struggle to even make Platinum on Caesars after making Diamond last two years.
Lowest tier at MGM
I guess they have all made it harder to get those ‘loyalty’ points.
MGM has Knicks win parlayed with over 217.5 at +220. Knicks on 5 game win streak and have league best record last dozen or so games. Heat on 5 game losing streak. Fair over under was around 219.
Embiid/Jokic to combine for 60 at even money. I’ve harped on Embiid being ‘guaranteed’ to get 30, and Jokic probably hits that mark in half his games. They combine to average 62.3 per game. I would think ‘fair’ number would be around 64, as in this battle of MVP candidates they are more likely to exceed their averages.
Curry 25/ James 6 assists at +140 seems great too. Probably very few games James gets 5 or fewer assists. Curry averages 27 so favorite to hit 25. I like the +140.
Quote: SOOPOO3 +EV boosts today (I think…)
MGM has Knicks win parlayed with over 217.5 at +220. Knicks on 5 game win streak and have league best record last dozen or so games. Heat on 5 game losing streak. Fair over under was around 219.
Embiid/Jokic to combine for 60 at even money. I’ve harped on Embiid being ‘guaranteed’ to get 30, and Jokic probably hits that mark in half his games. They combine to average 62.3 per game. I would think ‘fair’ number would be around 64, as in this battle of MVP candidates they are more likely to exceed their averages.
Curry 25/ James 6 assists at +140 seems great too. Probably very few games James gets 5 or fewer assists. Curry averages 27 so favorite to hit 25. I like the +140.
link to original post
First one hits easily.
Second one canceled as 76ers sat lots of players with ‘injuries’. No Embiid. No Maxey. No Melton. Whoever had this inside info made a boatload. Nuggets were -5.5 BEFORE Embiid announcement. So anyone who knew would bet the Nuggs, who missed a plethora of foul shots but still managed won by 6.
Third one hits easily as well. James had 6 sometime in 3rd Q. And Curry had 22 after 3. Game not over but the bet is.
Lebron is unbelievable. 4 of his assists were highlight reel passes.
McCaffrey 86
Gibbs + Montgomery 92
So with usual variance gotta think McCaffrey outgains them between 40 and 45% of the time. So +230 is great value.
Knicks (pretty sure) will be missing Julius Randle for a while. They really have no replacement for him. I’ll be betting against them until the lines catch up with how important he is to the team.
One MGM offer required me to make a 3 leg parlay. Only NFL or NCAA football allowed. It counted a SGP on either game as one leg! So impossible to use unless I could parlay with NCAA future bet. Hence I have 49ers/Ravens/Georgia champ at around 10-1. If I hit first two I’ll have money tied up for 11 months!
Quote: SOOPOOI think I got another +EV bet today. McCaffrey to outgain Gibbs + Montgomery at +230. BetRivers. Fair odds have
McCaffrey 86
Gibbs + Montgomery 92
So with usual variance gotta think McCaffrey outgains them between 40 and 45% of the time. So +230 is great value.
Knicks (pretty sure) will be missing Julius Randle for a while. They really have no replacement for him. I’ll be betting against them until the lines catch up with how important he is to the team.
One MGM offer required me to make a 3 leg parlay. Only NFL or NCAA football allowed. It counted a SGP on either game as one leg! So impossible to use unless I could parlay with NCAA future bet. Hence I have 49ers/Ravens/Georgia champ at around 10-1. If I hit first two I’ll have money tied up for 11 months!
link to original post
Would it have let you bet SB champ instead of ncaa champ for the 3rd leg?
Quote: unJonQuote: SOOPOOI think I got another +EV bet today. McCaffrey to outgain Gibbs + Montgomery at +230. BetRivers. Fair odds have
McCaffrey 86
Gibbs + Montgomery 92
So with usual variance gotta think McCaffrey outgains them between 40 and 45% of the time. So +230 is great value.
Knicks (pretty sure) will be missing Julius Randle for a while. They really have no replacement for him. I’ll be betting against them until the lines catch up with how important he is to the team.
One MGM offer required me to make a 3 leg parlay. Only NFL or NCAA football allowed. It counted a SGP on either game as one leg! So impossible to use unless I could parlay with NCAA future bet. Hence I have 49ers/Ravens/Georgia champ at around 10-1. If I hit first two I’ll have money tied up for 11 months!
link to original post
Would it have let you bet SB champ instead of ncaa champ for the 3rd leg?
link to original post
No. I tried that first. It’s been a yearlong promotion. This is of course first week it was nearly unusable.
Who's going to be the first book to offer a prop on whether or not Taylor Swift makes a "surprise appearance" in the halftime show?
(Somebody will almost certainly have a prop on how many times she is shown and/or mentioned by the announcers.)
Quote: ThatDonGuyFirst Super Bowl Prop-related post of the season:
Who's going to be the first book to offer a prop on whether or not Taylor Swift makes a "surprise appearance" in the halftime show?
(Somebody will almost certainly have a prop on how many times she is shown and/or mentioned by the announcers.)
link to original post
I would lay a very big price that she is not part of the halftime show. Supposedly she is doing a show in Japan on Saturday and will fly in for the game on Sunday. The question is will she fly her Falcon 900 or lease a Gulfstream so she doesn't have to stop for fuel.
Must have realized that offering a boost that you couldn’t use was bad business.
I’ve been on wrong end of superstar players being sat after I bet on their team. Tonight I’m on right side. Got Trail Blazers +9.5, then Embiid announced out. Line only dropped 1 point. I know Trail Blazers suck but 8.5 points at home against team missing their MVP player seems off.
I ‘think’ I have a + EV bet on MGM. Both Brunson and Tatum to score 30. At +290. With Randle out his subs are more defensive minded, thus expect Brunson to have way more opportunities to get 30. Tatum probably scores 30 in half his games.
Another + EV bet (I think?) is both Giannis and Jokic to score 25 at +150. Hard for me to picture Giannis not getting 30+ in first game Rivers is coaching. Jokic sometimes goes under if the defense encourages him to load up on assists. I feel +100 is fair.
Brunson hit 30+, but Tatum fell 2 points short. I was pretty accurate in my analysis. On a separate bet I made a few $$ on Hart over rebounds. Not only does he get more minutes with Randle and Anunoby out, he is playing a ‘bigger’ player on defense and thus in rebounding position more. He went over his total by mid 2nd quarter.
Jokic/Antetokounmpo hit at +150. I think the books don’t include the ‘flavor/personality’ of certain matchups. Like when I hit over on both Holmgren/Wembanyama.
Got a soccer offer today. I’m guessing I’m the only forum member rooting for the Mali/Morocco parlay to hit?
Great promo by Caesars (for Caesars!).
(I really have no idea how many others I’ll be sharing the 58 million with….)
Quote: SOOPOO
Got a soccer offer today. I’m guessing I’m the only forum member rooting for the Mali/Morocco parlay to hit?
Wrong, I am rooting for it just for you. My limited soccer knowledge dates back to the 1970's with the Tampa Bay Rowdies.
Quote: AZDuffmanJust heard that in 83% of NFL games the spread does not matter. IOW, 83% of the time the spread is covered or the underdog wins outright. Knowing this, when would you play the moneyline vs taking the points?
link to original post
This is my thought exactly. I have no idea why people care about the spread. It’s like nobody actually cares who wins or losses. Has any team been in the locker room and been totally bummed that they won a game but didn’t cover the spread? People talk very intently about how a line moved from 3.5 to 3 off the open and closed at 2.5. Then 90% of the time it didn’t even matter. Now of course that 10% of the time is where it matters. But I’d rather just get a better money line where it matters 50% of the time.
I did hear Captain Jack say something once that really made sense. I was comparing teaser prices and heard him say that when teasing through the 0 that makes very little difference and that definitely makes sense in the pricing I’ve seen and the logic of how a game would end. So if a team was -3 and you teased them to +3 that isn’t usually going to make a difference because if you have them +3 they are probably just going to end up winning anyways and you are wasting buying it down. But if you have a team +7 and you give them 6 points now they have +13 that is a much better value.
Quote: SandybestdogQuote: AZDuffmanJust heard that in 83% of NFL games the spread does not matter. IOW, 83% of the time the spread is covered or the underdog wins outright. Knowing this, when would you play the moneyline vs taking the points?
link to original post
This is my thought exactly. I have no idea why people care about the spread. It’s like nobody actually cares who wins or losses. Has any team been in the locker room and been totally bummed that they won a game but didn’t cover the spread? People talk very intently about how a line moved from 3.5 to 3 off the open and closed at 2.5. Then 90% of the time it didn’t even matter. Now of course that 10% of the time is where it matters. But I’d rather just get a better money line where it matters 50% of the time.
One book I have has some college coach quoted as saying "we cover better than anyone" though he meant in losing. I think it was just a quote for fun though and they do not take it serious. I can see a team getting upset for being questioned for not covering enough in a "you are not as good as you think you are" kind of way.
The moving of the line is of course just to entice people to balance action. Same as back in the day moving a stock 1/8 of a point. Back then if the fraction was not in 1/8s brokers would get a call that said "moo goo gai pan" meaning quit making a "Chinese Market" of weird fractions. But those small moves may get someone to take a stock or a team.
I think the Patriots were notable for never covering. But tell me this. 2 minutes left in the game. A -7 team is up 21-16. Do you really think they are risking the game with a drive to get a last second field goal so they can cover the spread? Of course not. They are going to kneel it out and win by 5.Quote: AZDuffmanQuote: SandybestdogQuote: AZDuffmanJust heard that in 83% of NFL games the spread does not matter. IOW, 83% of the time the spread is covered or the underdog wins outright. Knowing this, when would you play the moneyline vs taking the points?
link to original post
This is my thought exactly. I have no idea why people care about the spread. It’s like nobody actually cares who wins or losses. Has any team been in the locker room and been totally bummed that they won a game but didn’t cover the spread? People talk very intently about how a line moved from 3.5 to 3 off the open and closed at 2.5. Then 90% of the time it didn’t even matter. Now of course that 10% of the time is where it matters. But I’d rather just get a better money line where it matters 50% of the time.
One book I have has some college coach quoted as saying "we cover better than anyone" though he meant in losing. I think it was just a quote for fun though and they do not take it serious. I can see a team getting upset for being questioned for not covering enough in a "you are not as good as you think you are" kind of way.
The moving of the line is of course just to entice people to balance action. Same as back in the day moving a stock 1/8 of a point. Back then if the fraction was not in 1/8s brokers would get a call that said "moo goo gai pan" meaning quit making a "Chinese Market" of weird fractions. But those small moves may get someone to take a stock or a team.
link to original post
I just think I would be much more happy getting +140 on the moneyline when the rest of the market is +130 rather than +3.5 when the rest of the market is +3 and it probably won’t make a difference which points you take but it will on the moneyline price.
Quote: SandybestdogI think the Patriots were notable for never covering. But tell me this. 2 minutes left in the game. A -7 team is up 21-16. Do you really think they are risking the game with a drive to get a last second field goal so they can cover the spread? Of course not. They are going to kneel it out and win by 5.Quote: AZDuffmanQuote: SandybestdogQuote: AZDuffmanJust heard that in 83% of NFL games the spread does not matter. IOW, 83% of the time the spread is covered or the underdog wins outright. Knowing this, when would you play the moneyline vs taking the points?
link to original post
This is my thought exactly. I have no idea why people care about the spread. It’s like nobody actually cares who wins or losses. Has any team been in the locker room and been totally bummed that they won a game but didn’t cover the spread? People talk very intently about how a line moved from 3.5 to 3 off the open and closed at 2.5. Then 90% of the time it didn’t even matter. Now of course that 10% of the time is where it matters. But I’d rather just get a better money line where it matters 50% of the time.
One book I have has some college coach quoted as saying "we cover better than anyone" though he meant in losing. I think it was just a quote for fun though and they do not take it serious. I can see a team getting upset for being questioned for not covering enough in a "you are not as good as you think you are" kind of way.
The moving of the line is of course just to entice people to balance action. Same as back in the day moving a stock 1/8 of a point. Back then if the fraction was not in 1/8s brokers would get a call that said "moo goo gai pan" meaning quit making a "Chinese Market" of weird fractions. But those small moves may get someone to take a stock or a team.
link to original post
I just think I would be much more happy getting +140 on the moneyline when the rest of the market is +130 rather than +3.5 when the rest of the market is +3 and it probably won’t make a difference which points you take but it will on the moneyline price.
link to original post
And that’s why I took the underdog +7, not the favorite -7. In betting, if you feel that something is bad for one team, bet on the other team!
Of course a half point ‘probably’ won’t make a difference from 3 to 3.5. But I can assure you that you will remember the one time your tie becomes a loss more than the extra $1 you win on a $10 bet, if you even win!
I look at BOTH point spreads AND money lines. There are instances when one makes more sense than the other.
