![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
the saints in this position is an example of a good looking bet that does not cash...rams -6 takes the money... imho...gl all happy holidays...
I disagree, I think the Saints plus six is a very strong play.-Big Al--
Rams minus 6 does take your money...and give it to me, hehehehe
walking back to houston broke, oh well at least i know my money is being well used.....gl
No one will be gambling for a living for long off that chapter! Glad someone else thinks highly of McCune. Other books that are worthy of a read are few and far between. Robert Ross writes some excellent books on handicapping. The one on hockey will further your abilities greatly and the one on baseball is pretty good too. There are a bunch of decent, not great books, on football out there. I have said it before, too many books on handicapping cover the same material. Few have intermediate or advanced thoughts on beating the game. Too many cover the stuff all of us understand quite clearly, such as what is a pointspread. The books on college basketball and football by Trace Fields are in my collection, excellent books that think further than the standard logic you find in most books.
Really though, not much quality out there. Mostly anyone wanting to get good is going to have to do it by experience alone. Fortunately these days with offshore books experience can come real cheap. You will learn more in one full year of betting $5 a game with a couple of offshore books than any book could ever teach you and chances are it won't cost you very much as long as you are patient and play relatively few games. Chances are you won't lose much more than the bonuses they give you for signing up over a year as long as you keep the bets at the house minimums. Just remember its a learning experience and try to pick a few games a day in all sports and make bets (real bets not paper bets) then go back and do a post-mortem looking at the boxscores and see when your analysis was on and when it was off. Nothing else substitutes for learning than that.
My favorite Trace Fields Quote:
"bet on 10 win NFL teams. Teams in the NFL that win 10 games cover 58% ATS".
Thanks Trace. Now if only you could tell us the Saints would win 10, we would have won money.
But....oops if you play the expected to win 10 game teams, you get crushed since they are the joe q public teams like Jaguars and Wash.
All these guys are AWFUL. They can cap some, they have no idea how to bet at all, and they miss the dozens of no brainers ways to win. If you are any good at this, you should be able to id dozens of mistakes all these authors make......one of my favorite bothced works is Sklansky's writings on sports bettings.
Don't quit your poker job!
Of the 4 games this weekend, this is the only one I like. The Vikings have lost 3 straight and did not play last week. This means they will not have won a football game in over a month. I remember 4 years ago when the Broncos had clinched the best record in the AFC with 3 weeks to go. They lost their last 3, had a week off, then got beat at Mile High by a Jacksonville team that was a 14 point dog. Shanahan has said that one of the biggest mistakes he has ever made was letting everyone ease up after they clinched the best record. You will notice he did not do that the following 2 seasons when the Broncos won the Super Bowl. I think Minnnesota has made the same mistake. I like the Saints plus 8 a lot. Was wondering what others thought....Big Al
PS: Hope you had my shoe in of the yhear with Washington, a sweeeeet score....
I don't agree with the Saints pick. I think the Saints are still overacheiving. The Vikes eat up weaker teams at the Metrodome and Denny Green has a superb record coming off bye weeks (10-0 or something like that). The Vikings do have a weak defense, but regardless of last week's result I don't think the Saints have the offense to exploit the weaknesses. I'm also a big believer in betting against teams coming off a big win. New Orleans could really have a letdown.
Great pick with Washington. The PAC-10 had a pretty good bowl record, as predicted by many posters here. It seemed like Washington wanted to give the game away with that boneheaded lateral.
Now that the nemesis of the Vikings, Rams and Tampa Bay been knock out look forward to seeing the Vikings handing the Saints ass on a platter, you can take that to the bank.
now I know I am right...
Don't quit your day job. Teams with terrible ATS and SU recent records are GREAT plays in the playoffs.
For some reason, your memory has focused on 1 rare contrarian example....the Denver/Jax game. But you go on to talk about Denv. not letting up in their superbowl years.....huh? In their best year vs ATL, they were something like 13-0, then back to back losses to the Gmen and I believe the Fish, followed by a home ATS losing 28-21 game to Seattle. Not exactly a solid 3 weeks. Followed by them kicking the crap out of all team in the playoffs.
I believe in the year vs. GBay, they also lost some key games down the stretch, were playing lousy, and actually lost the home field due to it and had to win in KC and in Pitt.
"dont quit my day job"...go back through all these threads for this past year regarding football picks and see how I have done. I'll compare my record with anybody who has posted here this past year. I think there is always one surprise team in the playoffs and I think the Saints are it this year. I think them plus 8 is a very strong play this weekend.--Big Al--
I stand by my post. You clearly indicated that one of the major reasons you want to play vs. Minny is due to their recent bad SU and ATS performance. This is exactly the wrong conclusion. Basic Strategy playoff betting calls to go against hot teams, and on slumping teams due to a variety of reasons and great line value. This is well documented. Also, your Denver examples were about as far off as possible (as I indicated).
Sorry to be a bad guy, it does not mean that you cannot pick 57% ATS, or make a killing at this. But the shoe I happened to look in on, I saw you standing on 16 vs.7. And my experience is that those making plays like this, usually lead their followers down the drain.
So you ARE the same Fezzik that has written for Blackjack Forum.
One and the same.
Sneak preview for 2001. Giants under. They have been very lucky this year, and have you seen their 2001 schedule? AFC West (no Sd, and @denv,@kc). NFC non division includes NO, Rams, Minny, Gbay. Add triple revenge Philly x2, Washx2 and it will get ugly.
Bye-bye Gmen. 6-10 in 2001.
I know most people were on the Huskies, but I hope you all got on Oregon State. I am still stunned at how the line was so low. The mystique of the Irish I guess, but when I looked at that matchup I saw at least a 17 point differential in talent and it ended up even worse. Oregon getting all those points too seemed crazy. Maybe next year the Pac 10 will be over-rated because of this year and we can all make money going the other way, but it was a nice showing by the conference except for the poor children of Bruce Snyder. Even UCLA showed more effort than I was expecting going to El Paso and gave me a pointspread winner.
Anyone heard of a junior high team that needs a coach? I think Bruce Snyder is still looking for a job since his fellow idiot Schottenheimer took the last job he was qualified for...
FYI, I had Oregon State too, though not as heavy as I had the Huskies. What about last nights game? I posted a while back asking "Am I missing something?" regarding the Washington and Oklahoma lines. At the time I thought they were both out of whack, and they were. How an undefeated team, who played a tough schedule, can be an 11 point dog is beyond me. But the cash I won on the game last night didnt get beyond me...heheheheh.--Big Al--
Hey, wasn't I the guy here touting OSU to the hilt? I had a 4-0 bowl record betting the pac-10 (shoulda been 4-1 but I was wavering on ASU and didn't get a bet down).
JG
Oh well, maybe I missed it, but OSU was my best bet of the bowl season. However I bet flat amounts on every one of my bets so no bet is more important than others.
As for the Sooners, I don't know what you can say. The line was definitely high, but the Seminoles had the type of team to cover that number. I don't know how they could have performed so badly. The Sooners deserve some credit, but no team on out there is good enough to expect to essentially shut out FSU. Not having Minnis did hurt, but clearly you have to factor some of the loss into just a poor poor effort by the offense. I didn't bet the game so no big loss either way and I am somewhat glad we don't have to listen to the dueling coaches for number 1. In any event its scary to think what kind of program this would be if Bowden could figure out how to win more of these bowl games. He used to never lose in the bowls and now he has lost in some big ones in recent years. Well he can go and think about it because even with some key personnel losses this year, I am pretty sure he will be playing in Pasadena next year for the championship.
One thing that occurred to me was that the a priori distribution of possible outcomes basically depended on whether or not FSU turned out to have that blazing speed they had in previous bowl encounters v Big8/12 teams. So the curve kinda looked like FSU-blowout balancing out one side and a whole smooth distribution of good football games, many of which O would win. For that reason the money line seemed good to me, tho I expected to lose the bet. In the year in review retrospect, it's kinda odd that OSU was such an easy play for the last 9 weeks. Isn't the first bandwagon parameter in horseracing the jockey? Yet, still they covered week after week. Doubt there will be the great opportunity (at least in the pac-10) next year that there was this. Without seeing the sched, I bet Arizona might suprise some people. I think they underachieved with the talent they had. Ditto the devils. We'll see.
JG
coming out of nowhere.. whipping texas, beating nebraska and kansas state twice and then shutting out florida state's high powered offense.
do that and go undefeated and you get more than some credit from me.
while we are at it.. can anyone tell me reasons why bobby bowden is so great. it seems he has the best athletes year after year and with few exceptions seems to always come up short. fsu did not look prepared the other night. oklahoma sure did.
The reason Bobby is great, is because...........
1) He is a great recruiter.
2)He took a nothing program and built it into a national powerhouse.
How about evidence that he is a good coach focusing on game preparation and decisions? How would you rate him there?
My opinion is that he is not a great 'field tactician' or 'game coach'.Better then adequate,less then great. That's just my opinion though.
Good Luck
Howard
I too loaded up on Washington, Oregon, and Oregon St. I almost thought it was TOO obvious, and was falling into a trap. These were my only college bets over the Holidays, so the Pac 10 really came through for me.
Just to get the comments going I will give my thoughts on the four games this week hoping to get some insight back.
First off, this round on is the time of the favorites. Often no price is too high as this starts seeing the best teams playing (well I don't know about that this year) and the winners show no mercy while the losers do desperate things once they fall behind. So really if you like a team, don't worry too much about the number, you probably will get a cover if you have the winner.
My best bet, and I am thankful I get a chance at it, is Miami. I looked over things a week ago and thought that the final would be Miami and Tennessee. Miami has the perfect setup that they almost blew by starting so bad last week as I really was looking forward to betting this game. Miami's ideal opponent is one that lives on making big pass plays and no team really fits that more than the Raiders. Miami handled Buffalo and beat the Colts twice (once with Huard) because the home run hitters can't do much against this team. They have excellent corners, a big time hitter at safety and most importantly a vicious pass rush. I don't know if Jason Taylor even knows he is supposed to tackle a running back but he sure finds the QB. The Dolphins just generate too much pass rush to get the time to accurately throw too many long balls and their corners are generally with the recievers anyways. Gannon's history has been to make a lot of mistakes when he is under pressure and forced to win games himself. Granted he is a different man this year, but still despite all his scrambling capability he is more accurate just being a pocket passer. On offense, they will do fine as long as Fiedler stops being a negative and turning it over. That is hard to say but I have to think his injured off shoulder has to be healing a bit more each game. They will just run a lot of Smith on just a mediocre Raider rush D. In all I love the matchups here as the Fins get exactly what they need on both sides of the field. I am a bit worried because the Raiders get a lot of touchdowns on D so Fiedler better be careful. Other than that, this is a team that has won a bunch of tough road games this year so they aren't going to be intimidated. Further I like the fact that the Raiders are pretty playoff inexperienced with a coach going into his first postseason game. The Fins are regular playoff participants and should be focused and ready considering the embarassments they have been subjected to the last two years in the round two after tough wins in round one. All in all, I expect Miami to pull the upset and will be betting the money line since as I have stated the points probably won't do me much good here.
In the other games:
I like the Vikings. The Saints just strike me as a team that will come out flat here. The Vikings are the class now of a weak field and the two teams they fear most were eliminated last week. The Vikes have had a lot of disappointments in recent years and will be out to atone for that.
I slightly lean to the Giants. Clearly this is a matchup that the Eagles have yet to solve with two bad losses each year for a few years now. The Giants are getting a reasonable price and if they do their usual they will beat this team by at least 10 points.
I am passing on the "real Super Bowl". I guess I can't argue with it, this game probably will have the Super Bowl winner. I still can't see you putting money on Trent Dilfer when the chips are down, but the Titans are just plain doo doo when laying points like this. I think the Ravens are in a little over their heads in this one, but those points worry me as I just can't trust these guys as favorites. If anything though I like the over here as I don't see a defensive battle, but more of a Tennessee early lead and then a late Ravens comeback falling short.
If all goes as planned, I would expect the lines to be Minnesota -2 over NY Giants and Tennesee -13 over Miami. If that is the case, I would be stuck because I wouldn't like any teams at those numbers.
i appreciate your posts and generally agree...
The only game I like this week is the Saints/Vikes. I have to resprectfully disagree. I think the Saints plus 8 is a strong play. I have discussed this game previously. I think the other games could go either way and I am going to stay out of them. I will comment on the Miami game. I tend to agree with what you say. As you probably know, I have generally been pretty high on this Miami team (with the exception of Fiedler). I am just not sure they can beat the Raiders, though I think they can cover. That defense will help keep it close, although I dont think the offense can score enough to beat the Raiders. Since I am only playing the Saints, I am going to play that game hard. If it hits, I may put a small bet on the Fish.--Big Al--
Friends of mine at work think the Giants will be favored over the Vikes should it happen.
I agree that Minn will be a small favorite, but they are a dome team on the road in January.
Danny
It all really depends on how the teams look in their games. I just base it on the fact that I expect the Vikings to look better than the Giants for one, and for two the Giants never have seemed to catch on as a really public team despite what general logic would say about a New York team. The Vikings are definitely a public team when they are playing well because they can look so flashy and impressive while people forget things like defense and their choking in big games.
Dolphins will host Baltimore in the AFC championship game while Minny will travel into the medowlands .
fins have edge on both sides of the ball wrong teams favored in this one! vikes will come out firing and keep firing till the final gun. eagles can't solve the g-men mystery and will falter here. Balt will find a way to beat this team for a 3rd time this season.
fins-vikes superbowl
I must admit you were right about the Dolphins at the beginning of the year and I was totally wrong. I put my analysis on Damon Hoard quartebacking this team not on Fiedler and while he isn't the best he certainly was 5 wins better than Damon IMO.
I tip my hat to you and although they lost due to 3 interceptions two games in a row by Fiedler they did alot better than I thought they would.
Nice call Snowman
paul
Damn, I'm 7-1 in the playoffs and my only loser I had bet at 35-1 to win the afc championship.
Paul you did a good job on the O/U total wins for each team . I like those bets, you can always find 4 or 5 easy wins. I always plan a late august trip just to put in the prop and future bets before the season starts.
This post is for Wildbill and Holybull, but obviously anyone can comment. I respect both of you guys but am wondering about the Saints/Vikes game as you both have made similar comments. You both have said you think the Saints will be in a "letdown" or "coming out flat" mode for the game. If this were a regular season game, I could see that after their Rams win. But this is the playoffs. These guys are now thinking "hey, we are 2 wins away from the Super Bowl". I dont see how a team can come out flat or be in a letdown situation here. They will be up for this game. So will the Vikes, but I think you are using something that would usually apply to a regular season game to a post season game. I welcome your comments....--Big Al--
I'm not sure that I really agree with the "come out flat" assessment, but its quite possible that the vikings could come out smoking and be up 14-0 5 minutes into the game and kill your +8. Vikings and a lot of other teams historically destroy underdogs in the divisional round. I don't have all of the numbers in front of me, but most of my recollection is that most of these games are either major upsets or 21+ point blowouts. Which is why I agree with wildbill; the points are pretty much negligible, and taking the dolphins moneyline is the way to go if you like them. If you like the Saints, taking them moneyline seems a lot more logical to me. just cannot really imagine this game being a close one if the vikes win.
Well, 2 years ago in this exact same spot, that's exactly what happened. The vikes came out and torched the cards and it was over in the 1st quarter.
JG
I think there are two factors to a letdown game. One, a team must be coming off a really anticipated game. I know every NFL game is important, but each New Orleans Saint was more focused to play the Rams last week than he would have been for any other team. After they beat the Rams, they have a sense of accomplishment and relief. I don't think that the Saints were thinking Super Bowl before last week, they were only thinking of the Rams. However, I do tend to prefer letdown games when the team is coming off a big road win, and is now a home favorite.
Second, I beleive that when a team comes of a big-game win, they tend to be overhyped. Hype is a huge factor in lines, and too many bettors only look at the previous week's game. One example that comes to mind is a few months ago the Redskins beat the Rams in a pretty impressive Monday night performance. The public seemed to think that they were for real. Of course, the next week they got beat outright by Philly as 6 point favorites.
I don't want to talk you off of your horse, Big Al. You've been right more often than not this year. Good Luck!
Thanks, luck to you too. I admit, I maybe falling into the trap of having a one week memory regarding them, especially since they won for me last week.
Its hard to emotionally be fired up in this situation. The Saints got the big win, I mean their first ever as a franchise they don't come bigger than that. It also goes with the way a team acts in a game. A fired up team will make more plays being a step quicker or a split second more focused. Its subtle, but when its working for the whole team you get better team efforts. Its not something you can put a value on nor can you say for sure it will happen, but its just a factor that seems very much in play here. Think of it this way, if the Saints lose this game, their team and fans will still talk about what a great year it was and how much they accomplished and it would indeed be very true. The Vikings if they lost would be disappointed and think of how they blew it again. So if the Vikings fall behind a couple of scores, they will still be bitter and fighting it out much more intensely to win...not wanting that negative media after them again. If the Saints fall behind, that contentment could set in and they won't feel quite as urgent.
One thing everyone should think about is not falling into any of the traps you all talk about. What the Vikings did in the playoffs two years ago is pretty irrelevant to this particular game. The effect of the Vikings failures in recent years however IS relevant because it will play into their minds for right now. Be sure not to fall in the trap of thinking this game will be like the Cards game or any other game that has a similar situation. Its a new year, new players, but the way the teams approach things is somewhat affected by their past. When you properly filter out what matters, you are in great shape and right here past performance doesn't matter unless you are looking at what the teams did this season. This alone is why playoff experience is important. What happened before affects how you approach the games. Thats a good reason why I like Miami because they are a very hungry, yet experienced team in the playoffs. The Raiders are filled with guys who haven't been in the show for many years or not at all. Tim Brown might remember the massacre they had in Buffalo many years back, but no one else will.
This post is coming a few days late, but I couldn't help but comment on Philip Fulmer's play calling in the Cotton Bowl, for anyone who saw it. He has an all-american quality RB like Travis Henry, who he's ran into the ground all year (numerous 30+ carry games), and he flat-out refused to use him in the 2nd and 3rd quarters!! Granted, K State was playing a 9-man front and Henry had a fairly modest 35 yards on 8 carries first quarter. The way that freshman QB was throwing the ball, only being down 21-14 at the half, one had to figure theyd come out running 3rd quarter...but no! And sure enough, Clausen couldn't get the ball to anyone and they quickly fell behind 35-14 and the game was history. He breaks a long run late in the game and finishes with 180 yards on 15 carries or something.
I have no affiliations to either team, no action on the game, I was just mystified at what was going on. Anyone else know if this is a trend for this coach, or what?
I can't complain about that coach like some of my other targets out there. Fulmer is one of the best out there as his record attests to and he has usually called good games before. I didn't see it, but its quite possible that the weather and field conditions had something to do with it. I saw the highlights of a frozen field and that often causes troubles that may not be evident. Maybe he thought his receivers would have more of an edge with the field that way. Maybe he feared fumbles with Henry in those conditions. Henry or a key lineman may have been banged up and he didn't disclose that. Most of the calls we complain about here are just idiotic bonehead plays or play calls that have no explanation and show a clear lack of knowledge, but a coach not running the ball might have a lot more behind it than you realize.
Hey give OU credit their due, and stop sayin your players beat themselves. Smashmouth defense beat your dinasour quarterback. Iam sick of the Floridas and Miami's in the top five every year, now a breath of fresh air. I propose a salary cap for all the Florida's schools(Iknow this sounds ridiculous, but we really know why they are playin every new years day)
I had to throw this in there just to piss all you Florida state fans off. And screw coach Davis of Miami poppin his mouth off about Washington (at half time) should be run out of the Pac-10 for playing such a wimpy schedule, my I remind you coach it was Washington who kicked (your) Miami's ass in Miami. Be warned Pac-10 conference is to be reckoned with.
Did Davis really say that?!?! I can't believe Davis would say that considering they play a McNeese State or Florida A&M caliber team each and every season. And since when has the Big East EVER had a better top to bottom conference in a season than the Pac 10? Does he forget how much easier it is to win when you have a disparity like the Big East where you just focus on two or three challenging games and then coast the rest of the way. I would like to see Davis play in the Pac 10 or SEC where almost any game could beat you.
The Huskies had a rare easy non-conference game with Idaho, but rarely can anyone say they take an easy road. Walking out of the Rose Bowl I saw a Purdue shirt that showed their schedule. They opened up with Kent and I believe it was Central Michigan or some other MAC team. I commented that we need a schedule like that, but when I thought about it, I love the fact we always have tough non-conference games. Some teams schedule for quality football, others schedule to win a lot of games. The latter should all be ashamed of themselves!
To finish it off, since Davis was such a strong believer in the fact that his team got screwed being number 3 after beating FSU, why isn't he speaking out and saying he should be number 3 now since he lost to us and we have identical records???? They can say all they want about the Miami hype, but the Huskies beat them once and certainly could beat them again if they played today. I mean does he really think a conference with 3 out of the top 7 teams in the country is a walkover?
Isnt that where the Raider were on the Miami's 8 yard line first down, Stabler in the grasp of some linebacker named Vern, anyway Stabler desparate toss in the air as he was going down into a sea of white jerseys spots a lone black jersey which happen to be Clarence Davis(running back)scores the winning touchdown 28 to 26 breaking all those Dolphin's fans hearts........another moment in the Raider nation.....expect the Raiders to knock-out Miami's quarterback an embarrass the Miami pride.
BOS OVER 203.5 ***
Greeeetings from the black hole home of the skull patrol. Dolphin tuna served fresh to the faithful at Networks Coliseium,was this game to easy or was we to damn gooooood!
Dolphins weren't such a good team. Raiders deserved to be the big favorites against a marginal playoff team and a week's rest.
Next week will be tough. The Raiders will not get to the Super Bowl, they can not beat either Baltimore in Oak or Tennesee in Tennessee.
i cashed two medium tickets yesterday...more nervous about today...any comments on NFL playoffs today...Particularly giants/iggles...thnx...gl
here's a situation that I am in :
I bought some futures on a team that is in the final four. This is my current payoff :
If they lose in the Conference finals, I win/lose zero (I sold some of my futures to cover the costs already).
If they win the Confernce finals, but lose in the Super Bowl, I win $4,000.
If they win in the Super Bowl, I win $9,000.
Now, just to make the math easier for everyone....let's assume we know for a fact that no matter who they play in the Conference finals and the Super Bowl, the line will be pick'em...and also, let's assume there is no casino vig (every bet is even money).
Given this scenario - what is the correct strategy if I want to minimize risk, and try to even out my payoff in all three scenarios?
I think I know the answer, which I will post right below this, but I'm not sure.
my answer is to bet $3,250 against my team in the Confernce Final, and then if they get to the Super Bowl, bet $2,500 against my team in the Super Bowl
Wrong answer.
Do not insure your naturals. Shop like a maniac, and if you can get a no vig ML bet, then make it otherwise, do not make any more bets.
What is no-vig? For example if Minny/Gmen around town is -105/+125 then the novig line would be 115. So if you had the Giants, then you could hedge with no negative expectation if you got Minny -115. IF you could not get it, you do not bet.
Professionals don't make negative expectation bets just to minimize risk.
you should have read the following in my post "....and also, let's assume there is no casino vig (every bet is even money). "
that makes your response 100% moot, although I do agree with what you are saying, but I had calculated for that already (and yes, I do have avenues where I can lay off the action at a price that is fair)
Week 1 Wildbill First off, this round is the time of the underdogs 3:1
Week 2 Wildbill First off, this round is the time of the favorites. 3:1
Bill your 6 and 2 with those statements that you made. I must admit I enjoy your work.
Thanks for making this forum fun.
Paul
Thanks, things have gone well because I have always stuck to my philosophy of betting flat amounts and sticking to simple theories. This weekend had I bet based on my feelings for the game, I might have lost because I felt fairly strongly about the Dolphins. Amazingly my worst nightmare came true as the only thing I feared was the Raiders returning a Fiedler mistake for a TD and what happens? Anyways I tell everyone, forget grading your bets and just bet them flat. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't but the key here is to keep you working on the whole board and looking for edges in each and every number out there. Too many recreational guys fall in love with one game and stop working on the rest of them. Every game has a winner and loser and if you find enough value in many games you will do better in the long run, with less fluctuation.
As for this week, first of all it is indeed the strongest round for favorites. I think if you look over history the favorites have done close to 60% in the obviously limited sample, even with the two dogs winning last year. The reasoning is similar to last week, the best teams are playing and the best teams don't let up. The linemaker and the public has a very clear picture of who the better teams are, although there are still matchup edges and overrated teams that cloud the picture. One thing though that is different is that these numbers this year are not very high so maybe this bias won't be that evident.
Clearly with a 1.5 spread on one game, you can't be sure the public is on the right side so I don't think I would put much into the favorites bias for the NFC game. I predicted 2 on this game and its almost right on. Like I said before its hard for me to call this game. My first thought though is to go with the Vikings. Talent wise I think they have the edge. Their one back is better than the Giants two as he kinda does the things that each Giants back specializes in. The rest of the team just keeps making big plays and I don't know if the Giants are the type of team to stop that. The Saints probably have a better defense and they got torched, but the Giants playing outside will even things out a bit. Looking at the other side of things, I think the Giants will have some success passing the ball. Collins has avoided making too many mistakes and is facing a pretty straightforward zone defense. The line should give him some times so if he is patient and spreads it around he will do some damage. The running game will have to rely more on Dayne because I don't see the Vikes getting beaten too much from a speed perspective. This is definitely a game the Giants will need to stay ahead in because Collins won't do so well if he faces a strong pass rush. Special teams have been so important this year, but I would say they are about even with the Giants better in many spots, but the kicker who could be so important here definitely should side with Anderson over Daluiso. All in all, not a blowout, but I will call for an over with Minnesota winning 28-20.
The other game at 5 seems rather high as I was thinking right on 3 for the Raiders after the Ravens game was final. I think the game is very close. Both teams won games they didn't really dominate as much as the scores might indicate. Clearly the Ravens can't win every week when they are doubled in offensive yardage. The Raiders pretty much won their game with the first TD as it looked so promising for the Dolphins. That really just changed the whole game around and I don't know how much value I put into the Raider effort having beaten a team that wanted to run, but couldn't after falling behind so quick. The home advantage is hard for me to gauge because for so long there was no advantage to the Raiders at playing in Oakland. They have been a terrible favorite until the second half of this season where they have beaten a bunch of non-playoff caliber teams with only the win over the Jets looking worthy of value. Remember this is the team that was behind 2-0 for much of the game against Ryan Leaf!!! What this one will come down to is what Brown and Rison can get against a great secondary. Gannon won't face too much pressure, but he won't get as many downfield runs like he did last week as the Ravens LB corp is too fast for him to get much. The same will go for the running game. The other side of the ball is an equal toss up because Lewis should get some yards, but if the Ravens fall behind they obviously are in trouble. So which team to take? You got me there. My gut feeling is that the Raiders will find a way to make some big plays and squeeze by. They may cover, they may not. Believe me I will be far away from this game as far as betting goes, but being a lifelong Broncos fan you better believe I will be rooting for Trent Dilfer to put his skeletons back in the closet and get some redemption. I will leave the opinions on this game for others, this one is a pass for me.
From a fan's standpoint, wouldn't the Raiders vs. Vikings make a great Super Bowl matchup? The Giants vs. Ravens would put people to sleep.
I'll still go with the vikes over the g-men, too many weapons to be stopped and the defense will look better against the average offense of NY.
I may still be under-rating the Raiders but have to go with the Ravens. I'm picking both road teams , We'll see what happens!
I think the Raiders will win this one fairly easy. The Ravens have done it with smoke and mirros and that can only go so far. If you look at the numbers, the Titans dominated the game. Fisher said after the game they did everything they wanted to do both offensively and defensively. I dont think you can keep on relying on your special teams and defense to score for you. And Dilfer-5 for 17. Your QB has to complete more tan 5 passes a game. Also, Gruden of the Raiders is one of the hardest working and best coaches in the league. I hear on New Years eve he was at work, studing film and developing his game plan. He called his wife at midnight and wished her a happy New Year. I think a lot of people hate the Raiders, for whatever reason, and this colors their opinion about them. I look for them to win fairly easy against Baltimore. BTW, I agree with your analysis of the Minnesota game.--Big Al--
While it still takes defense and a running game to win in the NFL, when was the last time a qb as weak as Collins or Dilfer won a Super Bowl? Never. Warner, Elway, Favre, Aikman, Young, Montana... even relative stiffs (relative to the list above) like Simms, Hostetler and McMahon are Hall of Famers compared to Dilfer and Collins. Hard for me to believe that one of, if not both, Gannon and Culpepper aren't in the final.
Lest you forget John Elway's 12 completion game for 123 yards and only one pass to a WR? Yeah if you thought it was QB's that win a game, he was completely outplayed by Favre yet won his first Super Bowl. I think QBs aren't quite as important as they might seem to be. Spectacular QBs have done well, but no guys of that caliber exist today. However when healthy, the RBs of now are the deepest and most talented of any time in history. Just consider the chances in the past that Mike Anderson or Fred Taylor wouldn't even be among the top three RBs in a CONFERENCE when you look at the numbers they put up this year. Things go in cycles and right now the league is dominated by talented RB. Granted that is no assurance of a title as only Robert Smith is a proven star quality back left in the game right now (maybe Lewis with a couple of years experience), but it says a lot about how you win in the NFL today.
As for Trent Dilfer, he is in the same boat as Jay Fiedler. As long as he is not a negative, the team can win with him starting. Dilfer has avoided Fiedler's problems by not making game turning interceptions and thats why the Ravens are still alive. Once again it has to worry anybody backing the Ravens that the Raiders are about as prolific as any team in recent history at scoring TDs this season and last week they turned the game with one. As for an easy win, I don't think I could see the Ravens letting anyone get an easy win on them. Their losses this year have been tough losses, although their competition leaves much to be desired. The Raiders though played a real cupcake schedule the second half of the season so I think they might be overrated too. I still have to say this game is much too tough for me to call on either the side or the total.
Since you are a Bronco fan and thus a Raider hater, I think you are letting your personal feelings get in the way of you objectively analyzing this game. The Ravens are not that good, trust me.--Big Al--
No believe me I never let feelings get in the way, I have bet against my teams as much as on them in my past. Anybody that wants to win serious money realizes that their personal favorites should provide positive winning situations since you know them better than average. That entails knowing strengths and weaknesses. To prove it, I have bet on the Raiders 6 times this year and against them twice. I went 4-2 with them and 1-1 against them. Like I said I think they will find a way to win, just don't know about the number. As for the Ravens, well I have more respect for them than I did before. I really thought their defense would be exposed to this point and it has not. They deserve more credit than getting 6 points here since they just beat two of the best teams in the conference. Just look back to last year where the Titans got little respect even though they beat a tough Indy team that was 13-3 and a Buffalo team that was 11-5, neither in impressive fashion. People said they were pretenders and gave them 6 points against a team they beat twice. The rest is history. Not that it means much this year, just that I think it illustrates that good teams can get underrated when the public gets overly involved in a number.
As for those speculating on 7 points, I really believe the late action is coming pretty hard on Baltimore if it gets any higher. After all no one has incentive to bet them now considering each move has gone with the chalk so far.
Not sure I said qb's always win the Super Bowl. Bob Griese only completed (or was it attempted?) 7 passes in one Super Bowl.
I just don't think you can ignore the caliber and type of quarterbacks who have won. I haven't taken the time to go through the list of winning qb's of all 34 previous games, but I'm fairly certain that, were he to join that select group, Dilfer would rank last by a mile, and Collins would be in the bottom five.
That said, if I can get the Giants -3 @ -110, I'm taking them. Already have Oak -5. While the public loves Oakland (scary for me, huh?), and the knowledgable people I know (every last single one of them!) likes Baltimore, comments like "As long as he (Dilfer) isn't a negative..." makes me wonder how anyone can back Baltimore at the lower number.
For the record, I had Baltimore v. Denver, and laid off last week's game. I just think the run ends here.
Fortunately, despite my disdain for Collins, I bet the Giants. And yes, I had the Raiders.
Two weeks earlier, I had bet the AFC -3, thinking either the Titans or Raiders would make the final and be 6 point favorites.
I am now officially Trent Dilfer's biggest fan (aren't we gamblers a fickle bunch?)!
I have a juicy futures ticket on the Giants at 33/1 to win the Superbowl burning a hole in my pocket.
What is my best course of action???
Should i bet the Vikings to guarantee winning some money?? or is this a sucker play???
Cheers,
Keith
If you bet the Vikes you are also guarenteed of losing some money. Dont bet the Vikes and root like hell the Giants win.--Big Al--
Does your handicapping indicate who you think will cover this game? If so, bet the team your handicapping indicates you should bet. To do anything else would be making a negative expectation play.
Perhaps your handicapping doesn't lead to a play for this game? Then follow Alec's advice.
Consider your futures bet a sunk cost. The fact that you have it has no bearing on the outcome of the game.
Also, read fezzik's response below to "How Much to Bet". Question is raised that is somewhat similar to your situation.
"Consider your futures bet a sunk cost. The fact that you have it has no bearing on the outcome of the game. "
This assumes money has straight line utility. At some point it does not.
Say our hero had a ticket that was worth $500,000.
Say someone offered him $475,000.
Would he take the money? Most would. I see it on "millionaire" all of the time. Contestant has 32 locked up and has his/her 50-50. Should they ever stop when they dont know the answer to the 125 question?
Of course not. Do they? All of the time?
Why? Yes they are making a bad play in mathematical expectation, but their utility does not have a straight line function.
It is human nature to want to lock in a profit in a situation like this. Sure if you were to have this situation come up year after year, then you can't afford to give away the + expectation.
Hedge the bet if it makes you feel better. Consider the vig a small cost of not having to "sweat" the game.
Danny
Good point regarding the utility of money. I'm guessing we're not talking a six figure pay out on the ticket he is holding. For me, the point where I'd start making that trade off is pretty high.
I would bet a small wager on the vikings.Why not guarantee your self money.Take the "gamble " out of the game and sit back and collect the only sure thing situation in sports betting.
IF you are willing to pay some vig (twice maybe) to lock up a much smaller win, bet the money line on the vikes this game (I assume it's in the -120 range) for approximately half your putative payoff should the NYG win. If Giants win the game this weekend, do the same on the AFC team in the superbowl for half of what you would have remaining. If every line was even money no vig, you'd walk away with 8.5 times your original wager, but IRL I'd hazard you'd end up with about 6 or so. This is kinda large vig to me to lock in this profit. You should only make these bets if the reduced amount (6 times your wager) has massive relative utility compared to the next money you would win at 33:1. But if the original bet was only $100, I'd just grab a beer and hope for rain in NY.
JG
Well, what did you do?
Here is hoping the Giants win it all for you
Danny
DAL UNDER 191, winner in this game should score under 95 points. When DAL favored on the road the under was 5-1,CHI is last in FG% and SCORE average.
My Bad...Again.
I was just at the Mirage and Bellagio, and I was thinking of playing some BlackJack ($5 table, practicing counting, I'm still not good enough at it to make money, but I think I'm good enough to break even...I just need to continue to work on it)....however, I noticed a lot of their tables now have multideck shuffling machines.
Does anyone know anything about these machines? Do they shuffle constantly so the dealer never has to shuffle? How can you tell how deep the penetration on the multi-deck shoe is?
If you must really get close to these beasts, please load up on onions and beans and let rip at the table. The less action, the sooner the creeps upstairs will reconsider.
Does anyone know anything about these machines? Do they shuffle constantly so the dealer never has to shuffle? How can you tell how deep the penetration on the multi-deck shoe is?
Noone knows anything, thats the point. They are printing dealer blackjacks and player stiffs inside.
Constant shuffling machines are unbeatable. However what you might have also seen was just the standard shuffler which does nothing to your edge unless you are a shuffle tracker. The constant shuffling machines are not popular at all and if you ever go to a casino that doesn't have them on all tables notice those tables have maybe half as many players at them on average. People just don't trust them, its not the lack of counter play that will ruin them. Its just like this comment, a lot of people will think up outrageous untrue things such as it reads the hands of the players and picks out the appropriate cards to bust them or give the dealer 21. Ridiculous as it is, people will never trust them and their stupdity will save counters from them being too prevalent since they are the donators that make blackjack games very lucrative for the house.
I was told by a dealer (at a hand shuffling table) that the machine does all the shuffling, and all the dealer ever has to do is mix the cards in the beginning, and from that point forward, the dealer never shuffles or touches he rest of the cards (other than the cards dealt in that round).
So, does this basically mean every hand should be approached as the beginning of a new shuffle, and thus completely unbeatable for counters?
You got it, just think of the machines they have for Pai Gow or Caribbean Stud. The dealer is told to do a bit of mixing of the cards and then put them in the slot. Within less than five seconds the shuffler is supposed to have shuffled the cards so that the deck is "fresh". The machine does this by using a random number generator which determines which place in the deck (from 1 to 52) that the card will end up in so its totally unbiased, but also unbeatable for a card counter.
At my weekly meeting with my sports betting group tonight someone did point out though that he saw a game where they used this machine and dealt the hands face up like a shoe game since they had no worries of traditional counters. If you got on a full table with 5 players you could get a bit of an edge if the rules are decent one deck rules and you use a counting system that is strongest for playing strategy. I still would guess though that old fashioned counting on a game without this machine would yield more money, but then again since you would be flat betting the game you could get comps easily and probably never get barred.
interesting - but how much edge could you get by doing that? i can't imagine it would be anything significant at all.
Well the books say if you can get enough penetration you can beat single decks without bet spread. Since good single deck rules give the house only a .2% or less edge on a basic strategy player it shouldn't take much. Remember less fluctuation here because you don't have to spread bets and have certain bets be "key". Also you would be using a more efficient count that was geared to single deck play strategy, something that is obviously of great value. Thing is that you would obviously have to have a very full table and those aren't that common from what I saw and what I would guess, maybe just very busy nights.
Don't know what system you are using but if you are playing red and practicing I'd go with a shoe game and skip the single deck.
You can get much more practice that way. remember, counting is easy, not getting caught is the hard part.
The only shuffle machine you have to worry about is the continues shuffle and not the ones that shuffle a deck while you play another deck.
The good guys stay away from machines because they can not track the deck during a riff. Otherwise, random is random.
I'd also stay away from the Strip and the large Casinos unless you know they have good rules.
Are you in LA? If so, I'd welcome sitting in on your group's discussion 1 week. Always looking to pick up stuff, and IMHO, I think I personally could add a slight bit of value myself.
No I live in Vegas, we all meet in different spots around town. We call it the G7 although most weeks only 4 or 5 show up. We have 3 current pro bettors, two poker pros that bet sports seriously, a horse racing expert that is a semi-pro I guess since he runs a foreign business as well, and myself, the lone standard business world type. I am sure you could set the same thing up in LA area although obviously distances wouldn't make it quite as convenient for you all. Getting to talk about sports betting theory once a week is great for anyone and meeting in person is better since the exchange of ideas is much better than it ever is on these boards.
This question was posted on poker.casino.com. Q.Any pros making a living shooting craps? A. yes. I was referred to a site and article titled "Setting the dice"I couldn't find the site. Anybody know anything about this? Thanks! Dino
Yes, you WILL be able to make a living...for about 30 seconds. At that point, you'll be molested by security.
Thanks J.D. Dino
when playing this interesting game I am wondering what percentage advantage the banker has in beating the player since he has better drawing odds.
Is it worth it to only bet the player since you get even money (as opposed to 95% of your money or what ever the cut may be) or does the banker have a 5% advantage over the player thus making it a true 50/50 choice.
Are there any other hints for this game?
does counting cards or anything like that give you an edge?
thanks
I don't know the exact number, but its about a 51.something% edge. Its easy math really, get what the players disadvantage is its somewhere near 1.5%. Divide that amount by 2. Add that number to 50 and you have the expected winning percentage for the bank side since the bank edge is the exact opposite of the players disadvantage since they are based on 50/50 bets. The juice then makes the bank side a loser, albeit a smaller one than the player.
The bank has a 1.06% house edge, the bank's superior playing strategy compensates for the commission to some extent, making it a better bet than the player's 1.23%. Some idiot called John May wrote a book about counting cards at baccarat.
Well after a shaky start working out chemistry problems the Blazers have finally made it where I thought they would be, at the top of the Western Conference. They are seeing Stoudamire step it up and be the force they need who isn't afraid to take the big shot down the stretch. Kemp is slowly getting into shape and if he materializes they have yet another unguardable offensive weapon to add to their ridiculous stockpile. Simply put, I can't see anyone stopping this team this year. The Lakers get all the press, but the Blazers are superior and are hungrier after what happened last year. In spite of all this I have seen them listed at 5/1 in many places to win the title. This is silly. They will finish with the best record and I think will win the title fairly easily with maybe one or two series even making it to 6 games. I think the true odds on them should be no more than 2/1. No one in the East will give them a problem and it would take a great series by the Lakers or the Spurs to beat them because neither team has improved since last season and the Blazers improved their bench which will make them that much tougher down the stretch and in the playoffs.
For those that want a bit more of a longshot, I like Miami to win the East at 15/1. This is a team that really needed a few months to get used to not running offense through Zo. Now they have gotten the feel and are running off some wins. The East is a weak enough field that they could get through. As everyone knows you win in the playoffs with defense and this team still plays the best D in the East of all the contenders. By playoff time they should be a 3 or 4 seed and that might be enough for them to erase the bitter losses of the last few years and give them a shot at moving up to get squashed in the Finals. With teams like the Sixers and Knicks walking time bombs waiting to get caught up in strife, this team plays well together and two solid offensive weapons in Jones and Mason. Not to mention the rumors that probably are untrue of Zo coming back late in the year. That is very unlikely to happen, but if he comes back and can play near his usual level by the second round of the playoffs this is the clear conference favorite. Even if he doesn't come back, maybe what this team needs is the mentality of playing as an underdog to get over the hump. In any event, its a great value as I rate the true odds on them at about 5/1 to win the East.
I made a bet with what I will leave as an un-named offshore book last night just before posting this. The odds to win the East were 15-1 on Miami and I hit it for a modest $300. I told someone I liked the value and they wrote they went to the same book and it was down to 7-1. I didn't believe it, but sure enough, 7-1 today. I can't think they got steamed on the game last night. Is their action really that shallow that such a small bet causes them to lower their odds this much or have I been identified as a Wise Guy or something??? Whatever is the case, I looked some more and guess I was just getting a great number because I can't find them above 8-1 to win the conference anywhere else. At 8-1 they are still a decent bet, but below that and I would avoid it.
The favorites are going up from 1.0>2.5 Minn.
Oak 5>6.
Final line seems about to be 3 & 7 so if your betting the dogs hold on and if your betting the favs I hope you already got it in.
My question is when does the line cross the lines on these two games??
I have my ideas but I will wait to post them to see what others think and why?? Betting early before the weather forecast risky or doesn't matter most of the time??
Paul
The Oakland line has been at 6 for a few days now and seems to be holding there. I dont see it going to 7. --Big Al--
is oakland/ravens total good under?...still ticked about balt./tenn. going over...? can't see ravens scoring...?
No way this line stabilizes. Every square and his Uncle will want to bet this weekend, and squares only bet favorites.
I think the line closes at 6.8, and the Vikes a solid 3.0.
I disagree, I think the "squares" love to take the points...
I think you must be playing with me......how many average Joes bet Oregon St +25 vs. Stanford? ANS: Almost none.
The favorite scores in a sports book and the ROAR goes up. The dog scores, and you can hear a pin drop. All the chalk eaters are silent. You could make that Oakland line 13 and the dummies would still bet their hard earned 11 dollars on the Raiders. People recognize me, and say "who do you like". And when I say Cincinnati or Chicago they look at me like they simply cannot comprehend it.
I agree 100% with Fez.
I'm reminded of the time,when a friend of mine was on a horrible loosing streak.He asked me,if I would let him know, the next time I had a stong opinion on a game.This was back in '96 I believe. Anyway,a few weeks later,for a multitude of reasons, I had a strong opinion that Vanderbilt would cover the +26 at home against Tennessee.I thought about my friend(who is Joe Public personified),and his bad loosing steak.I reminded my friend, that he had asked me to tell him the next time I had a very,very,strong opinion on a game.The time was now and I proceeded to give him my long list of reasons why I thought this was an extra strong play.
The final score was Tennessee 14 Vanderbit 7,giving the Commodores an easy cover. I cashed a nice ticket that day and it was nice to help a friend as well.When I called my friend, I was shocked to hear the tone of his voice when he answered the phone.I asked him what was wrong, and he told me he could not bring himself to put any money on a team like Vanderbilt, no matter how many points they were getting !
Joe Pulic loves the favorites.
Good Luck Howard
Well I think in this case Joe Public likes the popular teams. The Raiders obviously get a lot of support and no one can say they are lifelong Ravens fans so there is one for the chalk. The Giants have their fans, but the Vikings are the more public team especially with Moss who everybody just loves to bet on and cheer for. I will say however the public doesn't drive lines like they used to. I don't want to say they have gotten smarter, its just I think with all the analytical shows on TV now that the public doesn't get all crazy about one team anymore. Someone who "seems" to know something is always out there to tell these stiffs to take the points. At least that is my feeling, but say 4 or 5 years ago, these lines would have already been at 3 and 7. Late in the week though I think you will see a lot of money on the Ravens as I can't see the big money letting this team get this big of a price. Also the line is high enough where you will get a lot of squares saying I will bet the dog because I think the Raiders will win, but not by a lot of points. Those suckers will also stem the tide of money that will come from the crowd of people from CA coming for the weekend.
Like most things, I am basing my statement on personal observation. "Joe Public" likes to take the points, IMO. This line has not moved all week. It opened at 6 and is still at 6. If the Raiders are such fan/public favorites (which I think is debateable, there are a ton of people who hate the Raiders and want to see them lose) why hasnt the line moved?
Your opinion is so flat out wrong I think you must be just playing devil's advocate or trying to get a reaction. This is 1 game and 1 sample, so even if it goes up (which it likely will) it proves nothing.
Your homework for next year is to track every TV football game when there is a limited slate. I could give you dozens of examples last year. To name a few, Tenn/Vandy runs from 17 to 22 (loser) and Wisky/Hawaii from 19 to 24 (another public loser). Saints/Rams? Goes from 5.5 to 6.8. TAmpa @ gbay? 2.5 to 3.0. Tampa @ philly? 2.0 to 2.9. Mia/Oak? 8 to 9. Mia/Fla? 5.5 to 6.8. Want me to keep going? I could cite over 50 FROM MEMORY ALONE!!!
Exceptions like FSU/Ok usually only occur due to solid info. and lots of tout releases on dogs. In Okie case, Okie was so clearly the right side, and after KST and Nebr crushed, with Okie 3-0 SU record EVERYONE I know who is a pro chunk bet Okie.
There is a bias of about 3 to 1 on line moves to favorites; more like 5 to 1 on big televised games. And look around a sports book and ask each person "who do you have?" Now it is 10-1 to the chalk team.
What planet are you living on? Have you ever been to a sporstbook before? GO TO ONE and record the sound level of a Oak score vs. a Balt score!
Well gee Fez, lets see, Oakland is about an 8 hour drive and one hour flight away from Vegas. LA is even closer, the former home of the Raiders. Baltimore is 5 hour flight away and few drive out here from there. The Raiders have a nationwide following due to their long history and character. The Ravens, well their history isn't even a decade long, now especially with the Browns being revived. You want to talk about a bad example this one is it. In any case, I am sure in the books there will be plenty of noise made for the Ravens, but the situation dictates more Raiders noise even if they were the dog.
Oh BEHAVE!
Take ANY #(%)*%(#%ing 6 pt chalk; it's all the same. And, Oakland fans all drive to RENO......... and many fly. It's the dumdum LA Raider fans that will be in Vegas, not the Bay area ones.
The books could make Balt the -6 favorite, and if the dumdums were not coached and had to make their own choice, they'd lay the wood on the Ravens. The average bettor thinks he can think about the game. But he cannot.....he lays the chalk 90%+.
Ps. Dal/Wash. Dal/Gmen. Both sky from 6 to 7. I could list 50 examples IN ONE YEAR. I'm getting VERY frustrated here. You guys can go back to shoveling your coal. Fez is checking "out" of the hotel. You don't want to win, then I cannot help you
Like the Mastercard commercial...
NFL Record this season: 27-17 NFL Record following Fez's advice: 0-0
Football picks, accepted everywhere by idiots young and old...
Fez buddy, chill. Where are all these profits you are trying to give us? And how do you figure all these people are LA idiots? I met 4 people tonight that are here in Vegas for the weekend from Fremont, a city I used to live in about 15 miles south of Oakland. They said they know of 5 groups of people here too. Its not just LA people for your information. Second, do you think just because a number is overbet by the public that its always a good bet to go against them? You know the public wins too, quite often I might add. Its not like Joe Public picks games at a 30% clip. Don't forget the playoffs are good to the favorites so an overpriced line doesn't mean you will cash a ticket. Unfortunately there are no easy profits and you have to do homework beyond "the public only bets favorites so bet the dogs because the lines will be overpriced".
Thank Goodness; a "good" post. Agree, heartily that favorites can have good value in playoffs, especially bye weeks. I was just getting so frustrated that people were disagreeing that favorites get run up in big games. The bowl is 2.5. What idiot would make a bet on Gmen +2.5? Wait for the 3......
My posted picks are on bj21.com green chip...... terrible football year for me at 53%. Hoops has been 62%. Capping is fine, but the key to winning is betting optimally..... like taking Moss under 98 yards last week.
Fezdick:
The Oakland line never moved off 6. This blows a hole in your post. What planet are you living on?????
Fez,
I agree with what your saying and that has been my observations over the years also, that's why I posted this question and thanks for your answers.
paul
My question is when does the line cross the lines on these two games??
This question puzzles me quite a bit. For instance when a line goes over a critical number say 3,7,10,14, etc. Do these warrant closer attention and should I not bet for instance if a line goes from 6 to 8. I don't have any answers to these questions but when they cross these invisible lines my decision is made much harder than a line going from 3 to 5.
Betting early before the weather forecast risky or doesn't matter most of the time??
Over time if you bet early I don't think this would be significant although I could be wrong but a 2 point advantage would seem to offset that to me.
JMO
Paul
>>This question puzzles me quite a bit. For instance when a line goes over a critical number say 3,7,10,14, etc. Do these warrant closer attention and should I not bet for instance if a line goes from 6 to 8. I don't have any answers to these questions but when they cross these invisible lines my decision is made much harder than a line going from 3 to 5.<<
Well if a line goes from 6 to 8 in pro football and you take the points you know that if your team is behind by 8; is in a fourth and long situation with two minutes left; has three time outs; and in field goal range they won’t kick a field goal but if they were behind by 6 they just might go for the field goal and kick to the other team.
If a team moves from a 3 point favorite to a 5 point favorite and you lay the points your team will be more than happy to kick the game winning field goal on the last play of the game.
>>Betting early before the weather forecast risky or doesn't matter most of the time??
Over time if you bet early I don't think this would be significant although I could be wrong but a 2 point advantage would seem to offset that to me. <<
If you found a lot of situations where the line moved from 8 to 6 during the week and you liked the dog I would think that betting early would far outweigh the advantages gained by knowing the weather conditions.
Western Conf. VS Eastern Conf.
When West Conf. teams favor on the road against East Conf. 30-19 ATS 61.2%
I laid a guy twelve to five ($120 to $50) on a two team parly for the play off games. Is my edge 15% or 6.25%. Is my expectation $7.50 for every fifty dollar bet that I make? Thanks.
One time out of four he will win $120. Three times out of four you will win $50. Therefore your expectation is to win $30 over every four trials so your expectation is $7.50 every time you make this bet.
Well I guess the betting should be easy for this weekend's playoff games take the dogs. However, the last 4 Super Bowl Champions had pretty good offenses as well (ok the Packers had a great offense and a great defense). In fact I think it is fair to say that the neither the Rams nor the Broncos had great defenses. I will say that if the Ravens play as pathetically on offense as they did last week their chances of covering are small. Ok the Titans have a really good defense but the Raiders aren't that bad and certainly good enough to stop an anemic offense cold. Tell me why the Ravens will produce significantly more on offense this week (I'd love to see the Ravens win this game).
I think that the spread in the Giants-Vikings game is about right and don't think it is worth a bet. You could convince me to take the Giants if you could convince me that Tiki Barber's broken arm wasn't affecting his game a great deal.
FYI, Toomer, the leading Giants receiver, is questionable for the game. I think the Raiders will cover this one fairly easy, the Ravens are not that good.--Big Al--
One thought about the Ravens vs. Raiders that I did have. I believe that Dilfer might have been told to play ultra conservatively last week and thus didn't make some throws he could have made but would have been construed as at least slightly risky. I think the Ravens are going to have to be much more aggressive on offense this week to have a chance to win the game or cover for that matter. They just can't afford to punt all day and give the Raiders the ball. Thanks for the info on Toomer.
How can a team not be that good and beat two of the best teams in football in the playoffs? Yes last week was a bit misleading, but they advanced playing on the road against the team most experts called the best team in football. People telling me I am letting my emotions get involved, but I think anyone that thinks the Ravens aren't that good has to take another look at the game. Same for the Giants, they aren't spectacular, but they are good. Just a question of good enough to win this week.
I think one has to keep in mind what happened in the 4th quarter of the Bal/Ten game - that skewed the stats a bit.
The Ravens had the ball for a total of 2 series in the 4th Quarter (the last two kneel downs down't count) - albeit 2 3 and out series - but at that time they were up 17 to 10 and 24 to 10, and I believe they had 5 running plays (which Ten was expecting), and one pass play that turned into a sack.
It was one of those odd games where the Ravens scored twice on the Titans offensive unit (FG unit and Interception), so the Titans just kept getting the ball back.
What I would do, is adjust the Ravens offensive stats and multiply them by 1.33 - to adjust for the missing 4th quarter.
Admittedly, it still doesn't make them look good, but its a bit more realistic and not as pitiful
Roughly how many points difference does one need in order to make a profitable middle on either an NBA side or an NBA total? I had the under on CHA/CHI at 172.5 yesterday, and wasn't sure if I should middle when it fell to 169. Is three numbers to win both sides and 1 to win/push enough? If it had been 173.5 (where the line opened) and 169 I'd have thought the middle was a no-brainer, but I'm wondering where to draw the line. I've rethought the situation and given that I'm getting 20:1 on my money and that the result should be expected to fall fairly close to the line, I think that 3 points to win both should be plenty.
-Sean
I really don't know the answer to the question as stated, but I do spot some 'fuzzy' thinking.
Whether this is a good middle at 20-1 is really only relavent if you are looking to 'put it on' sort of simultaneously.
Since this was not the case, you must realize that you made a bet in which you now have the best of it.
So the comparison that needs to be made is whether stayting naked with your 'edge' is a better play than taking the middle.
Once again, I will say that I don't know the mathematics of the situation.
Danny
How many times does it need to be said? Make your bets and forget it. Don't go back and look for middles, don't hedge, just keep an adequate bankroll and attack when you see a weakness in the number. Put quite simply, if I saw a 25 point middle I wouldn't do it! The problem here is faulty thinking, pure and simple. Just because a middle is offered to you doesn't mean 20-1 and such on your money. The 20-1 scenario comes up when you are betting both sides with the intent of getting that middle. Yeah sounds good, but face it, unless you are very good, you are going to call a whole lot of wrong line moves and you will then have a reverse middle situation. That is the secret to why middles aren't the 20-1 prop they seem to be. So unless you are betting purely for a middle you are sure of happening, say two places in town have different numbers and you are betting them just to get the shot at the middle, don't think of it this way. Think of it as this reply states, giving up your edge on a bet you liked. Besides if you were betting something you should have at least 5 or 6 points of percieved edge. Seeing as that is the case, the games really SHOULDN'T be that close to the number. Sometimes they are, but most of the time they are not. In any event, I can't pound this in more...forget middles, forget hedging, just bet the games that you have an edge in and forget it. Once you have bet your full amount on the game, don't even bother looking at the current numbers later if you will even be tempted to make such a foolish mistake. If you are tempted to take "sure" money even if its a mathematical disadvantage to you, then you need to either rethink your strategy or need to rethink your bankroll.
There is intelligent life out there!
But, note if the median line should be x and the posted amount is y, you don't need 5-6 pts. I'd bet 5k if I got 2 extra points vs. what it should be.
Re: middles. A 2 pt difference on a side or total (173 and 175) is profitably. But as you mention, pick the better play and bomb away.
I should have clarified a few things. First, I almost only play NBA totals when I find a soft line, so it's not uncommon for me to have a chance at an immediate middle, let alone the fact that the line might keep moving. For example, last night I got O204.5 on SAC/DEN when it was 207.5 at other places (and moved to as high as 208.5), and the other night I got O196.5 on CLE/VAN when it was 200 at other places. In other words, I'm almost always anticipating a potential middle opportunity, although for now I've been sticking with the soft line.
While I agree with the general theme of your post, that you shouldn't give up EV without a good reason, I think you exaggerated a bit. If you really wouldn't do a 25 point middle, you're throwing money away as there's no way in hell a 25 point middle wouldn't be more profitable than the first bet.
But, I do agree with the point that too many people try to hard to hedge and the whatnot. I often see people talk about hedging a bet on a game with a second half bet, and that just seems insane.
-Sean
You must be good at NBA total, Why don't you post your picks here? There're somebodies here who want to follow good picks. There're also someone who lies that he has 57% lifetime record,his bread and butter game...LOL.
It would be tough for me to post picks here because all of my plays are based on soft numbers, so the number is generally going to move pretty quickly. It's not tough to do yourself, just get access to as many different line sources and as many different books as you can, and look for a line that's a couple points off from the others. (Usually when the line at the other books has moved.) I've found that early line moves on NBA totals tend to be sharp, so going with the money on a soft line seems to be pretty profitable.
I've also had good luck with finding NHL lines that were pretty far off. The Kings/Senators total the other day was at 5.5 o-130 at most books, but I found a 5 o-130 at another. That's roughly a 40 cent difference, and having absolutely no opinion on the game whatsoever I figured that had to be a profitable bet. Generally if I find a 30 cent or greater difference I figure the soft line is going to be profitable.
-Sean
I did this six years ago,now it's hard to find sportsbook with different lines. I think late move in NBA total is very sharp, I used to sit in front of computer after 3 pm look at live odds when sharp money move the line all over vegas casino I find some offshore books that slow to move, I was able to beat them over 10K in two weeks before they closed my account(Intertops). I will go for middle if it's 10 points different in NBA total,I think oddsmaker do good enough job,for the past eleven years I don't think I see 10 points move in NBA total(I see 9 points).
I had a bet on that Senators game on the over and got 5.5 over -15. The book then sent me an email saying it was a mistake! These days books do all kinds of underhanded things claiming the lines are obviously off when in fact they are obviously just slow!!! Thats why I didn't feel all that bad about taking those bets on the Mexican soccer playoffs. Read more about it on Prescription, there are a lot of discussions and documentations of people that sniff out the great number only to have it taken away from them. Even worse, when you hit a book on one of their bad numbers they get all pissy and treat you like a criminal. Lets face it, many of these newer books are run by people that have no honor that used to pervade the sports betting industry. If you are slow or put up a reasonable number that is off a bit, a respectable book takes the action and moves the number to where it should be. These idiots just say you are trying to rob from them and cancel your bet. Oh well, I am not a Don Best follower so I don't get much trouble with this, but I know quite a few people are trying to make good money just working off line moves and things like this happen to them all the time.
Yeah, that actually just happened to me this morning. In the NHL I got BOS +.5 +110 on Intertops around 6am, (everywhere else was +.5 -125), and now I see that they have the bet listed as "refunded" and the line changed to +.5 -125. I didn't get an e-mail about it, and there's nothing on the web page that says why they cancelled the bets. They've taken down lines before when they had it listed backwards (I remember once a Clemens game was listed as Clemens +160/-180 instead of Clemens -180/+160) and refunded the bets, which is almost understandable because it was obviously an error, but this is the first time that I've ever heard of them cancelling a bet because a line was a bit soft. The other thing that gets my goat is that the line stayed like that for at least 8 hours without getting changed.
I agree with you that's completely disreputable, which is why I have absolutely no problem with the Mexican League soccer thing. If they're gonna screw you, you might as well screw them back.
-Sean
No, a 25 point middle is still not profitable from a pure sense. Yeah there probably is a lot of value in taking the other side just because the number has to be off, but really going looking for middles is still a loser's game most of the time I think. Hedging is not a winning strategy. It can be a small weapon should you have a lot of outs that vary quite a bit, but still its marginal in profit.
for whoever cares, here are my picks for this weekend :
Giants +3 (at least I believe you can get 3 now) Ravens +6
I believe both defenses will shut down the offenses, with the Ravens more so than the Giants.
Giants/Vikings - the Giants will blast the Vikings in the running game, using Dayne up the gut, Barber on the sweeps, and when they least expect it, Collins will go long to Toomer and Hilliard. I believe this is a great matchup for the Giants offense. On the Vikings offense/defense, I think Sehorn can cover Moss to a satisfactory degree (no one can flat cover him, but Sehorn is big, strong and fast). This will negate alot of Culpepper's bombs, and leave the Vikings with just Culpepper to Carter. With Sehorn one on one with Moss, then Carter can get double teamed. The wildcard is Robert Smith...but I just don't see him getting too many yards against the Giants front 7.
Ravens/Raiders - I don't see any of the RBs on the Raiders doing anything against the Ravens, and I think John Gruden probably will see that too, and so he will try the pass, 10-20 yard varieties, to begin the game, and try to open up the running game with the pass. Everyone thinks that the Raiders had a dominating game against the Dolphins, but i just don't think the Dolphins were a real playoff calibre team, they were lucky to get in and beat a defenseless Colts team. And with an injured Zach Thomas compared to a monster Ray Lewis, the Ravens are a lot better than the Dolphins defense. Tim Brown will get his catches, but I think the key will be Dudley and Jett - two guys who have a lot of problems hanging on to the ball. If these guys make 6 catches, then that means the Raiders are driving the ball well...but i just don't see that happening. Plus, Gannon, although a good scrambling QB, lays it on the ground way too often, and the Ravens are very opportunistic in this area. I don't see the Ravens O doing anything against the Raiders D either....but I think the Raiders D will make enough big plays to make the game close - thus they will either win the game outright or cover the spread.
in my last line, I wrote : "but I think the Raiders D will make enough big plays to make the game close - thus they will either win the game outright or cover the spread. "
the Raiders D in this case should read the Ravens D.
All that leaves is Carter??? Thats like saying well the Knicks can neutralize Kobe, all they have to worry about now is stopping Shaq. The over under for Carter's catches in the game is 6.5. If he gets 7 or more catches the Giants could be in trouble. That would probably mean 2 TD catches and Moss figures to get one as well. Leave one last score for Culpepper/Smith/Hatchette/Defense....thats 4 TDs and the Giants won't win if they have to beat 28 points.
Eastern Conference
Atlantic Division
Team-------------W-------L-------T-------Pct.
NY---------------22------13-------1-------62.9
PHI---------------18------14-------2-------56.3
MIA--------------20------17---------------54.1
ORL--------------15------18------2-------45.5
BOS--------------14------22------1-------38.9
NJ----------------14------22---------------38.9
WAS--------------14------23------1-------37.8
Central Division
TOR--------------20------15------1-------57.1
ATL--------------20------15------1-------57.1
CHA--------------21------16--------------56.8
CLE--------------17------17------1-------50.0
MIL--------------16------18------2-------47.1
DET--------------16------19------1-------45.7
CHI--------------16------19---------------45.7
IND--------------17------21---------------44.7
Western Conference
Midwest Division
DAL--------------22------15------1-------59.5
HOU--------------21------15--------------58.3
SAN--------------19------16---------------54.3
DEN--------------18------17------1-------51.4
UTA--------------17------17------2-------50.0
VAN--------------16------17------3-------48.5
MIN--------------15------22------1-------40.5
Pacific Division
LAC--------------24------13------1-------64.9
POR--------------21------16------1-------56.8
SAC--------------18------15------1-------54.5
GS----------------17------18--------------48.6
PHO--------------14------17------3-------45.2
SEA--------------17-------21--------------44.7
LAK--------------12------23------1-------34.3
ATS Notes.
BOS as home dog 1-7 ATS 12.5 %
DAl as away fav 6-1-1 ATS 85.7 %
DEN as home dog 8-1-1 ATS 88.9 %
DET as home dog 1-7 ATS 12.5 %
HOU as away dog 12-4 ATS 75.0 %
MIN as home fav 4-13 ATS 23.5 %
NJ as home fav 1-7 ATS 12.5 %
NY as away dog 9-2 ATS 81.8 %
PHO as away fav 1-5-2 ATS 16.7 %
SAN as away dog 1-5 ATS 16.7 %
SEA as away fav 2-7 ATS 22.2 %
Total Notes
DEN as away 13 over 3 under 81.3 %
MIA as away dog 2 over 8 under 20.0 %
MIL as away dog 11 over 1 under 91.7 %
MIN as away dog 7 over 2 under 77.8 %
NJ as away 3 over 13 under 18.8 %
NY as dog 3 over 9 under 25 %
SAC as away dog 1 over 5 under 16.7 %
Wow...good stuff. The worst team in the league vs. the spread is the Lakers. What does that tell you?
Danny
Most champions have poor ATS record next year,for the past 10 years only one NBA champ had 55% ATS,they were between 30-50%.
NY GIANTS
OAKLAND RAIDERS
OAKLAND OVER
He was 5-3 this playoffs.
who's Lem Banker?
Doc
Lem Banker is a sports betting legend. Sort of a Doyle Brunson or Ray Zee of the sports betting world, if you will. He's been doing it for a long,long, time (he's up there in the years now).He's known to be a very honest fellow and often gives his picks out for free (after he gets down his own bets first of course).
Good Luck
Howard
Back in July, when I pointed to the Giants as a team to make the Super Bowl next year (not this year), Wildbill replied:
NYG: Super Bowl next year? Interesting thought, I don't see that happening.
True, I underestimated the Giants as well, since I didn't know that their new offensive line would be so good.
-Abdul
A year is a lifetime in the NFL. If you're off a year, it means absolutely zero as far as profit is concerned.
Well, I did bet the Giants for the NFC conference, though I waited until September 19, getting them for 15:1 after they were 3-0.
-Abdul
nice bet!
I fell into the same trap as many in thinking that they needed a QB to get to the Show. I think that myth has been smashed. About week 10 I came to the conclusion that running backs and running games was how teams were productive in the new NFL. Only the Eagles and to a degree the Saints were successful this year without getting much out of the ground game and they made up for that a bit with McNabb and Brooks' scrambling ability. Look at the worst teams out there, except for Cincy they all just stink running the ball. Dallas is a great example because when Emmitt had a good day rushing they could beat some solid teams, but when he was out or had an off day they got crushed. Admittedly, to a degree your team's talent plays a role in your rush game since you don't run much when you are down, but I think the clear fact is that most stars in the league right now play RB.
Who knows, maybe the balance goes back the other way next year. I don't make any guesses any more because the NFL just completely changes in texture from year to year now. For the time being, pay attention to the running game and of course the run defense and you will see a lot of insightful things.
does this help make the super bowl a lock under...burn that clock...march the field...anticipate a close tough game and settle for field goals and count on your defense to hold them (and return blocked field goals and interceptions)...really how is either team going to scor more than 17 pts?...jmho the undertaker..
WARNING !This reads like a long quasi-trip report,so if you don't like that sort of thing,stop reading now !
I'm sure there will be numerius threads on the Superbowl before long.So I'll see if I can get the ball rolling with a few of my own meanderings.
First,as far as yesterday goes.........
Although I had no strong opinion on either of yesterday's games,I was fortunate enough to cash on both games.
I generally bet more units on my best plays and less units on my standard plays. I agree with Wildbill that this may not be what is best for eveyone. It has however worked for me, so hey, I'll keep it.
Now on to, how I made money without a strong opinion yesterday. The Vikings have Moss,Carter,Smith,and Culpepper.They all can make big plays that can break a game wide open.That's for sure.They also have one of the weakest defenses in the league. Afer looking at the game from as many angles as possible, my best guess was that grass was going to play a factor in the outcome.The Vikings are not a very good team on grass.Even Randy Moss's stats are way down when he plays on grass.On top of that the Vikings had not played on grass in a long time.
I put one unit on the Giants plus the points. Not so much a bet on the Giants,more like a bet against the Vikings on grass.
I don't think the grass Made it 41-0, but I'll take it anyway I can get it :-)
I had no real opinion on the Raiders game, but Baltimore has been a mini-goldmine (I stress the word mini) for me the past month.A few weeks ago, I told myself I would ride the Raven gravy train until I get a losing ticket.Hence, my action on this game.I put 1/2 unit + the points and 1/2 unit on the money line at +230.
Now on to the Superbowl........
I'm sure there will be lot's of threads in the next two weeks breaking the game down. I'm gonna take this time to list how I approached each Superbowl since moving to Vegas in the fall of '95. If this kind of thing bores you, you should stop reading right now.
96) After looking the lines and props over I found a bet at the Golden Nugget that looked too good to be true.Will the Steelers ever have the lead in the game? (even money) The same bet was at the IP but not anywhere near even money.The way I looked at it, there were all kinds of ways Pittsburgh could have the lead somewhere in this game.Heck,if they score the first field goal of the game and proceed to get blown out by the Cowboys,the bet wins !
I bet 3 units.The Steelers never have the lead.Goodbye 3 units.
97) Green Bay/New England
I thought Green Bay was so much better then New England,that I waited around the sportsbook for the line to go up, so I could bet it as soon as possible, for I thought the line was going to go nowhere but up.I bet 3 units on Green Bay -13'.It went to 14 on Monday and to my surprise never moved off 14.Later in the week I also put 1/2 unit on Andre Rison to score the first tochdown of the game at 10 to 1. Although I had the game wrong, in the sense that I thought the Packers would win by 30,thanks to a half point and Andre Rison I cashed both tickets.The Packers won by 14.
98) After the Broncos won their first playoff game I was shocked to see them listed at 10 to 1 to win the Superbowl, at the Fiesta in Las Vegas.This # was way out of line with what was being hung elsewhere in town.I put 1 unit here at 10 to 1.Needless to say,I was happy when Denver won the AFC. After breaking down the game I decided to put 2 units on Denver plus the points.Denver won,giving me back to back Superbowls with a winning 10 to 1 ticket.
99) Denver/Atlanta
I thought Atlanta had a good chance to win this game outright. 2 units on Atlanta. Goodbye 2 units.
2000) Rams/Titans
I bet the Rams to win (even money). No sportsbook this time. I have a friend who hates the Rams because they moved from LA. He wanted to bet me even money(he doesn't like point spreads). Rams Win. I win 1 unit from my friend.
Well, that's my 5 Superbowls in Vegas. Maybe you can share some of your happy,sad, exciting,etc.,Superbowl memories ?
Good Luck
Howard
Consider that fact that the "Over" bet, once the total is reached, cannot loose the way a pointspread bet can. Is this fact only psychologically soothing, or is there in fact an inherent advantage to betting Over? Some pointspread losses will occur when you have an unlikely event occur of your team going up big early, then another unlikely event happens and the other team comes back, beating you. In the case of Over, the latter could not beat you.
Contrarily, totals numbers could be biased upwards because bookmakers know that it is "safer" psychologically to bet the over, thus more people will want over than under (besides the fact that over means a lot of scoring/action).
How is this for simple handicapping:
1. To get a good bet, a line must be off.
2. The line can be off if bookmakers set it in prediction of a large public being biased in some way.
3. The public knows that both teams this year have great defense.
4. However, the public, thanks to last year's game, has forgotten how the games can blow-out: in only 2 of the last 10 games has one team not scored 27 or more points.
5. I think 33.5 is the lowest total in a while (ever?)
6. Over is a good bet (qed?)
Doug
Its not even close to the lowest total ever. There have been some 31 and 32 numbers over the last few years. I personally think the over might be the way to go here because the 2 weeks is bound to have a lot of focus on offense. Defense doesn't do much to prepare, just line up and go at it. Offense finds the wrinkles and tendencies that lead to successful offense. I am not feeling that strong on it because both teams don't appear to have solid TD scoring potential when considering the oppostion. If you kick a lot of FGs then the under is probably going to win.
The over/under is now at 32 1/2 at some places. I think you might get some EV by taking the over.
I was thinking the same thing. Just one at 32', -105. So it may be headed even lower.
Are there any books on learning to handicap jai alai?
Thanks for any help you can offer.
Jai Alai by Jeanne Humphreys
Jai Alai/Walls and Balls by Hal Coddon
Jai Alai/Wagering to Win by Don Lostritto
Gambling Times Jai Alai by William R. Keevers
It's been a few years since I've been to a Jai Alai fronton,so please don't ask me which book is best :-)
Good Luck
Howard
...
PHI UNDER 184
VAN + 7
IND -7.5
Abdul, I don't know what your ability/knowledge is of the NBA, but try this one out. I bet with Canbet among my numerous books and they offer -107 juice on any bet that involves a straight pointspread, ie not on hockey or baseball. Pinnacle offers -108 on totals, -105 on sides. I bet almost exclusively totals for NBA bets where there really aren't "key numbers". Many days I run into this scenario. I will have a game that has the best number at one place where I will have to lay -110 and at Canbet where the number is half point worse, but I get that -107 or Pinnacle where its -108. Do you think its worth it to take a number that is half point worse for 3 or 2 cents of saved juice if we accept the theory that there are no key numbers for NBA totals? To keep my action spread around I have just followed the policy of betting Canbet or Pinnacle only when the number was the same or better, thereby saving juice and not giving up edge. If I do go ahead and start betting when the number is half point worse something around 90% of my action will go to Canbet and Pinnacle. This is the policy I followed during football, but since football numbers are always more important due to lower scoring, I intuitively figured a half point is almost never worth saving a potential 3 cents for unless the number was something like 36 versus 36.5.
I haven't closely analyzed the value of a half point in NBA sides or totals.
In NFL, if you had a choice between a couple of nonkey number pointspreads, paying slightly more for a dead half point, like -8 -110 versus -8.5 -107, then the effective juice comes out roughly the same, between 4 and 5%, if the book pointspread was roughly correct in the first place.
However, if your handicapping was correct and the book line was off, then you'll be paying less juice with the worse line but better payout odds. For example, if you know Allah's line on an NFL game is -10, but you can take -8 -110 or -8.5 -107, the -8 -110 line will give you about a +3.5% edge, whereas the -8.5 -107 line will give you about a +6.2% edge.
Whenever I feel sure a line is way off, I seek out the best odds, like by taking a dog on the moneyline instead of the points. When I'm doing more arbitrage type things where I assume the book line is close to correct, I seek out the best pointspreads/totals.
I'll try to give you a more concrete answer for NBA later.
-Abdul
Whenever I feel sure a line is way off, I seek out the best odds, like by taking a dog on the moneyline instead of the points.
That's interesting. I would have thought the opposite would be true because the moneyline usually includes a lot more vig than the pointspread does. Or do you only take the dog on the moneyline when it's in the range where the vig is only 20 cents or not much more than 20 cents?
-Sean
One way to look at it is if you "know" a team is going to win, then would you rather take them at PICK +300 or +10 -110? I know what you're saying, but I'm a pretty big believer in going for the odds, juice be damned, when I have good reason to believe the line is way off. Due to the higher juice for higher odds, I do tend to shy away from the really monstrous moneylines, though, like you won't often see me take +1000/-1600. One point in favor of moneylines is that I rarely have more than a 20 cent spread on the best prices I find, and occasionally I even find a middle.
-Abdul
Unless the spread is pkem, it is almost always better in hoops to take a team +x.5, -110, then +x -105 or (yikes, -107). SHow me a guy who does not know this, and I'll show you a recreational player; since obviously this question comes up on virtually every night.
There are no dead numbers in hoops.
Good article by Stephen Nover Click Here and Here
Thanks Ronzoni.
I always enjoy reading what Mr Nover has to say.
Howard
Stardust's guy says he wanted to make sure he got some money in for Baltimore, that's why he's ok with setting the line at Bal -1 when others opened it at -2.5.
"Lupo believes the New York Giants are the right side in Super Bowl XXXV. That's why he opened Baltimore minus-one, while other sports books were opening the Ravens minus 2 1/2.
Lupo wanted to make sure he got plenty of Baltimore money. The Ravens are currently minus-three at many sports books, including the Stardust. "
This seems like pretty stupid reasoning to me. If he wanted some Baltimore money coming in, why not just set it at -2? I think the guy just made a mistake, and is now trying to defend it with a stupid reason. If I was management, I'd wonder a little about his abilities, and watch his book carefully (as compared to his competitors).
Can anyone recommend any of the sports betting software programs? Do they help at all? Are there any good books to learn how to get an edge in sports betting, especially college basketball?
Trace Fields has an excellent book on college basketball. He also has a great book on college football. Both are must haves for any serious handicapper.
TOR UNDER 196
CLE + 7
I like Knicks -3.5 and 76ers -8
I've been playing BJ at one of the Tunica casinos for about 5 years. I play 25 and my big bet is 100. I played basic strategy until recently when I started playing Wongs' Hi Lo. I have booked a few small winners the last 5 sessions, after some semi-bad sessions before I started counting. They were regularly giving me comped rooms etc. Now for my question. The last time I played a man at the table wanted to bet on my hand. I said OK, so he starts betting anywhere from 200 to 500 on my hand. I snagged a hot shoe and won 1100, making him about 7500. I haven't received any comps in the mail since then and am a little leery about calling them and asking for a room. How big of a mistake did I make by letting him bet on my hand? Thanks for your response. Dino.
Were you varying your bet with the count? Was he varying his bet with yours? Even if you were flat betting this kind of action would draw heat unless surveillance is completely sure you two are not counters. This is a very basic and obvious move that is used by blackjack teams. You having been a rated basic strategy player there for a while is great cover. Don't give the casino any other reason to think you are anything different. If I was in that situation I would just flat bet green or refuse him if the count is high. I'm sure surveillance scrutinized your play but as long as that guy doesn't show up again they will not be worried about you unless you start spreading 1-8 with high-low.
I usually have destroyed the Super Bowl props, but this year I haven't really seen one I like that much. Usually I can create a fairly accurate scenario that yields a prop or two that has great value. My problem this year is I can't come up with a scenario for this game. I think the Ravens are the better team and deserve to be favored, but I have a hard time backing a team that is in big trouble should they fall behind by more than a score. Football after all is a game of bounces and if the Giants get just a few more bounces than the Ravens then they will win the game.
Thinking back on the props of recent years, my biggest bet ever was on a SB prop. It was Super Bowl XXX, Dallas/Pittsburgh. The way I saw it was that Dallas was the veteran team for the big game with no one having been there more in a long time and they were out to prove they still were number one. The Steelers had squeezed by the AFC and were rookies in this game. Further Dallas always operated under the mode of trying to jump on the opponent early and then use Smith and the line to wear them out and put them away. This scenario would play out perfectly in this game I figured. The first quarter had the line of Dal -2, not bad, but at Mirage they had Dallas -200. Although that price seemed a bit steep for just one score, I felt almost certain that there was little chance Dallas would be behind and wanted the safety of having a tie just be a push. The more I thought about it and researched it, the more I was certain I had a winner. Since I had to lay the 200, I ended up making my biggest bet ever on the game, laying $7000 to win $3500. I had recently "retired" from being a pro sports bettor and I saw this as one last shot at making a score before settling into making more amateur size bets. The game played out EXACTLY as I had forecasted. Dallas marched easily down the field the first time they had the ball and was up 7-0 right away. The Steelers barely got one first down and then punted. Dallas marched right back down and had a TD called back on pass interference, but kicked a FG and the bet was in the bag. The Steelers had 3 or 4 incomplete passes and looked all the bit the inexperienced team in the big game while they got manhandled. The quarter ended 10-0. Of course the rest of the game was close and the Cowboys didn't cover, but that was the only bet I made all day so I was able to enjoy watching it.
Look for edges like that because the props offer them all the time. Just like the FG bets I talked about earlier in this season, these numbers are just based on pure stats, but if you can come up with a solid scenario for almost any facet of the game, you can probably beat a number on the board. I am sure I will find a few, I just need to think a little more about it.
do you remember what the money line for the entire game was?
also, why did you retire from sports betting - since you clearly follow it and have great insight into sports, why "retire" - why not keep betting the same levels - was it because it took too much time to concentrate on it or something like that? if that is so, doesn't that mean that your current bets aren't as clearly thought out as in the past?
good message as usual...but boy i do not like laying 2 to 1..learned that betting harness racing...got any college hoops locks bill? gl
SAC + 6.5
I was able to bet the Sacrament Kings @ 18-1 to win the NBA Championship just yesterday. This seems like a real good price - seems like the kind of price that should have been at the beginning of the year, but was not dropped down once the Kings showed how good they are this year. Any thoughts?
Solid value. Good bet.
Are there any online books that are offering better than 13/5 odds on two team parlays?
There are a few out there, even some in Vegas, but usually you are just best off finding the best combination of lines because the improvement from 13/5 to 13.5/5 is very minor and oftentimes you won't be able to get the best value because you need to get the best number on both games from the same place to take advantage of it. If all you want to do is bet small parlays though, just look around I know there are a few books out there that do offer 13.5/5 everyday.
I'm not usually in Vegas...so if you know anyone online that offers 13.5/5, please let me know. Thanks.
Intertops offers "true odds" on parlays, so a parlay on two standard -110 bets works out to about 13.25/5.
-Sean
Based on your reply, is it safe to assume that you think intertops is relatively safe and reliable in payouts?
Intertops is one of the best, they just don't like wise guys or anyone that seems to know what they are doing. Considering the action you are contemplating you will never have a problem with them. I can't seem to figure out who has what you are looking for. The best thing to do is go to www.theprescription.com and then go to their "forum" the link is at the top of the first page. When in there go into "offshore sports books" discussion. Either browse and find your answer or better yet post this question on that board and I assure you that you will get more answers to your question than you even need. Every book that has them will be mentioned to you, many by the books posters themselves.
Yes, I never had a problem when I used them several years ago. I just started betting sports again two months ago and haven't requested a cash out yet, but I have no reason to suspect that they're not as good as they were before.
-Sean
NY -5
NY UNDER 172
MIL OVER 209
Bad luck DET Jerry Stackhouse doesn't play.
This is a proposition I was reading on Olympic.
Will Ben Coates have a pass reception Player must play for action.
509 Yes +110
510 No -140
I think Yes is a good bet but I would like to hear OPO before I bet it.
paul
Congratulations Paul.
Coates had a big game considering he only had 9 catches all year.
Good call.I hope you enjoyed the game as much as I did.
Good Luck
Howard
Howard,
My logic in this bet was that he always made big catches for the Patriots in big games. The public caught on by game time it was -110 for one catch. To me it was a stick out. Who would of thought that Coates 3 for 31 and Sharpe 1 for 5yds!!!
Nice to see you make a killing Howard. You need those days to make up for the pitfall days.
Paul
Does anyone know what the true odds are on a 3 team 12 point teaser?Or ,what the sports books take is on this bet?
Thanx....BB
True odds are impossible to calculate on any teaser. Values of extra points vary depending on what the starting line is. I am assuming you are talking about football here as you would be hard pressed to find anyone to give you 12 point teaser on any basketball game so I won't even go into that. For football to figure the true odds you need to specify if its college or pro since pro games are much better teaser bets. Also specify the line because 12 points on a 28 point spread has fairly low value, but 12 points on a game like the Super Bowl with a tight line and very low total is almost like gold. In the end no teaser odds can be figured out for general purposes. Occasionally some people claim they have studied it and came up with odds but don't believe them unless they are basing their odds off particular line and total combinations.
I'm hoping to head to Las Vegas for the first weekend of March Madness. However, I have been unable to find out what days this corresponds to, and was wondering if any of you know. Also, I was wondering if you had any tips on where to try to find rooms. I imagine that the casinos with the best sports books will probably be the toughest to get in to (i.e. Caesar's), and I am open to any suggestions that you may have. Thanks in advance,
Worm
These are my picks for 1/23.
what happened to them? their site is now closed. did they just go bankrupt (as did many internet companies lately) - or were they shut down by the government or something like that?
They were a publicly traded internet company that went under like so many others...
Recently, I have found three league wide trends that have fared very well Against The Spread (ATS) since the beginning of the 99-00 season. The three trends (or maybe stats is a better way to say it) have all performed at a very good rate - around 65% winners, with populations ranging from 100 games to 200 games.
These searches were found with an idea to begin with - and I tested the theory to see how it did the last two years. Of about 15 that I tested, 12 came out to very close to 50/50 - while these 3 stand out as clear winners historically.
The searches are in the method of something like this (although not exactly) : Bet on the road underdog if they are coming off another road game with no day's of rest while the home team has at least 1 days of rest (the idea being that maybe that people are overestimating the rest days between the two teams - again, this is NOT one of the theories I tested, just an example of the type of things I was testing for).
My questions : Given that I found 3 out of 15 with 65% (62-67%) win percentages with a significant amount of games (100-200) - how signficant is it that these 3 may actually be winners in the future. What I mean is that I'm sure if I tested for 1000 different theories, that a few of them will be monstrous winners historically, but that may just be because of random coinflips (if I flip 100 coins 1000 different times, some of those series of flips will result in 65 or more heads - but that doesn't mean the coin is biased). I tend to think that the theories that I have tested for a worthwhile to bet on, at least small, but I can also see the possible flaws in using historical stats/trends like this for betting purposes since it may just have been randomization that got these trends to get "lucky" and have such great records.
Any insight would be highly appreciated.
I have talked to Andy Iskoe, a well known handicapper that works with trends more than most. He produces volumes of stuff that give trends for all kinds of sports. He says trends like this type, non-specific to team trends, take something in the neighborhood of 500 or more trials before they can even be considered reliable. Team specific trials can be had a little shorter time frame because you are dealing with tendencies that might be present in the teams themselves or, more commonly, in the betting habits of the public. In these situations as long as the reasoning isn't a stretch but actually has some theoretical backing, he would trust it after 30-50 trials. Very few non-specific trends ever see winning percentages beyond what you might expect to find in a random sample. Even worse, they are dangerous to play because if you just caught an "anomaly" you could be in for trouble if you hit the trend just as it regresses to the mean. I personally put no value whatsoever into trends per se. I do pay attention to domination of one team over another over a period of matchups and definitely pay attention to current form, but nothing that would be plain trend following.
wildbill wrote : "In these situations as long as the reasoning isn't a stretch but actually has some theoretical backing, he would trust it after 30-50 trials"
I just want to make sure I understand what you are referring to - are you referring to specific teams here or for league wide? I think you are referring to specific teams, but not sure. Thank you.
wildbill wrote : "Even worse, they are dangerous to play because if you just caught an "anomaly" you could be in for trouble if you hit the trend just as it regresses to the mean"
I think this is the incorrect application of the Regression to the Mean theory. If the historical numbers were just random numbers, then all one should expect is for future "predictions" by the theory to offer a .500 winning percentage, with some error around .500. Regression to the mean is towards the mean (.500)...it does not mean that future data will regress the whole population (including past data) to the mean, which seems like what you are suggesting.
Well maybe you are technically right, but since these are trends and we are supposing teams and bettors are working in a pattern here, one could expect under .500 performance. Namely in this case this would presume that bettors follow trends and therefore overbet a side and get burned for giving too much value. In any case, if you are in a .500 situation you obviously aren't doing yourself any good as it is.
This system was fantastic in the NFL for years. Without going into details you would play the team slumping against the team that is streaking.
The logic behind it is that the linesmakers had to adjust the line for the momentum players.
I woould play games that NOBODY in their right mind would play. YET - they would win consistantly. Problem has been with teams like St.Louis a few years ago that would CRUSH the spread every game. The squares were making out like bandits.
I agree totally with wildbill. I have a College football system that I found 9 years ago. SINCE then it has hit 61% with 453 games in those 9 years. Never worse then 54% never better then 68%.
Every other system I have ever seen looks great until you try it with real games and real money.
I had a great NFL system for 5 years but all of a sudden it dumped for no reason.
When looking at systems you need to understand WHY it is working and it has to be logical. AND what I have found is it has to go contrary to what the public thinks.
BTW - I do post the college plays on forums. I had a service for a couple years but the hassle was more the it was worth.
Tell me the trends, and I'll give you a reponse!
Doc, your accuracy statistic is worthless if you don't calculate the standard deviation. I think in this case the results for any one outcome would follow a bi-nomial distribution. Now, when the sample size gets large enough you can use the normal distribution. In this case, using a normal distribution to approximate the bi-nomial distribution, 65% is very significant, as in its not the same as 50%.
All of this may seem confusing but if you are going to run regressions or use statistic you MUST understand, at a minimum, how to calculate the standard deviation. There is software to do this. I think Abdul could probably direct you to a good place to learn. hope this helps.
it doesn't really help...it makes me feel like there is something there that you are saying, but very little of it makes sense to me.
Let's say the historical trend has a record of 65-35 in the last two NBA seasons - how do I calculate the standard deviation of something like this? Do you take every 10 game stretch and see what the results were? I'm not sure I follow on why standard deviation is important in a results oriented (win or loss) record - as opposed to a quantity oriented record (such as how much money you make over x hours in poker). The only thing that might make sense is if the calculation has something to do with how much the results beat the pointspread - in this case the average game beat the spread by 3 points...do you mean calculate a standard deviation based off of that? in fact, I will try to do that tomorrow.
Thanks for your help - let me know if I am on the right track.
So Doc, what if you found 5 different trends applying to a game. All of them were say 50-30, three siding with one team, two with the other. What do you do then? Does the 3 trends on one side mean they overpower the 2 trends for the other? If you look hard enough you could find dozens of potentially worthy trends, but still you use your judgement in how to apply them to a game right???
Please keep in mind that I am not randomly looking for trends that have good records. I am thinking of theories that make sense first, then testing them out on the records. So far, I've only tested out a few (10 or less)...some that I thought were so obvious that there would be no trend (such as away game after a home game with no rest) since everyone knows about it, thus the line would be adjusted.
I believe the theory comes first, and then if the data backs it up, then there is a chance that the theory may actually be good. however, even if the numbers work out, it is also possible that it was luck that made this trend work and may not work in the future, or it is also possible that others may have spotted the trend as well, and thus overbet it...or linemakers adjust their lines accordingly...thus even if the trend is good and works, it may not work in the future because of possible adjustments made.
It all just feels like trading stocks and options. Jab, reasses, adjust, jab, reasses, adjust, jab, reasses, adjust - and never going for the knockout punch...little jabs add up to a lot.
I could write a book on this.
You need to have the competency to know if 1) the trend is valid and 2) Has the marketplace recognized it already, sandbagging the value.
For example, 2000 Sacramento game scores way more 1st half, than 2nd half. But now the first half total is no longer game/2, but game/2 +1 or +1.5. Bye-bye value.
you should write a book about it, if you think you are knowledgeable...if it is a good book, I'm sure there would be a big marketplace for it...I, for one, would purchase it, if it was recommended and/or had good reviews.
There are already a ton of books with the purpose of just exposing the trends so if you actually go into trying to test validity of the trends then you would definitely have something there. I think for football there are at least 10 publications you can buy each season.
which are the good ones? not annuals, but real books. i'd love to hear any recommendations that you would have. thanks.
Sorry for the confusing answer. Here is how I would determine if the the trend was useful. First I would ask myself this question: if the trend was totally worthless what would I expect the outcome of those 100 games be? The answer is that 50 times the trend would predict correctly and 50 times the trend would predict incorrectly.
you observed that over the course of those 100 games, 65 times the trend was correct and 35 times it was wrong. Now you need some tool to determine whether or not this trend is of any value. For this situation Statisticians say that we can use a binomial distribution to help make a determination. the Binomial distribution is a pain in the ass. We can also use a pretty simple formula for a reasonable approximation of the mean and standard deviation. The mean is N (the number of trials) times P (the probability of success. so in this case N=100 and P=.5. the standard deviation (S) is the square root of N*P*(1-P). so S=5.
you observed that the trend was correct 65 times. If the trend was worthless we would expect it to be correct 50 times. 65 is three standard deviations away from 50. the probability that the trend is worthless is very, very small. this is most likely a valuable trend. As a rule of thumb any outcome that is more than 2 standard deviations away from what you expect is pretty significant.
If all this statistics is sounds like greek you might consider sitting in on a college stats course for a semester. Its not real difficult to learn in a class room. unless you're a rocket scientist it will take some work though. Hard to explain on the internet. it will also help you analyze trends in your sports betting.
p.s.- just reread this post. also confusing. this is why I'm not a teacher. my point is: learn some basic stats and it will help you alot.
One online casino has an O/U of 33.5. Another has 31.5
Is this a worthwhile middle - 32 & 33?
Where is this??? Honestly these are two rather dead numbers. I mean 20-13 is about the only somewhat viable outcome here with 23-10 being second best and maybe 17-16 has an outside shot. But if one team gets 21 then you need an 11 or 12, very unlikely. If you get 24 then you need 8 or 9, not real likely. If you get 27 then you need 6 which I don't think you will see a margin this big. If you get 28 forget about it, 4 or 5 isn't going to happen. So basically you are hoping for a real shot in the dark here. If you can get 31 then maybe you take it because you get the win and push that way, but without getting a 31 or a 34 in there it seems like you are rooting for about 4 possible outcomes out of many hundreds, most of which have much higher likely outcomes. What you are generally looking for is a score that is one score off the opponent since those are far more likely than any others and here you have really only spot like that.
wsex.com is 31.5 - canbet is 33.5
I came away with the same thoughts - that the numbers were not very active numbers.
Canbet tends to have some really wacky numbers and you get the -107 vig too so thats why I am a very active member there. I tend to think not only are the numbers dead but also that this game will end up siding one way or the other strongly, either being a very low scoring game or a game way over the total. With the nature of playoff games that was tends to happen. It either stays close and teams grind it out not wanting to make a mistake or one team gets ahead a couple of scores and then things open up as the team behind starts taking chances and often gets big plays both for and against themselves. Maybe the best strategy might be to play the "super totals" that are always up. I can't remember off hand what they are this year, but that is usually something like a line on over/under say 25 and 41 with odds attached. If it falls outside those two you should make over one unit.
ORL - 2
DAL UNDER 195
I tell you what, I'll bet you even money that you can't roll a 6 or 8 in two rolls.
I just love to gamble even when I know I'm taking the worst of it. I'll even show you the math to prove that you have the best of it.
We all know that there are five ways to make a 6 and another 5 ways to make an 8 on two dice. When we don't care which one is thrown then there would be 10 combinations. We also know there are 36 ways to make all the combinations. So the math goes like this:
10/36 + 10/36 = 20/36 or a 55.5% chance of making a 6 or 8 in two rolls. See, you have an advantage on me. I like to bet big so lets start at $100 per round.
CV
Nice try at catching a sucker. Wonder if this one would get David or Mason out showing their infinite math skills to prove your just misleading an idiot. Do you do the three card monte game on the corner too?
What, you can't come up with a proposition bet that gives you more than a 4.3% edge? You need to keep looking.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
I don't see where you get 4.3% isn't it obvious that the shooter has around a 10% advantage? :^)
I still waiting for takers.
CV
You win when I miss twice. I miss 26/36 of the time for each individual roll, and 26/36 * 26/36 is 52.16%. That means I hit 47.84%, and 52.16-47.84 is about 4.3% for your edge. If I'm wrong, please explain why, rather than just tsktsking (JG insider joke) me.
Thanks, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Sorry, only rhetoric for you Greg.
CV
Can I bring my own dice?
Danny
Sure, I'd like to see them.
CV
They only have 3's and 4's.....
Danny
Fossil Man is correct, YOUR edge is over 4%. Nice try, but you should take this to all the fools that bet hardways. They would probably go for it.
damn that was a cool movie.
scott
one of these days I'll need to watch it again, it's been years.
CV
This man is the best, read his article here. Today Lakers game goes under easy and should go under in a next few games.
Its all speculation because by nature the Lakers have no passers at all. When your point guard is Ron Harper or Brian Shaw, two guys known more for their shooting than passing, you aren't going to play deliberately all that much. For all the criticism he got, Fisher was the one who ran the Lakers like a true team, not as the shooting gallery they evolved into. Any team with their two starts plus a ballhog in Rider and spot up shooters like Fox and Horry and then pick up a guy like Penberthy who does nothing but shoot the 3...well its a joke to think they will play slow down basketball for more than a game or two in a row. Shaq is the only guy who usually passes much and thats only because its hard to shoot over a double team with your back to the basket. The key for the Lakers is that they are very much an over team at home as they get caught up in the crowd and how they respond to their offense while on the road they tend to be more defensive not being cheered on to be an offensive show. One thing that is hard to believe though is for all the talk in this article about the up-tempo game, there have been many many nights this season the Lakers have had like 0 or 2 fast break points while their opponents have 12. The Lakers are the uptempo team with no real fast break. A strange bird indeed.
MIA UNDER 179.5
PHI OVER 195
IND + 3
I guess you made this pick because of the Pacers recent strength and the bad game the Blazers had against the Cavs.
True, IND also lost to POR early this season,most people lost this game as some offshore books had line go down to POR -1.5.
During our weekly betting group meetings, I was given the task of initiating 5 new members that we just picked up. Our two old pro sports bettors left us and the remainder wanted to let some of their friends in the crowd. None of the new guys is terribly experienced at sports betting, but fortunately none of them are total idiots either! I guess it will be a challenge to get them "learned". I was given the task of introducing them to sports betting and I thought maybe I could share what I came up with the group and see if anyone could add to it. I wrote this out and passed around copies and guess some thought it so useful that they passed it to their friends. God knows how many of these copies will make it around town...
A lot of people think there is magic or tons of skill to being a long term winner at sports betting, but really I wouldn't say that. Simply put, I win consistently and over the years because of hard work. Nothing more, but I don't accept anything less. If you are having troubles with your picks or your bankroll is getting depleted, all I will ever say is work harder. Go through more box scores, check more stats, look over the opponents a team faced, etc. When it comes down to it, sports betting pros and poker pros really are very similar in the tasks they face and the road to success is very similar too. Yes the games are different and so is the opponent, but in reality if you work hard and look to grind matters out, you keep a sufficient bankroll, you maintain your discipline and maybe more importantly don't get too emotionally involved in the games, and just take things one day and one decision at a time you will probably be ahead over any significant amount of time. There is no magic in that is there?
One thing I always notice about the winners in either poker or sports is that they do truly stay unemotional about the game itself. Yeah I have my teams that I personally like, but they never enter into my decision process. I bet against my favorite teams probably more than I bet on them, but that is the way it has to be. Being unemotional means not believing anything is conspiring against you and not thinking your bet makes or breaks the result. Unemotional players don't endlessly follow their game scores and rarely watch games they have bets on. One thing I always laugh at is how people think a key is to watch as many games as possible to find edges. Honestly I watch almost none. I watch them for entertainment, when the work is done I will watch a game I might or might not have a bet on just because sports can be fun to watch. I don't pretend that I can figure much out watching games because I know that its just a small sample of what I might see and I don't think you can draw accurate conclusions from watching a team play a game or two a month. Your eyes tend to lie to you more than stats do, thats something I think we should all remember.
Bankroll can't be stressed enough. Proper bankroll allows the bettor to be unemotional. If you are desperate for a winner, well how can you be unemotional? Even though I think some of the gambling addiction ads are ridiculous, their recently created slogan is really the essence here "if you need to win, you need to quit" I couldn't say it better myself. Keeping a minimum of 50 bets should be second nature. If you are gambling small change for yourself, then you can stick under that amount, but if you want to be a consistent winner and the amount of money you bet can't be easily replaced in a month of disposable income, then its time to get religion and stick to betting units your bankroll can handle. Nothing else wrecks sports bettors (or poker players) more, there is no second factor when it comes down to it. Anyone that puts enough effort to study the games and say they want to consistently win probably has enough skill to last over the long run provided they have bankroll. Now I use methods that tend to risk my bankroll a bit more so I keep more than 50 units and I think 75 units is probably the proper amount for everyone to keep. Even more important is not to change this requirement. I have never needed close to 75 units, but I still stick with it. You never know when the "perfect storm" is going to come and you will see the mother of all losing streaks. Could start tomorrow so be prepared.
Lastly, before you think I am kidding, look at things this way. I looked into my logs since 11/26/00 and came up with my record up to today (1/24/00). Over the time I have gone 13-10 in the NFL, 6-2 in NCAAF, 46-50 in NHL, and 37-26 in the NBA. Somewhat mediocre 100-88, certainly not my best stretch. However in that time because a lot of those picks were dogs for the NHL and because of my use of my special bet sizing method, I have won a net of 13.3 units over this time. Over 188 games I would normally expect to win about 105 bets so I am not that far from where I should be. Its all about just making a good number of plays where you see edges and in the end you will take down the units. There are certainly smarter handicappers that win at a higher percentage than me. There are guys that win more money by betting bigger. There are guys that win more by working longer hours or doing it professionally, which I will never say describes me. However I think when you get to a reasonable enough bet size, winning about 6 units a month will make you very happy and give you a nice addition to your salary. So that is the Wildbill method. Nothing fancy, nothing special, just a lot of work grinding it out to get results. Sounds like the job description of a lot of my professional poker playing pals.
WildBill,
I'm waiting for your proposition bets that you like?? I probably won't bet it but I like the logic you use to pick them more than the actual bet. Thanks for sharing your stuff!!!
paul
To be honest Paul I haven't really looked at them or thought about the game much. I just don't have a good feel here. My old man just got into town and when I was with him I grabbed the infamous IP prop sheets, practically a book! I will look them over tomorrow and might come up with a play or two. One bet I do think might be a good one is to bet is that the team that scores first wins. I don't see either side getting off to a quick start, but if one can break a big play then they will control the tempo for a good while. Besides if that scenario doesn't play out, you still have the old fashioned seesaw battle that ends up winning the prop anyways. At -170 I think its a reasonable price to lay in a game where points could be at a premium or a game where one team could break out to a big lead and cruise in. I think one or the other will happen as I said earlier, either one team will get ahead a few scores and run it up from there or the teams will stay very close with few scores being made. Either scenario greatly benefits this bet.
Another prop that jumped out at me is the longest TD pass by Collins to be over/under 27.5 yards. I like the under here as I don't see him completing too many long passes. The Ravens have excellent cover CBs and Woodson patrolling the field. The rush is too strong for him to have time. I think the Giants will focus in on short routes and maybe take a long shot down the field. The speed of the Giants receivers isn't that great so they can be caught if they do catch a longer pass. Another prop is his longest completion being over/under 35.5 yards, but I think the TD prop is better as you add the scoring part and it makes it much tougher.
One last one for now is over 3 FGs laying -130. I think this one might be a free roll as I see a minimum of 3 kicks being made here. Billick showed his tendency in the Raider game to just kick the ball if he has the lead and not even try to score the TD. Fassel isn't that bad, but the Ravens D is so tough to score on inside the red zone. This should equal at least 3 made kicks and give me a shot good shot at winning the bet.
Betting against your favorite teams, I like it. I always say “bet with your head, not your heart”. I have a hard time watching my basketball bets as many times the spread will flip on a wild 3-pointer thrown up by a bench player in the game at garbage time.
Betting against your favorite teams, I like it a lot. I always say “bet with your head, not your heart”. I have a hard time watching my basketball bets as many times the spread will flip on a wild 3-pointer thrown up by a bench player in the game at garbage time.
I think that the above formula would make a nice forward to a book, when you decide to write it.
Good Luck
Howard
Mason and his boys don't want to publish sports betting, would cut into his poker books too much :)
Honestly I revise what I have written almost on a monthly basis. In some ways I think I learned more than I ever should have writing it and whether it gets to publishing matters not a bit anymore. I know most people don't have the knowledge or experience to write a book, but a few of you on here do. I can't imagine a better learning experience, even if its just a couple of chapters and 50 pages of material. Its something I suggest to all, not for the monetary rewards from sales, but from the monetary rewards to your intelligence and gathering your game plan. I have always said that anyone who bets games seriously should be able to write down their picks much as the newsletters do. If you can't justify your picks like that you probably don't have enough reasoning behind them unless its purely a statistical outlook much as totals or baseball bets might be.
i cannot help myself...still think the sb is a lock under...bet my max of 6% of br...jmho...gl alll
I'm going to vegas soon and would like to know the best places to play blackjack as far as rules, penetration,etc. Thanks. Dino
check out this site http://www.skister.com/bj/
Does anyone know anyone who likes and is betting the over? Everyone I've talked to/read on the internet loves the under.
Is this an obvious time to go against the public?
Danny
Lem Banker likes OVER.
The public is betting the over. I have been hanging around the casinos this weekend since my father is in town for the game and noticed all the books are slowly creeping up on the total with 33 or 33.5 everywhere where there was a lot of 32 and 32.5 earlier. The town is just packed more than I can ever remember for Super Bowl so you know the number is moving because the public is showing their usual tendency to bet the over. I personally am ambivalent as I think it will either be way over or way under depending on if the game stays close or one team can break out to a two score lead.
.
Click here and go to archive on Jan 26 to listen to Lem Banker picks. Lem talked about betting college basketball on Jan 12.
Has anyone tried the PDS software by The Sports Judge? Good? Bad? Useless? Does anyone have any comments?
Just finished reading Jacques Black's "Football betting to win". Its about betting English soccer matches but is universally applicable in that Black recommends approaches which can be applied to all forms of sports betting. What is particularly intriguing is that Black talks about a "friend" of his who bet made a killing by identifying lines which were widely out of sync with other bookmakers and betting the farm.
I wonder if you can do this systematically? How divergent does a line have to be before you can bet it, and could you figure out the optimal bet size from the extent of the divergence. Anyone shed any light on this.
This would also apply to the old days of sports betting where most of the action was going through bookies. Now that so much action is offshore and even more that so many places on the net carry the true lines, the divergence isn't what it used to be. People were telling me this weekend that the Giants were +1 or even in NY, but I had a hard time believing it. After all, you had to be in the dark not to know you should get 2.5 or 3 with them. How much you need to get for an edge really depends on the sport and how much fluctuations you are willing to put up with. If you always bet 3 point differences in football you would probably have an edge, but then again you would have maybe 5-10 bets a year unless you had really creative betting outlets. Note this means only 5-10 situations where you see one number at say 7 and another at 10, not where you bet it at 10 and it goes to 7 by game time. I just suggest shopping for lines to make sure you get the best prices on the sides you want to bet, but I generally don't worry or condone spending too much time hoping you will get a huge price differential you can bet both sides on at the same time because it will rarely happen in a spread large enough for it to be positive EV. Occasional spots where you get +3.5 and -3 for an NFL game and a -3 and +4 for a college game might yield modest results but numbers off key spots probably aren't worth much in edge in the long run.
Thanx, what I feared. The elixir of wealth will have to come from elsewhere.
GBV, Call me at 714 454-3720
I cannot talk about this online, but would welcome sharing conf. info. with you if you don't pass it on.
I'm a Brit so phoning is not really practical. If e-mail is cool then I can promise complete confidentiality and I will not pass it on. Otherwise sorry, thanks for the offer.
Orlando is a 9 point favorite over Chicago and L.A. is a 4 point favorite on the road over San Francisco. Why are these teams so favored? Other than the fact that the XFL allows teams to get players from their own area (Orlando gets lots of ex-Florida, Florida St, Miami players, and L.A. gets lots of ex-UCLA, USC players), is there any other reason to expect that these two teams should be that much better than the rest of the league. Is the local talent reason enough to make these two teams such big favorites (L.A. is 5/2 and Orlando is 4-1 to win the Championship - out of 8 teams.)
Quarterbacks are deciding it I think. I am not even sure but someone told me LA has two solid QBs and a couple of the bottom teams have guys perceived to be nobody type players. Take it for what its worth, no one knows how a QB will react to his coaches and his recievers and I don't think too many people can figure out how well the lines will play. Bottom line is I think at the start this will be a league with huge profits for those that are personnel types that followed these guys in college. I would think following the advice of some of the better sports advisory services might actual be useful at least for a few weeks. I haven't really followed him much this year, but does anyone know if Phil Steele of Northcoast is going to pick these games? He used to be incredible picking USFL and WLAF games just because he follows these guys religiously in college and knows what their pro capabilities are better than about any sports advisory service I know of.
The sports books have been able to watch scrimmages. They know they want the XFL action and will use any approximation they can devine for the first few weeks. Also the max wager on XFL will start at 5% of the max they use on NFL.
Well they won't figure out much I think. The last scrimmage they held here was on Friday and the sportscaster said the only score of the scrimmage was scored on a long TD run by some guy I have never heard of. I read later he will be the 2nd string runner. So obviously that didn't show much although last scrimmage might also have had something to do with it.
I couldn't believe it, down 27 points with a few seconds left the Giants run a DRAW PLAY!!! The 4 yards on that cost me my prop bet as I bet the Giants under 64.5 yards rushing. They got the yards on that play, the long run at the end of the first half and the scrambles by Collins, otherwise they were totally shut out on the run. That last play really got me because it prevented me from a huge day. I ended up playing the game over 40.5 at +180 and the Ravens -10.5 at +280 just going with my theory that once they got ahead the scoring would follow. Guess i got lucky with the last FG that put me over the super total.
One amazing thing was that despite the fact I saw no purple and all blue this weekend, the line to cash tickets was still a mile long! The over just kept getting money and the public got one right as they usually seem to do betting over in the big game. This number is usually inflated and yet its still one over after another. I think the standard thinking might have to change as I really do think as long as they have two weeks, the offense has the slight advantage in most cases. Wasn't the case this year though. The next few years are going back to one week breaks before Super Bowl I read so plan on getting in some under bets the next couple of years.
Nice to see you did well yesterday, Bill.
I had the best day of my life yesterday,as everything went my way ( most of it just dumb luck though).I didn't touch the total,however.
I find it kind of embarrassing,all the hard work I put in on baseball every year,and I have my best day ever on a football game.
Good Luck
Howard
I know what you mean. I have long been very solid in NHL while being just above average in the NBA. Now since the start of the NHL season I am 78-83, although I have averaged about +1.02 so its about breakeven. The NBA however has seen me go 56-34, my best season ever if it holds up. Add to that having my second best NFL season ever and through unusual fashion I am coming pretty close to expectation overall. If only I could get my usual hockey contribution it would be a huge year, but I won't complain...
I am no sports bettor but those back to back kickoff returns were flukes. The under was the bettor bet, IMO.
So were the return TDs by both teams, the past few weeks, flukes too ?
I bet the over hoping for some defensive/special teams turnovers, figuring one or two were very likely in light of what has happened recently. So many people said they were flukes, but really they didn't seem to understand the rule that they do count in the total!
The kickoff returns 'back to back' may have been a fluke but that there were two kickoff returns for touchdowns occuring at somepoint in the game is not such a fluke. Besides take one of those returns away and the game still goes OVER.
Plus the Giants had a TD called back on a marginal penalty.
Danny
If they score that TD the game might go under. The game became ripe for an over when Collins had to pass on every play. He was unsucessful to the point it tired out the Giants D and gave them little hope. In the 4th I was thinking after the second kickoff the Ravens would really start to pound them as a demoralized team was just ripe to get run over.
very interesting that you have as a key thesis that 2 weeks off help offenses, and it does make some sense (offenses require timing and perhaps the game films could reveal defensive weakness that an extra week could help exploit)...anyway i will check my database on this...but it did not seem to help the offenses in this game (from the parts of the game i saw) . i think the clock did not run enough in the first half and actually it was lucky that 10 more points were not scored in the first half...jmho....
i was expecting a closer game and felt down the stretch play would be more conservative...and hold score down....does a spread of 3 suggest a close game or is it just a number to keep betting even?,,,
i fully expected at least one td interception return by the quick attacking raven defense, but i expected less tds and more stopped drives with field goals...and often that's what really makes the difference in close totals... walking back to houston broke...gl all
Hey I know so many people that took the Ravens and the under and were bitching about the returns. I just wondered how they could bet a team that is favored and expect them to cover with no offense. They obviously didn't seem to remember that is exactly how most Ravens games were this year, big plays (TD pass to Stokely), defensive TDs, and special teams. Everyone knew they weren't going to drive the field but it still didn't stop them from playing some overs. Maybe there was luck involved in the final result, but still I think a lot of people that ignored the special teams and D were just fooling themselves when they made their bets.
Curious to see how I can do at this. Straight up: Detroit over Boston Cleveland over Washington Phoenix over Atlanta Minnesota over Milwaukee Utah over Denver New Jersey over Vancouver Golden State over Charlotte LA Clippers over San Antonio
For the past three years I have been pretty successful betting NFL footbal games. One thing I have noticed is that I tend to do really well for most of the season, yet fade at the end of the season and the playoffs. I tend to crush the games in the early and mid going, then stumble for the last few weeks of the season and the playoffs. This has been my pattern for the last 3 years. I make so much from my early/mid season success that it more than off sets my losses at the end. Since this has happened 3 years in a row, I am thinking something is a miss here. Was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on why this might be occuring. Obviously, I would like to stay strong for the whole year and not 75% of it. Thanks.--Big Al--
Damn lets ut us together Bi Al! I usually avoid the games in September, step very lightly in early October, get going late October and really put it to the floor in November and bowls/playoffs as well as final week of NFL.
In truth, I think most people have a similar pattern because the tools and abilities of everyone is different. Football is handicapped and played different later in the year. The early season guys are the ones that quickly catch on to changes and how they will work out. Late season specialists understand the implications of situations and how those should play out. The two are clearly not the same and if you want to win at both you better be able to wear two hats very well. There is a reason why September is always a vacation month for me. I don't bet anything for the most part then because I know I am not that far ahead of the game for late season baseball, hockey isn't up yet, and football is early season where I really have little or no edge. Maybe you should work on a similar schedule except cut out December/January football. I know most people find it impossible to go without betting the playoffs and bowls, but maybe it comes down to you deciding how important winning money is to you. In any event if you are ahead at the end of the season, no matter how you got there, just remember you are ahead of 90-95% of the betting public and be proud of that.
Well I am not the best at BJ advice, but you have the theory all wrong. You bet insurance because its a positive expectation on that bet itself. That bet has no bearing on your standard bet and in that way its independent, although if the dealer does have BJ of course the hand is over and you get your money back. The reason why you bet insurance at over 33% is because it has positive expectation regardless of what you hold. In fact if you hold junk your expectation might be even higher. Say the count is +5 going in and you get 3-3. Well the dealer has an A so that is -1 using the hi-lo counts and your treys are worth +1 so your count is +6 and your expectation has grown even higher. As for your reasoning about having a good hand, well that is still something to think about. I know many counters that say insurance can sink you quite a bit. Most people have a hard time convincing a boss they are such a total moron to be recreational players and insure such a garbage hand. It happens infrequently, but most losers only insure hands that they hope they can play later. Insuring a bad hand or even a mediocre hand will get you noticed. Of course you have to balance that with the fact that insurance is the single most important decision and moneymaker for you if you are counting. Therefore its really hard not to take it if the count warrants it. If anything, when you are close to that 33% hand and have garbage, yes you can pass on the insurance, but if the count is much over the breakeven number you have to take it regardless of your hand or else you are giving up too big a weapon in your arsenal.
Fortunately when you have must insure spots, you started with a very good count and now got a good hand like a 20 more often than not and insuring it looks like a normal play. I would just watch out for the boss if you have a count like +3 or +4 and just grit your teeth and take the insurance at +5 or above regardless of your cards and hope the boss doesn't come watch that hand or the eyes in the sky aren't onto you.
On each individual bet, you take it if your chances of winning are greater than 1 in 3, or 33.3%. However, some of those individual bets will be at a win rate of 33.5%, some at 34%, some at 36%, etc. However, if you're doing it right, slightly greater than 33.3% will be the worst you ever take. Since some bets are made at just above 33.3%, while others are made in situations where your expectation is much higher, the average of all those bets put together will be higher than 33.3%. I have no idea what the number would be, and it really doesn't matter. If you place the bet whenever that individual bet has +EV, then you're OK.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Other Gambling Games
January 2001 Digest is provided by Two Plus Two Publishing and ConJelCo