Quote Originally Posted by NYBartender: Quote Originally Posted by BigTimeHooks: @NYBartender Point is you’d have to be high and have 0 knowledge to think laying -160 on the under 3.5 was even a remotely good idea. As I said, Vegas got them donations lined up tonight. also, I said how many 4+ game in their wins lol. Not total games, indicating the Canucks had 0 chance. And that means 4+ goals... is that more clear Well, I might win, I might lose--looks like a loss which is fine. I had my reasoning and it had nothing to do with what happened between the Jets and Canucks four seasons ago. But, get back to me when you post some picks, noob. haha 20 years of betting don’t mean 20 years of winning. You laid -160 on this. Even if the jets don’t score again. get back behind the counter. Pour me a drink. oh and mix it with whatever you’re drinking daily
Quote Originally Posted by NYBartender: Quote Originally Posted by BigTimeHooks: @NYBartender Point is you’d have to be high and have 0 knowledge to think laying -160 on the under 3.5 was even a remotely good idea. As I said, Vegas got them donations lined up tonight. also, I said how many 4+ game in their wins lol. Not total games, indicating the Canucks had 0 chance. And that means 4+ goals... is that more clear Well, I might win, I might lose--looks like a loss which is fine. I had my reasoning and it had nothing to do with what happened between the Jets and Canucks four seasons ago. But, get back to me when you post some picks, noob. haha 20 years of betting don’t mean 20 years of winning. You laid -160 on this. Even if the jets don’t score again. get back behind the counter. Pour me a drink. oh and mix it with whatever you’re drinking daily
Quote Originally Posted by BigTimeHooks: Quote Originally Posted by NYBartender: Quote Originally Posted by BigTimeHooks: @NYBartender Point is you’d have to be high and have 0 knowledge to think laying -160 on the under 3.5 was even a remotely good idea. As I said, Vegas got them donations lined up tonight. also, I said how many 4+ game in their wins lol. Not total games, indicating the Canucks had 0 chance. And that means 4+ goals... is that more clear Well, I might win, I might lose--looks like a loss which is fine. I had my reasoning and it had nothing to do with what happened between the Jets and Canucks four seasons ago. But, get back to me when you post some picks, noob. haha 20 years of betting don’t mean 20 years of winning. You laid -160 on this. Even if the jets don’t score again. get back behind the counter. Pour me a drink. oh and mix it with whatever you’re drinking daily Its not called a "counter." I don't serve children. And I don't drink.
Quote Originally Posted by BigTimeHooks: Quote Originally Posted by NYBartender: Quote Originally Posted by BigTimeHooks: @NYBartender Point is you’d have to be high and have 0 knowledge to think laying -160 on the under 3.5 was even a remotely good idea. As I said, Vegas got them donations lined up tonight. also, I said how many 4+ game in their wins lol. Not total games, indicating the Canucks had 0 chance. And that means 4+ goals... is that more clear Well, I might win, I might lose--looks like a loss which is fine. I had my reasoning and it had nothing to do with what happened between the Jets and Canucks four seasons ago. But, get back to me when you post some picks, noob. haha 20 years of betting don’t mean 20 years of winning. You laid -160 on this. Even if the jets don’t score again. get back behind the counter. Pour me a drink. oh and mix it with whatever you’re drinking daily Its not called a "counter." I don't serve children. And I don't drink.
Quote Originally Posted by NYBartender: Quote Originally Posted by BigTimeHooks: Quote Originally Posted by NYBartender: Quote Originally Posted by BigTimeHooks: @NYBartender Point is you’d have to be high and have 0 knowledge to think laying -160 on the under 3.5 was even a remotely good idea. As I said, Vegas got them donations lined up tonight. also, I said how many 4+ game in their wins lol. Not total games, indicating the Canucks had 0 chance. And that means 4+ goals... is that more clear Well, I might win, I might lose--looks like a loss which is fine. I had my reasoning and it had nothing to do with what happened between the Jets and Canucks four seasons ago. But, get back to me when you post some picks, noob. haha 20 years of betting don’t mean 20 years of winning. You laid -160 on this. Even if the jets don’t score again. get back behind the counter. Pour me a drink. oh and mix it with whatever you’re drinking daily Its not called a "counter." I don't serve children. And I don't drink. So you just drink juice in all aspects of life?
If I like the bet and lose the bet that I like then, yup...what can ya do? You're up to 250 posts here in your noob forum life...but not one posted play? C',mon...show us what ya got.
Quote Originally Posted by NYBartender: Quote Originally Posted by BigTimeHooks: Quote Originally Posted by NYBartender: Quote Originally Posted by BigTimeHooks: @NYBartender Point is you’d have to be high and have 0 knowledge to think laying -160 on the under 3.5 was even a remotely good idea. As I said, Vegas got them donations lined up tonight. also, I said how many 4+ game in their wins lol. Not total games, indicating the Canucks had 0 chance. And that means 4+ goals... is that more clear Well, I might win, I might lose--looks like a loss which is fine. I had my reasoning and it had nothing to do with what happened between the Jets and Canucks four seasons ago. But, get back to me when you post some picks, noob. haha 20 years of betting don’t mean 20 years of winning. You laid -160 on this. Even if the jets don’t score again. get back behind the counter. Pour me a drink. oh and mix it with whatever you’re drinking daily Its not called a "counter." I don't serve children. And I don't drink. So you just drink juice in all aspects of life?
If I like the bet and lose the bet that I like then, yup...what can ya do? You're up to 250 posts here in your noob forum life...but not one posted play? C',mon...show us what ya got.
Quote Originally Posted by BigTimeHooks: Quote Originally Posted by NYBartender: Quote Originally Posted by BigTimeHooks: Quote Originally Posted by NYBartender: Quote Originally Posted by BigTimeHooks: @NYBartender Point is you’d have to be high and have 0 knowledge to think laying -160 on the under 3.5 was even a remotely good idea. As I said, Vegas got them donations lined up tonight. also, I said how many 4+ game in their wins lol. Not total games, indicating the Canucks had 0 chance. And that means 4+ goals... is that more clear Well, I might win, I might lose--looks like a loss which is fine. I had my reasoning and it had nothing to do with what happened between the Jets and Canucks four seasons ago. But, get back to me when you post some picks, noob. haha 20 years of betting don’t mean 20 years of winning. You laid -160 on this. Even if the jets don’t score again. get back behind the counter. Pour me a drink. oh and mix it with whatever you’re drinking daily Its not called a "counter." I don't serve children. And I don't drink. So you just drink juice in all aspects of life? If I like the bet and lose the bet that I like then, yup...what can ya do? You're up to 250 posts here in your noob forum life...but not one posted play? C',mon...show us what ya got.
Must one post everyday? Is there where all your friends are ?
Quote Originally Posted by BigTimeHooks: Quote Originally Posted by NYBartender: Quote Originally Posted by BigTimeHooks: Quote Originally Posted by NYBartender: Quote Originally Posted by BigTimeHooks: @NYBartender Point is you’d have to be high and have 0 knowledge to think laying -160 on the under 3.5 was even a remotely good idea. As I said, Vegas got them donations lined up tonight. also, I said how many 4+ game in their wins lol. Not total games, indicating the Canucks had 0 chance. And that means 4+ goals... is that more clear Well, I might win, I might lose--looks like a loss which is fine. I had my reasoning and it had nothing to do with what happened between the Jets and Canucks four seasons ago. But, get back to me when you post some picks, noob. haha 20 years of betting don’t mean 20 years of winning. You laid -160 on this. Even if the jets don’t score again. get back behind the counter. Pour me a drink. oh and mix it with whatever you’re drinking daily Its not called a "counter." I don't serve children. And I don't drink. So you just drink juice in all aspects of life? If I like the bet and lose the bet that I like then, yup...what can ya do? You're up to 250 posts here in your noob forum life...but not one posted play? C',mon...show us what ya got.
Must one post everyday? Is there where all your friends are ?
Games ending 3-0 bartender!! Have a little faith would ya.
In years past, maybe. This year...ain't happening. It was 1-0 going in to the 3rd last game out...if I couldn't grab a W on that one...a win isn't coming my way today.
Made up for it with Minny and the Ducks TT earlier so its all good.
Martin Jones doing a repeat of Monday's game as well when he clocked 41 of 42 after my "Martin Jones fade special" so its just that kind of day.
Games ending 3-0 bartender!! Have a little faith would ya.
In years past, maybe. This year...ain't happening. It was 1-0 going in to the 3rd last game out...if I couldn't grab a W on that one...a win isn't coming my way today.
Made up for it with Minny and the Ducks TT earlier so its all good.
Martin Jones doing a repeat of Monday's game as well when he clocked 41 of 42 after my "Martin Jones fade special" so its just that kind of day.
Quote Originally Posted by HockeyNight11: Games ending 3-0 bartender!! Have a little faith would ya. even a blind squirrel finds a nut some days. He could really use it that’s forsure...
Quote Originally Posted by HockeyNight11: Games ending 3-0 bartender!! Have a little faith would ya. even a blind squirrel finds a nut some days. He could really use it that’s forsure...
Quote Originally Posted by OneWayOut: @BigTimeHooks Get lost, punk. You’re definitely in the wrong forum. His type is nothing new on here. He'll be gone soon enough.
dont worry I won’t come back
***Overall 155-177 -$3362.00***
nothing useful here..
hopefully it was just tips, enjoy your juice and stay safe
Quote Originally Posted by OneWayOut: @BigTimeHooks Get lost, punk. You’re definitely in the wrong forum. His type is nothing new on here. He'll be gone soon enough.
dont worry I won’t come back
***Overall 155-177 -$3362.00***
nothing useful here..
hopefully it was just tips, enjoy your juice and stay safe
Quote Originally Posted by NYBartender: Quote Originally Posted by OneWayOut: @BigTimeHooks Get lost, punk. You’re definitely in the wrong forum. His type is nothing new on here. He'll be gone soon enough. dont worry I won’t come back ***Overall 155-177 -$3362.00*** nothing useful here
Oh no! How will I sleep at night? I'll toss and turn forever thinking of the huge insult lol
Quote Originally Posted by NYBartender: Quote Originally Posted by OneWayOut: @BigTimeHooks Get lost, punk. You’re definitely in the wrong forum. His type is nothing new on here. He'll be gone soon enough. dont worry I won’t come back ***Overall 155-177 -$3362.00*** nothing useful here
Oh no! How will I sleep at night? I'll toss and turn forever thinking of the huge insult lol
WIN TT U3.5 -160 Demko goes 8 of 9 starts not allowing more than 2 goals, dominated Winnipeg coming in to this series allowing on two goals combined in three starts, lets up 3 or more in back-to-back once I hop on the TT under of Winny. Bah!
LAK TT O2.5 -140 Martin Jones back-to-back games does it again stopping 42 of 44
WIN TT U3.5 -160 Demko goes 8 of 9 starts not allowing more than 2 goals, dominated Winnipeg coming in to this series allowing on two goals combined in three starts, lets up 3 or more in back-to-back once I hop on the TT under of Winny. Bah!
LAK TT O2.5 -140 Martin Jones back-to-back games does it again stopping 42 of 44
It’s a shame this thread has turned into a slanging match because there is the basis for a good discussion
NYB when you say the line is juiced do you mean that? As in, the Over should be +140 if the Under is -160. Obviously right?
if it’s not then you HAVE to find other bets that support your reasoning that are not juiced
Otherwise you’re basically betting red at a roulette table but allowing the croupier to add a 000. Winning against the juice is hard enough without adding a 50% premium
I have one rule now - NEVER make a bet where the juice on both sides is more than -110 or equivalent. If that means no props then so be it
Long term it’s a losing move, as sure as buying the hook or hedging a parlay on the last leg
It’s a shame this thread has turned into a slanging match because there is the basis for a good discussion
NYB when you say the line is juiced do you mean that? As in, the Over should be +140 if the Under is -160. Obviously right?
if it’s not then you HAVE to find other bets that support your reasoning that are not juiced
Otherwise you’re basically betting red at a roulette table but allowing the croupier to add a 000. Winning against the juice is hard enough without adding a 50% premium
I have one rule now - NEVER make a bet where the juice on both sides is more than -110 or equivalent. If that means no props then so be it
Long term it’s a losing move, as sure as buying the hook or hedging a parlay on the last leg
It’s a shame this thread has turned into a slanging match because there is the basis for a good discussion NYB when you say the line is juiced do you mean that? As in, the Over should be +140 if the Under is -160. Obviously right? if it’s not then you HAVE to find other bets that support your reasoning that are not juiced Otherwise you’re basically betting red at a roulette table but allowing the croupier to add a 000. Winning against the juice is hard enough without adding a 50% premium I have one rule now - NEVER make a bet where the juice on both sides is more than -110 or equivalent. If that means no props then so be it Long term it’s a losing move, as sure as buying the hook or hedging a parlay on the last leg Good luck tomorrow!
Sadly, you'll pretty much never make a bet on anything if that's the case.
Years ago, just as example NFL lines were ALWAYS a straight -110 betting the spreads. ALWAYS. As the years went on, the lines started getting juiced up and you'd see NE -7 for -130 or something along those lines. The same has happened throughout all sports. No over/under or TT in NHL was ever a -160 10 years back. The number should be set and the lines should reflect -110/+110 nothing more...but books have gotten ridiculously greedy with line making as the years have gone on...and its sad.
I didn't want to take that bet at -160. I took it and lost two days in a row and did a double unit the first day, no less. That was a horrible line and I said as much when I posted the play, BUT I make my decisions based on my analysis of the games and outcomes. I hate letting a line scare me off a bet. In the long run that mentality has served me well so I can't complain but its the fact that more and more these giant lines are becoming common place.
It’s a shame this thread has turned into a slanging match because there is the basis for a good discussion NYB when you say the line is juiced do you mean that? As in, the Over should be +140 if the Under is -160. Obviously right? if it’s not then you HAVE to find other bets that support your reasoning that are not juiced Otherwise you’re basically betting red at a roulette table but allowing the croupier to add a 000. Winning against the juice is hard enough without adding a 50% premium I have one rule now - NEVER make a bet where the juice on both sides is more than -110 or equivalent. If that means no props then so be it Long term it’s a losing move, as sure as buying the hook or hedging a parlay on the last leg Good luck tomorrow!
Sadly, you'll pretty much never make a bet on anything if that's the case.
Years ago, just as example NFL lines were ALWAYS a straight -110 betting the spreads. ALWAYS. As the years went on, the lines started getting juiced up and you'd see NE -7 for -130 or something along those lines. The same has happened throughout all sports. No over/under or TT in NHL was ever a -160 10 years back. The number should be set and the lines should reflect -110/+110 nothing more...but books have gotten ridiculously greedy with line making as the years have gone on...and its sad.
I didn't want to take that bet at -160. I took it and lost two days in a row and did a double unit the first day, no less. That was a horrible line and I said as much when I posted the play, BUT I make my decisions based on my analysis of the games and outcomes. I hate letting a line scare me off a bet. In the long run that mentality has served me well so I can't complain but its the fact that more and more these giant lines are becoming common place.
I’m still confused. Was the over at 140? If so it’s a fair line If not it is juiced up -130 for New England - 7 is fine if the opposite bet is paying +110 Am I missing something? Probably!
you can’t explain anything to him... the reason books offer -160 is cause people like him bet it... not much else. As mentioned donations lined up on that. I said I wouldn’t come back. But I got thinking. Your bet lost to copp alone
I’m still confused. Was the over at 140? If so it’s a fair line If not it is juiced up -130 for New England - 7 is fine if the opposite bet is paying +110 Am I missing something? Probably!
you can’t explain anything to him... the reason books offer -160 is cause people like him bet it... not much else. As mentioned donations lined up on that. I said I wouldn’t come back. But I got thinking. Your bet lost to copp alone
NYR -130 I’d prefer not backing either side here as I’ll be watching but I can’t stay away from what I see as a perceived mismatch. The Flyers are floundering having lost 3-straight and only have 3 wins in their last 11. Carter Hart has been a disaster posting a terrible .875 Save% and 3.85 GAA on the year and it’s gotten worse lately because in his last 5 outings he has a combined .832 Save% and 4.62 GAA. In those five starts he’s allowed 4, 6, 3, 4, & 4 goals with the Rangers touching him up for 8 goals in 5 periods during that stretch. Meanwhile, the Rangers are trending up. The offense has started to click which isn’t saying much with how poorly they performed early on but quietly they have worked their way up to just outside the top 10 in shooting % which is a small miracle considering they were bottom 3 for the majority of the season. The forward group is fully healthy, and they return Igor Shesterkin today who had also been on a roll posting a .921 Save% and 2.31 GAA on the season after a very slow start—rust could be a factor here, but I’ll stick with the Rangers improved play in their own zone to help him out here. The Rags have the fourth best xGA in the league which comes from a structured D system which allows the sixth fewest scoring chances allowed and eight fewest high-danger chances allowed at 5x5 meanwhile their PK unit has been fantastic and now sits at #3 in the league.
WASH -1/2 -135 Vitek Vanecek had a slow start to the season with a .901 Save% through the first month but since he’s gone 8-2-1 with a .923 Save% and 2.06 GAA meanwhile Mackenzie Blackwood came out of the gate on fire then just got progressively worse. There was a point where he was a top 5 ranked goalie in GSAA but that has since become moot statistic for him. A red hot 4-0-1 starts has been followed by a 4-8 run with an .889 Save% and 3.35 GAA that takes in to account his current 3-game win streak—although two of those games against the Sabres and spiraling Flyers aren’t noteworthy. The Devils don’t generate much offense as evidenced by their #29 rank in xGF and only create the second fewest scoring chances at 5x5 and #26 overall in shooting %. In come the Caps with the top ranked shooting %, highest GF/G, a top 10 PP and a hot goalie on home ice. Riding the home team here to close it out in regulation.
NYR -130 I’d prefer not backing either side here as I’ll be watching but I can’t stay away from what I see as a perceived mismatch. The Flyers are floundering having lost 3-straight and only have 3 wins in their last 11. Carter Hart has been a disaster posting a terrible .875 Save% and 3.85 GAA on the year and it’s gotten worse lately because in his last 5 outings he has a combined .832 Save% and 4.62 GAA. In those five starts he’s allowed 4, 6, 3, 4, & 4 goals with the Rangers touching him up for 8 goals in 5 periods during that stretch. Meanwhile, the Rangers are trending up. The offense has started to click which isn’t saying much with how poorly they performed early on but quietly they have worked their way up to just outside the top 10 in shooting % which is a small miracle considering they were bottom 3 for the majority of the season. The forward group is fully healthy, and they return Igor Shesterkin today who had also been on a roll posting a .921 Save% and 2.31 GAA on the season after a very slow start—rust could be a factor here, but I’ll stick with the Rangers improved play in their own zone to help him out here. The Rags have the fourth best xGA in the league which comes from a structured D system which allows the sixth fewest scoring chances allowed and eight fewest high-danger chances allowed at 5x5 meanwhile their PK unit has been fantastic and now sits at #3 in the league.
WASH -1/2 -135 Vitek Vanecek had a slow start to the season with a .901 Save% through the first month but since he’s gone 8-2-1 with a .923 Save% and 2.06 GAA meanwhile Mackenzie Blackwood came out of the gate on fire then just got progressively worse. There was a point where he was a top 5 ranked goalie in GSAA but that has since become moot statistic for him. A red hot 4-0-1 starts has been followed by a 4-8 run with an .889 Save% and 3.35 GAA that takes in to account his current 3-game win streak—although two of those games against the Sabres and spiraling Flyers aren’t noteworthy. The Devils don’t generate much offense as evidenced by their #29 rank in xGF and only create the second fewest scoring chances at 5x5 and #26 overall in shooting %. In come the Caps with the top ranked shooting %, highest GF/G, a top 10 PP and a hot goalie on home ice. Riding the home team here to close it out in regulation.
OTT +253 Just taking a stab here at a big underdog. The Sens are worth a look at this price with how spunky they’ve played this year and moreso the results they’ve gotten against Toronto thus far. Ottawa comes off two straight wins against the Flames and now seeks their fourth win against Toronto. They’ve split the first six games with the Leafs thus far. Filip Gustavsson gets the call here tonight and he has been great thus far in three appearances with a .973 Save% and 0.86 GAA so maybe he can provide some underdog magic here for Ottawa. Worth a shot at this price.
PIT -1 ½ -125 Same reasoning as any game the Pens play the Devils or Sabres. Pittsburgh built up a solid record and put themselves into playoff standing while never playing the bottom feeding teams which is impressive and now they get to cement their spot or climb higher as their schedule the second half will consist of a lot of games against these two teams. Both Pens goalies have turned things around. DeSmith is in net for Pittsburgh tonight and after a rough opening month to start the season,--similar to Jarry—he has turned it around to the tune of a .941 Save% and 1.58 GAA over his last seven appearances which includes a 24 save shutout win over these Sabres. Buffalo is in free fall and the only thing scary about this bet is the fact that odds dictate that the Sabres are due for a win at some point, but the Pens have handled them with relative ease thus far winning all three matchups covering he puck line.
DET TT U2.5 -135 Saros in net for Nashville tonight and he stopped 36 of 37 against Detroit in his lone start against the Wings earlier this season and the last time Saros allowed more than 2 goals in an appearance was the first week of February. During these last 8 appearances he has allowed 0, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 2 & 1 goals for a .958 Save% and 1.36 GAA (two were shortened, but still).
CAR -1/2 -140 Going to ride with another hot goaltender who has only allowed more than 2 goals in a start once since mid-February so 5 weeks or so and spanning 8 appearances wherein he’s had a .947 Save% and 1.48 GAA. He gets to face the Jackets offense that ranks dead last in xGF, scoring chances and high-danger chances. Special teams could come in to play here as Carolina boasts the top ranked PP unit which is converting at an absurd 30.61% and they get to fire pucks against the Blue Jackets #26 ranked PK unit so watch for special teams tonight.
OTT +253 Just taking a stab here at a big underdog. The Sens are worth a look at this price with how spunky they’ve played this year and moreso the results they’ve gotten against Toronto thus far. Ottawa comes off two straight wins against the Flames and now seeks their fourth win against Toronto. They’ve split the first six games with the Leafs thus far. Filip Gustavsson gets the call here tonight and he has been great thus far in three appearances with a .973 Save% and 0.86 GAA so maybe he can provide some underdog magic here for Ottawa. Worth a shot at this price.
PIT -1 ½ -125 Same reasoning as any game the Pens play the Devils or Sabres. Pittsburgh built up a solid record and put themselves into playoff standing while never playing the bottom feeding teams which is impressive and now they get to cement their spot or climb higher as their schedule the second half will consist of a lot of games against these two teams. Both Pens goalies have turned things around. DeSmith is in net for Pittsburgh tonight and after a rough opening month to start the season,--similar to Jarry—he has turned it around to the tune of a .941 Save% and 1.58 GAA over his last seven appearances which includes a 24 save shutout win over these Sabres. Buffalo is in free fall and the only thing scary about this bet is the fact that odds dictate that the Sabres are due for a win at some point, but the Pens have handled them with relative ease thus far winning all three matchups covering he puck line.
DET TT U2.5 -135 Saros in net for Nashville tonight and he stopped 36 of 37 against Detroit in his lone start against the Wings earlier this season and the last time Saros allowed more than 2 goals in an appearance was the first week of February. During these last 8 appearances he has allowed 0, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 2 & 1 goals for a .958 Save% and 1.36 GAA (two were shortened, but still).
CAR -1/2 -140 Going to ride with another hot goaltender who has only allowed more than 2 goals in a start once since mid-February so 5 weeks or so and spanning 8 appearances wherein he’s had a .947 Save% and 1.48 GAA. He gets to face the Jackets offense that ranks dead last in xGF, scoring chances and high-danger chances. Special teams could come in to play here as Carolina boasts the top ranked PP unit which is converting at an absurd 30.61% and they get to fire pucks against the Blue Jackets #26 ranked PK unit so watch for special teams tonight.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.