Profile | Entries | Thread Author | Posts | Activity | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BOL
|
estes1717 | 11 |
|
|||||||||
BOL BE
|
BostonEagle | 24 |
|
|||||||||
BOL
|
HotRoute | 31 |
|
|||||||||
replied to
Why oh why does everyone always think that a game in the past predicts the future? BCS Winner & Why.
in College Football
Great write up, BOL tonight
|
vegasjack2 | 42 |
|
|||||||||
Nice write up, appreciate the research and well-thought out explanation, not many of those on covers these days...
BOL |
KScapping | 49 |
|
|||||||||
A dime is $1,000
A nickel is $500 To "lay chalk" is to give points, or take the favorite....for example Pitt -9, you could make the statement "Thats too much 'chalk' for me" if you thought they were giving too many points Your dad's playing with your tuition money |
pizzamaker | 28 |
|
|||||||||
Not to state the obvious, but this Giants D-line has been on FIRE lately! Pierre-paul is an absolute Freak, guy does backflips in pads...
Atlanta underperformed this year, many believed their offense would have been more explosive given the addition of Jones, not that he would necessarily do much himself, but give Roddy a break from the double/triple coverage he saw last year. I feel as though Atlanta's offense has been hindered by Matt Ryan's inability to pickup blitzs. This game, seeing as its been only Ryan's 2nd outdoor game since week 4 (I believe this is true, could be wrong) will reveal the weakness of the Atlanta O-line. Got like the G-men to cover -3 -105 BOL |
RazorSharps | 9 |
|
|||||||||
LSU would get absolutely MURDERED!
|
eddothebook | 72 |
|
|||||||||
Glad I grabbed at 62.5!
Already up to 64 on my book |
DynastyOne | 16 |
|
|||||||||
replied to
pac12 here to give you the winning pick of west virginia vrs clemson========
in College Football
See you at the window |
pac12expert | 4 |
|
|||||||||
Quote Originally Posted by archdriver: I agree that it was a catch. Not only a catch, but a spectacular catch. incredible the way he laid out and cradled the ball . i actually had Michigan (also had the over) and when I saw it real time, I thought, no way that was a catch. whenthe ref indicated TD, I thought the ref was giving himn a borderline decision. Then , when I saw the replay, it looked clearly like a catch. his elbow obviously comes down in time and the ball never seemed to rattle around. i did see the ball drag the ground and that might have been where the final decision came from. i never saw any lack of control. As I said,, the ball dragged a little and it seemd like his hands were around and under the ball. BUT, the ball did touch the ground . Thats what I'm thinking, I'm not going to go back and youtube the catch to call on anyone on here, its pointless, but from what I remember it DID look like the bottom nose of the football touched the ground, granted he had his arms/hands around you get into the argument about establishing possession if the ball is moving with in the hands..... Think of holding a football on the sides with points pointing to the sky and the ground....if it rotates end-over-end, do you still have possession? I feel as though both college and pro football have been unclear and inconsistent with this rule |
AACHEN2011 | 24 |
|
|||||||||
replied to
pac12 here to give you the winning pick of west virginia vrs clemson========
in College Football
Special teams will be a factor, even if neither team scores a return TD, both teams will be working on short fields alllll night
|
pac12expert | 4 |
|
|||||||||
To support that statement, WV RB Garrison is out, granted I haven't watched much of WV this year so I can't really vouch for how effective he was, but he did average 5.5 ypg...definitely looking to put the ball in the air more often then they have been
|
DynastyOne | 16 |
|
|||||||||
My only concern would be that perhaps they'll be throwing a little bit more with the absence of Garrison, not a bad play and good job looking up the competions
|
Dugan8 | 8 |
|
|||||||||
Gotta love the over, special teams will be a factor....even if there isn't a return TD, both teams will be working with short fields
|
DynastyOne | 16 |
|
|||||||||
GoBrowns mentioned this in a different thread...
When analyzing public bet % all of the sites I've ever heard take into account the total NUMBER of bets made on a particular side...NOT the total AMOUNT wagered on a particular side.... In other words, 80 bettors placing $100 bets on clemson = 8,000 on clemson 20 Bettors placing $1000 on west virginia =20,0000 on west virginia IF I was a linesmaker I would move the line down to -2.5 too! Now you can argue, the west virginia bettors are the sharps....maybe, or maybe not |
Hockeyguy9 | 50 |
|
|||||||||
"I don't want yo money, I want yo bookie's money"
|
GetDisMoney | 28 |
|
|||||||||
GetDisMoney
No worries, questions are always welcome.....this forum is meant for gamblers to HELP EACH OTHER |
GetDisMoney | 28 |
|
|||||||||
Note.....should have mentioned in previous post, that statement is not consistent with what GoBrownsMS72 posted,....just more food for thought
|
chopnbroc | 12 |
|
|||||||||
Quote Originally Posted by GoBrownsMS72: Everyone keeps saying 85% of the public is on Clemson and 80%+ of wagers are on Clemson, but does that mean that 80% of the MONEY is on Clemson? It's the money that counts in Vegas, not whether Joe Public has put $10 on Clemson 5000 times. If "other" bettors have put $1000 on WVU 50 times, then the money is even, just like Vegas likes it. Or worse, if bettors have put $1000 on WVU 100 times, then it means they need to entice bets on Clemson. Simple math for the most part. I guess the question I am asking is.....when you say 85% of the public are on Clemson, what does that truly mean with regard to the amounts of MONEY bet on either side? Where are you getting your stats from and what are they counting as 85%? 100% Correct....if Joe schmo walks in to a casino and lays 50 large (hypothetical situation I know limits restrict this) on a side no one cares, but if a known sharp lays down 5-10k books take notice |
chopnbroc | 12 |
|
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.