Profile | Entries | Thread Author | Posts | Activity |
---|---|---|---|---|
Sorry for double post. Using LTE on a subpar mobile site. |
MrFreedo | 31 |
|
|
@MrFreedo I strictly play underdogs. I say strictly, 85-90% of the time. Have for close to five years now and you have the right mindset. They cover often. Why? Simply put, we’re betting on or against a large group of 20 year olds and a mistake is costly to a favorite when betting the spread. I look at public betting %s and reverse line movement. Public backing an underdog is a huge red flag and reason to bet the favorite. It’s not often this is the case. I also look at past scores, the more recent a result is the more significant it is as it applies to recency bias. For instance, UCF is -13.5 against HOU this weekend. UCF has beaten one team recently and only two all season by this margin. The former being OKST, latter being Villanova, and that was two months ago. Public 80% on UCF, Houston is a great candidate for wagering. Other factors to consider in conjunction with playing against the majority of bettors is rivalries, let down spots, and revenge spots. Home dogs are great to bet in one of those instances. Smaller numbers, single digits and under 7 are what I look for first as variability lessons, similar to games with low totals as you mentioned. Also, teams tend to be what they are and never cover at relatively high numbers. See Vanderbilt, can’t cover double digits to save their lives. Anyways, I chimed in because I liked your post and have been using a similar big picture as strategy for some time now, and I have found it to be an advantage when ignoring favorites. |
MrFreedo | 31 |
|
|
@MrFreedo I strictly play underdogs. I say strictly, 85-90% of the time. Have for close to five years now and you have the right mindset. They cover often. Why? Simply put, we’re betting on or against a large group of 20 year olds and a mistake is costly to a favorite when betting the spread. I look at public betting %s and reverse line movement. Public backing an underdog is a huge red flag and reason to bet the favorite. It’s not often this is the case. I also look at past scores, the more recent a result is the more significant it is as it applies to recency bias. For instance, UCF is -13.5 against HOU this weekend. UCF has beaten one team recently and only two all season by this margin. The former being OKST, latter being Villanova, and that was two months ago. Public 80% on UCF, Houston is a great candidate for wagering. Other factors to consider in conjunction with playing against the majority of bettors is rivalries, let down spots, and revenge spots. Home dogs are great to bet in one of those instances. Smaller numbers, single digits and under 7 are what I look for first as variability lessons, similar to games with low totals as you mentioned. Also, teams tend to be what they are and never cover at relatively high numbers. See Vanderbilt, can’t cover double digits to save their lives. Anyways, I chimed in because I liked your post and have been using a similar big picture as strategy for some time now, and I have found it to be an advantage when ignoring favorites. |
MrFreedo | 31 |
|
|
LSU will beat the breaks off FSU |
Vegas11787 | 9 |
|
|
I could see Purdue pulling it off. Michigan is off their Super Bowl and has struggled against teams like Illinois and Maryland. The competition they have played this season isn’t strong enough for me to be confident in them winning. It is likely but I suspect there’s some vulnerability if Purdue comes out ready to play. |
TxRangers | 14 |
|
|
I would guess USC -6ish |
CaseyMcGehee | 27 |
|
|
@magiccarpetride I’m not giving you a hard time, but for reasons you stated +30 gets the job done without relying on a second leg. The second leg is what I mean by expensive. The amount is entirely relative, it doesn’t matter. Mathematically speaking you are buying a spread up 20%, if the line is Auburn +1 then you would buy up 600%. It’s a curious point for me |
magiccarpetride | 16 |
|
|
I’m sorry but what is attractive about teasing a 30 point spread. That is a very expensive wager |
magiccarpetride | 16 |
|
|
@iou69 As someone who was sitting on FSU +3, FSU ML, and the u50.5, I can most certainly assure you that your beat was far from being a bad one. Much closer to business as usual. The over never had a prayer until about five minutes left and even then it was unlikely.
|
iou69 | 12 |
|
|
@Winston704 Would be Iowa or no play for me. Too easy to look into Iowa’s game last week and think Iowa St is the right side. |
Winston704 | 20 |
|
|
Week 1 add:
FL +125 |
razorbackprofit | 6 |
|
|
Florida Florida St Illinois Rutgers |
Raidernator76 | 17 |
|
|
@LonghornHoosier Thanks for the kind words LH, good luck this weekend. |
razorbackprofit | 6 |
|
|
Going to try to post my picks each week for tally. I took these earlier in the offseason and will likely add 2-3 more Sat. games:
WVU +7 Arkansas -7 Ohio St. -14 FSU +3
Good luck this season guys, a lot of clock watching to do this week. |
razorbackprofit | 6 |
|
|
@MLMaverick
I would always choose to tease a small dog up (over a TD), or a single digit favorite down (under a FG).
I don't find much value in teasing spreads at anything higher. Consider teasing an Alabama from 42 to 48, that is moving the line by roughly 15%. Compared to 7 to 1, that is moving the line 600%. Thus, indicating 42 points and 48 points aren't near as different from a final margin standpoint as 1 and 7 is. |
MLMaverick | 35 |
|
|
@invest4profits Thanks bud, you too. |
invest4profits | 14 |
|
|
@HooAlum I think your theory makes a lot of sense. Looking at the number of games that the spread moved higher compared to lower is .33/.66. It's almost like a twice baked potato but a twice baked fade on the public. Probably a poor joke but point still stands. Also, as you mentioned- the public does not back dogs much, whatsoever. I may play a favorite in one out of every five to seven bets because of this alone. Being a math guy myself, I enjoy crunching the odds and betting statistics more than the football statistics. I find myself parlaying underdogs on the ML some too because of this. Honestly, I haven't found it to be incredibly successful in CFB. CFB is just more difficult in general I think. However in CBB and the MLB it's a night to day game changer. |
Volplaya8 | 25 |
|
|
@LonghornHoosier My man, I’m jealous. I moved from Fayetteville back in March and this will be the first season opener I’ve missed since 2007. Hope you have fun wherever you’re watching, likely a better time than last season |
invest4profits | 14 |
|
|
@HooAlum Man that is a pretty interesting statistic regarding (-) vs +. Any idea why this could be the case? I actually used to follow the time stamps on SI when I first paid attention to RLM, 7-8 years ago. I didn’t understand how to properly interpret what I was reading however, young and ignorant. It didn’t matter- I was gonna bet 15 games regardless. I guess it’s why I check lines so often, to get a feel for timing. Probably once or twice an hour from Sunday open to placing wager. It makes me feel more comfortable when RLM is my primary reason for the play. I’m going to really pay attention to the (-) vs + RLM, I would have to think there is something to it for sure. But what? |
Volplaya8 | 25 |
|
|
@Bridge1 I tend to follow lines closely all week, from open until I place a wager. I don’t think you would be in the black if you played every single game with RLM by its textbook definition. I use it as an indicator to rethink the line and come up with a reason as to why it may be the case. Prime time games, highly bet games, etc is when I see it working into your favor the most. The data can really only be taken at face value and then it takes a little digging from there to determine if the RLM is a significant indicator of a right side. Finding in holes in the side the RLM is against is when I use it to wager, so it can provide a great starting point. However there are multiple games every Saturday that the team RLM favors blows the cover big. |
Volplaya8 | 25 |
|
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.