Profile | Entries | Thread Author | Posts | Activity |
---|---|---|---|---|
If youre going to divide $200 between the spread and moneyline on a +3 then youre better off just putting all $200 on the moneyline. The dogs cover at about 50% and win outright 97% of the time on those covers. Only applies to spreads of 3 or less though.
|
jaydeez40oz | 119 |
|
|
Cheers OP, good call, squares got destroyed.
|
Clax339 | 29 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by Nycgags: Why ask dumb questions unless you assume the game is fixed. Almost as dumb as assuming that the question 'why' implies im assuming something that was never mentioned in 3 paragraphs. Im simply curious as to why a team that would appear as a giant favourite in the publics eye would open as a 1 point favourite against a team that has looked hisotrically bad on offense. Especially with such a giant sample size of...2 games. |
Clax339 | 29 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by WilliamMunny: Travel weary? They played at home last week And theyre playing in a different continent this week, at 930am. Maybe travel-weary isnt the best way to describe it but theres surely a major adjustment to their entire game prep. Jax has also never faced a defense like Baltimores in their previous 4 trips across the pond either. Maybe the 49ers, but the total of that game was more a result of the 49ers still having ultimate success with the read-option and Jax being beyond bad against the run. One last thing, 6 of their last 8 meetings have been under 40...but hey, thats just another trend in a long line of pointless ones. BOL though. Dave is right...if this game goes over then its thanks to Bortles ball security.
|
iEmano | 5 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by Nycgags: Sorry, I am not buying your Scientology "the games are fixed argument." 2 games start a trend, not to be ignored. Never said they were. I now understand why reading is a gift, though, so thanks. |
Clax339 | 29 |
|
|
Not sure I can trust Bortles and a travel-weary Ravens team.
|
iEmano | 5 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by porcelainfist: They don't want to cross key numbers. Buffalos d was on the field the entire game in the Carolina heat, now they get Denver. I know they'll fight but Ron Leary has been huge for the run game, and did you notice the Bills two best DTs were injured? Dareus is irrelevant and Williams has.....a black eye. Nothing to worry about.
|
Clax339 | 29 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by Nycgags: Scoring points per game 3. DEN 33 26. BUF 12 Opp Scoring points per game 4. BUF 10.5 13. DEN 19.0 Total Yard per game 11. DEN 350.5 24. BUF 292.0 Opp Yards per game 2. BUF 234.5 4. DEN 258.5 Avg Team Passer Rating 5. DEN 106.9 17. BUF 86.1 Opp Avg Team Passer Rating 3. BUF 68.7 13. DEN 80.9 Summary Points DEN 33-19 BUF 12-10.5 Yards DEN 350.5 - 258.5 BUF 292 - 234.5 QB Rating DEN 106.9 - 80.9 BUF 86.1 - 68.7 DEN looks like a good bet to me @ -3 A 2 game sample size of generic stats probably isn't the best approach to capping. This game stinks and it's obvious. Denver just obliterated America's Team and have looked great in all facets. Buffalo looks inept and one dimensional on offense. Great defense, yes, but if you shut down Shady then you shut down the offense. Denver just held the best RB in the league to 8 yards. Yet it opened -1 and is now, predictably, -3. Why?
|
Clax339 | 29 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by ASmartMan: Seriously, doesn't get easier than this. Bet the house and post your ticket, then.
|
ASmartMan | 30 |
|
|
replied to
UTAH STATE @ WISCONSIN: You want to bet on a team that is like a Ford Pickup: Built Ford TOUGH!!!
in College Football
And thats that. Hard to say if Davis made that much of a difference...not sure it wouldve mattered with how bad the offense was for the last 55 minutes.
Hindsight being 20/20, maybe they shouldnt have punted on 4th and short from the 38. That was their chance to put Wisky in a hole.
|
scalabrine | 54 |
|
|
Playcalling on D has been great. Offense looks fluid enough. Hopefully the loss of Davis doesnt hurt too much.
Bet365 had +500...down to +475 atm
|
Digitalkarma | 7 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by Rickey: BTW, I put money on Boise State based on SCAL's analysis last year, and lost. To say I'm a little bit chapped is an understatement.. hope the truth makes you feel better. The truth is you're a donkey who is taking his anger out on someone because you blind-tailed 'one' of his losing picks.....6 months ago. Take it as a lesson, kid. Flat bet 2% of your bankroll every pick and you'll never have a reason to be mad at anyone but yourself....especially when you're not good enough to cap your own games.
|
Rickey | 73 |
|
|
replied to
Everyone posting is barking for the DOGS! U want the SQUARE side w/ the FAVORITE! I have it HERE 4U!
in College Football Quote Originally Posted by Rickey: cuz there's real money on the line here and you're giving bad advice. As opposed to the other forumers who post 75% winners and even when they lose, there's still hidden value in their post of "Wisc -17.". I know you love feeding the trolls Scal but I still don't know why you bother.
|
scalabrine | 51 |
|
|
replied to
Show us how smart you are, if you were the coaches how would you call this game?
in NFL Betting
Crash, I agree, my initial thought is that the Falcons try and pound the rock to take advantage of the extra coverage that everyone thinks the Falcons WR's will get.
This is Belichick though. He knows this. And if theres 1 game to switch up your MO of 'taking away the best player' the Superbowl is that game. Why? The Falcons have too many weapons to limit your defensive focus to 1 player. Need proof? Well, the Falcons are 6-0 this season when Julio has less than 40 yards receiving. IMO we most likely see the Pats lining up in combo-man, making it appear as if Julio is doubled but the safety will likely be in some kind of switch/replace that assigns him to a slot receiver or a deep zone over the middle after the ball is snapped (or whatever the Pats think Ryans second read will be). IMO Julio is going to be open/single covered along the sidelines and itll be up to Ryan to make time in the pocket, be patient with his read and of course, make good throws under pressure. And yes, I also think the Falcons need to work screens to the RBs to soften up the Pats coverage on the WRs. As for the Pats, well, dink and dunk, gadgets, lil bit of Blount and Tom Brady, in no particular order. Thats the beauty of the Pats. You kind of know whats coming but you never know when. If im the Falcons Im playing 'bend but dont break' and hoping you can score TDs vs Pats FGs. |
Crashdavis565 | 20 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by House33: In a perfect world we would get to see a new winner defeat an old hat. Good vs Evil. Atlanta vs New England. Too bad I didnt parlay that ATL NFC with NE.
|
begginerboy | 20 |
|
|
Both goalies, like usual
|
jrgumpert | 12 |
|
|
Jakece is a d*ck but hes right. Its not as simple as them just giving you $500.
Whats the rollover? At Bodog it is 5xbonus for sports. If thats the case then you will need to wager/win 5x500 ($2500) before anything won via the bonus can be withdrawn. Usually, if the bet placed is greater than the amount won i.e. risk 110 to win 100 then only $100 will be deducted if you win the bet. If you lose, $110 would be deducted from the rollover requirements. Hope this helps
|
jackson151 | 31 |
|
|
First downs via a pass will stop the clock. Other than that I think its the same as the NFL.
|
fadeORdie | 5 |
|
|
In a perfect world we would get to see a new winner defeat an old hat. Good vs Evil. Atlanta vs New England.
|
begginerboy | 20 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by HabsHater88: Agreed. No E Thomas and Falcons almost won in Seattle. Falcons scored 3 TDs and 200+ yards in 3rd quarter against them. Seattle is not the same team as in Super Bowl years. They're not even the same team they were in week 11. |
bouncer07 | 19 |
|
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.