Profile | Entries | Thread Author | Posts | Activity |
---|---|---|---|---|
"Back-asswards state of PA"? I would say there are far more turd-gobbling redneck fucks per square mile in New York State, pal.
All the fine "folks" who are criticizing Penn State University, Joe Paterno or the football program for what happened ought to be directing their ire towards the infinitely hypocritical Board of Trustees. You are no better than the rabid herd of village idiots clamoring to burn supposed witches at the stake--fuckin' pathetic. How dare the Board of Trustees levy a charge of "lack of leadership" against the one individual that put the university on the map. It only shows that, in keeping with the trustee's stereotype of a conservative, stodgy fuck, they really have no good response to the criticism and are trying only to preserve their image. Apart from that, it's impossible to take seriously anybody who uses letters in place of words when they write. Lazy, illiterate fucks. |
Capper007 | 33 |
|
|
Nebraska and Florida.
|
jwheels86 | 23 |
|
|
Very good information in this thread. Thanks for taking the time to post it.
|
rjmccool | 26 |
|
|
I don't think there is a best way to 'cap games. Each 'capper has his own method and tries to find what works for him. I employ different methods for early-season games (weeks 1-4) and the rest of the season. Relying as I do on game statistics (as of week 5) as part of my 'capping for the following week's schedule makes it impossible with this method to 'cap beyond the coming week's games. If the 'capper can be ready for the following week's games when the lines are released on Sunday evening, more power to him, because it gives him one more edge. Reviewing game summaries and stats is helpful--in my case, when it comes to adjusting power ratings--because final scores don't always tell the whole story. I'm primarily a fundamental 'capper but situational and technical 'capping also have their place.
As for cfgadmin's post, good money management is essential to staying in the black/maximizing profits (or minimizing losses) but good handicapping services are not. On the home page of "College Football Gambling," the reader is told in one section, "Do not handicap you own games...You really need a dependable college football handicapping service if you are serious about making money in the long term. You are better off having the experts pick the games for you..." WTF??? Gee, I'm serious about making money in the long run, but I don't need a handicapping service, dependable or otherwise. If you don't have the TIME to 'cap your own games, crunch the numbers and do the research, then a reputable service may be a good option. However, CFG's assertion as stated should be an insult to anyone who does 'cap their own games and has found a method that works. Only the sorriest, most ignorant and gullible fool would fall for a sales pitch like that. |
topperchris | 32 |
|
|
SMU.
|
4degreeswarmer | 19 |
|
|
replied to
After Studying The Results Of 179 Opening Week Games(since '04),I Have Found Some Amazing Trends.
in College Football
Good info. Nice work.
|
-29- | 57 |
|
|
Missouri, Georgia, Florida State
|
pat_d | 43 |
|
|
Does anyone know whether any of these magazines, apart from Steele's and Pro Football Weekly's, have team unit rankings? I know the Sporting News's does not.
|
bookieassassin | 31 |
|
|
With you on Jax and the points. Don't have a strong feeling about totals early in the season. Good luck.
|
davy | 17 |
|
|
With you on Ohio, Tennessee and Alabama. Nice write-up on Ohio State. I hope you are wrong about their offensive line. Steele ranks it 2nd in the Big Ten, and this was part of the basis for my 'capping of the Navy game, which shows a huge edge for OSU in the trenches.
|
Jim_Tressel | 71 |
|
|
"Say your bankroll for college football is $ 2,500
Never bet more than 1%
each unit = $25"
I'm confused. You say never bet more than 1% (and $25 is 1% of $2500) then tell us most of your week 1 bets are quadruple that amount. You must have meant, "Never make your unit size more than 1% of your starting bankroll." What is standard bet size, be it percentage of bankroll or a flat amount, will depend in part on the volume of wagers one can expect to make over the course of the season. High-volume players will tend to have smaller bet sizes, and low-volume players will probably tend to have larger bet sizes. It is my understanding that people who do this for a living rarely exceed 2% per wager. Still have a very hard time buying into the unit system, though some will swear by it. IMO, a selection is either worthy of a wager or it is not. The only way it could possibly work out is to ensure higher-unit wagers account for a much smaller proportion of your overall number of wagers. |
jordyn31 | 45 |
|
|
With you on Kentucky.
|
Emmittrudd | 22 |
|
|
Quote Originally Posted by Ice4Blood: no chef... it won't be more than 45... probably more like 41-42... I'd be very surprised if Penn State laid that many to Syracuse. I doubt the line will come close to 40, more like high 20s or low 30s. LY the line was PSU -27 @ SYR, if I'm not mistaken. |
djuengoe | 111 |
|
|
Toledo, North Texas, Ohio University, Oregon
|
deejay811 | 45 |
|
|
With you on Kentucky and Nebraska. Good luck.
|
BertMaGert1 | 26 |
|
|
Like Boom Boom, I like North Texas and Toledo. North Texas opened at +20.5?? The line must have fallen mighty fast... I also think Central Michigan and Ohio are worth a look.
|
thorpe | 57 |
|
|
Can anyone tell me which, if any, magazines have team unit rankings or ratings, for either pro or college ball, as part of their content? I know Phil Steele has them in both his pro and college 'zines. Pro Football Weekly has them in their pro preview, but not in their college preview. (I just phoned their offices to find out.) If Athlon does, I couldn't find it on their web site. Lindy's web site does not seem to specify whether they have this, either. Any help is greatly appreicated. Thanks and good luck this season.
|
larojoes | 1 |
|
|
Will probably pull the trigger on Cal in Week 1. On paper, they have everything going for them in this matchup, most importantly, the way I see it, a HUGE edge in the trenches--plus the revenge angle. Maryland is way, WAY down the list in my power ratings (which admittedly are a work-in-progress for me at this stage). That said, Maryland has burned me countless times the past two seasons, no matter which way I bet on them. It seems they always play to the level of their opponent, whether that is up or down.
|
bigfish310 | 26 |
|
|
Interesting thread... It hurts to admit it as a Penn State fan, but I think they might be overrated--at least by Phil Steele. I'm currently devising power ratings and I didn't like the results I got for Penn State within the Big Ten. They could be the team to fade once conference play begins. I've seen some posters in this forum saying Penn State is going to slaughter Akron in the opener. Maybe they will, but I wouldn't be surprised if Akron gave them a tougher game than Syracuse the following week. I think their biggest concern is having to re-tool the O-line and they're replacing 3 starters in the secondary.
|
TripleOption | 18 |
|
|
Here's my take on Mark Lawrence. The last two seasons, I subscribed to his Playbook football newsletter, which I find informative and entertaining to read. Relative to numerous others in this industry, he is the William Shakespeare of sports service advisors. I'm not going to subscribe to the newsletter this season for two main reasons: 1) much of the newsletter content, as I eventually realized, turns up on his website www.playbook.com, and 2) Lawrence is mainly a technical handicapper, and technical analysis happens to be the smallest part of my own 'capping. However, I ordered his annual preview for this season because I wanted an additional source for my NFL handicapping and I feel there is useful information to be gleaned from it. Agreed, at times he throws some ridiculously complicated trends at you, making you wonder whether the guy is serious, but I am hopeful there may emerge some league-wide trends from the individual team trends he details in the annual.
I don't think Lawrence deserves to be called a "scamdicapper" for what he does. I don't know what his Sports Monitor numbers are, but his best bets from last year's newsletter--college sides, pro sides and pro totals--went 89-59-1 (60.1%). I do agree that, as someone in this thread mentioned, he is good at marketing himself. I think there's some good info/articles on his website. The prudent 'capper needs to take his brain-melting trends and angles with a grain of salt. |
Fugettaboutit | 58 |
|
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.