Recent Posts

Thread Author donny300 Post Entries
donny300
donny300
They never beat a team convincingly in a superbowl once.  By that i mean like lead by 10 points or more at the half or most importantly, win by double digits except the last one which they probably should have won by 7 if it wasn't for that missed fg by the rams.  Why have they not once won a super bowl like 42-20 or something like that?  The cowboys, 49ers and other teams have won super bowls by blowouts.  So the best nfl team ever who played in 9 super bowls and won 6... not once have they won convincingly.  The rams had it tied 3-3 late and if they didn't mess up, they could have gotten the lead.  The rams played as bad as you can the entire 1st half and early in the 2nd half... the Pats only scored 3 points the entire time.  If you look at the stats, you would figure they are up minimum 2 touchdowns.


So many of these superbowls could have gotten either way.  Brady gotten lucky by other teams mistakes... yes he has gotten unlucky against the giants with that catch... but when you look at all the things, the coins flip much more in their favor vs the other teams.  


Back then i thought tom brady was a game manager.  Then what he did in 07... well not anymore with how much they scored.  After that, he didn't ever put up numbers like that.  But he's still very good when you look at his td/int stats.  He always seems to be clutch at the end which is the most important thing of all.  I mean they were down 10 points against the jaguars in the title game last year and came back and won.  He is very clutch.  But is there a reason why he does not dominate from start to finish?  That way, he doesn't need to make a comeback at the end?  They always say how Brady has so many comebacks to win games.  Sure thats great... but how is your team the best ever when you keep playing from behind?  I thought the pats were gonna lose against the rams when watching the game because i thought how could you guys play this bad when the rams are playing the worst they could ever play.  I thought this is going to bite the pats in the end... but what happens,... the pats come through.


When i think of dominant teams, i think of the yankees, lakers and spurs because when they win, they win convincingly.  When the yankees won the ws, they don't need to play 7 games.  They win by a couple of runs.  The lakers would win 4-2 or 4-1 in the nba title.  Even the spurs... who people dislike... even though they win, they don't win by a nailbitter.  They win pretty convincingly.


Anyone agree/disagree on this?  I always liked tom brady but the more that i look at it, i really think its the system they have in place.  I think if you put brady in any other team, i don't believe he would have this much success in at all.  I mean look at players who are no longer in new england.  They are basically nobody anywhere else.  Yet when you look at the guys on the patriots roster, do you think they would success in any other team?  I can't imagine edelman being this good in say pittsburgh or say denver.

donny300
donny300
I always liked the Patriots ever since Brady was their QB minus that year when they beat the Rams as I was a huge rams fan.  The patriots win every single year.  Early on, it was their defense that did everything.  Their offense early on was never that good, they rarely had big plays.


I always liked the patriots because they seem to win the right way.  I did recall that season when they went undefeated in the regular season and was basically unstoppable on offense.  The greatest show on turf rams was the best offense i ever seen and what the patriots did back then was just unbelievable.  But greatest show on turf rams to me is still best offense ever.  But every season after that one it seemed, they never put up the kind of points they did in that big offensive season.



Now when you look at the patriots, the one thing that back then i never noticed was their margin of victory.  The thing is they always win at least 10 games every season and win their division almost every single season.  But when i look at who they play against, the worst division in football... well people say the same thing.  They play the dolphins, bills and jets and their record is skewed because of this.  I didn't think much of that but it definitely is true.  I mean would they have that record if they play in any other division?  I doubt it.  The other thing is this.  I have rarely seen them blow teams out.  Yes its the nfl... but when you are the best team in the nfl, surely you blow teams out every now and then right?  Yes they do blow out the jets and bills, but rarely they ever win by double digits.  For a team that is good, is anyone here shocked that every super bowl they played has been a close game?  Every game has been decided by 3 points or less besides the last few which were all very close till the end.  



donny300
donny300
You can't play any worst than the Rams did the 1st half.  Yet after all this, the Pats are up only 3-0.


This team just does not blow teams out.  
donny300
donny300
Every patriots game besides the atlanta one has been decided by 3 points or less where they won by 6 points.


Why are people coming out with predictions that Patriots would win easily by 10 points or more or blow out the Patriots.  I feel if anything, the Patriots get blown out.
donny300
donny300
Is there any prop on this?  Just curious
donny300
donny300
You really think this is a low line?  Boston at home getting this many points?  This would seem like most people would bet Boston here.  GS laid like 2 points to the Nuggets and blew them out.
donny300
donny300
GS Opened at -2 on the road.  Now its all the way to -3.5 and -4 at most books.  This means they are -9.5 or -10 at home to the celtics in boston.  At first i thought with the -2, that seems right.  Because Boston plays very well at home and they beat the Warriors early in the season in Boston the last few times.  But Boston is very good at home.  They are getting this many points?  At first the line looked right because well GS lay low number but Boston owns them in the regular season at home.


Now let's look at the total.  It went up from 230 to 233.  The last few times these teams played each other in Boston, it was low scoring every single time... both games did not even hit 200.  Now its 233?  The only reason i can think of this is because its on free tv etc.  This number looks so high and anyone who remember these 2 teams playing at boston, its most likely a low scoring affair.  Yet the total goes from 230 to 233?  Even 230 seems very high.  Boston never gets a total this high.  



donny300
donny300
I didn't know the other guys are out for the pelicans.  So how is this total this high then?  Basically the top 3 scorers for these 2 teams are out.  Total went from 225.5 to 227.5?  


Where are the points going to come from?  I know pelicans play fast but who is going to even score that many points?
donny300
donny300
Spurs best 2 best players are out.  Yes the best player is out with the pelicans.  


Also, how is this total 229.5?



Kovy
Kovy
Can you explain exactly what happened fully?  So they dribbled the ball around the 3 point arc the entire time or something?  The guy did not even try to attempt to do anything until the last few seconds?


Because the total was 207.  It opened at 210.  And it lands exactly on 207 if that is the case.



donny300
donny300
Anyone have input on this? However it does seem like when there isn't this completely opposite line movement after the initial steam... the steamed side usually does pretty well it seems. Also in a sport like hockey, wouldn't it make sense only a sharp guy or group would know a lot? Also if someone sharp did bet Colorado to get the number that high and then the opposite steam happen right afterwards, what does that usually mean? Most likely its the same person or group right? Or it could be someone liking them but once they bet that, another sharp or group saw great odds on Minnesota and then bet big amount on Minnesota? Or could a sharp bet a big amount just to fool others thinking that is the right play? Also when it comes to hockey, anyone knows how much money it takes to move a line? Example that line moved 15 cents towards colorado in one move. Then it dropped back 20 cents a bit later on. Also anytime a move like this happens, the bet is almost always placed at bookmaker or pinnacle right since they take the biggest limits? Like if someone was a big bettor and sharp and bet the max limit at betonline or 5dimes, well pinnacle or bookmaker isn't going to move the line like this right? How much money does it take to even move a line 10 cents on one move? And it has to be someone sharp right? If it was some guy who is a huge whale and loses and bets 10k a game and decides he wants to bet 100k on a hockey game multiple times on pinnacle since they accept rebets, is that going to move the line at pinnacle and thus at other books?



Would be curious what others think here and did anyone else notice this steam on colorado and then steam right back on minnesota?
donny300
donny300
I look at line movement quite a bit. Also look at lines where some i think is strange etc. Of course most lines seem to be around right. But I'm sure many of you know what I mean when i say certain line looks very strange.


Well i was looking at a hockey game earlier between minnesota at colorado. Line was around -119 colorado at home. I saw their starting goaltender was not playing so i thought it was a bit strange so i liked colorado. Because this line would essentially mean a pickem on neutral ice or minnesota the favorite about the same as colorado would be. I did not bet it yet until i notice there was lot of steam about 20 minutes before the start of it. It was at -119 and then steamed immediately to -133. I then bet it when the line dropped a bit but still it was higher than what i wanted but i thought it was the right side. Then a few minutes later, the line dropped to -123 all the way down to -113 before the game started. It was steaming the other way now for Minnesota. I had noticed certain games have line movement like this and this rarely works out for the side that got steamed and then went completely the other way. 



From what i read on the forums, this is called a head fake and it was on Colorado right? Thus i read that sharps would bet a huge amount of money on one side, in anticipation that the oddsmakers would move the line a lot ... and they would go even larger on the other side that they wanted. Thus bet a good amount on a side for x amount... then hammer 2x the amount on the other side to get a better line. Is that what most likely happened here and in many similar situations? Colorado was up 1-0 and then it went 1-1 and then got the lead again at 2-1 and then 2-2. Then they got blown out 5-2. I did not feel good about the colorado bet once i saw the line movement completely went the other way after the initial steam like 15 minutes before it started. However from that line movement, the highest odds Minnesota got was +115 so if that person or group bet big at -119, well they got only +115 here while they laid -119. However, if they are doubling their bet with Minnesota, then they do profit here with getting +115 and +112 right? But the line kept dropping and it went all the way to +102 only at closing line.
donny300
donny300
Edmonton went from -160 to -140.  I know they have been playing horrible.  But this line means they are 20 cents better than Detroit.  Does anyone here think this is correct?  Seems very low a line for Detroit.  However, Edmonton has been playing very bad so that makes sense?  Also the total seems a bit high?  Its 6 and im surprised there is no heavy juice on the under at the moment.



donny300
donny300
One of the best teams at home.  The clippers are horrible.  
jroc1247
jroc1247
NHL Betting / Caps/Sharks / View Post
Is there a reason this line is so low for washington since it seems san jose is playing the backup goalie?  Thoughts on the the total?  
donny300
donny300
Why is the line so high at 6.5 with heavy juice on the over?  I notice Lippsman mentioned getting it at 6 if you could for the over and said swiss cheese which means he likes the over a lot.


Also why is this line so low for San Jose?  They are about -120 or so on the road.  So if they are at home, they are only -160 against Florida?  That line looks very fishy.  What would be the line if San Jose played at home?  The thing is i notice both starting goalies are playing so why is this line so low?  So would San Jose be -170 at home against Florida instead of -160?  Still this line looks very low.


But the total with heavy juice has me confused even more.
donny300
donny300
So orlando had a big lead and then blew it.  Does anyone know why orlando was favored here?
donny300
donny300
They went from +1 to -1.5.  Yes they are at home.  But they are favorites at home?
cowboydave
cowboydave
Is that percentage for winning straight up or ATS?
donny300
donny300
NHL Betting / Fishy Lines? / View Post
Line is now -175.  Any news or something?  



Desktop View: Switch to Mobile View