maybe the bet percent was favoring boston in the beginning, but looks like that is coming down now and is almost 50/50. just slightly more on C's but i see that evening out by tip off. so no i don't think public is pounding boston either i still think the C's are getting slighted by the betting public and oddsmakers otherwise it should be 70/30 or 75/25 but its not.
Sip on that plus money honey!
0
Quote Originally Posted by jpot34:
Public pounding Boston?
maybe the bet percent was favoring boston in the beginning, but looks like that is coming down now and is almost 50/50. just slightly more on C's but i see that evening out by tip off. so no i don't think public is pounding boston either i still think the C's are getting slighted by the betting public and oddsmakers otherwise it should be 70/30 or 75/25 but its not.
Unless you are paying a lot for your site be careful with the info you are getting. Many times, especially as you get closer to the bigger games, these cheap sites individuals pay for don’t give out accurate info. No site truly gives out ultra accurate info but I can tell you the sites you are paying for compared to the sites a few of my buddies pay for (not your typical sites that are known by the public)....they differ greatly. There are ways to get pretty accurate information but you have to pay A LOT and let’s just say the information isn’t available by logging on. Good luck tonite bud.
0
Quote Originally Posted by jpot34:
Public pounding Boston?
Unless you are paying a lot for your site be careful with the info you are getting. Many times, especially as you get closer to the bigger games, these cheap sites individuals pay for don’t give out accurate info. No site truly gives out ultra accurate info but I can tell you the sites you are paying for compared to the sites a few of my buddies pay for (not your typical sites that are known by the public)....they differ greatly. There are ways to get pretty accurate information but you have to pay A LOT and let’s just say the information isn’t available by logging on. Good luck tonite bud.
In playoffs, road dogs of 6 or more coming off a home win of 10 or more points are 19-44 ATS in the following game
For every stat that supports one side, there is usually one that counters it. I wonder....how many teams who swept a previous series go 0-2 to start their next series? There can’t be a lot. I’d be interested to see the data on that.
Also, no data warrants a -6.5 line for the Cavs here so to say the line is off....that’s an understatement. Imo, this line should be -3.5/4. I understand your thought process in that this is probably why you are going with the Cavs to cover that bogus line. Believe me, I’ve looked at this line too and it just seems too easy to take Boston. The books are definitely up to something with this line so good work by them. Not a soul I’ve talked to (ones that would support the public) has said the Cavs will cover that line and sometimes those conversations can help one cap a game as crazy as that is to say. Good luck tonite brotha.
0
Quote Originally Posted by AussieDownUnder:
In playoffs, road dogs of 6 or more coming off a home win of 10 or more points are 19-44 ATS in the following game
For every stat that supports one side, there is usually one that counters it. I wonder....how many teams who swept a previous series go 0-2 to start their next series? There can’t be a lot. I’d be interested to see the data on that.
Also, no data warrants a -6.5 line for the Cavs here so to say the line is off....that’s an understatement. Imo, this line should be -3.5/4. I understand your thought process in that this is probably why you are going with the Cavs to cover that bogus line. Believe me, I’ve looked at this line too and it just seems too easy to take Boston. The books are definitely up to something with this line so good work by them. Not a soul I’ve talked to (ones that would support the public) has said the Cavs will cover that line and sometimes those conversations can help one cap a game as crazy as that is to say. Good luck tonite brotha.
Thanks, fellas. It was even easier than I even thought it would be. Wire to wire. It was a strange game. Boston never even showed up. This is where their lack of experience finally caught up to them. Though Cavs were ahead, they looked tight (imo) and the crowd seemed nervous. But boston never offered any real resistance. Game 4 should be a better game. Anyway, this makes up for that awful game one loss. So we are 4-1 for the playoffs. 4 blowout wins and one blowout loss. Not bad. Situational plays in the playoffs are the way to go!
0
Thanks, fellas. It was even easier than I even thought it would be. Wire to wire. It was a strange game. Boston never even showed up. This is where their lack of experience finally caught up to them. Though Cavs were ahead, they looked tight (imo) and the crowd seemed nervous. But boston never offered any real resistance. Game 4 should be a better game. Anyway, this makes up for that awful game one loss. So we are 4-1 for the playoffs. 4 blowout wins and one blowout loss. Not bad. Situational plays in the playoffs are the way to go!
Thanks, fellas. It was even easier than I even thought it would be. Wire to wire. It was a strange game. Boston never even showed up. This is where their lack of experience finally caught up to them. Though Cavs were ahead, they looked tight (imo) and the crowd seemed nervous. But boston never offered any real resistance. Game 4 should be a better game. Anyway, this makes up for that awful game one loss. So we are 4-1 for the playoffs. 4 blowout wins and one blowout loss. Not bad. Situational plays in the playoffs are the way to go!
For learning purposes, let's recap all the situational plays.
1) Rockets at Jazz series tied 1-1 and Rockets a short favorite at -3. Jazz, a young team, was undefeated at home playing against a superior opponent with playoff experienced vets and star power. No way Houston was going to drop that game after the season they had had. Now, a few years ago Warriors were in a similar situation against the Grizz and they did drop game 3. But there the roles were reversed. The Grizz were the savvy wets while the Warriors were young and inexperienced.
2) Warriors at Pelicans game 4 with the Warriors up 2-1 and the line at -5.5. Warriors had just dropped a game on the road against a team they have owned only because they lost interest. This was always a terrible matchup for the Pelicans and one game was not going to change that. Then you had the added motivation of Rondo trying to break Curry's and Green's ankles. The experienced Warriors had had enough and were ready to finish them off in 5.
3) Warriors at Rockets game 1 at +1.5, but we took them on the moneyline +110. Warriors had lost the season series, and home court, despite being the more talented, deeper team and the world champs. The Rockets were in the unenviable position of having to prove their #1 seeding against a better team (recall what the Cavs did to the Celtics in game 1 of the EFC last year). The Rockets never had a chance.
4) Cavs at Boston game 1 at pickem and we got this one all wrong because the situation was actually favoring Boston. Even though this was a different Boston team, Stevens had faced the Cavs three times in the playoffs with only one win. His team had also lost the first 2 games in each series. One could argue, as I did, that the Cavs and LBJ (after years of heartbreak against the Celtics) simply own the Celtics; just as they owned the Raptors. The problem with that logic was Brad Stevens is no Casey. The guy is brilliant and learns from his mistakes. No way he was going to lose a 4th straight game 1 to the Cavs.
And then of course we had tonight's great situational play, which we have already analyzed/explained to death.
0
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy:
Thanks, fellas. It was even easier than I even thought it would be. Wire to wire. It was a strange game. Boston never even showed up. This is where their lack of experience finally caught up to them. Though Cavs were ahead, they looked tight (imo) and the crowd seemed nervous. But boston never offered any real resistance. Game 4 should be a better game. Anyway, this makes up for that awful game one loss. So we are 4-1 for the playoffs. 4 blowout wins and one blowout loss. Not bad. Situational plays in the playoffs are the way to go!
For learning purposes, let's recap all the situational plays.
1) Rockets at Jazz series tied 1-1 and Rockets a short favorite at -3. Jazz, a young team, was undefeated at home playing against a superior opponent with playoff experienced vets and star power. No way Houston was going to drop that game after the season they had had. Now, a few years ago Warriors were in a similar situation against the Grizz and they did drop game 3. But there the roles were reversed. The Grizz were the savvy wets while the Warriors were young and inexperienced.
2) Warriors at Pelicans game 4 with the Warriors up 2-1 and the line at -5.5. Warriors had just dropped a game on the road against a team they have owned only because they lost interest. This was always a terrible matchup for the Pelicans and one game was not going to change that. Then you had the added motivation of Rondo trying to break Curry's and Green's ankles. The experienced Warriors had had enough and were ready to finish them off in 5.
3) Warriors at Rockets game 1 at +1.5, but we took them on the moneyline +110. Warriors had lost the season series, and home court, despite being the more talented, deeper team and the world champs. The Rockets were in the unenviable position of having to prove their #1 seeding against a better team (recall what the Cavs did to the Celtics in game 1 of the EFC last year). The Rockets never had a chance.
4) Cavs at Boston game 1 at pickem and we got this one all wrong because the situation was actually favoring Boston. Even though this was a different Boston team, Stevens had faced the Cavs three times in the playoffs with only one win. His team had also lost the first 2 games in each series. One could argue, as I did, that the Cavs and LBJ (after years of heartbreak against the Celtics) simply own the Celtics; just as they owned the Raptors. The problem with that logic was Brad Stevens is no Casey. The guy is brilliant and learns from his mistakes. No way he was going to lose a 4th straight game 1 to the Cavs.
And then of course we had tonight's great situational play, which we have already analyzed/explained to death.
Haha, there wont be a game from now til the end where he wont pick GSW so you got your wish. I bet he'd even picks GSW even if houston faces the Cavs in the finals.
Just messing bc I can see that he's a big GSW homer.
0
Quote Originally Posted by gambling-devil:
FWIW, I hope you are on GSW tomorrow.
Haha, there wont be a game from now til the end where he wont pick GSW so you got your wish. I bet he'd even picks GSW even if houston faces the Cavs in the finals.
Just messing bc I can see that he's a big GSW homer.
Not a warriors homer at all. In fact, I do not like this version of the team that much. I liked them without KD a lot more. That was my team. With KD they are not as fun to watch because he just bails them out. If only Barnes had not been such a choker...
0
Not a warriors homer at all. In fact, I do not like this version of the team that much. I liked them without KD a lot more. That was my team. With KD they are not as fun to watch because he just bails them out. If only Barnes had not been such a choker...
Haha, there wont be a game from now til the end where he wont pick GSW so you got your wish. I bet he'd even picks GSW even if houston faces the Cavs in the finals.
Just messing bc I can see that he's a big GSW homer.
Every day out of the red is a big win.
0
Quote Originally Posted by hardly covers:
Haha, there wont be a game from now til the end where he wont pick GSW so you got your wish. I bet he'd even picks GSW even if houston faces the Cavs in the finals.
Just messing bc I can see that he's a big GSW homer.
For learning purposes, let's recap all the situational plays.
1) Rockets at Jazz series tied 1-1 and Rockets a short favorite at -3. Jazz, a young team, was undefeated at home playing against a superior opponent with playoff experienced vets and star power. No way Houston was going to drop that game after the season they had had. Now, a few years ago Warriors were in a similar situation against the Grizz and they did drop game 3. But there the roles were reversed. The Grizz were the savvy wets while the Warriors were young and inexperienced.
2) Warriors at Pelicans game 4 with the Warriors up 2-1 and the line at -5.5. Warriors had just dropped a game on the road against a team they have owned only because they lost interest. This was always a terrible matchup for the Pelicans and one game was not going to change that. Then you had the added motivation of Rondo trying to break Curry's and Green's ankles. The experienced Warriors had had enough and were ready to finish them off in 5.
3) Warriors at Rockets game 1 at +1.5, but we took them on the moneyline +110. Warriors had lost the season series, and home court, despite being the more talented, deeper team and the world champs. The Rockets were in the unenviable position of having to prove their #1 seeding against a better team (recall what the Cavs did to the Celtics in game 1 of the EFC last year). The Rockets never had a chance.
4) Cavs at Boston game 1 at pickem and we got this one all wrong because the situation was actually favoring Boston. Even though this was a different Boston team, Stevens had faced the Cavs three times in the playoffs with only one win. His team had also lost the first 2 games in each series. One could argue, as I did, that the Cavs and LBJ (after years of heartbreak against the Celtics) simply own the Celtics; just as they owned the Raptors. The problem with that logic was Brad Stevens is no Casey. The guy is brilliant and learns from his mistakes. No way he was going to lose a 4th straight game 1 to the Cavs.
And then of course we had tonight's great situational play, which we have already analyzed/explained to death.
How are you 4-1 BB? You said you are taking Cle in game 1 and GS in game 1, and would double up if either lost in game 1 b/c you can see either starting 0-2... cle lost both games... that would give you 2 losses right there.
0
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy:
For learning purposes, let's recap all the situational plays.
1) Rockets at Jazz series tied 1-1 and Rockets a short favorite at -3. Jazz, a young team, was undefeated at home playing against a superior opponent with playoff experienced vets and star power. No way Houston was going to drop that game after the season they had had. Now, a few years ago Warriors were in a similar situation against the Grizz and they did drop game 3. But there the roles were reversed. The Grizz were the savvy wets while the Warriors were young and inexperienced.
2) Warriors at Pelicans game 4 with the Warriors up 2-1 and the line at -5.5. Warriors had just dropped a game on the road against a team they have owned only because they lost interest. This was always a terrible matchup for the Pelicans and one game was not going to change that. Then you had the added motivation of Rondo trying to break Curry's and Green's ankles. The experienced Warriors had had enough and were ready to finish them off in 5.
3) Warriors at Rockets game 1 at +1.5, but we took them on the moneyline +110. Warriors had lost the season series, and home court, despite being the more talented, deeper team and the world champs. The Rockets were in the unenviable position of having to prove their #1 seeding against a better team (recall what the Cavs did to the Celtics in game 1 of the EFC last year). The Rockets never had a chance.
4) Cavs at Boston game 1 at pickem and we got this one all wrong because the situation was actually favoring Boston. Even though this was a different Boston team, Stevens had faced the Cavs three times in the playoffs with only one win. His team had also lost the first 2 games in each series. One could argue, as I did, that the Cavs and LBJ (after years of heartbreak against the Celtics) simply own the Celtics; just as they owned the Raptors. The problem with that logic was Brad Stevens is no Casey. The guy is brilliant and learns from his mistakes. No way he was going to lose a 4th straight game 1 to the Cavs.
And then of course we had tonight's great situational play, which we have already analyzed/explained to death.
How are you 4-1 BB? You said you are taking Cle in game 1 and GS in game 1, and would double up if either lost in game 1 b/c you can see either starting 0-2... cle lost both games... that would give you 2 losses right there.
How are you 4-1 BB? You said you are taking Cle in game 1 and GS in game 1, and would double up if either lost in game 1 b/c you can see either starting 0-2... cle lost both games... that would give you 2 losses right there.
nah, those are losers and he does not bet on losers
he already said he does not like the current GSW team so he might not take them if they are going to lose today (he will tell you that tomorrow).
Every day out of the red is a big win.
0
Quote Originally Posted by dopeman:
How are you 4-1 BB? You said you are taking Cle in game 1 and GS in game 1, and would double up if either lost in game 1 b/c you can see either starting 0-2... cle lost both games... that would give you 2 losses right there.
nah, those are losers and he does not bet on losers
he already said he does not like the current GSW team so he might not take them if they are going to lose today (he will tell you that tomorrow).
How are you 4-1 BB? You said you are taking Cle in game 1 and GS in game 1, and would double up if either lost in game 1 b/c you can see either starting 0-2... cle lost both games... that would give you 2 losses right there.
If you back and read that post, I changed my mind after the Cavs lost game 1. Here is what I wrote:
"I have never seen a guy coach up players like this guy. Bellecheat is
the only guy who comes close. But as you know, coaching guys up is much
tougher in the NBA because even though it is still a team sport it is
5-5 and star players and their teams have a huge advantage. The fact
that the Cavs did not show up was worse than losing the bet. It was
absolutely disgraceful. I would not double down on them even though I
think they have a good chance to win. If they lose, however, I would
certainly back them in game 3, which would be a blowout win for the
Cavs. This Cavs team is starting to have the look of LBJ teams of the
past when he knew he was not coming back (think Cavs v Celtics Big 3 and
Miami vs Spurs) and/or there was so much uncertainty that the team was
disjointed."
0
Quote Originally Posted by dopeman:
How are you 4-1 BB? You said you are taking Cle in game 1 and GS in game 1, and would double up if either lost in game 1 b/c you can see either starting 0-2... cle lost both games... that would give you 2 losses right there.
If you back and read that post, I changed my mind after the Cavs lost game 1. Here is what I wrote:
"I have never seen a guy coach up players like this guy. Bellecheat is
the only guy who comes close. But as you know, coaching guys up is much
tougher in the NBA because even though it is still a team sport it is
5-5 and star players and their teams have a huge advantage. The fact
that the Cavs did not show up was worse than losing the bet. It was
absolutely disgraceful. I would not double down on them even though I
think they have a good chance to win. If they lose, however, I would
certainly back them in game 3, which would be a blowout win for the
Cavs. This Cavs team is starting to have the look of LBJ teams of the
past when he knew he was not coming back (think Cavs v Celtics Big 3 and
Miami vs Spurs) and/or there was so much uncertainty that the team was
disjointed."
Lebron is already packing his bags for Houston after tonight.
Zero chance the Cavs could even remotely contemplate beating them in a Finals match up (if they get there).
Lebron is not going to spend the final years in the East getting bombed like this.
He’s likely to head to Houston and after they lose and the Cavs eventually lose. Philly with a far 10% shot and outside the talent base, is attractive because Lebron can continue to dominate the East to the Finals.
0
Bb nice win here.
Lebron is already packing his bags for Houston after tonight.
Zero chance the Cavs could even remotely contemplate beating them in a Finals match up (if they get there).
Lebron is not going to spend the final years in the East getting bombed like this.
He’s likely to head to Houston and after they lose and the Cavs eventually lose. Philly with a far 10% shot and outside the talent base, is attractive because Lebron can continue to dominate the East to the Finals.
Lebron is already packing his bags for Houston after tonight.
Zero chance the Cavs could even remotely contemplate beating them in a Finals match up (if they get there).
Lebron is not going to spend the final years in the East getting bombed like this.
He’s likely to head to Houston and after they lose and the Cavs eventually lose. Philly with a far 10% shot and outside the talent base, is attractive because Lebron can continue to dominate the East to the Finals.
He’s not going to Houston and if curry tweaks an ankle or something sure they could beat them if not the cavs could always land another super star next year will be interesting to see what he decides to do
0
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
Bb nice win here.
Lebron is already packing his bags for Houston after tonight.
Zero chance the Cavs could even remotely contemplate beating them in a Finals match up (if they get there).
Lebron is not going to spend the final years in the East getting bombed like this.
He’s likely to head to Houston and after they lose and the Cavs eventually lose. Philly with a far 10% shot and outside the talent base, is attractive because Lebron can continue to dominate the East to the Finals.
He’s not going to Houston and if curry tweaks an ankle or something sure they could beat them if not the cavs could always land another super star next year will be interesting to see what he decides to do
Cavs cannot land another star. They can gdraft Trey Young at best and make a splash but once that pick stayed at 8, Lebron was heading out. And GS’s smashing of a Houston team that would beat Cleveland in the Finals pretty much seals it.
And Philly is the only team in the east he really could go to that has a shot to win a title. Ben Simmons needs the ball and plays a similar style so you’d be overloading the team (admittedly with the best) but for how long? 2-3 years?
0
Cavs cannot land another star. They can gdraft Trey Young at best and make a splash but once that pick stayed at 8, Lebron was heading out. And GS’s smashing of a Houston team that would beat Cleveland in the Finals pretty much seals it.
And Philly is the only team in the east he really could go to that has a shot to win a title. Ben Simmons needs the ball and plays a similar style so you’d be overloading the team (admittedly with the best) but for how long? 2-3 years?
Cavs cannot land another star. They can gdraft Trey Young at best and make a splash but once that pick stayed at 8, Lebron was heading out. And GS’s smashing of a Houston team that would beat Cleveland in the Finals pretty much seals it.
And Philly is the only team in the east he really could go to that has a shot to win a title. Ben Simmons needs the ball and plays a similar style so you’d be overloading the team (admittedly with the best) but for how long? 2-3 years?
Yes idk why ppl think Philly, Ben Simmons plays literally same exact why, and this would stunt his growth (he alright looked like a toddler in playoffs) Bron either goes to Houston, Spurs, or Lakers. I dont see a situation where he stays in Cleveland. Its in both best interests to end the marriage until he retires.
0
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
Cavs cannot land another star. They can gdraft Trey Young at best and make a splash but once that pick stayed at 8, Lebron was heading out. And GS’s smashing of a Houston team that would beat Cleveland in the Finals pretty much seals it.
And Philly is the only team in the east he really could go to that has a shot to win a title. Ben Simmons needs the ball and plays a similar style so you’d be overloading the team (admittedly with the best) but for how long? 2-3 years?
Yes idk why ppl think Philly, Ben Simmons plays literally same exact why, and this would stunt his growth (he alright looked like a toddler in playoffs) Bron either goes to Houston, Spurs, or Lakers. I dont see a situation where he stays in Cleveland. Its in both best interests to end the marriage until he retires.
, Great job BB
Good call
Hot Forum Topics
