Quote Originally Posted by Stew Baker: @MrFreedo Your patience with this guy is noteworthy! On another note, perhaps you could weigh in on a theoretical question that relates to yesterday's game. Thirty some years ago, a guy I knew from the Stardust told me that in a 7th game, if the home team covered the opening number in game 1, and the books opened game 7 lower than thay had opened game 1, then the home team was more likely than not to fail to cover. I never tracked this, as I matter of fact I basically forget about it till now, but considering the source, I assume the trend was valid. Of course you would have to standardize what you would consider the opener; you would want, I believe, a book that was sharp and put out their openers early. I believe that the game 1 opener was 12.5, and there was no Embiid. I believe the game 7 opener was 9.5, and there was an Embiid. I'm going to disregard that Tatum was a scratch because that came later, and throws a whole other variable into the equation which I don't care to deal with at this point. From a theoretically technical standpoint, would you say it's more correct to say that ok, Boston covered game 1 and they opened game 7 lower, so that favors Philly against the spread, or would you say it's more correct to say, ok, Embiid is perceived as being worth 3 points, so the game 1 and game 7 openers are essentially equal and the trend doesn't apply? @Stew Baker good to see you If both healthy rosters the whole series and the line opened lower gm7 I would tend to agree. Lots of different factors to think about though higher seeding, the market, matchup specific, etc. Maybe there’s a reason they changed their stance or adjusted. I mean I didn’t expect Boston to get pushed to 7 games even with Embiid healthy as a #2 seed.
0
Quote Originally Posted by MrFreedo:
Quote Originally Posted by Stew Baker: @MrFreedo Your patience with this guy is noteworthy! On another note, perhaps you could weigh in on a theoretical question that relates to yesterday's game. Thirty some years ago, a guy I knew from the Stardust told me that in a 7th game, if the home team covered the opening number in game 1, and the books opened game 7 lower than thay had opened game 1, then the home team was more likely than not to fail to cover. I never tracked this, as I matter of fact I basically forget about it till now, but considering the source, I assume the trend was valid. Of course you would have to standardize what you would consider the opener; you would want, I believe, a book that was sharp and put out their openers early. I believe that the game 1 opener was 12.5, and there was no Embiid. I believe the game 7 opener was 9.5, and there was an Embiid. I'm going to disregard that Tatum was a scratch because that came later, and throws a whole other variable into the equation which I don't care to deal with at this point. From a theoretically technical standpoint, would you say it's more correct to say that ok, Boston covered game 1 and they opened game 7 lower, so that favors Philly against the spread, or would you say it's more correct to say, ok, Embiid is perceived as being worth 3 points, so the game 1 and game 7 openers are essentially equal and the trend doesn't apply? @Stew Baker good to see you If both healthy rosters the whole series and the line opened lower gm7 I would tend to agree. Lots of different factors to think about though higher seeding, the market, matchup specific, etc. Maybe there’s a reason they changed their stance or adjusted. I mean I didn’t expect Boston to get pushed to 7 games even with Embiid healthy as a #2 seed.
Hot Forum Topics
