Posted:
#26
A good capper needs to know when to side with the public. It isn't always about sharps vs the public - it's about finding the value in a line. 
Congrats WINNERS!!! (squares or not 
)
)0
Congratulations Squares...
Posted:
#27
What's up with this whole square vs wiseguy bullshit?
You really think whoever bet the better teams today - ravens and eagles - is a square?
I can't understand this, so please explain. Are you one of those who goes against alleged public percentages?
If yes, I strongly recommend you review the way you cap games because you are going to lose a lot of money by simply going against the public.
You really think whoever bet the better teams today - ravens and eagles - is a square?
I can't understand this, so please explain. Are you one of those who goes against alleged public percentages?
If yes, I strongly recommend you review the way you cap games because you are going to lose a lot of money by simply going against the public.
0
Posted:
#32
Quote Originally Posted by ItalianSharp:
What's up with this whole square vs wiseguy bullshit?
You really think whoever bet the better teams today - ravens and eagles - is a square?
I can't understand this, so please explain. Are you one of those who goes against alleged public percentages?
If yes, I strongly recommend you review the way you cap games because you are going to lose a lot of money by simply going against the public.
What's up with this whole square vs wiseguy bullshit?
You really think whoever bet the better teams today - ravens and eagles - is a square?
I can't understand this, so please explain. Are you one of those who goes against alleged public percentages?
If yes, I strongly recommend you review the way you cap games because you are going to lose a lot of money by simply going against the public.
Say the guy that bet indy and Atl yesterday
0
Posted:
#37
You sided with Tavaris Jackson to guide the Vikes to victory and your pist because the public won with the other side? Stop throwing your $$$ at shi**y bets and you'll have nothing to complain about...anyone who watched the NFL this year knows this bet was Eagles -3 or a layoff, but certainly not a bet on the Vikes with Jackson behind center and a head coach who makes Andy Reid look like Nostradomus...enough with your foolish posts
0
Posted:
#45
Quote Originally Posted by ratherBgambling:
Lol you Philly backers...Take away one Westbrook run and the Eagles win by 2 and you people are scratching your head wondering why your bet didn't hit and checking to see who the Lakers are playing next so you can lay 10+ points worth of road chalk
You sound more and more foolish with every post. Rather be a square than a fool.
0
Posted:
#46
Quote Originally Posted by ratherBgambling:
Lol you Philly backers...Take away one Westbrook run and the Eagles win by 2 and you people are scratching your head wondering why your bet didn't hit and checking to see who the Lakers are playing next so you can lay 10+ points worth of road chalk
0
Posted:
#47
Quote Originally Posted by ratherBgambling:
Lol you Philly backers...Take away one Westbrook run and the Eagles win by 2 and you people are scratching your head wondering why your bet didn't hit and checking to see who the Lakers are playing next so you can lay 10+ points worth of road chalk
Whatever,dude.
Nice play investing your money in Tavaris Jackson and Brad Childress After they squeaked by NYG's backups to get in.
0
Posted:
#48
Quote Originally Posted by bowlwins:
Say the guy that bet indy and Atl yesterday
Say the guy that bet indy and Atl yesterday
I dont think Atlanta was a "square" play, they hardly are a public team and were traveling to Arizona with a rookie QB and head coach...so I am not sure what you are trying to say there...
Yeah, I can agree about Indy and Payton Manning, although the "sharps" needed major help from the officiating crew to win it.
I think this square vs sharp controversy is getting old.
Just cap the games and come out with who should win the game. If you can nail the winner, you are looking real good capping the NFL, especially when the spread is < 7pts.
That's what I do and it works for me. I would never put money on a team if I dont believe they can win the game straight up, it's just plain stupid IMO because it'd mean to wager about a team not losing by more than X points.
Atlanta vs Arizona was a toss up for me and stayed away from it. I did bet Indy and that was a real close one as well...if Indy converts on 3rd and 1 I win my bet...they didn't and I lost.
Today I was on Ravens large because I just couldn't see Miami keeping it close for 4 quarters vs that crazy defense. I am a Dolphins fan so I got to follow all Miami games this season, and there have been so many close games Miami won in the final minutes that could have easily lost...the most recent one was one week ago in a very emotional showdown vs division rivals Jets. The Cinderella story was meant to finish today and it did.
I also wagered on Philly - nothing crazy, small unit - because I felt -3 offered good value when you have McNabb vs Jackson.
Really nothing to overthink today and yesterday. I went 2-1 and I am happy with it.
Does my thinking make me a square? I dont care. It's about making money, not geometry.
0
Posted:
#49
Quote Originally Posted by ratherBgambling:
Lol you Philly backers...Take away one Westbrook run and the Eagles win by 2 and you people are scratching your head wondering why your bet didn't hit and checking to see who the Lakers are playing next so you can lay 10+ points worth of road chalk
makes no fucking sense. why dont you take away the 40 yd Peterson td? or wait, why stop there? take away the david akers fg's, mcnabb fumble inside scoring territory, desean jackson punt returns too
then us philly backers would be all fucked right???
get a life bro and quit being a bitch
0
Hot Forum Topics
