Quote Originally Posted by GrindItOut44: Quote Originally Posted by DoubleUp4Life: Quote Originally Posted by 14allall41: First pick of the weekend Bills -0.5 First Quarter Wow great work .. You got a Fantastic line ...Its 1.5 at the Sportsbook here and 2 at the locals .. What juice are you paying ? You can still get .5 at -120 to -125 at multiple main online books. Why would you pay extra to go from -2 to -.5 for a 1st quarter bet? This makes no sense to me.
Who said anything about paying juice to go down from -2 to -.5?? DU said his books had jumped to -1.5 and -2, the OP posted his line of -.5 and I answered DU by stating multiple books were still offering the -.5 line at -120 to -125. All 4 books I use offered only that line at those prices you couldn't buy down to -2 for less juice!?!?!
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:
Quote Originally Posted by GrindItOut44: Quote Originally Posted by DoubleUp4Life: Quote Originally Posted by 14allall41: First pick of the weekend Bills -0.5 First Quarter Wow great work .. You got a Fantastic line ...Its 1.5 at the Sportsbook here and 2 at the locals .. What juice are you paying ? You can still get .5 at -120 to -125 at multiple main online books. Why would you pay extra to go from -2 to -.5 for a 1st quarter bet? This makes no sense to me.
Who said anything about paying juice to go down from -2 to -.5?? DU said his books had jumped to -1.5 and -2, the OP posted his line of -.5 and I answered DU by stating multiple books were still offering the -.5 line at -120 to -125. All 4 books I use offered only that line at those prices you couldn't buy down to -2 for less juice!?!?!
Reich is a Godfather of NFL = he can orchestrate the best entertainment we can long for and at the same time be a books darling. He is doing that for over 30 years now.
That's exactly what I meant
Not happy the OP is only 1-2, but, certainly glad I'm 2-0
Quote Originally Posted by WrightTheBright:
Reich is a Godfather of NFL = he can orchestrate the best entertainment we can long for and at the same time be a books darling. He is doing that for over 30 years now.
That's exactly what I meant
Not happy the OP is only 1-2, but, certainly glad I'm 2-0
Just want to share some info from vegasinsider. (I'm not fading you) I had Washington +8 in my picks, now I'm undecided...
Since the 2011-12 NFL Playoffs, the Wild Card round team that's the biggest favorite for the weekend is 6-4 SU but just 3-7 ATS; 1-7 ATS since 2013-14.
There are a couple of things to note here, the first being the sample size hits 10 instead of 9 because back in 2017, Kansas City and Jacksonville each closed at -8.5 for the largest spread of Wild Card weekend. Neither of them covered the number, but the Jags did win outright in their 10-3 victory over the Bills.
The second thing to note is that all three ATS wins have come when it's been a double digit spread. In 2011 we had New Orleans close at -10.5 in an easy SU and ATS victory, and Green Bay followed suit the very next year closing at the same -10.5 number. It wasn't until 2016 that we had another double digit spread during Wild Card weekend, as Pittsburgh rolled to 30-12 win over Miami as -11.5 chalk. Every other time the largest spread of the weekend has closed lower than double digits, the underdog has covered.
So it's up to you on whether or not to trust that second caveat this week, as it's the New Orleans Saints who own the distinction of being the biggest favorite this week at -10, although it does seem to be moving into the single digit range at various places in the market.
It will be New Orleans or Tampa Bay that closes in this role as the biggest Wild Card favorite though, and if both end up in single digits, it may be time to close your eyes and hit submit on ATS wagers on Washington and Chicago, even with how unsettling that may feel.
Just want to share some info from vegasinsider. (I'm not fading you) I had Washington +8 in my picks, now I'm undecided...
Since the 2011-12 NFL Playoffs, the Wild Card round team that's the biggest favorite for the weekend is 6-4 SU but just 3-7 ATS; 1-7 ATS since 2013-14.
There are a couple of things to note here, the first being the sample size hits 10 instead of 9 because back in 2017, Kansas City and Jacksonville each closed at -8.5 for the largest spread of Wild Card weekend. Neither of them covered the number, but the Jags did win outright in their 10-3 victory over the Bills.
The second thing to note is that all three ATS wins have come when it's been a double digit spread. In 2011 we had New Orleans close at -10.5 in an easy SU and ATS victory, and Green Bay followed suit the very next year closing at the same -10.5 number. It wasn't until 2016 that we had another double digit spread during Wild Card weekend, as Pittsburgh rolled to 30-12 win over Miami as -11.5 chalk. Every other time the largest spread of the weekend has closed lower than double digits, the underdog has covered.
So it's up to you on whether or not to trust that second caveat this week, as it's the New Orleans Saints who own the distinction of being the biggest favorite this week at -10, although it does seem to be moving into the single digit range at various places in the market.
It will be New Orleans or Tampa Bay that closes in this role as the biggest Wild Card favorite though, and if both end up in single digits, it may be time to close your eyes and hit submit on ATS wagers on Washington and Chicago, even with how unsettling that may feel.
Just want to share some info from vegasinsider. (I'm not fading you) I had Washington +8 in my picks, now I'm undecided... Since the 2011-12 NFL Playoffs, the Wild Card round team that's the biggest favorite for the weekend is 6-4 SU but just 3-7 ATS; 1-7 ATS since 2013-14. There are a couple of things to note here, the first being the sample size hits 10 instead of 9 because back in 2017, Kansas City and Jacksonville each closed at -8.5 for the largest spread of Wild Card weekend. Neither of them covered the number, but the Jags did win outright in their 10-3 victory over the Bills. The second thing to note is that all three ATS wins have come when it's been a double digit spread. In 2011 we had New Orleans close at -10.5 in an easy SU and ATS victory, and Green Bay followed suit the very next year closing at the same -10.5 number. It wasn't until 2016 that we had another double digit spread during Wild Card weekend, as Pittsburgh rolled to 30-12 win over Miami as -11.5 chalk. Every other time the largest spread of the weekend has closed lower than double digits, the underdog has covered. So it's up to you on whether or not to trust that second caveat this week, as it's the New Orleans Saints who own the distinction of being the biggest favorite this week at -10, although it does seem to be moving into the single digit range at various places in the market. It will be New Orleans or Tampa Bay that closes in this role as the biggest Wild Card favorite though, and if both end up in single digits, it may be time to close your eyes and hit submit on ATS wagers on Washington and Chicago, even with how unsettling that may feel.
While I do understand your point and perfectly see what are you trying to establish - I don't agree at all that the stats that are hand picked to prove a point can really be used for handicapping purposes. When you're basing your picks on stats you're actually basing your picks on what Vegas wants you to base your picks on. On top of that - please reread the opening lines of my thread here and the previous one: this season is very different from all the seasons so far as the variables in place are structured in a way that any stat from the past besides the "no one won twice in a row since the Pats did it 2003-2004" is the only stat I can use as it is the one coming out of NFL unofficial policy and is fully supported from a business perspective of merchandizing. I know, sounds crazy, nevertheless - true 100% (at least from my perspective).
So, with all due respect - winning or losing - the stats are created after the games are over and since our slogan is everyday starts with 0-0, past stats have no value for me as per say
Quote Originally Posted by zOrO-GZA:
Just want to share some info from vegasinsider. (I'm not fading you) I had Washington +8 in my picks, now I'm undecided... Since the 2011-12 NFL Playoffs, the Wild Card round team that's the biggest favorite for the weekend is 6-4 SU but just 3-7 ATS; 1-7 ATS since 2013-14. There are a couple of things to note here, the first being the sample size hits 10 instead of 9 because back in 2017, Kansas City and Jacksonville each closed at -8.5 for the largest spread of Wild Card weekend. Neither of them covered the number, but the Jags did win outright in their 10-3 victory over the Bills. The second thing to note is that all three ATS wins have come when it's been a double digit spread. In 2011 we had New Orleans close at -10.5 in an easy SU and ATS victory, and Green Bay followed suit the very next year closing at the same -10.5 number. It wasn't until 2016 that we had another double digit spread during Wild Card weekend, as Pittsburgh rolled to 30-12 win over Miami as -11.5 chalk. Every other time the largest spread of the weekend has closed lower than double digits, the underdog has covered. So it's up to you on whether or not to trust that second caveat this week, as it's the New Orleans Saints who own the distinction of being the biggest favorite this week at -10, although it does seem to be moving into the single digit range at various places in the market. It will be New Orleans or Tampa Bay that closes in this role as the biggest Wild Card favorite though, and if both end up in single digits, it may be time to close your eyes and hit submit on ATS wagers on Washington and Chicago, even with how unsettling that may feel.
While I do understand your point and perfectly see what are you trying to establish - I don't agree at all that the stats that are hand picked to prove a point can really be used for handicapping purposes. When you're basing your picks on stats you're actually basing your picks on what Vegas wants you to base your picks on. On top of that - please reread the opening lines of my thread here and the previous one: this season is very different from all the seasons so far as the variables in place are structured in a way that any stat from the past besides the "no one won twice in a row since the Pats did it 2003-2004" is the only stat I can use as it is the one coming out of NFL unofficial policy and is fully supported from a business perspective of merchandizing. I know, sounds crazy, nevertheless - true 100% (at least from my perspective).
So, with all due respect - winning or losing - the stats are created after the games are over and since our slogan is everyday starts with 0-0, past stats have no value for me as per say
GL on the rest Ive tailed some here and gained some knowledge TY!!....
(just fyi both 1q plays are currently at +$juice on bookmaker and its been freaky since December early plays / 2h plays...that +juice has been the death knell.....)
14allall41(sp)
GL on the rest Ive tailed some here and gained some knowledge TY!!....
(just fyi both 1q plays are currently at +$juice on bookmaker and its been freaky since December early plays / 2h plays...that +juice has been the death knell.....)
@GrindItOut44 When you choose to pay -125 at one book at -.5 over another book at -2 -110, you are buying it down. Think before you speak.
I tried being nice, twice, now I will try another way….Hey dikbreath maybe try reading and COMPREHENDING before posting INCORRECTLY and INSULTING someone. Yes, I understand how basic odds work, thanks. Your original question was, “Why would you pay extra to go from -2 to -.5…? This makes no sense to me?” And I explained nicely the progression of what had happened and that no one was doing this but instead of READING and COMPREHENDING you would rather be an ANNOYING CUUNT!! So, I will say again no one is doing that, all the online books had it at -.5!! Double-Up’s Local had it at -2 and his other local or Casino Book had it at -1.5 thus no one was “Choosing to pay -125 at one book at -.5 over another book at -2 -110”, do you understand now FUKTARD??? Or do you need a flowchart?? So get that bad of diks out of your mouth and pay attention if you can, dikbreath!!
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:
@GrindItOut44 When you choose to pay -125 at one book at -.5 over another book at -2 -110, you are buying it down. Think before you speak.
I tried being nice, twice, now I will try another way….Hey dikbreath maybe try reading and COMPREHENDING before posting INCORRECTLY and INSULTING someone. Yes, I understand how basic odds work, thanks. Your original question was, “Why would you pay extra to go from -2 to -.5…? This makes no sense to me?” And I explained nicely the progression of what had happened and that no one was doing this but instead of READING and COMPREHENDING you would rather be an ANNOYING CUUNT!! So, I will say again no one is doing that, all the online books had it at -.5!! Double-Up’s Local had it at -2 and his other local or Casino Book had it at -1.5 thus no one was “Choosing to pay -125 at one book at -.5 over another book at -2 -110”, do you understand now FUKTARD??? Or do you need a flowchart?? So get that bad of diks out of your mouth and pay attention if you can, dikbreath!!
Hot Forum Topics
