Posted:
#51
BOL week 3 phixer. 
0
don't get fooled again week 3
Posted:
#53
Awesome insight phixer. What's your look at the cowboys with romo and Bryant hurt. They are underdogs +2 and public doesn't seem to be back them as much. I believe they traded for Matt cassell so you think it's a good opportunity to back the cowboys still as they are somewhat undervalued?
0
Posted:
#56
Phixer,
I've been thinking a bit about your stance that Vegas controls a lot these games. It makes complete sense to me and I agree, but I'm curious how much you factor in the NFLs need for good storylines and teams that fit certain expectations or roles. When I look at your record of 12-4-1, I see 3 losses and 1 push that are the result of either Brady or manning winning the game or pushing the total too high when Vegas stood to lose on those results. Take away your bets against those two and you're a ridiculous 12-1 right now.
The NfL always wants new good teams to emerge and to have teams that have been strong for a while start to fall to keep people guessing but they always seem to let Brady and manning remain the untouchables. My question: how much of a role do you think the NFLs interests play into the results of games? It can't be just Vegas pulling the strings, can it?
Thanks for your thoughts.
I've been thinking a bit about your stance that Vegas controls a lot these games. It makes complete sense to me and I agree, but I'm curious how much you factor in the NFLs need for good storylines and teams that fit certain expectations or roles. When I look at your record of 12-4-1, I see 3 losses and 1 push that are the result of either Brady or manning winning the game or pushing the total too high when Vegas stood to lose on those results. Take away your bets against those two and you're a ridiculous 12-1 right now.
The NfL always wants new good teams to emerge and to have teams that have been strong for a while start to fall to keep people guessing but they always seem to let Brady and manning remain the untouchables. My question: how much of a role do you think the NFLs interests play into the results of games? It can't be just Vegas pulling the strings, can it?
Thanks for your thoughts.
0
Posted:
#57
Quote Originally Posted by fanatical_facts:
Phixer,
I've been thinking a bit about your stance that Vegas controls a lot these games. It makes complete sense to me and I agree, but I'm curious how much you factor in the NFLs need for good storylines and teams that fit certain expectations or roles. When I look at your record of 12-4-1, I see 3 losses and 1 push that are the result of either Brady or manning winning the game or pushing the total too high when Vegas stood to lose on those results. Take away your bets against those two and you're a ridiculous 12-1 right now.
The NfL always wants new good teams to emerge and to have teams that have been strong for a while start to fall to keep people guessing but they always seem to let Brady and manning remain the untouchables. My question: how much of a role do you think the NFLs interests play into the results of games? It can't be just Vegas pulling the strings, can it?
Thanks for your thoughts.
Phixer,
I've been thinking a bit about your stance that Vegas controls a lot these games. It makes complete sense to me and I agree, but I'm curious how much you factor in the NFLs need for good storylines and teams that fit certain expectations or roles. When I look at your record of 12-4-1, I see 3 losses and 1 push that are the result of either Brady or manning winning the game or pushing the total too high when Vegas stood to lose on those results. Take away your bets against those two and you're a ridiculous 12-1 right now.
The NfL always wants new good teams to emerge and to have teams that have been strong for a while start to fall to keep people guessing but they always seem to let Brady and manning remain the untouchables. My question: how much of a role do you think the NFLs interests play into the results of games? It can't be just Vegas pulling the strings, can it?
Thanks for your thoughts.
How much money do the networks pay the NFL? Billions. So if a team is getting blown out at half time, it would make alot of sense to start the second half with the blown out team mounting a comeback. It keeps viewers glued to the TV. WWE style.
0
Posted:
#59
Quote Originally Posted by saintsfan1977:
How much money do the networks pay the NFL? Billions. So if a team is getting blown out at half time, it would make alot of sense to start the second half with the blown out team mounting a comeback. It keeps viewers glued to the TV. WWE style.
How much money do the networks pay the NFL? Billions. So if a team is getting blown out at half time, it would make alot of sense to start the second half with the blown out team mounting a comeback. It keeps viewers glued to the TV. WWE style.
Much like the 13-3 halftime snooze fest being put on by GB/Sea, then the Russell Wilson "magic" got the interest back, before the correct team covered
0
Posted:
#61
looking at the lines and the props for the game this is what i see:
giants over 23.5 -125, skins over 19.5 -125
giants under 23.5 -110 skins over 19.5 -110
if you sum up you get giants -4 and total of 43 and from my experience those numbers as well as skins exactly 20 +1000 and the giants exactly 24 +1100 are never going to happen. the numbers are meant for the "sharps" who think they can outsmart "vegas" numbers (been burnt several times in the past from those calculations - the best example i stayed out and almost was sorry i did was in broncos at chiefs where the exat scoring numbers were 24-17 chiefs and that is a precise reason it did not happen as that as the score before manning throwing a td 36 seconds before the end)
what i gather from those numbers (yet conditional - will keep looking at the numbers some more) is that giants aren't going to win in 4 points, giants aren't going to score exactly 24 and the skins arent going to score exactly 20. it is going to be under and the skins have a better chance to cover than the giants
0
Posted:
#62
Quote Originally Posted by Hoops1487:
Awesome insight phixer. What's your look at the cowboys with romo and Bryant hurt. They are underdogs +2 and public doesn't seem to be back them as much. I believe they traded for Matt cassell so you think it's a good opportunity to back the cowboys still as they are somewhat undervalued?
Awesome insight phixer. What's your look at the cowboys with romo and Bryant hurt. They are underdogs +2 and public doesn't seem to be back them as much. I believe they traded for Matt cassell so you think it's a good opportunity to back the cowboys still as they are somewhat undervalued?
They may have traded for Matt Cassell but Weeden will still be the starter. Granted it was the Eagles, Weeden still looked good. And with that defensive support he has plus the o line and receiver corps, look for a lot of short dump passes and rushing. Cowboys will be eating a ton of clock as usual.
That being said, i'm going under @ 45.
(I know the question was directed at phixer, just wanted to give my input)
0
Posted:
#63
Quote Originally Posted by phixer:
looking at the lines and the props for the game this is what i see:
looking at the lines and the props for the game this is what i see:
giants over 23.5 -125, skins over 19.5 -125
giants under 23.5 -110 skins over 19.5 -110
if you sum up you get giants -4 and total of 43 and from my experience those numbers as well as skins exactly 20 +1000 and the giants exactly 24 +1100 are never going to happen. the numbers are meant for the "sharps" who think they can outsmart "vegas" numbers (been burnt several times in the past from those calculations - the best example i stayed out and almost was sorry i did was in broncos at chiefs where the exat scoring numbers were 24-17 chiefs and that is a precise reason it did not happen as that as the score before manning throwing a td 36 seconds before the end)
what i gather from those numbers (yet conditional - will keep looking at the numbers some more) is that giants aren't going to win in 4 points, giants aren't going to score exactly 24 and the skins arent going to score exactly 20. it is going to be under and the skins have a better chance to cover than the giants
Looking over the past few games by the giants and skins, I am thinking of going under in the 2nd half due to the fact that they both blow hard in the 2nd half. But a TT per team going the under on both seems like the smart bet?
0
Posted:
#64
i appreciate you guys asking me questions about the games i did not post the pick for. although i may post some and may not - i don't practice and advise you also not to practice part time handicapping. if i handicap a game - i dive whole 30 meters and stay there as long as i get the supply of the oxygen or i get my mark -whatever comes first - but i do not throw away my opinions just to answer and look knowledgeable. so, please focus on what i handicap with all due respect. you can converse here between each other and offer opinions about the other games - i really dont mind it - but please do not expect me to answer things i did not initiate
0
Posted:
#65
Quote Originally Posted by dfwben:
Looking over the past few games by the giants and skins, I am thinking of going under in the 2nd half due to the fact that they both blow hard in the 2nd half. But a TT per team going the under on both seems like the smart bet?
it seems like the bet of the person that is sure there will be under and then takes a chance to pay the juice or get double win. why? if you are already sure it is under - pay the damn thing and get it over with. you may hit in the way you asked about once or twice but over the long run ats bets and total bets are what will get you through mostly because it allows you to manage your money
0
Posted:
#66
Quote Originally Posted by phixer:
it seems like the bet of the person that is sure there will be under and then takes a chance to pay the juice or get double win. why? if you are already sure it is under - pay the damn thing and get it over with. you may hit in the way you asked about once or twice but over the long run ats bets and total bets are what will get you through mostly because it allows you to manage your money
I feel like we have been over this before....
0
Posted:
#67
Quote Originally Posted by saintsfan1977:
How much money do the networks pay the NFL? Billions. So if a team is getting blown out at half time, it would make alot of sense to start the second half with the blown out team mounting a comeback. It keeps viewers glued to the TV. WWE style.
Wholeheartedly concur and think there is waaaay more influence on games from the NFL head office than VEGAS has over games. The key word being "influence" - not "fixed" nor "scripted" like the WWF. JMHOHow much money do the networks pay the NFL? Billions. So if a team is getting blown out at half time, it would make alot of sense to start the second half with the blown out team mounting a comeback. It keeps viewers glued to the TV. WWE style.
The pen is mightier than the pigs
0
Posted:
#69
the main objective is entertainment value. all the professional leagues have the narrative saying to expect the unexpected and that is always right for "vegas" when needed. and we yet didn't cover the subject of other interests than "vegas" and the league usually opposed to both. that is at least half the seldom cases the events go out of "scripted" limits
0
Posted:
#71
Quote Originally Posted by phixer:
regarding our analysis of what we have seen last week and how that is translated into the picks - here is a valuable example that will teach you to fish rather eating one i provide:
regarding our analysis of what we have seen last week and how that is translated into the picks - here is a valuable example that will teach you to fish rather eating one i provide:
we all remember jets colts game and how "dominant" the jets were and how "bad" luck was. well, that was for the sole purpose of that game as one in a previous week for the purpose to have jets colts game balanced which apparently didn't help and then had to happen what we saw happened.
so, if the pattern of public not believing that luck and the colts are as weak as they were "looking" continues - we may see another "bad performance". the meaning is that the imbalance of the money dictates the result and not opposite. the line that opened at colts -5.5 in tennessee has quickly dropped to -3 colts despite "sharp" money being on the colts. by my calculations the only people who has been really in the biggest hole since the beginning of this nfl season are the same "sharps" who did not adapt to ever changing "vegas" policies of conduct.
and again - there is much more between the lines than i wrote and it is about the time you began deciphering the codes as that is the only way you are going to survive in this ever changing scenery of super crooks working for the legit businesses. you have to be super duper crook in your thinking process and great accountant at the same time. only those two characteristics will get you thru week after week
Really good assessment. Never the less I am seeing a Colts team that hasn't found any sort of rhythm and we all know how key that is to winning games. Don't believe me look at Manning and Breez. Manning while not at his best has rallied his troops and makes progress each week, Breez while a very good QB is having communication problems and an offensive line that is miss reading cues and running the wrong routes. Colts have the same problem and Luck just isn't the same caliber leader. On the road at Carolina, I'm liking the streaking Panthers.
Giants and Skins both have decent offense, so I was really surprised to see you take the under. I really feel this could go either way and 44 seems very tight. I wonder if the Giants ATS wouldn’t be a better pick.
Keep up the good work and best of luck this weekend.
0
Posted:
#72
Quote Originally Posted by irage:
Really good assessment. Never the less I am seeing a Colts team that hasn't found any sort of rhythm and we all know how key that is to winning games. Don't believe me look at Manning and Breez. Manning while not at his best has rallied his troops and makes progress each week, Breez while a very good QB is having communication problems and an offensive line that is miss reading cues and running the wrong routes. Colts have the same problem and Luck just isn't the same caliber leader. On the road at Carolina, I'm liking the streaking Panthers.
Giants and Skins both have decent offense, so I was really surprised to see you take the under. I really feel this could go either way and 44 seems very tight. I wonder if the Giants ATS wouldn’t be a better pick.
Keep up the good work and best of luck this weekend.
Sorry, that should be the Titans not Panthers.
0
Posted:
#74
On tonight's game, for me, it comes down to not who wins Giants or Skins, but rather who wins Sharps or Squares.
I am on the Under because for TNF/SNF/MNF I usually always am - especially when the square bet looks like a good play as Squares win their bets but lose their parlays.
Phixer I did not fully read your analysis in the "teach to fish post" as that one needs some time and decent concentration (a luxury cannot afford that right now). But if you are stating (and I don't think you are) that the sharps lost this past weekend that would not be correct. The house and the sharps cleaned up this past weekend and Mon Night, with the sharps only losing one game - the Bills. Every nickel the house lost in week 1 came back in week 2 dressed up as a dollar - or so the saying goes.
If the Squares - who are the lifeblood of Vegas - lose every week they will not come back. They have to win - the house and the sharps cannot win every week. OVer time with the vig the house always grinds out positive $ but that's a given.
Tonight the Sharps are all over the Skins and rightfully so, they are driving the line down on a big money game to 3, short week for the Giants, Giants stinking out the joint the first 2 weeks, Skins moved the ball well vs MIA and MIA had to come back to win(every one saw that game and bet MIA), Skins rock the Rams (everyone saw that game and bet STL). Pretty square thinking but they see something and when you, Suuma and a few others have you writeups maybe the fuzz in my brain may dissolve....
But past events warrant the 3 point line and the public will still take the Giants at home, nationally televised night game and there will be good support $ wise on both sides, this is a good line for Vegas.
But it's a soft line, IMHO.
Before week 1 Giants would have been a 6-7 point fav here against Gruden's crappy squad for many reasons.
But after two measly weeks we have an overreaction making this line 3.
IMHO the squares take this tonight as Giants are still the better team even with a short week. IMNSHO this bodes REAL well for the UNDER.
I am on the Under because for TNF/SNF/MNF I usually always am - especially when the square bet looks like a good play as Squares win their bets but lose their parlays.
Phixer I did not fully read your analysis in the "teach to fish post" as that one needs some time and decent concentration (a luxury cannot afford that right now). But if you are stating (and I don't think you are) that the sharps lost this past weekend that would not be correct. The house and the sharps cleaned up this past weekend and Mon Night, with the sharps only losing one game - the Bills. Every nickel the house lost in week 1 came back in week 2 dressed up as a dollar - or so the saying goes.
If the Squares - who are the lifeblood of Vegas - lose every week they will not come back. They have to win - the house and the sharps cannot win every week. OVer time with the vig the house always grinds out positive $ but that's a given.
Tonight the Sharps are all over the Skins and rightfully so, they are driving the line down on a big money game to 3, short week for the Giants, Giants stinking out the joint the first 2 weeks, Skins moved the ball well vs MIA and MIA had to come back to win(every one saw that game and bet MIA), Skins rock the Rams (everyone saw that game and bet STL). Pretty square thinking but they see something and when you, Suuma and a few others have you writeups maybe the fuzz in my brain may dissolve....
But past events warrant the 3 point line and the public will still take the Giants at home, nationally televised night game and there will be good support $ wise on both sides, this is a good line for Vegas.
But it's a soft line, IMHO.
Before week 1 Giants would have been a 6-7 point fav here against Gruden's crappy squad for many reasons.
But after two measly weeks we have an overreaction making this line 3.
IMHO the squares take this tonight as Giants are still the better team even with a short week. IMNSHO this bodes REAL well for the UNDER.
The pen is mightier than the pigs
0
Posted:
#75
Quote Originally Posted by gcwrestling08:
"well, that was for the sole purpose of that game as one in a previous week for the purpose to have jets colts game balanced which apparently didn't help and then had to happen what we saw happened."
Mr Wrestler, English is not my first language either but behind a grammatical issue or two is the point if you just look a little..."well, that was for the sole purpose of that game as one in a previous week for the purpose to have jets colts game balanced which apparently didn't help and then had to happen what we saw happened."
this is the guy you people trust your money with? wtf...
A line that balances the $ more or less, based on public perception of recent events or bad information is prone to be a soft line with an advantage going to the astute capper.
The pen is mightier than the pigs
0
Hot Forum Topics
