Too early to know 40+ points have been scored in the second half before.
Not to mention if there OT.
Alot has to go wrong for the under to hit.
Sure if things continue as they are. But it has not been domination by either side so far.
One deep play and the over alive again.
Too early to know 40+ points have been scored in the second half before.
Not to mention if there OT.
Alot has to go wrong for the under to hit.
Sure if things continue as they are. But it has not been domination by either side so far.
One deep play and the over alive again.
@Yanasaur
Here’s the Proof if anyone is interested, forgive the symbols that aren’t recognized, but I think you get the gist.
Theorem on Asymmetric Viability in NFL Over/Under Betting
Statement: In NFL over/under betting, the over bet maintains infinite theoretical viability while the under bet has bounded viability.
Proof:
Let T ? R? be the betting total (over/under line) and S(t) be the cumulative score function where t ? [0, T_game] represents game time.
Part I:
The Over Has Unbounded Viability
For any time t < T_game, define the remaining scoring potential as:
P_remaining(t) = sup{points scoreable in [t, T_game]}
Since football scoring mechanisms have no theoretical upper bound within finite time:
• Touchdowns (6 pts) + conversions (1-2 pts)
• Field goals (3 pts)
• Safeties (2 pts)
• No rule limiting scoring frequency per unit time
Therefore: P_remaining(t) = 8 for all t < T_game
This means for any deficit d = T - S(t) > 0, there exists a theoretical scoring sequence such that:
S(T_game) - S(t) = d + e for any e > 0
Corollary: The over bet cannot be declared mathematically impossible until t = T_game.
Part II:
The Under Has Finite Viability
Define the “death point” of the under bet as:
t* = inf{t : S(t) > T}
Once S(t*) > T, we have S(t) = S(t*) > T for all t = t* (score monotonicity).
Therefore: P(Under wins) = 0 for all t = t*
Mathematical Asymmetry:
• Over viability: [0, T_game] (full interval)
• Under viability: [0, t*] where t* = T_game (bounded interval)
QED
Practical Implication: This asymmetry creates different risk profiles - over bettors maintain hope throughout the entire game duration, while under bettors face definitive elimination at a finite threshold, making the psychological and strategic dynamics fundamentally different between these bet types.
@Yanasaur
Here’s the Proof if anyone is interested, forgive the symbols that aren’t recognized, but I think you get the gist.
Theorem on Asymmetric Viability in NFL Over/Under Betting
Statement: In NFL over/under betting, the over bet maintains infinite theoretical viability while the under bet has bounded viability.
Proof:
Let T ? R? be the betting total (over/under line) and S(t) be the cumulative score function where t ? [0, T_game] represents game time.
Part I:
The Over Has Unbounded Viability
For any time t < T_game, define the remaining scoring potential as:
P_remaining(t) = sup{points scoreable in [t, T_game]}
Since football scoring mechanisms have no theoretical upper bound within finite time:
• Touchdowns (6 pts) + conversions (1-2 pts)
• Field goals (3 pts)
• Safeties (2 pts)
• No rule limiting scoring frequency per unit time
Therefore: P_remaining(t) = 8 for all t < T_game
This means for any deficit d = T - S(t) > 0, there exists a theoretical scoring sequence such that:
S(T_game) - S(t) = d + e for any e > 0
Corollary: The over bet cannot be declared mathematically impossible until t = T_game.
Part II:
The Under Has Finite Viability
Define the “death point” of the under bet as:
t* = inf{t : S(t) > T}
Once S(t*) > T, we have S(t) = S(t*) > T for all t = t* (score monotonicity).
Therefore: P(Under wins) = 0 for all t = t*
Mathematical Asymmetry:
• Over viability: [0, T_game] (full interval)
• Under viability: [0, t*] where t* = T_game (bounded interval)
QED
Practical Implication: This asymmetry creates different risk profiles - over bettors maintain hope throughout the entire game duration, while under bettors face definitive elimination at a finite threshold, making the psychological and strategic dynamics fundamentally different between these bet types.
@Saywaht
Exactly hahaha. Put in practical terms, you dont even have to bet for very long to know you are constantly sweating any under and its brutal
@Saywaht
Exactly hahaha. Put in practical terms, you dont even have to bet for very long to know you are constantly sweating any under and its brutal
@nuyencac
???
Chiefs have to score a FG or TD and get the onside kick.
The over may not hit but by all means it not dead.
Anyone who has under right now is sweating hard.
Maybe stop betting O/U since you seem to think it over after 1 qtr.
@nuyencac
???
Chiefs have to score a FG or TD and get the onside kick.
The over may not hit but by all means it not dead.
Anyone who has under right now is sweating hard.
Maybe stop betting O/U since you seem to think it over after 1 qtr.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.