Posted:
#26
What site was used for the original statistics?
0
Record Numbers Coming in on Green Bay
Posted:
#27
Quote Originally Posted by tuco:
well, i happened to play hockey in college and had an MCL tear.
I was able to play within a week after diagnosis and my doctor and rehab regiment were not nearly as good as what cutler has.
in any case, money talks.. mine is on the bears.
well, i happened to play hockey in college and had an MCL tear.
I was able to play within a week after diagnosis and my doctor and rehab regiment were not nearly as good as what cutler has.
in any case, money talks.. mine is on the bears.
Ive never played hockey, but Im guessing an injury for a hockey player and NFL QB are a bit different and have different results....
The QB handles the ball every snap of the game, so if you think a tear will not effect him moving, stepping, bracing, running, as leverage, then so be it.
Good luck with your wager. There is a reason GB went from +110 to 1-5 to win the divison this week 
0
Posted:
#30
I agree but it doesnt work every time, some weeks I have noticed over the years will happen like this....Vegas lets the public have all the games with 90% on a side and takes all the others that have 70% and 60% and still make out ok. its not an exact science but If I believed the NFL were completely real how could I not bet my entire life on GB this week
0
Posted:
#32
Quote Originally Posted by HoustonSports:
There is no site, period, where you can obtain the dollar amounts that have been wagered. If I am wrong, please show me the site and I will gladly say I was wrong.
The numbers you posted are completely fictitious.
Yep, completely fictitious. In fact, like another poster mentioned, i'm pulling these numbers right out of my butt.
Denver -2½ -130 $84,150 90.73%
Baltimore +2½ +110 $8,602 9.27%
Detroit -7 +115 $94,361 92.94%
Arizona +7 -135 $7,172 7.06%
Green Bay -3 -110 $565,785 95.50%
Chicago +3 -110 $26,676 4.50%
0
Posted:
#35
LC must be laughing his behind off
so many people butthurt about not knowing the source. Pretend you never saw what LC posted and cap your own games...very interesting numbers, but I am still feeling good about my Packers pick.
OMG HE HAS INFO...I WANT IT...WAHHHHHH...SINCE I CAN'T FIND IT, YOU ARE LYING...WAHHHHHH
so many people butthurt about not knowing the source. Pretend you never saw what LC posted and cap your own games...very interesting numbers, but I am still feeling good about my Packers pick.
OMG HE HAS INFO...I WANT IT...WAHHHHHH...SINCE I CAN'T FIND IT, YOU ARE LYING...WAHHHHHH
0
Posted:
#36
Quote Originally Posted by bpbeelen:
I think the Bears are going to win straight up, but to bet purely based on line movement is insane. It's a football game.
I think the Bears are going to win straight up, but to bet purely based on line movement is insane. It's a football game.
Who said anything of this sort?? You sound like some of my friends Ill give them some good info and theyll tell me Im an idiot for betting on just that when I never ever bet on just one thing and never will. Not to mention i am up about 3 times the amount they are. I crack up at them fools. Hope they reading cause they been some retards lately.
0
Posted:
#37
Quote Originally Posted by theshadynfl:
I agree but it doesnt work every time, some weeks I have noticed over the years will happen like this....Vegas lets the public have all the games with 90% on a side and takes all the others that have 70% and 60% and still make out ok. its not an exact science but If I believed the NFL were completely real how could I not bet my entire life on GB this week
I agree but it doesnt work every time, some weeks I have noticed over the years will happen like this....Vegas lets the public have all the games with 90% on a side and takes all the others that have 70% and 60% and still make out ok. its not an exact science but If I believed the NFL were completely real how could I not bet my entire life on GB this week
"Vegas lets the public have all the games with 90% on a side and takes all the others that have 70% and 60% and still make out ok."
Vegas doesnt need to profit EVERY GAME.....just everyday as a whole
There are about 60+ games that day, in which Vegas will win their money back
If you think Vegas is going to risk their profits on Cutler against GB
0
Posted:
#39
Quote Originally Posted by mrquija27:
Who said anything of this sort?? You sound like some of my friends Ill give them some good info and theyll tell me Im an idiot for betting on just that when I never ever bet on just one thing and never will. Not to mention i am up about 3 times the amount they are. I crack up at them fools. Hope they reading cause they been some retards lately.
Let's say you like the Bears to cover. Wouldn't you rather get them at 3.5 or 4? Or would you prefer the line stays at 3, because if it does, the Bears are the "sharp" pick? Sounds like LC is in the latter category, which I can't comprehend. I'll be on the Bears regardless, but that extra half point could be the difference in this game.
0
Posted:
#40
Quote Originally Posted by bpbeelen:
Let's say you like the Bears to cover. Wouldn't you rather get them at 3.5 or 4? Or would you prefer the line stays at 3, because if it does, the Bears are the "sharp" pick? Sounds like LC is in the latter category, which I can't comprehend. I'll be on the Bears regardless, but that extra half point could be the difference in this game.
Is this a trick question? Of course I would take the points.
I think LC is implying this is a trap game for Green Bay and Vegas knows something we do not and is not scared to lose this bet. I am not saying he is correct I do not know. I dont necessarily believe in the Vegas trap angle. I myself am playing the Bears for other reasons but it is always good encourement to have Vegas wanting you to win. That can never hurt. I dont believe in fixing but a little influence does happen from time to time.
Think about it. Vegas are the pros we are not. We all wanna be but they have people involved investigaing everygame etc. Lets just say they know something the public dont and they fully expect a bears cover with the 3 and there is no need to raise it to 3.5-4. Regardless if his numbers are accurate we all know 90%+ bets are coming in on Green Bay why would they adjust the spread to lose bets on them if they feel they have an edge. If they are worried at all about losing this game the spread wouldve budged to at least 3.5. Obviously for some unknown reason Vegas dont plan on losing this bet is the entire point of this thread in my opinion. I might be incorrect but that is my take and I agree and was already on the Bears without this information. But this only reenforces the pick but not the main factor for it. Like you say if your betting solely on this your just lazy and dumb.
0
Posted:
#41
Quote Originally Posted by mrquija27:
Is this a trick question? Of course I would take the points.
I think LC is implying this is a trap game for Green Bay and Vegas knows something we do not and is not scared to lose this bet. I am not saying he is correct I do not know. I dont necessarily believe in the Vegas trap angle. I myself am playing the Bears for other reasons but it is always good encourement to have Vegas wanting you to win. That can never hurt. I dont believe in fixing but a little influence does happen from time to time.
Think about it. Vegas are the pros we are not. We all wanna be but they have people involved investigaing everygame etc. Lets just say they know something the public dont and they fully expect a bears cover with the 3 and there is no need to raise it to 3.5-4. Regardless if his numbers are accurate we all know 90%+ bets are coming in on Green Bay why would they adjust the spread to lose bets on them if they feel they have an edge. If they are worried at all about losing this game the spread wouldve budged to at least 3.5. Obviously for some unknown reason Vegas dont plan on losing this bet is the entire point of this thread in my opinion. I might be incorrect but that is my take and I agree and was already on the Bears without this information. But this only reenforces the pick but not the main factor for it. Like you say if your betting solely on this your just lazy and dumb.
Only thing you need to read is right there. Pinny is holding -3 (+105) right now. I'll say it again, if this line closes at -3, i'll be going extremely large on CHI. Still time for it to move though so we'll see.
0
Posted:
#44
Quote Originally Posted by bpbeelen:
We see this all the time though. Publicly backed team gets juiced and still covers. I think there are a lot of situational angles and football reasons to like the Bears this week, and I pray the line goes to 3.5. If not, oh well.
We see this all the time though. Publicly backed team gets juiced and still covers. I think there are a lot of situational angles and football reasons to like the Bears this week, and I pray the line goes to 3.5. If not, oh well.
That's just the thing, the Packers aren't being juiced. Books are giving +105 on the opening line of -3 despite 95% of all bets being on them. Look at Pinny, the sharpest book in the industry, still giving out the Packers at -3 with +odds, basically begging for more GB money.
0
Hot Forum Topics
