All Forums | NFL Betting Forum

Superbowl line GB -3.5?

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 2945
Posts: 43
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2009
Posts: 542
Posted: #26

Quote Originally Posted by Hollywoodturf:

Quote Originally Posted by walktheline:

Yeah, are you on planet earth? What in the blue hell makes you think they would ever give the Steelers 3 full points, let alone the hook?

What makes Green Bay a better team to begin with? Get your head out of your ass.
[/Quote]   What makes Greenbay the better team is SACK PRESSURE, PENALTYS & PASSING YARDS ALLOWED!! Now can I put my head back in my ass?

Steelers rank #1 in the NFL in sacks and yards per pass.  Sounds like you know your shit.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2009
Posts: 1154
Posted: #27
Pitt opened PK +110 at Pinnacle during the game.
The more people saw the Jets shredding the Steelers' "prevent defense" in the 2nd H, the more the line went > Green Bay.
It's now Pitt +2.5 +105.
I am now contemplating my initial Pitt SB victory after what the Jets were able to do in the 2nd H, passing wise (e.g. Seattle exposing Chi-town, 2nd H). Remember, both AZ and Seattle had plenty of opportunities to win the game outright vs Pitt in their SB match-ups.
However, if the line goes to 3, Pitt should definitely be considered. (Barring any major injuries.)
Note: I believe they were 6.5 pt faves vs AZ and 4 pt faves vs Seattle.
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2010
Posts: 694
Posted: #28


GB won THREE road games vs the TOP three seeds.

Pitt was life and death at home vs the BOTTOM two seeds.

GB is clearly the hotter team, getting much public love and playing great. They should be favored

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2009
Posts: 1654
Posted: #29

Quote Originally Posted by LakeTahoeKid:

However, if the line goes to 3, Pitt should definitely be considered.

 Umm no shit sherlock

 Pitt should definitely be considered

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2009
Posts: 1654
Posted: #30

Pit should be favored you moron

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 4526
Posted: #31
Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyY83:



GB won THREE road games vs the TOP three seeds.

Pitt was life and death at home vs the BOTTOM two seeds.

GB is clearly the hotter team, getting much public love and playing great. They should be favored






If you feel that the Falcons and Bears are better than the Ravens and Jets, you need a Pap smear.
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2011
Posts: 586
Posted: #32
Quote Originally Posted by walktheline:






If you feel that the Falcons and Bears are better than the Ravens and Jets, you need a Pap smear.


The Falcons beat the Ravens, and the point could definitely be argued.
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2011
Posts: 586
Posted: #33
Quote Originally Posted by daysbtwin:

Pit should be favored you moron



Do you always feel the need to overcompensate and disrespect others?  The person was just giving their opinion.  Show some respect.  Thanks.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2009
Posts: 1154
Posted: #34
Quote Originally Posted by daysbtwin:

Pit should be favored you moron

WTF are you talking about??

Then why in the fuck weren't YOU the one posting WHEN THEY OPENED pk +110!?
You chastise me for re-evaluating my original thought--when the line is in a questionable outcome parameter (< or > 3 with 2 evenly matched teams).
They didn't set the line at PK for no reason, MORON!

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2009
Posts: 1654
Posted: #35

Quote Originally Posted by PULLA:



Do you always feel the need to overcompensate and disrespect others?  The person was just giving their opinion.  Show some respect.  Thanks.

I sometimes feel the need to disrespect sheep. PIT ML

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2009
Posts: 1154
Posted: #36
Quote Originally Posted by daysbtwin:

I sometimes feel the need to disrespect sheep. PIT ML

A "sheep." I am hardly a sheep.
Actually I am an activist, politically. The govt-corporatocracy takeover is our (US citizens') biggest threat, along with terrorism.

By the way, take Pitt +2.5 +105 rather than +126 on the ML (assuming you are betting at Pinnacle). A mathematically better bet, obviously.




 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2010
Posts: 184
Posted: #37
I guessed the line would be GB -1.5, pretty close.  See it at -2.5
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 4526
Posted: #38
Quote Originally Posted by LakeTahoeKid:

A "sheep." I am hardly a sheep.
Actually I am an activist, politically. The govt-corporatocracy takeover is our (US citizens') biggest threat, along with terrorism.

By the way, take Pitt +2.5 +105 rather than +126 on the ML (assuming you are betting at Pinnacle). A mathematically better bet, obviously.






On first though, I would agree with that. I don't know how large of a sample size you would need to figure it out, maybe two seasons? I would make a snap judgment and say that +2.5 at +105 is better than +126 (that number seems a bit low) but I wonder if the points out weight the +.20 cents? 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2009
Posts: 1154
Posted: #39
The points (+2.5 +105) outweigh the payback on the ML @ +126.
Buying 2.5 points from a ML @ +126 would equate to less than a +2.5 +105 payback. My book(s) are 10 cents for every point purchased.
Figuring the usual 6-8 cents with Pinny, it would convert to around +110 on the ML in comparison.
Individual (non-related) probabilities are basically in the eye of the beholder. There is no sample size to directly match-up these to teams (i.e. Pittsburgh) into a mathematical equation from PK to a ML.
Just basic "Pinnacle" math points to Pitt +2.5 +105 over Pitt ML +126. It's a no-brainer.



 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2007
Posts: 4526
Posted: #40
Quote Originally Posted by LakeTahoeKid:

The points (+2.5 +105) outweigh the payback on the ML @ +126.
Buying 2.5 points from a ML @ +126 would equate to less than a +2.5 +105 payback. My book(s) are 10 cents for every point purchased.
Figuring the usual 6-8 cents with Pinny, it would convert to around +110 on the ML in comparison.
Individual (non-related) probabilities are basically in the eye of the beholder. There is no sample size to directly match-up these to teams (i.e. Pittsburgh) into a mathematical equation from PK to a ML.
Just basic "Pinnacle" math points to Pitt +2.5 +105 over Pitt ML +126. It's a no-brainer.





You would think so, but the priced charged per point/half point doesn't have anything to do with how valuable those points are. It still costs you the same amount to buy from 7 to 7.5 as it does 1 to 1.5 in most cases.

It wouldn't be about the two teams matching up, but how often historically those points would have made a difference in the outcome of a wager vs the +.2x you would gain on the moneyline.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2009
Posts: 1154
Posted: #41
walktheline, +130 is what I meant to type. However +129 is more of an accurate figure.
Good luck with whatever side you choose.
Based on past Super Bowl results (small sample size), I would surmise it will NOT fall within the 0 to 2.5 Pitt loss.
But over a large W/L historical NFL point differential pattern...give the the +2.5! (Lost too many 1-pt games.)
But I am waiting for the key # 3!

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2009
Posts: 1154
Posted: #42
Quote Originally Posted by walktheline:



You would think so, but the priced charged per point/half point doesn't have anything to do with how valuable those points are. It still costs you the same amount to buy from 7 to 7.5 as it does 1 to 1.5 in most cases.

It wouldn't be about the two teams matching up, but how often historically those points would have made a difference in the outcome of a wager vs the +.2x you would gain on the moneyline.

Like minds think alike!
I take so long to hunt and peck--under the influence--that I didn't read this until after I posted.
Buying off of 3 or 7 is 20 cents (off-shore), and most books in Nevada won't even sell them.
Let's just hope we're both on the same victorious side and that it lives up to the over-anticipated hype.
 
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2007
Posts: 13450
Posted: #43
Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyY83:



GB won THREE road games vs the TOP three seeds.

Pitt was life and death at home vs the BOTTOM two seeds.

GB is clearly the hotter team, getting much public love and playing great. They should be favored

The two "Bottom Seeds" Balt & NY were much better than the Colts & Chiefs.  That statement means nothing.

All Forums | NFL Betting Forum
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Office Pools
The Covers community has
810,221
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 30 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2026 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

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.