The points didn’t matter this week

First time I think I’ve ever seen it. The spread did not come into play a single time this week. 

Once you see it, you cannot unsee it

@brn2loslive2win

 The Points never matter.

I track this for years. its 84% of games, all you need to do is pick the winner.

It has happened before. it happens a few times a year.

Youve been preaching it brother 

I believe the average is 14-17% or something in that neighborhood. Definitely can’t say that it never matters but yes it is irrelevant the vast majority of the time. 

@TJZags598

 Still don’t ever recall seeing a week where the spread wasn’t a factor in a single game.

@brn2loslive2win

Two years ago I tracked the 1st 100 NFL games of season the winner of the game covered 93 times 1 push . Only 6 times did the loser of the game cover the spread.

When this trend of the line makers being way off on results teasers and money line parlays are automatic losers the house cleans up.

@brn2loslive2win

 No, he's right. The straight up winner covers the spread around 85% of the time. Usually only for the first 13-14 weeks. 

I've been saying it for a long time, not often but this topic does come up once in a while around here.

The books love it when you take their offer of +3, +4.5, +10, whatever the spread is. As long as that -110 is attached to that #, they are happy. They want you to pay them tax. 

Oddly enough when bettors look at ML's like +140, +165, +250 whatever it is, they think "no way" or "no chance". We should be seeing money signs instead of fearing those #'s.

But, there's a huge but here, picking the su winner is a lot harder than it seems. It's a tough task.

On the flip side, if you like the fav, lay the #. You pay only -110 on some stupid # that's fine. Just don't lay -200 or more crazy ML's. You really don't like your money if you do that consistently.

My 2 cents

Simply untrue  Goo look back at week #1   % dogs covered but did not win outright ergo the points did matter  

That was in week 1. This past week non of the spreads mattered.

On average throughout the year, the spreads will come into play about 17% of the time

When I bet dogs I typically do point spread and moneyline if they are bigger numbers. I hardly ever take the points if its less than 6. On dogs less than 6 normally just bet moneyline, 6 and over do spread and moneyline because the bigger the spread its more likely for it to come into play. 

I especially dont understand when people bet +1.5 or +2.5. You are paying juice for an incredibly unlikely event. How many games are decided by 1 or 2 points exactly? Not anywhere close to enough to justify the money it costs to buy those points when you couldve bet the dog to win at +110-130. 

Now when its a higher number, say +7.5, now taking the points at -110 makes sense because now im covering a way higher amount of outcomes and they are much more common ones. So put some on the spread and some on the moneyline. 

@Yanasaur

 I have finally come to the realization that taking moneyline dogs is silly. If the dog is going to win it obviously has to be by some margin, so why not lay 2 or 3 or even 4 or 6 at way better odds? If the dog happens to win by exactly 1 point I’ll eat the loss. Matter of fact I just did last week with Tennessee. But I’d be surprised if it happened more than a couple times all season. 

Of course if it’s a dog of a significant number I’ll take the points as an insurance policy in addition to laying some as my own version of a ml bet.

You mentioned a possible play on Seattle this week. I’ll be on Seattle -2 +115 and -3 at +140. And maybe a sprinkle on a 6 or 7.

@brn2loslive2win

@brn2loslive2win

 Absolutely right. If I like the dog to win I will often play -2.5 for a better payout and then sprinkle a little more on -6. 

I assure you it is much higher than that  I is one of betting the NFL's biggets fallacies    I will be glad to track it if you wish 

@the1toturn2

 You can track it all you want. I’ve gone through seasons of the past and it’s almost always fallen between the 14-17% range. 

This year we had a week 1 (or was it wk2?) with a bunch of dogs covering. At a very quick glance I see that we’re at roughly 18% this season. And I believe we’re still due for more regression. I was very suspicious that regression was coming before last weeks games and sure enough…

I’d love for you to prove that dogs cover the spread more than this on average 

Edit to my last post-

Dogs cover the spread without winning outright. Meaning that the spread actually comes into play.