At best you will finish .500 and lose on the juice. Pinpointing 2 teams like this can be good but you need to know when to jump to the other side based on home team/matchups and other factors. Good Luck, you will need it.
0
At best you will finish .500 and lose on the juice. Pinpointing 2 teams like this can be good but you need to know when to jump to the other side based on home team/matchups and other factors. Good Luck, you will need it.
At best you will finish .500 and lose on the juice. Pinpointing 2 teams like this can be good but you need to know when to jump to the other side based on home team/matchups and other factors. Good Luck, you will need it.
You think your post that added NO new information or value to the thread is going to convince me to do something dozens before you have already tried to do???
I'm fading the Bills/Browns ALL season... I said I might reevaluate Cleveland but for right now, they're still the stink tank I capped them to be. I'm not some fucking rookie, I know the statistical probabilities of this system.
I beat the odds.
0
Quote Originally Posted by semperfi19:
At best you will finish .500 and lose on the juice. Pinpointing 2 teams like this can be good but you need to know when to jump to the other side based on home team/matchups and other factors. Good Luck, you will need it.
You think your post that added NO new information or value to the thread is going to convince me to do something dozens before you have already tried to do???
I'm fading the Bills/Browns ALL season... I said I might reevaluate Cleveland but for right now, they're still the stink tank I capped them to be. I'm not some fucking rookie, I know the statistical probabilities of this system.
You think your post that added NO new information or value to the thread is going to convince me to do something dozens before you have already tried to do???
I'm fading the Bills/Browns ALL season... I said I might reevaluate Cleveland but for right now, they're still the stink tank I capped them to be. I'm not some fucking rookie, I know the statistical probabilities of this system.
I beat the odds.
OK Mr. I BEAT THE ODDS. POINT TAKEN Here is some helpful info for this weeks Browns/Falcons matchup
Browns Traded for Minn Vikings pass rushing specialist Jayme Williams. The Back story is DL Robaire Smith, Kenyon Coleman, and Shaun Rogers are all dinged up and they need depth. So they are bringing in a 4-3 DE to help in a 3-4 scheme that has never played in a 3-4. Makes sense? All 3 players will be probable but the injuries will keep them from playing at 100%.
The Browns record is 10-2 vs the Falcons which is their best mark versus any opponent. A usseless fact but interesting none the less.
Hope that is more helpful. Fact remains you are playing the odds that the linesmakers overvalue both of these teams more so than the talent of the teams. Not trying to talk you out of it just looking at your logic from a different perspective. Good luck.
0
Quote Originally Posted by dj_destroyer:
You think your post that added NO new information or value to the thread is going to convince me to do something dozens before you have already tried to do???
I'm fading the Bills/Browns ALL season... I said I might reevaluate Cleveland but for right now, they're still the stink tank I capped them to be. I'm not some fucking rookie, I know the statistical probabilities of this system.
I beat the odds.
OK Mr. I BEAT THE ODDS. POINT TAKEN Here is some helpful info for this weeks Browns/Falcons matchup
Browns Traded for Minn Vikings pass rushing specialist Jayme Williams. The Back story is DL Robaire Smith, Kenyon Coleman, and Shaun Rogers are all dinged up and they need depth. So they are bringing in a 4-3 DE to help in a 3-4 scheme that has never played in a 3-4. Makes sense? All 3 players will be probable but the injuries will keep them from playing at 100%.
The Browns record is 10-2 vs the Falcons which is their best mark versus any opponent. A usseless fact but interesting none the less.
Hope that is more helpful. Fact remains you are playing the odds that the linesmakers overvalue both of these teams more so than the talent of the teams. Not trying to talk you out of it just looking at your logic from a different perspective. Good luck.
I don't get where the 3-2 on fading the Browns comes from.
Covers has the Browns listed as 2-2 ATS. They also won the last 7 games in a row ATS last year. That makes them 9-2 ATS over the last 11 games.
I think the Browns are a perfect example of the "better than the public thinks they are" trap team. They've had a lead in the fourth quarter of every single game this year.
I always hear stories like this. Some guy claimed decent profits from fading the Pirates all year, but the thought immediately crosses my mind...what if you tried this with the '99 Rams, the '06 Tigers, the '08 Rays, the '10 Padres or any other bad teams that turned out to be surprisingly good.
0
I don't get where the 3-2 on fading the Browns comes from.
Covers has the Browns listed as 2-2 ATS. They also won the last 7 games in a row ATS last year. That makes them 9-2 ATS over the last 11 games.
I think the Browns are a perfect example of the "better than the public thinks they are" trap team. They've had a lead in the fourth quarter of every single game this year.
I always hear stories like this. Some guy claimed decent profits from fading the Pirates all year, but the thought immediately crosses my mind...what if you tried this with the '99 Rams, the '06 Tigers, the '08 Rays, the '10 Padres or any other bad teams that turned out to be surprisingly good.
OK Mr. I BEAT THE ODDS. POINT TAKEN Here is some helpful info for this weeks Browns/Falcons matchup
Browns Traded for Minn Vikings pass rushing specialist Jayme Williams. The Back story is DL Robaire Smith, Kenyon Coleman, and Shaun Rogers are all dinged up and they need depth. So they are bringing in a 4-3 DE to help in a 3-4 scheme that has never played in a 3-4. Makes sense? All 3 players will be probable but the injuries will keep them from playing at 100%.
The Browns record is 10-2 vs the Falcons which is their best mark versus any opponent. A usseless fact but interesting none the less.
Hope that is more helpful. Fact remains you are playing the odds that the linesmakers overvalue both of these teams more so than the talent of the teams. Not trying to talk you out of it just looking at your logic from a different perspective. Good luck.
Of course that is more helpful... I'm always up for discussion and debate. Your angle is that I believe these teams are overvalued more than heavy favourites -- which isn't true a hundred percent. I'll think about this and see how I feel.
0
Quote Originally Posted by semperfi19:
OK Mr. I BEAT THE ODDS. POINT TAKEN Here is some helpful info for this weeks Browns/Falcons matchup
Browns Traded for Minn Vikings pass rushing specialist Jayme Williams. The Back story is DL Robaire Smith, Kenyon Coleman, and Shaun Rogers are all dinged up and they need depth. So they are bringing in a 4-3 DE to help in a 3-4 scheme that has never played in a 3-4. Makes sense? All 3 players will be probable but the injuries will keep them from playing at 100%.
The Browns record is 10-2 vs the Falcons which is their best mark versus any opponent. A usseless fact but interesting none the less.
Hope that is more helpful. Fact remains you are playing the odds that the linesmakers overvalue both of these teams more so than the talent of the teams. Not trying to talk you out of it just looking at your logic from a different perspective. Good luck.
Of course that is more helpful... I'm always up for discussion and debate. Your angle is that I believe these teams are overvalued more than heavy favourites -- which isn't true a hundred percent. I'll think about this and see how I feel.
OK. I read the whole thread. I guess you get credit for doubling up on the KC bet, but the bottom line is this is a really stupid strategy.
Given the choice between playing both of these teams every week and fading them both each week , I would play them....and it wouldn't be a remotely close decision.
There is a whole lot of parity in this league. The difference between the good and bad teams is nowhere near as large as people seem to think and the value bet is often on the "bad" team.
You mention several times that if the Browns were to start winning, you might switch your bets. By that point the lines would have adjusted as well and the value bet might actually be fading them.
You'd be doing the exact wrong thing twice.
Honestly, people might think I'm insane but I'd rather fade the Colts the whole year than the Browns.
0
Quote Originally Posted by dj_destroyer:
Read the whole thread...
OK. I read the whole thread. I guess you get credit for doubling up on the KC bet, but the bottom line is this is a really stupid strategy.
Given the choice between playing both of these teams every week and fading them both each week , I would play them....and it wouldn't be a remotely close decision.
There is a whole lot of parity in this league. The difference between the good and bad teams is nowhere near as large as people seem to think and the value bet is often on the "bad" team.
You mention several times that if the Browns were to start winning, you might switch your bets. By that point the lines would have adjusted as well and the value bet might actually be fading them.
You'd be doing the exact wrong thing twice.
Honestly, people might think I'm insane but I'd rather fade the Colts the whole year than the Browns.
Great read concerning overvalued favourites/public teams and subsequent plays on the corresponding underdogs... A good read for anyone tailing; it might open your eyes to how risky what I am doing actually is.
Its like you sort of realize this is a bad idea but are doing it anyway....
0
Quote Originally Posted by dj_destroyer:
Great read concerning overvalued favourites/public teams and subsequent plays on the corresponding underdogs... A good read for anyone tailing; it might open your eyes to how risky what I am doing actually is.
Its like you sort of realize this is a bad idea but are doing it anyway....
Pure entertainment. I love that this dude with the bouncing titties is calling people out on their grammar! I guess he PLAID himself. HAHAHHAAAAAA
I was going to post right after and note the mental error in mixing the word 'laid' and 'played' but didn't want to make a mostly useless post. Where did I call someone out on their grammar? Also, that is a spelling mistake, not a grammatical one. Furtherrrrrrmore, go through this entire thread and find one more mistake from me. You won't.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Big_Earl:
Pure entertainment. I love that this dude with the bouncing titties is calling people out on their grammar! I guess he PLAID himself. HAHAHHAAAAAA
I was going to post right after and note the mental error in mixing the word 'laid' and 'played' but didn't want to make a mostly useless post. Where did I call someone out on their grammar? Also, that is a spelling mistake, not a grammatical one. Furtherrrrrrmore, go through this entire thread and find one more mistake from me. You won't.
OK. I read the whole thread. I guess you get credit for doubling up on the KC bet, but the bottom line is this is a really stupid strategy.
Given the choice between playing both of these teams every week and fading them both each week , I would play them....and it wouldn't be a remotely close decision.
There is a whole lot of parity in this league. The difference between the good and bad teams is nowhere near as large as people seem to think and the value bet is often on the "bad" team.
You mention several times that if the Browns were to start winning, you might switch your bets. By that point the lines would have adjusted as well and the value bet might actually be fading them.
You'd be doing the exact wrong thing twice.
Honestly, people might think I'm insane but I'd rather fade the Colts the whole year than the Browns.
You may not feel like it but you're putting words into my mouth by saying that if the Browns start winning, I'm going to start playing them. I never said anything of the sort.
I simply said I was reevaluating my position but that the bottom-line remained; they are a shitty team that I will fade continuously because linesmakers cannot possibly set the line high enough for the other team.
All the respect for the Browns and hate for this thread are clear signs to keep fading them.
0
Quote Originally Posted by tallguyindc:
OK. I read the whole thread. I guess you get credit for doubling up on the KC bet, but the bottom line is this is a really stupid strategy.
Given the choice between playing both of these teams every week and fading them both each week , I would play them....and it wouldn't be a remotely close decision.
There is a whole lot of parity in this league. The difference between the good and bad teams is nowhere near as large as people seem to think and the value bet is often on the "bad" team.
You mention several times that if the Browns were to start winning, you might switch your bets. By that point the lines would have adjusted as well and the value bet might actually be fading them.
You'd be doing the exact wrong thing twice.
Honestly, people might think I'm insane but I'd rather fade the Colts the whole year than the Browns.
You may not feel like it but you're putting words into my mouth by saying that if the Browns start winning, I'm going to start playing them. I never said anything of the sort.
I simply said I was reevaluating my position but that the bottom-line remained; they are a shitty team that I will fade continuously because linesmakers cannot possibly set the line high enough for the other team.
All the respect for the Browns and hate for this thread are clear signs to keep fading them.
You're wrong. I'm still up large despite not listening... What? Did you want me to tail your picks? No thanks, Titans and Steelers were LOCKS. Only a rookie would bet against them...
See how stupid that sounds ^^ You play your plays, I'll play mine. Do you seriously have enough time to go around and challenge people's plays when you can't even pick winners yourself?
I'm not playing these plays on the basis that the Browns/Bills will go 8-8 you fucking idiot, time to start reading before posting. I've stated from the start that the linesmakers cannot make the lines high enough. The Patriots had an easy cover game to work with and they blew it with shitty mistakes... The Ravens were in a bit deeper but still, played a poorly executed game.
This will continue and be even better next week as people give the Browns/Bills a bit of respect but this time, their opponents won't take them lightly.
Fade Bill Browns or get the fuck out!
PS. Work on your spelling/grammar/punctuation and maybe someone will take you seriously.
PPS. I'm still playing with the books money... so if thats a typical moron move then I'm all for it!!!! fucking loser...
Sorry... I guess I can't read.
0
Quote Originally Posted by dj_destroyer:
You're wrong. I'm still up large despite not listening... What? Did you want me to tail your picks? No thanks, Titans and Steelers were LOCKS. Only a rookie would bet against them...
See how stupid that sounds ^^ You play your plays, I'll play mine. Do you seriously have enough time to go around and challenge people's plays when you can't even pick winners yourself?
I'm not playing these plays on the basis that the Browns/Bills will go 8-8 you fucking idiot, time to start reading before posting. I've stated from the start that the linesmakers cannot make the lines high enough. The Patriots had an easy cover game to work with and they blew it with shitty mistakes... The Ravens were in a bit deeper but still, played a poorly executed game.
This will continue and be even better next week as people give the Browns/Bills a bit of respect but this time, their opponents won't take them lightly.
Fade Bill Browns or get the fuck out!
PS. Work on your spelling/grammar/punctuation and maybe someone will take you seriously.
PPS. I'm still playing with the books money... so if thats a typical moron move then I'm all for it!!!! fucking loser...
I was going to post right after and note the mental error in mixing the word 'laid' and 'played' but didn't want to make a mostly useless post. Where did I call someone out on their grammar? Also, that is a spelling mistake, not a grammatical one. Furtherrrrrrmore, go through this entire thread and find one more mistake from me. You won't.
Oh... so because you realized you were stupid after you did something that made you sound stupid, that makes you not so stupid anymore? Great logic! You sound like the guys that run our country! Then you even come back with the "I dare to you find something else stupid that I have done!"
Really though... you have outsmarted Vegas. You know the Browns and Bills are bad. I am sure that they will be large public bets the rest of the season because everyone else thinks they are so good. Vegas wont adjust the lines at all if the Bills continue to get beat by 3 TD's. Congrats! You win! Hahahhahaaa
0
Quote Originally Posted by dj_destroyer:
I was going to post right after and note the mental error in mixing the word 'laid' and 'played' but didn't want to make a mostly useless post. Where did I call someone out on their grammar? Also, that is a spelling mistake, not a grammatical one. Furtherrrrrrmore, go through this entire thread and find one more mistake from me. You won't.
Oh... so because you realized you were stupid after you did something that made you sound stupid, that makes you not so stupid anymore? Great logic! You sound like the guys that run our country! Then you even come back with the "I dare to you find something else stupid that I have done!"
Really though... you have outsmarted Vegas. You know the Browns and Bills are bad. I am sure that they will be large public bets the rest of the season because everyone else thinks they are so good. Vegas wont adjust the lines at all if the Bills continue to get beat by 3 TD's. Congrats! You win! Hahahhahaaa
Oh... so because you realized you were stupid after you did something that made you sound stupid, that makes you not so stupid anymore? Great logic! You sound like the guys that run our country! Then you even come back with the "I dare to you find something else stupid that I have done!"
Your logic is flawed... You attacked my argument but not what I was arguing. You chirped the fact that I told you to go find another spelling or grammatical error but yet, you didn't find any errors?
Pretty sure that means my argument is right, not yours. Please don't talk about logic in the future.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Big_Earl:
Oh... so because you realized you were stupid after you did something that made you sound stupid, that makes you not so stupid anymore? Great logic! You sound like the guys that run our country! Then you even come back with the "I dare to you find something else stupid that I have done!"
Your logic is flawed... You attacked my argument but not what I was arguing. You chirped the fact that I told you to go find another spelling or grammatical error but yet, you didn't find any errors?
Pretty sure that means my argument is right, not yours. Please don't talk about logic in the future.
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.
Hot Forum Topics
