Posted:
#26
And Vegas took a bit of a bath in that OAK/TB SB if I remember correctly...
0
Why are the pack favored?
Posted:
#27
Quote Originally Posted by tjohnsont:
Where is all this 'balance the books' mumbo jumbo coming from. Let me guess, you read an article from a linesmaker and you actually believe what he's writing?
It's amazing how someone can call themselves an authority, spew whatever propaganda they want and everyone believes. You can take a bum off the street, dress him, label him stockbroker, put him on tv, have him give picks, and everyone will somehow believe him. No wonder informercials are so profitable.
boookmakers rely on this mentality - its how they make money. The lines they set ARE NOT predicting the outcome of games. They arent the gamblers, its the gamblers that pay them. If they wanted to gamble - they'd give up their billions in profit and risk it at other books.
in predicting the outcome - i like the steelers. i'd still like em at (-2.5). But their research prolly indicates the +2.5 is safer for them - so yes, the line is correct regardless of the outcome.
0
Posted:
#29
Quote Originally Posted by rollmaestro:
So tjohn, do you more or less agree with me that this particular SB line is a classic Big Town "false-favorite" point-spread?
The last Super Bowl "false-fav" line of recent memory was OAK-3.5 over Tampa back in '03 I think... the WORLD was on Tampa gettin those tasty points, esp. after the Raider's center went AWOL the night b4 the big game heh heh heh...
I can't remember that far back but history does sometimes give you an indicator of the future as we all know. So wouldn't you think the linesmakers would also know that and adjust accordingly? It's all a mind f*ck- the obvious usually won't make you money- if it did we would all be winners.
0
Posted:
#31
Quote Originally Posted by texancapper:
Packers are fav., cause the books are asking for Pitt $$$$. Simple as that. There's no balance action when it comes to $$$ been wager in this SB, not when the books made Packers a -2.5.
If you ask me, with my small amount of knowledge, the 'balance the bets' is an illusion and story that is given to the public to digest. And I can almost prove it but I don't have time for that.
The casino is happy taking your money at a 1-3 percent advantage at the card tables- supposedly, blackjack is almost even odds (about .5 percent or so until the soft 17 hits). What makes you think they want even action when they have a 70 percent advantage lets just say. You don't think they will play with a 70 percent advantage when they are playing at the casinos at a 51 to 55 percent house advantage and winning?
0
Posted:
#32
The reason the Packers are favored is they are a better team.They are playing better football right now,have more offensive weapons,and their D,while not as good as Pittsburg is impressive.Most important,the game is played on a fast field where weather is not an issue.Huge Packer advantage,I have the Packers winning and covering easily,but advise getting the 2.5 we all know that half pt can be a factor
0
Posted:
#33
I think the line is perfect. Steelers D has been lights out, but one thing I have noticed is that the Steelers have only played 2 top 11 passing offenses all season, and both times they lost by double digits (NE and NO). Steelers D had one of the easiest schedules in the league as far as lining up against weak passing teams. Dont get me wrong their D is nasty, but GB's D is at an elite level as well, and too me this game looks very similar to the Steelers-Cards Super Bowl game, but the Pack has a D that far outmatches what the Cards brought to the table. Should be a terrific game either way, but if anything I feel like the Pack deserve to be a slight favourite, with the fact that the game is being played indoors also favouring their team
0
Posted:
#34
Quote Originally Posted by chuckgee:
Mildly humorous story --
Went to be Sunday night wondering what I'd do if the oddsmakers made Greenbay a double-digit dog. I'm a bit old school and often take double-digit dogs without question. On the other hand, Pittsburgh IMHO is going to stomp the Packers.
So Monday morn I check the odds; Greenbay's a 2.5 point favorite. It took me a while to figure out what the oddsmakers were trying to do. You can imagine the look on my face when I first saw that line.
are you trying to say that you thought the books would make Pitt a double digit favorite?
0
Posted:
#35
I will say that if those GB WRs can achieve seperation, we may see some PI/illegal contact flags and thus shorter fields for ARodg and co, something I worry about regarding the Steeler secondary with Ike, Clark, and McFadden if they aren't damn sharp... I believe Pittsburgh's best bet is to take advantage of their stout running game, extend drives, win the clock, and keep ARodg OFF the field... duh, right? And when they aren't running the rock, take advantage of Heath Miller's size and hands...
0
Posted:
#36
Quote Originally Posted by chuckgee:
Really?? the packers have not lost by more than 4 all year and never trailed by more than 7, im a religious packer fan thought pitt would have to be 3 point favourite but when i seen the line i smiled cuz its just begging you to take pitt... i know where my money will be!!
Mildly humorous story --
Went to be Sunday night wondering what I'd do if the oddsmakers made Greenbay a double-digit dog. I'm a bit old school and often take double-digit dogs without question. On the other hand, Pittsburgh IMHO is going to stomp the Packers.
So Monday morn I check the odds; Greenbay's a 2.5 point favorite. It took me a while to figure out what the oddsmakers were trying to do. You can imagine the look on my face when I first saw that line.
0
Posted:
#38
Quote Originally Posted by Ice4Blood:
Gold Rush... one thing nobody has talked about on this thread is the injury to Pouncey... i actually think that's the biggest reason this line is where it is! keep an eye on his status... without Pouncey, Pittsburgh has some major issues trying to hold the Packers pass rush!
Gold Rush... one thing nobody has talked about on this thread is the injury to Pouncey... i actually think that's the biggest reason this line is where it is! keep an eye on his status... without Pouncey, Pittsburgh has some major issues trying to hold the Packers pass rush!
As a Pitt backer, I am worried about the Pitt center being hurt as much as anyone else. With that said, I do believe that 11-12 full days of practice for the backup is AMPLE time to get the kinks figured out. Let's say Pouncey got banged up in the 1st quarter of the Super Bowl; now that's a disaster and a game changer. If he got hurt during a normal 1 week break between games, that is something to consider. But with 2 full weeks I am sure the Steelers will be able to neutralize the negative impact a bunch.
As for the line itself, it is looking like the line set by the books is actually pretty spot on. As it is, it still seems like more money is being put on the Pack and all the Jo Schmos I talk with seem to be on the Packer bandwagon. Each week I set "my line" and a line on what I think the books will put it at and search for value that way. For the SB, I had BOTH lines at Pitt -2.5, and while I was surprisingly off, I still feel "my own personal line" is the correct line.
0
Posted:
#39
Quote Originally Posted by Orangemen44:
I think the line is perfect right now, there will be a lot of action on both sides, I dont think Vegas will want to us the advantage of hitting up Pitt or GB as a bigger dog
I think the line is perfect right now, there will be a lot of action on both sides, I dont think Vegas will want to us the advantage of hitting up Pitt or GB as a bigger dog
Seems like their plan is working. So many people are excited to get Pitt as a dog and its taking away from all of that GB love out there
I would imagine tons of folks are going to take that and tease it to + 9.5
0
Posted:
#40
Quote Originally Posted by texancapper:
Packers are fav., cause the books are asking for Pitt $$$$. Simple as that. There's no balance action when it comes to $$$ been wager in this SB, not when the books made Packers a -2.5.
It seems they were doing the same thing vs Chicago, Phili and Atl and it worked with me.. I took the bait all 3 times.. I have lost betting against GB as a dog 3 times, now they finally made them the favorite...
0
Posted:
#41
Quote Originally Posted by handyman62:
The reason the Packers are favored is they are a better team.They are playing better football right now,have more offensive weapons,and their D,while not as good as Pittsburg is impressive.Most important,the game is played on a fast field where weather is not an issue.Huge Packer advantage,I have the Packers winning and covering easily,but advise getting the 2.5 we all know that half pt can be a factor
The reason the Packers are favored is they are a better team.They are playing better football right now,have more offensive weapons,and their D,while not as good as Pittsburg is impressive.Most important,the game is played on a fast field where weather is not an issue.Huge Packer advantage,I have the Packers winning and covering easily,but advise getting the 2.5 we all know that half pt can be a factor
It would be weird to see a SB end on 2 points but we always have to prepare for that scenario.. every half point is key no matter what # the game lands on
0
Posted:
#42
Quote Originally Posted by Ice4Blood:
Gold Rush... one thing nobody has talked about on this thread is the injury to Pouncey... i actually think that's the biggest reason this line is where it is! keep an eye on his status... without Pouncey, Pittsburgh has some major issues trying to hold the Packers pass rush!
Gold Rush... one thing nobody has talked about on this thread is the injury to Pouncey... i actually think that's the biggest reason this line is where it is! keep an eye on his status... without Pouncey, Pittsburgh has some major issues trying to hold the Packers pass rush!
That is a huge loss, literally. glyde makes a good point about having 2 weeks to overcome that. It will still hurt pass protection no doubt but atleast they wont be fumbling the snap like they did on the goal - line causing the saftety.. man Ben is so lucky he got that fumble
0
Posted:
#45
Quote Originally Posted by Ed-Collins:
The answer is actually quite easy to understand.
The line (pointspread) is not meant to predict the winner. Never has been. Never will be. The line is simply a number to generate equal money, or as equal as possible, on both sides.
Right now Green Bay, with the way they've been playing, is the public favorite. That's why they are the favored team. But that in no way at all means the oddsmakers expect them to win.
Even if the oddsmakers had a crystal ball and KNEW Pittsburgh, for example, was going to win, and by exactly how much, they would STILL make Green Bay a slight favorite.
The line opened up at Green Bay -1.5 and enough money came in on Green Bay early to quickly bump it up to 2.5 which is about where it's been since. It was adjusted because the oddsmakers wish to balance their books as much as possible, and since the initial money was initially bet on the Packers, the line moved upward to entice others to bet on Pittsburgh.
I like Pittsburgh on the Moneline myself. I see value in that, even if others don't. I think the game is essentially a tossup. I like getting +140 odds on what I think is essentially a tossup. And with my +140 odds I just happen to get a team who's already won this event twice in the past five years? Wow!
Ever get the feeling your pissing in the wind? LOL
The answer is actually quite easy to understand.
The line (pointspread) is not meant to predict the winner. Never has been. Never will be. The line is simply a number to generate equal money, or as equal as possible, on both sides.
Right now Green Bay, with the way they've been playing, is the public favorite. That's why they are the favored team. But that in no way at all means the oddsmakers expect them to win.
Even if the oddsmakers had a crystal ball and KNEW Pittsburgh, for example, was going to win, and by exactly how much, they would STILL make Green Bay a slight favorite.
The line opened up at Green Bay -1.5 and enough money came in on Green Bay early to quickly bump it up to 2.5 which is about where it's been since. It was adjusted because the oddsmakers wish to balance their books as much as possible, and since the initial money was initially bet on the Packers, the line moved upward to entice others to bet on Pittsburgh.
I like Pittsburgh on the Moneline myself. I see value in that, even if others don't. I think the game is essentially a tossup. I like getting +140 odds on what I think is essentially a tossup. And with my +140 odds I just happen to get a team who's already won this event twice in the past five years? Wow!
0
Posted:
#46
Quote Originally Posted by tjohnsont:
You should listen to Ed, he is correct.
Where is all this 'balance the books' mumbo jumbo coming from. Let me guess, you read an article from a linesmaker and you actually believe what he's writing?
It's amazing how someone can call themselves an authority, spew whatever propaganda they want and everyone believes. You can take a bum off the street, dress him, label him stockbroker, put him on tv, have him give picks, and everyone will somehow believe him. No wonder informercials are so profitable.
0
Posted:
#47
Quote Originally Posted by Ed-Collins:
Even if the oddsmakers had a crystal ball and KNEW Pittsburgh, for example, was going to win, and by exactly how much, they would STILL make Green Bay a slight favorite.
Even if the oddsmakers had a crystal ball and KNEW Pittsburgh, for example, was going to win, and by exactly how much, they would STILL make Green Bay a slight favorite.
This makes no sense. If they KNEW Pittsburgh would win by, let's say, 7 points, then they'd make Green Bay a 6.5 pt. dog.
Everyone would bet GB, or virtually everyone. LV would make a killin, ah mean I killin, on Pittsburgh.
But they don't. They might know that GB was better than Phila and Atl. Hence the +2.5 line. They probably thought GB was much, much better than Chicago. Hence the -3.5 line ON THE ROAD.
A line of -2.5 tends to sucker in favorite money. People think, "Hey a FG means the fav. wins." If Vegas were worried that GB would cover, I imagine they'd move the line up to 3.
0
Posted:
#48
Quote Originally Posted by composite:
I think your 1/2 right.This is the SB and if Vegas was to make Whatsamatta U. the fav then J.Q. is going that way.The great unwashed masses who bet this game could give a hoot bout no 6 1/2 where as gamblers and handicappers think twice.I'll say it again,they made Pack the fav cause thats where they want John Q to lay his bulla bulla to balance the books.
This makes no sense. If they KNEW Pittsburgh would win by, let's say, 7 points, then they'd make Green Bay a 6.5 pt. dog.
Everyone would bet GB, or virtually everyone. LV would make a killin, ah mean I killin, on Pittsburgh.
But they don't. They might know that GB was better than Phila and Atl. Hence the +2.5 line. They probably thought GB was much, much better than Chicago. Hence the -3.5 line ON THE ROAD.
A line of -2.5 tends to sucker in favorite money. People think, "Hey a FG means the fav. wins." If Vegas were worried that GB would cover, I imagine they'd move the line up to 3.
0
Posted:
#49
Quote Originally Posted by rollmaestro:
So tjohn, do you more or less agree with me that this particular SB line is a classic Big Town "false-favorite" point-spread?
The last Super Bowl "false-fav" line of recent memory was OAK-3.5 over Tampa back in '03 I think... the WORLD was on Tampa gettin those tasty points, esp. after the Raider's center went AWOL the night b4 the big game heh heh heh...
Actually, the Raiders were a huge public darling. They had the Number One offense in the league. The Buccaneers QB was Brad Johnson. I recall reading an article after the SB by an oddsmaker who stated they set the line with Oakland as the fave, because they were afraid that ALL the money would be on the Raiders if they installed TB as a 3 pt favorite. They couldn't afford to take that risk.
Not sure any of this has anything at all to do with this game. Just setting the record straight. It was the easiest moneyline bet I ever cashed.
0
Hot Forum Topics
