All Forums | Penalty Box

My Old Man always told me 3 things about Betting NFL

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 5836
Posts: 92
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2013
Posts: 15267
Posted: #76
Quote Originally Posted by zamigo6:


I don't disagree to your response to those numbers, but we have to think about what we are talking about. We are talking about the dominate elite QBs and their records against the spread. They only became dominant elite qbs beacuse they were WINNING and probably covering too (a lot). So after 5 years of covering like crazy (just a hypothetical) everyone wants to bet them constantly. Thats when you are no longer getting gifted lines with them. So yes all of those QBs have great ATS records in their entire career, yet almost all of them have losing ATS records in this season...If in 7 years Terry Bridgewater was to become a legendary hall of famer dominant QB in the league, that would mean he tore it up for the better part of his first 6 seasons, no? I wonder if you took down the top 3 QB's in terms of popularity prestige whatever preseason every season, and then saw how they did ATS that year what it would look like...

I'm not fighting you or the OP just something to think about...

Overall I don't refute the advice in general, but it is hard not to view it as a bit of an oversimplification as far as profitting is concerned. With no numbers or stats to defend myself it sure seems like MOST people lose betting over time & MOST people bet the better QBs and better teams. Do you guys feel otherwise? Do most people (the majority) bet weaker QBs and weaker teams? Or do most people win at this?





I agree with what you're saying and have mentioned it myself. Yes, we are looking at the arch of a career and eventually books catch up, performance drops etc... But what about the new crop of elite QBs, Wilson, Luck, etc. These guys are just starting and could post similar numbers in 5-6 years and we might be kicking ourselves.
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2010
Posts: 13130
Posted: #77
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy:


I agree with what you're saying and have mentioned it myself. Yes, we are looking at the arch of a career and eventually books catch up, performance drops etc... But what about the new crop of elite QBs, Wilson, Luck, etc. These guys are just starting and could post similar numbers in 5-6 years and we might be kicking ourselves.

Maybe this is just me, but it seems that in the modern era of iphones and commercials and the works, star status is acquired faster than ever before. I see every touchdown pass every QB throws every Sunday. Perception gets influenced faster than ever before now (and can be deliberately manipulated). If you were to do it you have to flat bet an equal amount on every game, because I imagine the books make a killing when somebody like Peyton blows two teams out in a row, and then loses to a Geno Smith for example. So as long as you bet the same amount each game maybe you could turn a profit.

I am certainly not participating but a I curious to follow along
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2013
Posts: 15267
Posted: #78
Quote Originally Posted by zamigo6:


Maybe this is just me, but it seems that in the modern era of iphones and commercials and the works, star status is acquired faster than ever before. I see every touchdown pass every QB throws every Sunday. Perception gets influenced faster than ever before now (and can be deliberately manipulated). If you were to do it you have to flat bet an equal amount on every game, because I imagine the books make a killing when somebody like Peyton blows two teams out in a row, and then loses to a Geno Smith for example. So as long as you bet the same amount each game maybe you could turn a profit.

I am certainly not participating but a I curious to follow along

These are all great points. No one is flying under the radar these days. Still, guys like Luck, Wilson and Rodgers seem to have a knack for making the linsemakers look silly. I will back those guys more often than I fade them (or no bet them).
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2006
Posts: 3362
Posted: #79
my grandfather said #1 show me a beautiful woman and ill show you a man that's tired of friggin her. #2 never date a snicker licker.... those girl have no self esteem. #3 who gives a garbage, do what you want
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2010
Posts: 13130
Posted: #80
Pretty funny now that I think of it...my grandfather gave me life advice, not gambling advice, but I think it was gambling advice...

"The only free cheese is in the mouse trap"
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2013
Posts: 15769
Posted: #81
[Quote: Originally Posted by ActionMagnet] 1) Never bet on a bad quarterback

2) Don't spend much time analyzing the lines, it takes your focus away from simply making a play on the better team

3) If your gonna lose your money, lose it with your own pick not some one else's 

1)soooooooo......the line-setters don't know just how bad the "bad" quarterbacks are and how much influence,both positive and negative,they will have on the outcome of a game??.....and those same line-setters cannot therefore take that knowledge(because they don't have it of course,they barely even know what they're doing),and integrate it into each line that they set for a game??.......ooooo-kaaay then,cool story

as for 2)again,the better team(regardless of that added bonus of having the "super-duper quarterback" advantage)does NOT cover more than about 53% of the time so maybe your old man was drunk again when he hit ya with that pearl of wisdom......of course its subjective in some cases as to who the better team is but on a long enough time-line WHOEVER you select as the "better" team will only cover somewhere around that mark mentioned.
and as for 3)if you ever get to the point where ya realise youre gonna lose money gambling,then what the fu.k does it matter whose pick you lose it with???....like im gonna feel a whole lot better and more smug cos i just threw away a fat wad of cash on MY OWN opinion rather than someone elses??.....arent you more inclined to feel like more of a tool in the event that that should happen cause now youre a lot poorer and useless at gambling on top of it.

man,vegas/bookies are such idiots not knowing this basic stuff,they mite as well give up and find sumthing else to do



 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2013
Posts: 15267
Posted: #82
Melo, I respect you a lot but you're wrong on this one. We are talking about guys (elite, elite QBs) that the books can't do nothin about despite their best efforts. Most of us would be thrilled if we could win 55% of the time. If you blindly tailed the QB's on the list at the end of this article, you'd have a nice bankroll by now. Read the article below and you'll see what I mean about the books being helpless against the great ones:

Joe Covers: Using betting lines as a measuring stick, Montana ranks as best NFL QB of all-time

By David Purdum on August 19, 2013 at 5:58 am@DavidPurdum

Chris Andrews’ first run-in with Joe Montana came in high school.

On a muddy Friday night in 1974, Montana, the quarterback for the Ringgold Rams, helped his team to a 14-0 lead over Churchill High, Andrews’ school.

“I didn’t play. I was in the stands booking the game,” said Andrews with a chuckle. “I think I had them as 3-point favorites. We scored twice on fluke plays and ended up winning.”

Sixteen years later, Montana unleashed a $250,000 measure of revenge on Andrews, who went on to a long career as a Nevada bookmaker, mostly with Cal Neva sportsbooks in Reno. Because of the proximity to California, the Reno books were always flooded with money on Montana’s San Francisco 49ers during their dynasty run of the 1980s and 90s.

“They (49ers) absolutely killed us,” Andrews said.

Super Bowl XXIV between the 49ers and Denver Broncos was no different. San Francisco was a 12-point favorite, with the total set at 48. Andrews remembers doing everything he could to balance the action, including bumping up the line several points. But by the time Montana and the Niners finished off a 55-10 drubbing of the Broncos, Andrews knew he was in trouble.

“I remember looking at the entire left side of the parlay card, and it all hit,” he said. “We lost a quarter of a million dollars on that Super Bowl.”

Andrews was far from the only bookie to get smashed by the 49ers during Montana’s Hall-of-Fame career. In fact, no quarterback in the last 30 years with at least 100 starts has had a higher winning percentage against the point spread than Montana.

In the billion-dollar betting market’s eyes, there is no doubt – Montana is the greatest quarterback of the modern era.

He covered the spread in 61.4 percent of his 187 starts. During his career in San Francisco, a $110 bet on the 49ers in each game with Montana under center netted bettors $15,800 in profit. (San Francisco was 22-10 against the spread as an underdog during that stretch.)

New England’s Tom Brady is a close second to Montana among the quarterbacks with at least 100 starts. Brady has covered the spread in 59.6 percent of his starts entering 2013, and his 10-13-1 ATS mark in the playoffs also pales in comparison to Montana, who went 13-10.

Joe Montana 115 72 0 61.4%
Tom Brady 114 77 8 59.6%
Eli Manning 80 61 5 56.7%
Donovan McNabb 98 73 5 56.7%
Phil Simms 94 74 4 55.8%
Drew Brees 97 79 3 55.1%
John Elway 130 109 13 54.3%
Peyton Manning 127 109 8 53.8%



 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2013
Posts: 15769
Posted: #83
yep,fair enough beginnerboy....but,as per your conversation with zamigo6 up above,at what point in time do you officially recognize the said quarterback as being at that exact level of greatness???...and by the time you do is it too late and will the spreads have gotten out of hand??...i think league-capper cited brady's stretch over recent years being less than stellar as evidence....its yet another case of a "profitable" trend only becoming recognised as a trend once its too late...that's wat a trend is-a recognition of history,and not all of them are fair representations of the future by a long stretch....also,as mentioned by zamigo6,in this age of over-blown hyperbole and hyper-active information over-load players can easily be made out to be more than perhaps they are.so maybe 4 or 5 guys touted as being the next big thing rite now will be weeded down to only 1 in a few years time....who knows,maybe luck will be one of those guys weeded out??..i dont know a damn thing about gridiron so i cant say.
  but if youre willing to blindly bet on someone you consider to be "great" every time he plays a crap team with a rubbish quarter-back then go for it...best of luck,i always wish the best for a fellow gambler.
but you cannot beat the spread with something as simplistic as this hair-brained theory/piece of advice...shi.t,its hard enuff beating it with the most advanced analytics and information available on the planet.
once again,zamigo6 is a source of great opinion in my eyes and as he said-every joe blow and his dog loves betting an elite quarter-back against a poop team and look where its got them.....is your average joe cleaning up on those bets????
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2014
Posts: 406
Posted: #84
Yeah your old man obviously owed his local a lot going by these square rules m
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2013
Posts: 15267
Posted: #85
Quote Originally Posted by melossinglet:

yep,fair enough beginnerboy....but,as per your conversation with zamigo6 up above,at what point in time do you officially recognize the said quarterback as being at that exact level of greatness???...and by the time you do is it too late and will the spreads have gotten out of hand??...i think league-capper cited brady's stretch over recent years being less than stellar as evidence....its yet another case of a "profitable" trend only becoming recognised as a trend once its too late...that's wat a trend is-a recognition of history,and not all of them are fair representations of the future by a long stretch....also,as mentioned by zamigo6,in this age of over-blown hyperbole and hyper-active information over-load players can easily be made out to be more than perhaps they are.so maybe 4 or 5 guys touted as being the next big thing rite now will be weeded down to only 1 in a few years time....who knows,maybe luck will be one of those guys weeded out??..i dont know a damn thing about gridiron so i cant say.
  but if youre willing to blindly bet on someone you consider to be "great" every time he plays a crap team with a rubbish quarter-back then go for it...best of luck,i always wish the best for a fellow gambler.
but you cannot beat the spread with something as simplistic as this hair-brained theory/piece of advice...shi.t,its hard enuff beating it with the most advanced analytics and information available on the planet.
once again,zamigo6 is a source of great opinion in my eyes and as he said-every joe blow and his dog loves betting an elite quarter-back against a poop team and look where its got them.....is your average joe cleaning up on those bets????

Russel Wilson. He is just getting started and is not a flashy/sexy player but gets the job done. 
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2009
Posts: 6703
Posted: #86
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy:


These are all great points. No one is flying under the radar these days. Still, guys like Luck, Wilson and Rodgers seem to have a knack for making the linsemakers look silly. I will back those guys more often than I fade them (or no bet them).

For the most part, yes. However, the exception seems to be Wilson. Quite a few people still wouldn't give him any credit( I bet you've seen those threads before).  I actually like that because the "perception" keeps the spread reasonable.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2010
Posts: 1933
Posted: #87
Quote Originally Posted by Winteriscoming:

2. as has been noted round here yesterday it's over 90% now this year that when a favoured team wins, it also covers.

 

I don't understand what people mean when they say this ^..

Straight up favorites are winning 65% of the time this year. Those same favorites are 51% ats.

 

 

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2008
Posts: 1367
Posted: #88
Quote Originally Posted by Guy_2U:

Lot of advantages of playing the dog, they don't need to win the game, and might cover. Playing the Fav is a must win and points.

I normally play the fav because they have better overall stats, but of course pick my spots as in TNF Colts -2.5, Ravens -3, and 49ers -3, they might not be winners, but I capped it and the plays feel good, then on game day I do some chanting for luck. 

TNF Colts -2.5, 
Ravens -3,  
and 49ers -3,  
they might not be winners, but I capped it and the plays feel good, then on game day I do some chanting for luck.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2010
Posts: 9704
Posted: #89
This thread is still going 

Don't bet on sh1t QB's 

Fitzy, Cousins, Austin, Geno
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2009
Posts: 7041
Posted: #90
Quote Originally Posted by gfinger:

Great call on Brady in the playoffs. Jake Plummer was a legend at ASU. That's a great story about Jake though. I'm having trouble remembering the teams, however, I believe it was ASU vs. UCLA. This was when OT just started in college. I wanna say I was getting 11 with UCLA. Game goes to OT, ASU goes first and scores a TD, UCLA gets their chance, pick 6, lose the game by 13 and blow a DD cover in OT. Gotta be one of the biggest mooses of all time. Anyone remember that game? Teams?

  • Tom Brady is 163-56 as a starter (124-90 ATS).
  • Tom Brady is 18-8 in the playoffs (11-15 ATS). 

    • LMAO...OH MY I HAD UCLA/USC  IN THAT GAME TO AND I THINK ITS THE ONLY DAM TIME THAT HAS EVER HAPPEND IN THE FORMAT OF OT...IT WAS UNREAL...I THINK IT WAS USC BUT I STILL RECALL THAT BS
     
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Dec, 2010
    Posts: 2672
    Posted: #91
    Quote Originally Posted by degengambler34:

    Im just curious how fitzpatrick keeps getting starting gigs. Must be a really smooth talker. He did go to harvard, i guess those connections are beneficial to nfl gm's, owners, and coaches. It sure as chit isn't because he can play football though. Guy is single handedly taking a very talented team to mediocrity. 


    He did go to Harvard. That means he must be smart enough to know he absolutely sucks at quarterback.
     
     
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Dec, 2010
    Posts: 2005
    Posted: #92
    Quote Originally Posted by Dutch1976:

     

    I don't understand what people mean when they say this ^..

    Straight up favorites are winning 65% of the time this year. Those same favorites are 51% ats.

      


    His comment was "as has been noted round here yesterday it's over 90% now this year that when a favoured team wins, it also covers."

    The real question is, how often does a favored team win?  53% of the time?  See the play on words?

    It's kind of like saying, 60% of the time, I'm 100% correct...or as said in Anchorman...60% of the time, it works all the time.


    All Forums | Penalty Box
    About Us
    Contact Us
    Careers
    Our Team
    Brand
    Testimonials
    Betting Guides
    Sportsbook Reviews
    Betting News
    Podcasts
    Responsible Gambling
    Betting Sites
    US Betting Sites
    Canada Betting Sites
    Canada Casinos
    Best Betting Apps
    Contests
    Streak Survivor
    King of Covers
    Ultimate Race
    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.
    21+
    Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER
    Help Privacy Terms of Service Cookies Sitemap Forum
    Covers is verified safe by:
    Evalon Logo Logo GPWA Logo GDPR logo Logo GeoTrust logo Logo PCI DSS logo Logo
    Copyright © 1995 - 2026 CS Media Ltd. 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.