2 gimmies for Sunday

[keilan]

I generally don’t give out football games but I’m feeling rather festive tonight.

San Diego (7.5pts) to cover
Cincinnati (11.5pts) to cover


You should be able to get somewhere around 3-1 on this bet. Undo the elastic-band boyz. :jump:

[Suff]

I generally don’t give out football games but I’m feeling rather festive tonight.

San Diego (7.5pts) to cover
Cincinnati (11.5pts) to cover


You should be able to get somewhere around 3-1 on this bet. Undo the elastic-band boyz. :jump:

pik4 contest has a Youbet hat up for grabs if your looking to really score big tommorrow.

[Zaf]

Hello K

Gonna check out what Pinny has to offer ;)

Z

[bigmack]

keilan,

current pinnacle offering is:

San Diego Chargers -9 +117 -324 UNDER 41 -105
Cincinnati Bengals -10.5 -102 -535 UNDER 39.5 +100

Still a bargain?

[Valuist]

Laying over a touchdown in the NFL is usually a recipe for trouble.

[keilan]

Final Score: Cincinnati 27, Oakland 10

[bigmack]

You should be a lock with the current SD/Denver score @ 21-3

Nice pickin'

[keilan]

Final Score: San Diego 48, Denver 20

[keilan]

[QUOTE=Valuist]Laying over a touchdown in the NFL is usually a recipe for trouble.[/QUOTE



And I thought you knew something about football :lol:

[keilan]

Hello K

Gonna check out what Pinny has to offer ;)

Z


Hey Darrell -- hope you jumped aboard :)

[BetHorses!]

[QUOTE=Valuist]Laying over a touchdown in the NFL is usually a recipe for trouble.[/QUOTE



And I thought you knew something about football :lol:


You won and thats what counts but laying that kind of wood especially in Parlays on a consistent basis is trouble for the player.

[Zaf]

Oh yeah !!! Capped off a great weekend !!!

Thanks Keith !!!

[keilan]

Oh yeah !!! Capped off a great weekend !!!

Thanks Keith !!!


Good stuff D :ThmbUp:


Bethorses -- I gave out what I considered a gimmie wager -- nothing more, nothing less. Do you think I make this wager every week :)

[BetHorses!]

Good stuff D :ThmbUp:


Bethorses -- I gave out what I considered a gimmie wager -- nothing more, nothing less. Do you think I make this wager every week :)


No I don't. I was agreeing with Valuist :)

[Vigors]

....better not get to good with your NFL picks......or
you'll have "PriceandProbability" all over you for how
you did it...mark my words...he's a pitbull that won't let go!!!

[keilan]

No I don't. I was agreeing with Valuist :)


Valuist didn't like the bet, you agreed with him. Now it's time to move on.

When someone posts a play and cashes most posters say congrats, whats the problem ;)

It's like when someone analizes a race and selects a closer who wins, do fellow cappers dump all over that player. It's akin to saying most closers lose, duh!!! -- to deduct that any player only wagers on closers is preposterious as are parlays etc.

Wagering of any sort as you know is to find a edge and exploit it. Some do -- others talk about it :)

[keilan]

....better not get to good with your NFL picks......or
you'll have "PriceandProbability" all over you for how
you did it...mark my words...he's a pitbull that won't let go!!!


With handles like "Valuist" and "PriceandProbability" I doubt they would be looking Northward for any advice from me :D

[Show Me the Wire]

keilan:

I like to say CONGRATS :jump:

[bigmack]

Laying over a touchdown in the NFL is usually a recipe for trouble.
You won and thats what counts but laying that kind of wood especially in Parlays on a consistent basis is trouble for the player.
Valuist didn't like the bet, you agreed with him. Now it's time to move on.
Wrong again Nanook. Valuist is a much respected member & was pointing out "usually" - BetHorses pointed out that it doesn't hold water on a consistent basis. Neither said they didn't like the bet. Get over yourself & move on as well.

[keilan]

keilan:

I like to say CONGRATS :jump:


Why thank you SMTW :)

Nice to see you back on the board, take care my friend.

[Valuist]

[QUOTE=Valuist]Laying over a touchdown in the NFL is usually a recipe for trouble.[/QUOTE



And I thought you knew something about football :lol:

If you knew something about ANYTHING, you'd know that two events doesn't prove something right or wrong.

[keilan]

[QUOTE=keilan]

If you knew something about ANYTHING, you'd know that two events doesn't prove something right or wrong.


This was the surest wager I made all year, that’s why I called it a "gimmie".

Maybe you’re just not very good and don’t understand today’s match ups.

Now why don’t you stay the f*** outta my threads until you actually learn something.

For a $2 dollar bettor you make a lotta noise

[bigmack]

[QUOTE=Valuist]Now why don’t you stay the f*** outta my threads until you actually learn something.
For a $2 dollar bettor you make a lotta noise
YOUR thread? Temperatures must be plummeting up yonder as you're getting cantankerous.

Bit of advice - post in the spring/summer months and a whole lot less in the winter. Being couped up with the wife makes you irritable and renders your opinion useless.

[PaceAdvantage]

Gee, you think the sudden belligerent turn to this thread has anything to do with those Michelle Wie golf threads from a while back?

At least Keilan tried to take the high road:Valuist didn't like the bet, you agreed with him. Now it's time to move on.Now I will put on my hard hat while accusations of me jumping up to protect my "friend" Keilan are hurled from every direction (never mind that I wouldn't be able to pick out Keilan from a lineup if my life depended upon it....)

PS. Keilan, thanks for the picks.....a winner is a winner (or two)....you told us ahead of time this was pretty much a one shot deal....why anyone is looking to "start something" over this is beyond me....

[bigmack]

[QUOTE=Valuist]
Now why don’t you stay the f*** outta my threads until you actually learn something.

For a $2 dollar bettor you make a lotta noise
Looks like the lowroad to me. Read the whole thread PA. Nobody questioned the individual bets - Valuist and BetHorses know their stuff and simply stated that bets of that nature over time would be doomed. OK?
Gee, you think the sudden belligerent turn to this thread has anything to do with those Michelle Wie golf threads from a while back?
Sure, that makes sense as I was the one who stated "nice pickin". You bet PA

[PaceAdvantage]

[QUOTE=keilan]
Looks like the lowroad to me. Read the whole thread PA. Nobody questioned the individual bets - Valuist and BetHorses know their stuff and simply stated that bets of that nature over time would be doomed. OK?

That's true, and Keilan AGREED with them (in his own way):

It's like when someone analizes a race and selects a closer who wins, do fellow cappers dump all over that player. It's akin to saying most closers lose, duh!!! -- to deduct that any player only wagers on closers is preposterious as are parlays etc.

And for the record, I did read the whole thread.....the "lowroad" you quote occured after his "let's move on" thread....after ANOTHER exchange had taken place.

There's nothing worse than when the drift of a thread turns into an analysis of itself....

[bigmack]

OK, you're right and I hope the relationship between you two goes well. Let me know where the registry is located so I can send you both a nice gift.

You like when people refer to threads as "theirs"?

[PaceAdvantage]

You like when people refer to threads as "theirs"?

Luckily, it doesn't happen all that often, although technically, if you create a thread, in some sense, it is yours, is it not?

[bigmack]

Another silly thread involving Keith. I have little interest in the pursuit. Valu and BetHorses were making valid points. He didn't like it. Tough Titties.

If he forgets his milk money tomorrow be sure to run it over to him.

[PaceAdvantage]

I have little interest in the pursuit.

Funny, I was gonna type the very same words. The whole turn to the thread was ridiculous from every aspect.

[bigmack]

Funny, I was gonna type the very same words. The whole turn to the thread was ridiculous from every aspect.
Nah, the Big Turn was here.
Now why don’t you stay the f*** outta my threads until you actually learn something.

For a $2 dollar bettor you make a lotta noise

[BetHorses!]

Laying over a touchdown in the NFL is usually a recipe for trouble.
I was agreeing with Val's statement above. Keyword=usually

Valuist didn't like the bet, you agreed with him. Now it's time to move on.

When someone posts a play and cashes most posters say congrats, whats the problem ;) CONGRATS I have no problem and happy my friend Zaf respects your opinion and cashed also

It's like when someone analizes a race and selects a closer who wins, do fellow cappers dump all over that player. It's akin to saying most closers lose, duh!!! -- to deduct that any player only wagers on closers is preposterious as are parlays etc.

Wagering of any sort as you know is to find a edge and exploit it. Some do -- others talk about it :)

Where was your edge? Current Super Bowl favorite or biggest Double Digit fav on board? Think the point is you don't want to be in the crowd of people who cashed this ticket on Sunday and many people cashed this "event"

[QUOTE=Valuist]

For a $2 dollar bettor you make a lotta noise

Lets just say he is. Who cares? Childish comment and I am surprised it came from you.

[cj]

The whole thing about "usually" doesn't make much sense. These games were played one time, and will never be played again. What "usually" happens has little relevance, as he was dead on in his analysis. I think it is more impressive that he went against what "usually" happens and called them gimmes, and was easily right.

[betchatoo]

I must be missing something here. The man posted 2 games that he suggested were gimmee's. He didn't say play all big favorites. He didn't say bet these teams every week. He said this week they look like easy winners. And they were! It was good handicapping.

Anyway, congrats, Keilan. As for those criticizing (and some of you I generally respect your opinions), it might be better to offer advice when he picks badly.

[BetHorses!]

Anyway, congrats, Keilan. As for those criticizing (and some of you I generally respect your opinions), it might be better to offer advice when he picks badly.

This is getting silly. Let me clarify my position here. I have two parts.

Part 1--Betting favorites of more than 7 points can be trouble in the NFL. Maybe someone can pull up some stats for the last few years, I don't have the time at the moment. I agreed with Valuist on this

Part 2- If you have two games and bet them individually and split you will lose the vig, if you bet a 2 team parlay (which was suggested) and lose one part the whole parlay is bust.

Keep in mind I posted my opinion after the results were in that he won both games. I simply implied that taking two big favorites to win especially in a parlay situation consistently is not a winning formula. After that, Keilan asked me if I think he makes this type of wager every week to which I responded NO. (copied below) - followed my agreement with Valuist's recipe for trouble statement that I think Keilan misunderstood as a personal attack on his exact picks. Its the type of bet combined with the big spread in general that I had a problem with. I for one would never make that bet no matter who gives it out, but that's me.



Bethorses -- I gave out what I considered a gimmie wager -- nothing more, nothing less. Do you think I make this wager every week



No I don't. I was agreeing with Valuist
[QUOTE=BetHorses]

[Suff]

If You like two cold, then I'd play an A and R. Action reverse. Pays 4-1.


Parlay locally pays 700 on 300, or 900 on 400. But they drop the vig. So its true odds.

A and R pays 1200 on 300. But charges a vig, and its double if you lose one side. 360 on one side 660 both sides.
The fact is, these were big lines, big games and called out by Kielan. Sometimes your right, and thats good. Frequently your wrong, and thats bad. Kielan was right so it was good.


All reverse bets are double action: the remaining bets in the sequence will be placed if the preceding bet is a win, a "push," or is cancelled for any reason. The same rules apply to the reverse if win as apply to the regular if win. An "if bet" (double action) follows the sequence "if X wins, ties or cancels then Y." Placing a reverse bet will include that sequence and its opposite: "if X wins, ties or cancels then Y" AND "if Y wins, ties or cancels then X." As you can see, a reverse bet contains two "if bet" sequences, and you must lay down or risk an equal amount for each one: an if bet for $110 is $220 as a reverse bet

[Valuist]

[QUOTE=Valuist]


This was the surest wager I made all year, that’s why I called it a "gimmie".

Maybe you’re just not very good and don’t understand today’s match ups.

Now why don’t you stay the f*** outta my threads until you actually learn something.

For a $2 dollar bettor you make a lotta noise

You're not only an idiot, you're the biggest asshole when you when a bet that I've ever seen. Probably because it doesn't happen very often.

As for staying out of "your" threads (I thought this was PA's board?), that will be no problem since you contribute nothing.

[keilan]

Bethorses I have no axe to grind with you and I suspect I never will. I understood your point from the outset and agree that playing to cover large spreads can be unhealthy but that’s one of the reasons that made Sunday’s wager so appealing to me -- cj said it best.

Bethorse asked --Where was your edge? Current Super Bowl favorite or biggest Double Digit fav on board? Think the point is you don't want to be in the crowd of people who cashed this ticket on Sunday and many people cashed this "event"

Keilan -- In my original post I stated that you should get somewhere around 3-1 on this bet, again it depends who’s booking your bet. I don’t generally give out WAGERS that pay 3-1 but I truly felt that both teams would cover very easily and they did, my only surprise was that the losing teams scored as many as they did.

So I’ve stated from the outset that it was a “GIMMIE BET” along with the approximate LOW ODDS. If someone chose to wager $100, $500 or $1000 I think they might be satisfied with their return. For me it was like wagering on a horse that should have gone off at 1-1 and public missed something. Hope that explains my EDGE.

As a side note my brother played;
Baltimore over Kansas City
Jacksonville over Indy
Giants over Carolina
Tennessee over Houston
San Diego over Denver

He and I discussed only one hockey game on Sunday and both agreed that the Edmonton Oilers were ripe for a loss in Chicago but since he loves the Oil so he”ll never bet against them. The Oiler’s game would have increased his take by a little over double. I suppose if one wanted to be critical one can find fault just about anywhere.

p.s. – I told you that for a $2 dollar bettor he makes a lot of noise. He’s latest post characterizes him pretty well, not someone I’d wanna be aliened with.

[Valuist]

I think alienation is one thing you do actually know something about.

[bigmack]

Laying over a touchdown in the NFL is usually a recipe for trouble.
And I thought you knew something about football :lol:
Everything was running along copacetically until this exchange, then the fur started to fly. Let's just say for the sake of discussion that it was the greatest two sports picks in the history of mankind and "move along"

The fact remains that "keilan" has a hair up his kiester about certain members and has the inability to let it go. Valuist is one, I am another, SQ764 is one, and I trust there's a few others that get under his skin. He makes no small secret of it and that's the way it is.

[cj]

I would say Valuist should have commented on the specific picks, or just let it go. Throwing out a general statement like that didn't make a lot of sense, unless he was implying that he thought it was a bad bet. If that is the case, just say it and maybe why. Regardless of whether, as a group, laying double digits is a poor play, there are certainly instances when it is a good bet. I suspect it isn't as easy as saying it is a bad bet, or people could make a living betting every NFL dog getting 10 or more, right?

It would be like like someone posting a frontrunning winner at Keeneland on the polytrack, and I say, "Great, but frontrunners usually lose at Keeneland". Maybe they do, but some still offer value. In this case, Keilan clearly called these gimmes, meaning he thought 3-1 was value in this situation. Judging by the results of the games, gimme was probably an understatement.

[Valuist]

I would say Valuist should have commented on the specific picks, or just let it go. Throwing out a general statement like that didn't make a lot of sense, unless he was implying that he thought it was a bad bet. If that is the case, just say it and maybe why. Regardless of whether, as a group, laying double digits is a poor play, there are certainly instances when it is a good bet. I suspect it isn't as easy as saying it is a bad bet, or people could make a living betting every NFL dog getting 10 or more, right?

It would be like like someone posting a frontrunning winner at Keeneland on the polytrack, and I say, "Great, but frontrunners usually lose at Keeneland". Maybe they do, but some still offer value. In this case, Keilan clearly called these gimmes, meaning he thought 3-1 was value in this situation. Judging by the results of the games, gimme was probably an understatement.

If it was a bad bet, I would've said take the other side. I just didn't feel they were "good" bets. According to Wagerline, as of right now, dogs have covered 55% of the games in the NFL this season. Last year, favorites had their best season in 30 years, winning about 58% of the time. In general, dogs tend to cover slightly more (around 51 to 51 1/2%). Its different than in college, where teams have incentive to run up big scores. In the NFL, when you get a lead in the 4th quarter, its about working the clock, not putting up more points (unless your defense is pitifully bad). I'm guessing the thought process behind laying the wood w/SD was that it was 1) Cutler's 1st road start, and 2) there's rumors that some Denver players have mailed it in. Number 1 isn't debateable; the second point is. Also, it was a divisional rivalry game, which invariably tend to be played closer to the vest. As for Cincy, they are sharp right now. Oakland was horrible for most of the season although their D was improved. Bengals figured to win but at the steep price you could be vulnerable to a garbage TD and back door cover. But he never did elaborate the reasons for his supreme confidence. Instead he gloated and ripped into me like a sore winner. I guess some people are never happy.

As for the comment on generalities, I "generally" agree but there are exceptions and they involve odds/price/spread. I think its a good idea to never take a low price on a horse who's being asked to do something its never done before. I think its a good idea to never bet on a horse who's bled thru Lasix. In the NFL, I think its a good idea to never lay more than 7 pts in a divisional game; especially if there is a strong rivalry. And double digits for any game should be avoided. In the case of the two games mentioned earlier, I didn't take the other sides. I just passed on them.

[keilan]

The fact remains that "keilan" has a hair up his kiester about certain members and has the inability to let it go. Valuist is one, I am another, SQ764 is one, and I trust there's a few others that get under his skin. He makes no small secret of it and that's the way it is.


Yes I can see the three of you playing for the same team -- As for facts Mac you are hardly qualified to make such statements. You know squat about me and that's the way it will remain.

I see that you are still looking to fit-in somewhere on this board, I wish you good luck!!!!

[keilan]

But he never did elaborate the reasons for his supreme confidence. Instead he gloated and ripped into me like a sore winner. I guess some people are never happy.


It isn't important why I liked the wager, nor will I qualify the reasons (which are several on each game) because that isn't necessary.

As I’ve stated previously I gave out what I considered a gimmie wager -- nothing more, nothing less. I intentionally posted this thread in the selections forum for my horseracing buddies. Either PA or one of the moderators moved it into “off topic sports”.

Valuists if you truly believe I ripped into you like a sore loser because I called two games correctly then I suggest you get back on your medication because nothing could be further from the truth. I’ve gone back through the entire thread and I don’t see that anywhere.

Whether you realize it or not you have conducted yourself like a “punk” in this thread. You have called me an idiot and asshole in text because you think you can. You can either apologize to me as a gentleman or take your chances that I never have the pleasure of bumping into you down the road.

U feeling lucky!!!!!!!

[keilan]

Hopefully the foolishness is over

Thanks to Suff, Zaf, PA, CJ, BetHorses, Vigors, SMTW, and betchatoo for all adding some sensibility to this thread.

Next time I’m feeling festive maybe I’ll post some hockey games :bang:

[andicap]

Hopefully the foolishness is over

Thanks to Suff, Zaf, PA, CJ, BetHorses, Vigors, SMTW, and betchatoo for all adding some sensibility to this thread.

Next time I’m feeling festive maybe I’ll post some hockey games :bang:

Moral of this thread

No good deed goes unpunished.

:lol:

Nice going K!

[Suff]

Hopefully the foolishness is over

Thanks to Suff, Zaf, PA, CJ, BetHorses, Vigors, SMTW, and betchatoo for all adding some sensibility to this thread.

Next time I’m feeling festive maybe I’ll post some hockey games :bang:

Word on the street is that Valuist is talking smack about you on another board.

I would'nt sit still for that.

[andicap]

My cousin, who some of you met in Saratoga last summer, is the best PRO pigskin picker i've ever seen. I know he's good because I sit with him almost every Sunday and know exactly what he bets. He's second in his pool this season ($1,300 top prize plus weekly cash).

Anyway, he NEVER does research except reading the daily newspaper. Barely knows who's injured. Doesn't care to know about trends (except how the line has gone during the week -- but that's not his main M.O. for picks) Doesn't watch ESPN or read USA Today weekly or any other football pub. Of course he does watch a lot of games every week at the sports bar but how much can you learn trying to watch six games at once?

So when I ask how he does it, he replies, "It's just a feel -- I can't explain it."
Drives me crazy!
When I press he'll say something like "I think the Ravens are a powerful team, very physical." He does have a good grasp on general concepts like which teams are good at home, but from experience, not research. And he'll go against these "rules" all the time. Like betting against the Chiefs at home last weekend. And he LOVES dogs and often seems to bet against the "HOT" team, like the Jets last week as he innately understands their spreads are often inflated.

Plays "if" bets and reverses and is very profitable about 3 years out of 4.

I know you guys won't believe this or say I'm exaggerating, but I swear on a stack of CJ figs this is the truth. I've stopping fighting it and now just bet his picks.

[rrbauer]

Keith, how about some losers. That's what everyone expects!

:)

[keilan]

Andicap – great story, you know I love stuff like that.

Suff -- Word on the street now is he went underground.

rrbauer -- haha I have my share of those too, we need to get together for a day at Tampa before Christmas.

All the best guys & thanx :cool:

[Valuist]

My cousin, who some of you met in Saratoga last summer, is the best PRO pigskin picker i've ever seen. I know he's good because I sit with him almost every Sunday and know exactly what he bets. He's second in his pool this season ($1,300 top prize plus weekly cash).

Anyway, he NEVER does research except reading the daily newspaper. Barely knows who's injured. Doesn't care to know about trends (except how the line has gone during the week -- but that's not his main M.O. for picks) Doesn't watch ESPN or read USA Today weekly or any other football pub. Of course he does watch a lot of games every week at the sports bar but how much can you learn trying to watch six games at once?

So when I ask how he does it, he replies, "It's just a feel -- I can't explain it."
Drives me crazy!
When I press he'll say something like "I think the Ravens are a powerful team, very physical." He does have a good grasp on general concepts like which teams are good at home, but from experience, not research. And he'll go against these "rules" all the time. Like betting against the Chiefs at home last weekend. And he LOVES dogs and often seems to bet against the "HOT" team, like the Jets last week as he innately understands their spreads are often inflated.

Plays "if" bets and reverses and is very profitable about 3 years out of 4.

I know you guys won't believe this or say I'm exaggerating, but I swear on a stack of CJ figs this is the truth. I've stopping fighting it and now just bet his picks.

But w/out documentation, its tough to prove. I think people don't realize how difficult beating the NFL is. These moron touts get on TV and claim they hit 75% or 80% and anybody who's bet sports knows that that would be impossible to do over a big sample size. I doubt anybody could do it with a sample size of 75 games. The top handicappers on Wagerline were right around the 60% mark. And that's out of over 17,000 selectors. Most pros say they shoot for 55 to 60%.

http://www.wagerline.com/Handicapping/topHandicappers.aspx?sportid=1

Suff- that is pretty funny. Keilan may be notorious but I doubt anybody on other boards has any idea who he is.

[andicap]

Valuist, are you saying you don't think he's really winning consistently?

I'm not saying he hits 75% or even 65%. He himself says you're a Hall of Famer if you pick 60% over a season. I do know he wins most weeks as evidenced by his top showing in the pool. (They pick ALL games vs. spread, giving half games 2 pts, the other half 1 pt.)

I'll try and post who he likes in the next few weeks - usually get the final picks within an hour of game time. He bets about 8-10 games a week but puts more emphasis on certain games. That's why winning % not always relevant. Hypothetically, If he wins 52% of all picks, but is 60% on the games he puts the most money on (or uses the most in his "if" bets and reverses) then that's darn good.

[JPinMaryland]

According to Wagerline, as of right now, dogs have covered 55% of the games in the NFL this season. Last year, favorites had their best season in 30 years, winning about 58% of the time. In general, dogs tend to cover slightly more (around 51 to 51 1/2%). .. .


Do you have any stats on favorites to cover 8 or more? Since that would be germane to the original comment that kicked off the debate. My guess is that they are probably running around the same 49% or whatever the avg. is.

I dont know why it is generally thought that covering 8 or more is so bad. I know Mel Kiper had repeated that mantra last year on the local radio, but Kiper is more about the draft and not really a handicapper. According to Kiper just go with what team you feel will win and dont worry about the pts. Citing some stat that said teams that win the game generally win the bet, at a rate of X% (60?). Not good reasoning though.

So what % do teams cover 8 or more?

[Valuist]

Do you have any stats on favorites to cover 8 or more? Since that would be germane to the original comment that kicked off the debate. My guess is that they are probably running around the same 49% or whatever the avg. is.

I dont know why it is generally thought that covering 8 or more is so bad. I know Mel Kiper had repeated that mantra last year on the local radio, but Kiper is more about the draft and not really a handicapper. According to Kiper just go with what team you feel will win and dont worry about the pts. Citing some stat that said teams that win the game generally win the bet, at a rate of X% (60?). Not good reasoning though.

So what % do teams cover 8 or more?

I'll try to get numbers on that. The reason more than 7 is significant is because its two scores. And like I said earlier, in the NFL, they don't get style points. Coaches don't care about covering the spread. They don't have to impress alumni or voters. Their jobs are based on winning, not covering the spread. When teams get leads into the 4th quarter, they tend to get conservative. They often are willing to let opponents chip away 7-8 yards per play as long as the clock keeps running. Offensively, they run the ball to keep the clock moving. The win/you cover mantra is based on the fact the majority of NFL point spreads are less than 6 points. 8 pts is not a big college line; but its a sizeable NFL spread.

Andicap- I'm not saying the guy hasn't won or is having a profitable season. But over the long haul, I don't believe one can beat the NFL by picking up a newspaper. Pros are pouring over hundreds of stats and watching hours upon hours of game film. I can go to the track without pps and play trainers and jockeys alone and have a winning day. But could one expect to make money over a period of time with no advantage? Nope.

[JPinMaryland]

The top handicappers on Wagerline were right around the 60% mark. And that's out of over 17,000 selectors. Most pros say they shoot for 55 to 60%....

This is a bit misleading, you are making it sound as if there's a ceiling of 60% above which nobody can get past. Not one person in 17,000.

However that's not true, the rankings are based on soem sort of pt. system which I assume is rewarding people for hitting bigger wagers or something like that.

So if you go to page 3 of the rankings (rankings 101-150) there is one guy at 89%, one at 73%, one at 70%, one at 68; 3 at 67, 2 at 66, 1 at 64, and 3 at 63.

This sort of thing must exist throghout the whole list. If you go to page 4, (rankings 151-200), one guy at 77%, one at 76, 2 at 74, 1 at 70; 1 at 68, 65, 64, 2 at 63 and a bunch at 61 and 62.

Presumably there could be a guy hitting 70% and not even be in the top 1000 or top 500, since the ranking is based on pts and not consistency.

So anyhow that is a bit misleading...Interesting stuff though.

[Bathless]

These moron touts get on TV and claim they hit 75% or 80% and anybody who's bet sports knows that that would be impossible to do over a big sample size. I doubt anybody could do it with a sample size of 75 games. The top handicappers on Wagerline were right around the 60% mark. And that's out of over 17,000 selectors. Most pros say they shoot for 55 to 60%.


Just got a spam-type email from a guy claiming to hit 74%. Funny thing is that he's a track bud of mine and I know he spends his non-working hours betting PHA and PEN (he wins consistently). I also know he doesn't even watch football. He's just fishing for a handful of saps to toss him $25 a week. Says it more than pays for his website and a few dinners.

60% sounds damn good to me.

[JPinMaryland]

cant find anything on underdogs 7 1/2 pts or more...durn it.

[Valuist]

This is a bit misleading, you are making it sound as if there's a ceiling of 60% above which nobody can get past. Not one person in 17,000.

However that's not true, the rankings are based on soem sort of pt. system which I assume is rewarding people for hitting bigger wagers or something like that.

So if you go to page 3 of the rankings (rankings 101-150) there is one guy at 89%, one at 73%, one at 70%, one at 68; 3 at 67, 2 at 66, 1 at 64, and 3 at 63.

This sort of thing must exist throghout the whole list. If you go to page 4, (rankings 151-200), one guy at 77%, one at 76, 2 at 74, 1 at 70; 1 at 68, 65, 64, 2 at 63 and a bunch at 61 and 62.

Presumably there could be a guy hitting 70% and not even be in the top 1000 or top 500, since the ranking is based on pts and not consistency.

So anyhow that is a bit misleading...Interesting stuff though.

The guy at 89% has made a grand total of 27 selections. Yeah a nice run but the sample size is too small to be meaningful. Let's see how he does after 400 games, not 27. Also, the Wagerline selection odds line tends to lag a little bit behind the major books. You may be able to make a selection on team A on Wagerline at -3 but if you tried to bet them at Pinny, The Greek or Cascade, the number would be -3 1/2.

The guys (or women) who are near the 60% mark after several hundred games are pretty damn good.....and the severe minority when you see there's over 17,000 selectors.

[bigmack]

Have a chum that wanted to subscribe to a service @ $2200/mo, threw it out to bethorses and Valu and they said negative. I told him he would be ill-advised to do it. Well, he did it. It's all sports betting and they've done pretty well. Couple of weeks ago it looks like: They've done similar in previous weeks.

Mon --- Seton Hall -11 80-60 Final +3X
Tues--- Vanderbilt -9 62-70 Final -3X
Weds--- Loyola-MD -8 75-63Final +3X
Pacific -3.5(buy to 3) 79-72 +3X
Thurs----<159 Gonzaga/Port St 69-51 Final +3X
>47 C. Mich/Ohio 31-10 Final -3X
Fri---- Coppin St +9 69-68 Final won outright +3X
>53 Hous/S Miss 34-20 +3X
Sat---- New Mexico St -13 50-23 Final +3X
W. Virginia -10 41-39 Final -1X
Sun--- Missouri -8 73-54 Final +3X
Oakland -3 14-23 Final -3X
Green Bay (pick) 10-38 Final -1X
>41 Den/Sea 23-20 +3X

That is a total of +27X and -11X. Grand total of +16X.

[BetHorses!]

Have a chum that wanted to subscribe to a service @ $2200/mo, threw it out to bethorses and Valu and they said negative. I told him he would be ill-advised to do it. Well, he did it. It's all sports betting and they've done pretty well. Couple of weeks ago it looks like: They've done similar in previous weeks.

Mon --- Seton Hall -11 80-60 Final +3X
Tues--- Vanderbilt -9 62-70 Final -3X
Weds--- Loyola-MD -8 75-63Final +3X
Pacific -3.5(buy to 3) 79-72 +3X
Thurs----<159 Gonzaga/Port St 69-51 Final +3X
>47 C. Mich/Ohio 31-10 Final -3X
Fri---- Coppin St +9 69-68 Final won outright +3X
>53 Hous/S Miss 34-20 +3X
Sat---- New Mexico St -13 50-23 Final +3X
W. Virginia -10 41-39 Final -1X
Sun--- Missouri -8 73-54 Final +3X
Oakland -3 14-23 Final -3X
Green Bay (pick) 10-38 Final -1X
>41 Den/Sea 23-20 +3X

That is a total of +27X and -11X. Grand total of +16X.


Ask your buddy,

if he gets the number they give out. Cause if they are sharp and move games for people like Billy Walters or Doc-- heres what happens. They will give Missouri out at -8 but its old news by the time your friend gets it and he has to lay -9 (if he's lucky) Yes these sharps might win more but your friend (the suckers) who follow might win for a while but trust me getting games from the best and taking bad numbers will result in a loss in the long run.

Also, these guys buy back. They lay 8 give it out and take the other side at +10.5. They have a 9-10 middle and 8 side working for them--- oh yea the $2,200 per month also :)

[BetHorses!]

Guys, (Kei + Val)

Nobody is forcing people to like each other here but at least keep it respectful. I don't get involved in all the petty stuff cause its just a waste of time. You both contribute a lot here and IMO have much to offer especially with the ponies which is why we are here in the first place. Not only do I respect you both but have you both on my list of posters to seek out and read your opinions about various subjects. Many others are on the list but at the risk of leaving someone out I will not name anyone else.

Sometimes its good to check our egos at the door when we log on to PA. It will benefit all here.

[keilan]

Guys, (Kei + Val)

Nobody is forcing people to like each other here but at least keep it respectful. I don't get involved in all the petty stuff cause its just a waste of time. You both contribute a lot here and IMO have much to offer especially with the ponies which is why we are here in the first place. Not only do I respect you both but have you both on my list of posters to seek out and read your opinions about various subjects. Many others are on the list but at the risk of leaving someone out I will not name anyone else.

Sometimes its good to check our egos at the door when we log on to PA. It will benefit all here.

Tough post to disagree with – I’ll try to be a better member in the future.

[Zaf]

Sure was. I don't bet the NFL too often, becuase frankly my opinion stinks. I have know Keilan for a few years now and I know darn well enough if he posts something related to wagering, I'm going to check it out, especially when the dude says "gimmies" :) Thanks to his post I made some nice $$ on a few parlay tickets ! Thanks again Keith !

As for Bethorses & Valuist, their opinions on Football are excellent also and I have taken some of their opinions to the bank in the past.

So I leave the football handicapping to others !

I kinda agree with CJ about each event being a unique entity, just like a horse race.

Happy Holidays to All.

Z

[skate]

well i only could read bout 1/2 the post, gees.

\ the guy makes an excellent call and all hell breaks lose, give it a break will ya?

hey, but what i really need to know is "what is Keilan doing in a LINEUP?

[keilan]

hey, but what i really need to know is "what is Keilan doing in a LINEUP?


He found Mac & Val in the same alley :lol: :lol:

[bigmack]

He found Mac & Val in the same alley
Tisk tisk now SnowBird. It's been a mere a 24 since your "jolly" post.

I’ll try to be a better member in the future.

[keilan]

Tisk tisk now SnowBird. It's been a mere a 24 since your "jolly" post.


Obviously you have no sense of humor / sarcasm / timing or anything else. Why does that surprise me?

Now go get a life – hell go shopping, buy yourself a nice meal but get away from the computer for 20 minutes would you!!!!

[BetHorses!]

There goes my Nobel Peace Prize :rolleyes:

[bigmack]

There goes my Nobel Peace Prize :rolleyes:
He posts from the bottom of the bottle if you know what I mean.


http://www.tasteoftx.com/spirits/onrocks2.gif

[bigmack]

I bumped into that old video of Rodney King where he states:"Can't we all get along" and by gum the big lug got to me. I say if they could stop civil unrest in LA of years ago I can help stop this silliness in the "proprietors" thread.

I retract the the implication that the "proprietor" hits the sauce. Doens't mean I have to like the guy. I am now officially outro with this thread. :bang: