North American
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
08 Jan 14
09:26
Joined:
Date Joined:
19 Oct 05
i dont care if they win it or if they dont. im on about pure mathematics.
7.2
if seattle win, and theyre 1/4 to do so, then the 49ers have to beat carolina away then seattle away then the superbowl.
they are 1.9 to win at carolina
what price to win at seattle? they were about 2.9 last time i imagine, so lets go with that. if that sounds too big, it makes seattle about 1.52 which doesnt sound far out to me.
then the superbowl. if they play denver probably around evens the pair. but for the sake of balance, as they could play someone crap like the colts, lets go with 1.8
1.9 x 2.9 x 1.8 = 9.918
ahh you say, but what if seattle lose? good point.
then theyd have to beat carolina, new orleans and whoever wins the afc.
1.9, lets go with 1.4 to beat new orleans at home bearing in mind new orleans will have already pulled off a massive upset winning at seattle i think 1.4 is fair enough. then 1.8 superbowl.
1.9 x 1.4 x 1.8 = 4.788
so the 7.2 is pretty much right in the middle of where the odds are likely to swing to after the seattle result is known. but of course seattle are about 1/4 to win. so much more likely that the odds on the 49ers will go up, not down.
while were at it, the colts odds are totally barmy. 25.0
the most likely scenario is they have to win at both the patriots and broncos, then beat the nfc champs.
3.9 v patriots, about 4.5 broncos, then would be at least 2.5 against the seahawks or 49ers and thats being generous.
3.9 x 4.5 x 2.5 = 43.875. 25.0 is one of crappest bets in history, regardless of whether they win it or dont.
7.2
if seattle win, and theyre 1/4 to do so, then the 49ers have to beat carolina away then seattle away then the superbowl.
they are 1.9 to win at carolina
what price to win at seattle? they were about 2.9 last time i imagine, so lets go with that. if that sounds too big, it makes seattle about 1.52 which doesnt sound far out to me.
then the superbowl. if they play denver probably around evens the pair. but for the sake of balance, as they could play someone crap like the colts, lets go with 1.8
1.9 x 2.9 x 1.8 = 9.918
ahh you say, but what if seattle lose? good point.
then theyd have to beat carolina, new orleans and whoever wins the afc.
1.9, lets go with 1.4 to beat new orleans at home bearing in mind new orleans will have already pulled off a massive upset winning at seattle i think 1.4 is fair enough. then 1.8 superbowl.
1.9 x 1.4 x 1.8 = 4.788
so the 7.2 is pretty much right in the middle of where the odds are likely to swing to after the seattle result is known. but of course seattle are about 1/4 to win. so much more likely that the odds on the 49ers will go up, not down.
while were at it, the colts odds are totally barmy. 25.0
the most likely scenario is they have to win at both the patriots and broncos, then beat the nfc champs.
3.9 v patriots, about 4.5 broncos, then would be at least 2.5 against the seahawks or 49ers and thats being generous.
3.9 x 4.5 x 2.5 = 43.875. 25.0 is one of crappest bets in history, regardless of whether they win it or dont.
Show More
If you think the Colts odds are poor, care to explain the Chargers odds? Far, far worse in my opinion.
49ers win and are still 4.8
they were 7.8 before the game
they were 1.95 to beat carolina
4.8 x 1.95 = 9.36...
yep the chargers odds are poor too. 22 is plain daft when theyre 4.0 to beat denver.
as if theyre gonna be 5.5 if they win????
they were 7.8 before the game
they were 1.95 to beat carolina
4.8 x 1.95 = 9.36...
yep the chargers odds are poor too. 22 is plain daft when theyre 4.0 to beat denver.
as if theyre gonna be 5.5 if they win????
what price away at the patriots? 3.5 ish i imagine.
then probably about 2.6 in the superbowl.
4.0 x 3.5 x 2.6 = 36.4
22.0 is a maximum lay
i layed the 49ers, carolina, chargers, colts and saints before this round. all of em were way too short.
or to put it another way, the other three were too big.
then probably about 2.6 in the superbowl.
4.0 x 3.5 x 2.6 = 36.4
22.0 is a maximum lay
i layed the 49ers, carolina, chargers, colts and saints before this round. all of em were way too short.
or to put it another way, the other three were too big.
Hi sideshow, if all these teams were too short... who was too big?
the panthers were an insane price at 13.0 today.
would have been massive underdogs at seattle. the saints were 4.5 and theres nothing between the saints and panthers.
bound to be at least 4.0 at seattle. then about 2.5 in the superbowl if they played the broncos.
panthers should have been around 20.0
would have been massive underdogs at seattle. the saints were 4.5 and theres nothing between the saints and panthers.
bound to be at least 4.0 at seattle. then about 2.5 in the superbowl if they played the broncos.
panthers should have been around 20.0
All high prices, Bob, but would you have laid Carolina @ 13 ? Other then laying, how could you exploit these wrong odds.
patriots, seahawks and broncos were all too big. all at home and all around 1/4 to win their games.
last week seattle were 3.9 to win the superbowl with home field advantage.
miles too big. they could have played the panthers, if they had the odds would have been roughly
1.28 v new orleans, 1.33 v carolina and 1.8 in the superbowl. 1.28 x 1.33 x 1.8 = 3.06
even now 1.28 x 1.55 x 1.8 = 3.57
and would be a hell of a lot shorter if somehow san diego or indy played seattle in the superbowl.
last week seattle were 3.9 to win the superbowl with home field advantage.
miles too big. they could have played the panthers, if they had the odds would have been roughly
1.28 v new orleans, 1.33 v carolina and 1.8 in the superbowl. 1.28 x 1.33 x 1.8 = 3.06
even now 1.28 x 1.55 x 1.8 = 3.57
and would be a hell of a lot shorter if somehow san diego or indy played seattle in the superbowl.
its easy to exploit the prices. i did lay carolina yes. i layed the 49ers too. 25k liability on both. with a side bet on the 49ers to win the game, cos obviously the 49ers were gonna be a shorter price than carolina would have been if theyd won.
the play in this game was to lay san diego to win the superbowl at 22.0, but back them to win the game at 4.0.
did the same with the colts and saints.
did the same with the colts and saints.
basically i layed the chargers at 22.0 for the superbowl
but backed them to win the game to a stake that presumed the true price is 32.0
ive got a grand on the chargers at about 4.0, but a 25k liability on them for the superbowl.
im better off if denver win, though hard to calculate by exactly how much.
though in reality its a 41k liability on the chargers, cos i have 16k green on denver.
sounds great but not really cos i have a 22k red on the 49ers currently.
its ok, would have been loads better if carolina had won.
but backed them to win the game to a stake that presumed the true price is 32.0
ive got a grand on the chargers at about 4.0, but a 25k liability on them for the superbowl.
im better off if denver win, though hard to calculate by exactly how much.
though in reality its a 41k liability on the chargers, cos i have 16k green on denver.
sounds great but not really cos i have a 22k red on the 49ers currently.
its ok, would have been loads better if carolina had won.
Excellent analytical skills Bob. You've obviously won something with the contenders dropping off, but SF has to be close to evens with Seattle next week, how are you going to lay off your big red on them
No way in this world will SF be evens next week. They`ll be 6/4 minimum and a 3.5 under dog on the handicap.
I've since gone online and seen the numbers too Mac. I said close to even. Tomatoe tomatoe, a FG is close to even.
I haven`t seen online prices buddy, I make my own lines and 6/4 is nowhere near evens.
I`ll lay you all you want on 49ers @ evens, I`ll even give you 5/4 which is still nowhere 6/4+
from the greek.com
3.5, 20/17
20/20 is evens. 20/19 is close to evens 10/9 is close to evens 20/17 is close to evens. 3.5 is close to evens
If you want to get technical, 20/17 is closer to evens then 6/4 is to 20/17
tomatoes tomaaaatoes potatoes potaaatoes
3.5, 20/17
20/20 is evens. 20/19 is close to evens 10/9 is close to evens 20/17 is close to evens. 3.5 is close to evens
If you want to get technical, 20/17 is closer to evens then 6/4 is to 20/17
tomatoes tomaaaatoes potatoes potaaatoes
Why can`t you just admit it when you are wrong? You were referring to the ML.
Yes I was referring to the money line. I WAS WRONG. I thought it would be maybe 10/9. In my little mind, that's close to evens. Sideshowbob would understand. Instead of saying, " I think SF will be 10/9 next week " I said close to evens. Ooooohhh. My bad. Want to nitpick ? 20/17 is closer to evens then 6/4 is to 20/17. Maybe it's time for your admission of being wrong.
The 6/4 minimum I stated was regards the ML as that is what you were referring to and the 3.5 I quoted was on the handicap. Didn`t need to put prices for the handicap as any idiot knows the price will be 10/11. So for the record I wasn`t wrong. If I was, I would admit it. Punkha is nearer the mark.
Sideshowbob will understand ok that you were wrong.
YES, I WAS WRONG. I thought SF would be close to evens next week ( ML ). I don't have much experience making my own line, that's why I have much interest in what SSBob has to say here. It's something that I find interesting, especially now that I see how Bob makes it pay. I never had a use for making my own line because I always bet into the posted line if I think the linemaker put more or less weight on something that I felt was wrong, whereas it looks like to me SSBoS and MMac compare their lines to the official line and bet a discrepancy. I do that at the racetrack.
Bob thinks SF will be 19/10, MMac thinks 15/10 plus, Punk thinks 17.5/10, I think 11/10, and I mean the ML, not the handicap. The Greek has it at 17/10. I was wrong in quoting 20/17. Mac was right about that, I was wrong. I think we all quoted what the game time odds will be, except the Greek. The odds may go up or down by gametime.
I should have questioned myself before I became been so flippant with MMac, because I know one of his strengths is making a line.
So anyway SSBob, how do you plan to lay off your 25 red if SF is only 2.90 ?
Bob thinks SF will be 19/10, MMac thinks 15/10 plus, Punk thinks 17.5/10, I think 11/10, and I mean the ML, not the handicap. The Greek has it at 17/10. I was wrong in quoting 20/17. Mac was right about that, I was wrong. I think we all quoted what the game time odds will be, except the Greek. The odds may go up or down by gametime.
I should have questioned myself before I became been so flippant with MMac, because I know one of his strengths is making a line.
So anyway SSBob, how do you plan to lay off your 25 red if SF is only 2.90 ?
Fair play buddy, come next weekend, who knows, you may be nearer the ML mark than me, and if you are I`ll be the first to concede you were right and I was wrong.
You are spot on, I make my own lines, always have, and if the bookmakers differ, I bet accordingly. Most times I`m right and sometimes I`m very wrong and end up deep in the ****. Can`t comment on sideshow`s strategy.
I don`t doubt for one moment that you are extremely knowledgeable on the NFL and I`ve often followed you when I don`t have an opinion on a specific game and I`ve won money by doing so. Thanks for that.
Regards bob`s situation, imo, the only way he can cover himself is to lay off some of his potential winnings on Seattle, assuming he has a good book on them, and back SF to win SB with the lay off to cover any possible losses. Although it`s hard for me to comment as I don`t know his full position.
You are spot on, I make my own lines, always have, and if the bookmakers differ, I bet accordingly. Most times I`m right and sometimes I`m very wrong and end up deep in the ****. Can`t comment on sideshow`s strategy.
I don`t doubt for one moment that you are extremely knowledgeable on the NFL and I`ve often followed you when I don`t have an opinion on a specific game and I`ve won money by doing so. Thanks for that.
Regards bob`s situation, imo, the only way he can cover himself is to lay off some of his potential winnings on Seattle, assuming he has a good book on them, and back SF to win SB with the lay off to cover any possible losses. Although it`s hard for me to comment as I don`t know his full position.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539