North American
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
12 Jan 14
16:45
Joined:
Date Joined:
05 Jun 04
Full disclosure : I seldom bet pre off. It's not worth my time and effort to research and come up with a bet when I can just play in play, take a few percentage, be happy.
I have put some picks up here when I've been so inclined just for the heck of it. I think I've gone 6 - 0 over the last 3 years. The following pick is not based on the same criteria that I used for those picks.
I'm going with a small 1% of my bankroll pre off on San Diego. My pick is not based on any hard facts like rushing yards, passing defence, strength of schedule etc. Those facts are already built into the line, and who am I to go against the man, the man that knows way more then I do. Let him do all the heavy lifting
I believe the only way to beat the handicap is to find something that I think the linemaker hasn't fully applied, or over applied to his line. Not because he doesn't know about it, but he can't because then he'll have an unbalanced betting skew.
I think the line should be Denver -4. The public sentiment is so pro Denver and Manning, the LM had to raise the line by 4 points to get a balanced book.
Normally I wouldn't bet with a little 4 point advantage because that's just one fumble, pick, 3 and out.
I'm on SD because I'm getting 8 points for a 4 point bet, and because I think SD can win outright.
As always, my pick may lose. I don't care. I won't come back here crying if they lose, or crowing if they win.
I'll even have a good chance of winning if Denver wins because of in play betting.
I have put some picks up here when I've been so inclined just for the heck of it. I think I've gone 6 - 0 over the last 3 years. The following pick is not based on the same criteria that I used for those picks.
I'm going with a small 1% of my bankroll pre off on San Diego. My pick is not based on any hard facts like rushing yards, passing defence, strength of schedule etc. Those facts are already built into the line, and who am I to go against the man, the man that knows way more then I do. Let him do all the heavy lifting
I believe the only way to beat the handicap is to find something that I think the linemaker hasn't fully applied, or over applied to his line. Not because he doesn't know about it, but he can't because then he'll have an unbalanced betting skew.
I think the line should be Denver -4. The public sentiment is so pro Denver and Manning, the LM had to raise the line by 4 points to get a balanced book.
Normally I wouldn't bet with a little 4 point advantage because that's just one fumble, pick, 3 and out.
I'm on SD because I'm getting 8 points for a 4 point bet, and because I think SD can win outright.
As always, my pick may lose. I don't care. I won't come back here crying if they lose, or crowing if they win.
I'll even have a good chance of winning if Denver wins because of in play betting.
Show More
1% of your bankroll?
Its called gambling, have a go ya mug
sounds like you've been reading too many gambling books
Its called gambling, have a go ya mug
sounds like you've been reading too many gambling books
1% is very sensible imo, lots of variance never bet more than 5% of what you have
he is 6-0 over 3 years and he is betting 1%
better off in some type of investment
better off in some type of investment
Where's nugget ? Give us another free money bet nuggy, up your recent record to 9 and 3. I don't know what I like more, winning a bet that takes a bit of thought to find, or watching the two waaankers blow their load early.
I wish you were a bookie though. You would be out of business in a week.
I'd be out of business in a week ? Why ? Would Nugget free money me to death. I've been here over a decade. Maybe I'm doing alright going against the bookies.
The smiley face reference is to what I typed in putting down nuggy and watching waankers. I pushed enter too soon. Nothing about the win. Win some, lose some.
The smiley face reference is to what I typed in putting down nuggy and watching waankers. I pushed enter too soon. Nothing about the win. Win some, lose some.
Because no NFL handicapper in the world would have marked Denver up -4. You would have been steamrolled for that mark and you would have lost a fortune.
Why you so disrespectful to nugget and cd and anybody else who has an opposing point of view? They are entitled to their opinions and most of their comments are tongue in cheek. Sure, we wind up each other when things go tits up but it`s only friendly banter most of the time. Disagree by all means, that`s what gambling is all about, but why have you got to be so nasty and arrogant all the time? Chill out man.
Why you so disrespectful to nugget and cd and anybody else who has an opposing point of view? They are entitled to their opinions and most of their comments are tongue in cheek. Sure, we wind up each other when things go tits up but it`s only friendly banter most of the time. Disagree by all means, that`s what gambling is all about, but why have you got to be so nasty and arrogant all the time? Chill out man.
I'm only disrespectful to the disrespectful. I'm a counterpuncher. Clay posts up a novel full of factual errors. If you ever read one of his posts, you'd know. Nugget posts up dozens of "free money" bets, that are far from free money. I think both guys just think people will eat it up. Perhaps that was the case. I called them both on their BS. Surprise, neither of them liked it. In a twisted way, if they know their BS won't be so easily swallowed anymore, they'll have to up their game. If I'm the only one taking offense at people who try to shovel BS without penalty, so be it.
As to and anybody else who has an opposing point of view, you'll have to show me where, when, and to whom.
Everybody is entitled to their opinion, even me. Don't try to back your opinion with facts that you know to be false, or you just can't be arsed to check out. That's arrogance.
Nugget and Clay's comments aren't tongue in cheek. They're meant as the gospel. I'm chilled out, I just call a spade a spade.
I would never have priced Denver up at -4. I thought my explanation was clear. Maybe not. I thought the line had to be fluffed up because there was an obvious P Manning and Denver sentiment, along with a bit of dislike for Rivers. It seems to me 4 extra points looked right in this instance. Take the handicap of 8, take off the fluff, and in hard football facts, statistics, number crunching, the linemaker told me Denver was 4 points the better team . Of course I know a line of D -4 would get plowed, even though I thought they were only 4 points better. My point was, the linemaker thought, in just football analysis, Denver was only 4 points better.
My estimate of a 4 point line adjustment is just based on seeing thousands NFL lines. I know it's not absolute, that's why I said in the opening post I wouldn't usually bet with only a 4 point cushion.
As to and anybody else who has an opposing point of view, you'll have to show me where, when, and to whom.
Everybody is entitled to their opinion, even me. Don't try to back your opinion with facts that you know to be false, or you just can't be arsed to check out. That's arrogance.
Nugget and Clay's comments aren't tongue in cheek. They're meant as the gospel. I'm chilled out, I just call a spade a spade.
I would never have priced Denver up at -4. I thought my explanation was clear. Maybe not. I thought the line had to be fluffed up because there was an obvious P Manning and Denver sentiment, along with a bit of dislike for Rivers. It seems to me 4 extra points looked right in this instance. Take the handicap of 8, take off the fluff, and in hard football facts, statistics, number crunching, the linemaker told me Denver was 4 points the better team . Of course I know a line of D -4 would get plowed, even though I thought they were only 4 points better. My point was, the linemaker thought, in just football analysis, Denver was only 4 points better.
My estimate of a 4 point line adjustment is just based on seeing thousands NFL lines. I know it's not absolute, that's why I said in the opening post I wouldn't usually bet with only a 4 point cushion.
you got lucky
4th and long then an on-side kick
San Diego's only chance to cover was always going to be at the end, thats why any bet on them before the game was wasteful
when you could of a nice juicy price when they were down big...
but enjoy your 1% at odds-on
4th and long then an on-side kick
San Diego's only chance to cover was always going to be at the end, thats why any bet on them before the game was wasteful
when you could of a nice juicy price when they were down big...
but enjoy your 1% at odds-on
Gee thanks Nuggy boy. Win and you're great, lose and the other guy got lucky.
I see you haven't posted any wonderful free money tips since I pointed out your miserable record. I'm not going anywhere. There's some B ball tonight. Can't wait for your free 1.02 tips.
Maybe you should go back to the cricket forum and get some more Biatch slapping. You seem to like it.
I see you haven't posted any wonderful free money tips since I pointed out your miserable record. I'm not going anywhere. There's some B ball tonight. Can't wait for your free 1.02 tips.
Maybe you should go back to the cricket forum and get some more Biatch slapping. You seem to like it.
Was not a lucky handicap win on SD.
SD did the "hard part" of their pregame task which was slow up the Denver point scoring machine (over 31.5 was odds on) to the tune of more than a touchdown. Restricting Denver to 24 means it would have been extremely unlucky to have a lost an 8pt handicap bet.
Simply focusing on the late game breaks going SD's way (in closing the gap to 7pts) is garbage analysis - it's a whole game bet, so you have to look at all events in the game.
SD did the "hard part" of their pregame task which was slow up the Denver point scoring machine (over 31.5 was odds on) to the tune of more than a touchdown. Restricting Denver to 24 means it would have been extremely unlucky to have a lost an 8pt handicap bet.
Simply focusing on the late game breaks going SD's way (in closing the gap to 7pts) is garbage analysis - it's a whole game bet, so you have to look at all events in the game.
bigpoppapump - I'm sorry but u are completely wrong if u listening to Peyton Manning's post match interview about Denver's tactics. It was Denver who moved away from their usual game plan to occupy time. Nothing of San Diego's doing
Anybody that bet SD +8.5 on the handicap, including myself, got lucky. If it had been a boxing match the ref would have stopped it.
Nah. I bet SD +10 at 1.66 or something, and it was never more than 17 gap, so I was never two scores down. Don't see how that's a lucky winner. Yeah, Denver proved they were the better team, and always comfortable, but that wasn't the bet. It's a handicap.
You can analyse everything afterwards now we know what happened, and find things to prove yourself correct but the bet was based on previous head to head matches (8pt win one way, and 7 pt win the other way). And this one finished 7pts, so right in line with the pattern.
It's only a trick of the eye caused by looking at too much detail to think a bet's result is caused by luck or bad luck. Stand back - look at the match result and tell me it's a "wrong result" in context of previous matches between the two. You cant. Was a good bet on SD with better than 8pt margin. It won. Move on...
You can analyse everything afterwards now we know what happened, and find things to prove yourself correct but the bet was based on previous head to head matches (8pt win one way, and 7 pt win the other way). And this one finished 7pts, so right in line with the pattern.
It's only a trick of the eye caused by looking at too much detail to think a bet's result is caused by luck or bad luck. Stand back - look at the match result and tell me it's a "wrong result" in context of previous matches between the two. You cant. Was a good bet on SD with better than 8pt margin. It won. Move on...
Glad it won for us, but if you were confident that you were going to win, let alone get a push with your 10pt start, when 4th and long on their own 25yd line late on, then I`m afraid you are kidding yourself on - move on
you're missing the point - not all winning bets are going to be immediate winners with no adversity (it's why they settle after 60 mins and not after 5 mins). So often, you can pick a point in an event when it looked like a loser and then say it was lucky that it became a winner. But this is bizarre behaviour. Do you do the same with bets that look like they'll win (at one specific moment in time) but then do not? Are they considered unlucky? Why?
At 0-0 as they kicked off I was confident I would win. And I did.
you will miss out on the patterns of results if you get up too close. (I win more money on cricket I don't watch, than when I do watch, for example). This over analysis of every minute occurance in an event is unhealthy and unprofitable.
Big picture: 27-20; 28-20; 24-17 - the three matches between these two this year. How can you argue that opposing a 10pt spread bet is a bad bet between these teams? If they played again on Sunday i'd definitely make the same bet...
At 0-0 as they kicked off I was confident I would win. And I did.
you will miss out on the patterns of results if you get up too close. (I win more money on cricket I don't watch, than when I do watch, for example). This over analysis of every minute occurance in an event is unhealthy and unprofitable.
Big picture: 27-20; 28-20; 24-17 - the three matches between these two this year. How can you argue that opposing a 10pt spread bet is a bad bet between these teams? If they played again on Sunday i'd definitely make the same bet...
How can you argue that opposing a 10pt spread bet is a bad bet between these teams
Where did I ever state that?
Try reading my posts. I BET SD TOO and the way the game went I got lucky and so did you.
However all that matters is Final score, so you are right in that aspect.
Where did I ever state that?
Try reading my posts. I BET SD TOO and the way the game went I got lucky and so did you.
However all that matters is Final score, so you are right in that aspect.
you implied it by arguing it was lucky to win (ie should have lost ie was a bad bet etc etc).
And to repeat: It was only lucky to win FROM A SPECIFIC MOMENT IN TIME WHICH YOU HAVE CHOSEN AFTER THE EVENT. When actually there's no more luck involved than in any given bet. It's you personally that lost the faith at some point because of events. But you seem to have not grasped a truism of NFL betting - you've never won until you've won because these things can turn around so quickly. 3 and out, or an onside kick as in this case, bookended by two Tds and you can have a 14 pt swing for 5 minutes game time. Happens so often. And the flipside is that you've never lost until it's over. And this one was never 24 pts down anyway (the ten in the bet plus two scores).
As a bet, in the context of the results between these two, it wasn't lucky. And which is more relevant; The random moment in time you choose afterwards, or the result?
And to repeat: It was only lucky to win FROM A SPECIFIC MOMENT IN TIME WHICH YOU HAVE CHOSEN AFTER THE EVENT. When actually there's no more luck involved than in any given bet. It's you personally that lost the faith at some point because of events. But you seem to have not grasped a truism of NFL betting - you've never won until you've won because these things can turn around so quickly. 3 and out, or an onside kick as in this case, bookended by two Tds and you can have a 14 pt swing for 5 minutes game time. Happens so often. And the flipside is that you've never lost until it's over. And this one was never 24 pts down anyway (the ten in the bet plus two scores).
As a bet, in the context of the results between these two, it wasn't lucky. And which is more relevant; The random moment in time you choose afterwards, or the result?
In the context of this I liked the post db1974 made as part of his divisional thread
"so there is definitely a shift towards the Road Dog covering the spread since 2004 following years of dominance by the Home Fav. I think this makes sense as home advantage means less and less in the NFL while garbage-time TDs and prevent defence mean that teams often score a TD late on to beat the spread
eg - if you take the Seahawks -8.0 against the Saints then you will probably need them to be 16 points up at some stage in the 4th quarter in order to cover that spread"
So as bigpoppa says, where was the supposed luck in this given they were never two scores away from covering?
"so there is definitely a shift towards the Road Dog covering the spread since 2004 following years of dominance by the Home Fav. I think this makes sense as home advantage means less and less in the NFL while garbage-time TDs and prevent defence mean that teams often score a TD late on to beat the spread
eg - if you take the Seahawks -8.0 against the Saints then you will probably need them to be 16 points up at some stage in the 4th quarter in order to cover that spread"
So as bigpoppa says, where was the supposed luck in this given they were never two scores away from covering?
ffs I give up. You`re right, we weren`t lucky. I`m brilliant, you`re brilliant, everybody else that bet SD are brilliant too and the result was NEVER in doubt. Easy money this NFL 
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539