are you high?
call it public, call it sharp...i dont carewhat name you put on it....EVERYONE was on baylor .....EVERYONE!
line shoulda been 6 ....
you think the oddsmakers thought that a line of 1.5 was going to generate 50/50 action on both sides?
are you fuckin high?!?!?!
wtf are you getting at?
of course when a #12 team......they was ranked in the top 5, and top 10 for the first half of the year.....is laying 2 points to an overated shit bum team thats not even ranked.....for the player....its always profitable....for the books...never.
im talking from the books standpoint....that line should NEVER be -1.5 ever.
by setting that line so low...the books are baiting public money on baylor....they arent trying to genereate 50/50 action....if they wanted 50/50 action theyd get it....everytime....theyre not idiots.....the books gamble too. and today the books needed kansas st....and they got torched.
so explain.....wtf is your point?
gtown heavily favored....lost.
syracuse was not that heavily favored despite what you may think. That line was right on point....pretty much 50/50 action. Alot of people were on uconn as well. i have no beef with that line.
Yes, there have been some bizzare lines lately but a sample of a week is nothing. A crazy month is nothing. A " too good to be true" season is nothing in the long run. The NFL had a season 7-8 years ago when the favs covered at 60% for an entire season! If 3-4 weeks in you noticed the trend and tried to play contrarian figuring it would end soon you wouldve gotten crushed. Lets remember that these are neutral site games. Why is gtown -4 at a neutral site fishy? Identical records and cincy won at gtown earlier. -4 is perfect.Maybe even too high. Kstate can play with anyone. They beat Mizzou twice and Baylor has been one of the worst ats teams in all of cbb the past month. So these lines are 2-3 points off what you think it should be. So fucking what? If you like a side play it and maybe the mousetrap will snag you and maybe it wont. 
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
