Posted:
#26
BTW Blowout....would you still bet Clemson -9.5??....great capping this year BTW....awesome...
Blowoutgm’s week 14 plays 8-3-1 last week 106-51-3 YTD
Posted:
#28
Area51-
I lean to Auburn in that game but I hate betting on teams that just came off huge wins(emotion etc.) This Auburn team should cover in my opinion but they are banged up and I think this game will be a dog fight. They won't have the home field advantage here. I think this one could go either way and it wouldn't surprise me if Georgia won. I do think Auburn squeaks by but I am not confident enough to put a wager on it. Sorry if that doesn't really help-
Good luck this week!
Posted:
#29
Ilm4321-
I would but losing 2.5 points in value is never good- I think the Miami front 7 on defense can keep it close but I expect their offense to really struggle and turn the ball over themselves. If you think about it- if a team covers the 7 then they probably win by 10 or more- I have seen the stat posted on how rarely a team wins by 8-9 points on a 7 point spread. The last I looked the line went back down to 7.5-
Good luck with your bet!
Posted:
#30
KK1
I haven't had too much time to properly cap the Ok/TCU game but while TCU has the superior defense, I think the Oklahoma offense is close to unstoppable. I think they pretty much outscore everyone and I think they win it all this year. I usually say a great defense will be a great offense but this offense is really special with Mayfield playing the way he is. I lean for Oklahoma to cover but I am still doing some digging on this game-
Good luck this week!
Posted:
#31
WilliamMunny-
I bet way more favorites than dogs it seems year after year and since 1994 when I started doing this my win % is very similar. I never understood why people hate betting favorites- I would love to know the % of wins by favs/underdogs- I would think it is close to 50/50- so anyone should be able to cap a game and win over 50% of the time- with a point spread sports, betting favorites has no real disadvantages- however in sports like hockey or baseball- betting favorites can cause your bankroll to take a tumble really quickly!
Remember, you don't pay juice on winners!!
Good luck this week!
Posted:
#32
To answer last thread re fav/dogs split, I agree with you BlowOut.
That being said, the yearly results is 380-404-25 for favorites - and generally is this each year (48.5ish%).
That's why people don't like betting "favorites" or the sharps don't b/c they think they have slight 1.5% edge the other way - but even that blanket dogs is NOT profitable b/c need 2.38% edge to break-even at -110 (need to be 52.38%).
But, yes to your point, it is "basically 50-50" so what's the big deal - isn't so bad.
Also, wrong about winners not paying juice. The winners pay the juice every time, not losers.
If you bet CLEMSON -9.5 at -110. You are risking $110 to win $100. If you did NOT pay juice you should get $110. So the WINNER paid the juice. If you lose, you lost $110 (that's fine since you risked $110) - it's when you WIN that you are getting "taxed" by the bookie and they are short-changing what you would have been paid if there was NO JUICE. So winners pay juice.
But, at your record of 67% - all this stuff is irrelevant as your predictive powers far exceed the edge of books.
Good luck!!!
Posted:
#44
Winner pays juice - i copied 2 parts of that thread:
The winner always pays the juice.
Assume I make a bet for x amount of dollars. You don't know what x is. Assume I lose. I'm out x dollars. Did I pay any juice? You don't know and there is no way to determine it. There may have been no juice at all. For example, I may have betting x amount of dollars to win x amount of dollars with a friend. x might be 110 dollars and if so you might assume I'm betting 110 to win 100, but you don't know for sure. And if you don't know what I expect to get back, you can't say for sure I'm paying any juice or that there is any juice.
Now, again assume I make a bet for x amount of dollars. This time I win the bet. And again, until I tell you how much I won, you still don't know a thing. But if tell you the total amount returned to me, including my bet, is x * 1.909, NOW you can determine WHAT the juice was and that "I" paid it.
I paid it because with no juice I should have gotten back (x * 2).
It makes no difference at all if the money is paid up front or via a local bookie who just pays the winners afterwords. That's completely irrelevant.
Winners always pay the juice. They always pay it because they always get back LESS than if there was no juice at all. And the amount they get back less, is the amount of juice they paid.
Assume I make a bet for x amount of dollars. You don't know what x is. Assume I lose. I'm out x dollars. Did I pay any juice? You don't know and there is no way to determine it. There may have been no juice at all. For example, I may have betting x amount of dollars to win x amount of dollars with a friend. x might be 110 dollars and if so you might assume I'm betting 110 to win 100, but you don't know for sure. And if you don't know what I expect to get back, you can't say for sure I'm paying any juice or that there is any juice.
Now, again assume I make a bet for x amount of dollars. This time I win the bet. And again, until I tell you how much I won, you still don't know a thing. But if tell you the total amount returned to me, including my bet, is x * 1.909, NOW you can determine WHAT the juice was and that "I" paid it.
I paid it because with no juice I should have gotten back (x * 2).
It makes no difference at all if the money is paid up front or via a local bookie who just pays the winners afterwords. That's completely irrelevant.
Winners always pay the juice. They always pay it because they always get back LESS than if there was no juice at all. And the amount they get back less, is the amount of juice they paid.
Posted:
#45
AND 2nd explanation is:
Imagine if you are a bookie paying -110 odds
Bettor #1 bets on the OVER 45 for $500 to win $455
Bettor #2 bets on the UNDER 45 for $500 to win $455
You have $1000 cash in your hands....and the OVER hits.
Bettor #1 gets his $500 back, plus the $455 for a total of $955
Bettor #2 gets nothing back.
You, as the bookie gain $45...and the WINNER pays the vig
Bettor #1 bets on the OVER 45 for $500 to win $455
Bettor #2 bets on the UNDER 45 for $500 to win $455
You have $1000 cash in your hands....and the OVER hits.
Bettor #1 gets his $500 back, plus the $455 for a total of $955
Bettor #2 gets nothing back.
You, as the bookie gain $45...and the WINNER pays the vig
Posted:
#47
BG..no need to go bak n forth with these guys. If it helps any i play the local book too n have played 1 units n paid juice only when i lost. For example id do a str8 bet fr 100$ on a single game pick the winner but they fail to cover the spread i paid 20% juice. Bottom line it all differs by who u play thru i believe as well. But nvm all that rat poison 
lol they just tryn to make you lose focus cuz the hotstreak u are on. Plz post more of ur nsights about the games we appreciate it. Plz n ty n gl to everybody!
lol they just tryn to make you lose focus cuz the hotstreak u are on. Plz post more of ur nsights about the games we appreciate it. Plz n ty n gl to everybody!
Posted:
#50
BG you’re the best capper this season by a mile - but you’re dead wrong on juice
Your example was flawed - in the example your stake was 550 not 500. Your stake is defined as the amount you are wagering; the amount you lose if your bet loses
The bookie price of -110 says it all. That’s the return on a winning bet
When you lose on a -110 bet you lose. End of
When you win you double your money minus a bit. That is the juice by definition. The bookies cut. Call it what you will
Hot Forum Topics
