I use technical data to make plays...a left brained approach......at least 90% of handicappers use their right brain....both ways can work, and one way is not inherently better than the other. If your methodology works, and you are up money at the end of the season, then your wallet will tell you if you are successful at what you do, or not. I've used this methodology to have a successful year so far in the Canadian Football league and I expect it to work in NCAA football.
1) North Texas +10
2) San Jose State +5
3) Army +17
4) Toledo +3
5) S. Miss +6-
In regards to the Army game, triple option teams have been historically successful as away dogs with the exception of when they're playing other triple option teams.
Army and New Mexico haven't had the success rate of as say Navy, Georgia Tech and Georgia Southern, however, Army and New Mexico have new coaches that have had a year or more to implement their systems and their defenses have also improved over what they'd had in previous years.
Army returns a high number of players from last year, an unusually high number for a service academy.
They covered against similar teams to Temple last year in Penn State and UConn as away dogs.
In my database which covers 26 years of data, teams that outrush their opponent as away dogs cover 76% of the time and have a record of 86-25 in week 1.
Teams that rush for >200 yards as an away underdog cover 76% of the time also. Army rushed for >300 yards/game on the road last year, so it's not a stretch to think that they'll be able to get 200 against Temple ...they rushed for 260 versus Penn State and 180 against UConn.
In regards to North Texas, they are putting in a spread offense similar to what Texas Tech has run. That means lots of plays, and perhaps lots of points. It will be interesting to watch how fast this team can successfully utilize this system.
Teams that score >27 points as a home dog cover 80% of the time and the OVER hits 80% of the time when scoring >27. So, two games in particular to watch the first week would be North Texas and Houston who are both home dogs and could conceivably score >27 points on their week one opponents.
Good fortune this season.
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
I use technical data to make plays...a left brained approach......at least 90% of handicappers use their right brain....both ways can work, and one way is not inherently better than the other. If your methodology works, and you are up money at the end of the season, then your wallet will tell you if you are successful at what you do, or not. I've used this methodology to have a successful year so far in the Canadian Football league and I expect it to work in NCAA football.
1) North Texas +10
2) San Jose State +5
3) Army +17
4) Toledo +3
5) S. Miss +6-
In regards to the Army game, triple option teams have been historically successful as away dogs with the exception of when they're playing other triple option teams.
Army and New Mexico haven't had the success rate of as say Navy, Georgia Tech and Georgia Southern, however, Army and New Mexico have new coaches that have had a year or more to implement their systems and their defenses have also improved over what they'd had in previous years.
Army returns a high number of players from last year, an unusually high number for a service academy.
They covered against similar teams to Temple last year in Penn State and UConn as away dogs.
In my database which covers 26 years of data, teams that outrush their opponent as away dogs cover 76% of the time and have a record of 86-25 in week 1.
Teams that rush for >200 yards as an away underdog cover 76% of the time also. Army rushed for >300 yards/game on the road last year, so it's not a stretch to think that they'll be able to get 200 against Temple ...they rushed for 260 versus Penn State and 180 against UConn.
In regards to North Texas, they are putting in a spread offense similar to what Texas Tech has run. That means lots of plays, and perhaps lots of points. It will be interesting to watch how fast this team can successfully utilize this system.
Teams that score >27 points as a home dog cover 80% of the time and the OVER hits 80% of the time when scoring >27. So, two games in particular to watch the first week would be North Texas and Houston who are both home dogs and could conceivably score >27 points on their week one opponents.
Gotta say brother, I am liking all of those plays! Southern Miss might be my favorite play in week one. I want to play North Texas, as SMU laying DD's on the road in their first game of the season with a trip to Baylor on deck is just silly. I just can't stomach a play on those guys. Don't know if you heard that Army's QB just left the team for personal reasons. I could see you going 5-0, 4-1 with those picks. Best of luck this season man!
0
Gotta say brother, I am liking all of those plays! Southern Miss might be my favorite play in week one. I want to play North Texas, as SMU laying DD's on the road in their first game of the season with a trip to Baylor on deck is just silly. I just can't stomach a play on those guys. Don't know if you heard that Army's QB just left the team for personal reasons. I could see you going 5-0, 4-1 with those picks. Best of luck this season man!
I normally play favorites, so I am on the other end. I like the coaches at N Texas, but with Morris at SMU, in his 2nd year, with N Texas implementing new systems, that they will be able to stay up with SMU. Both Defenses are terrible. Game is at N Texas. I think the key thing for you is...does the N Texas D have enough competence to at least slow down SMU. S Miss should give UK everything they can handle. GL
LonghornHoosier
0
I normally play favorites, so I am on the other end. I like the coaches at N Texas, but with Morris at SMU, in his 2nd year, with N Texas implementing new systems, that they will be able to stay up with SMU. Both Defenses are terrible. Game is at N Texas. I think the key thing for you is...does the N Texas D have enough competence to at least slow down SMU. S Miss should give UK everything they can handle. GL
Being on opposite sides is what makes a market, so no worries.....
I don't have a great feeling about North Texas for the reasons you have stated, however it is part of a system I play, and I've learned through experience that deleting plays because I have "a feeling" is a net losing result for me in my betting career.
It's an intriguing game to ponder and one that I'll watch with interest.
0
Being on opposite sides is what makes a market, so no worries.....
I don't have a great feeling about North Texas for the reasons you have stated, however it is part of a system I play, and I've learned through experience that deleting plays because I have "a feeling" is a net losing result for me in my betting career.
It's an intriguing game to ponder and one that I'll watch with interest.
Army doesn't have a quarterback, one of the quarterbacks left the program and the other is injured and may not be ready for the week one game against temple. No matter what side of your brain you use to pick these games, you have to factor that in
0
Army doesn't have a quarterback, one of the quarterbacks left the program and the other is injured and may not be ready for the week one game against temple. No matter what side of your brain you use to pick these games, you have to factor that in
Whatever works for you.....I am hitting 75% of my plays thus far in the CFL, so my method works for me.
Whatever "method" people use, 96% of bettors lose, if you are one of those that win....good on you.
That means absolutely nothing to us, and it's such a small sample size that that percentages very very much irrelevant.
If you even hit 60% in one college football season you are amazing, and I will be paying attention this year to see if even that can be done from you and your system. My guess, is that by about a week seven you'll be right at about 52%. I'll be right here ready to eat crow if I'm wrong
0
Quote Originally Posted by Indigo999:
Whatever works for you.....I am hitting 75% of my plays thus far in the CFL, so my method works for me.
Whatever "method" people use, 96% of bettors lose, if you are one of those that win....good on you.
That means absolutely nothing to us, and it's such a small sample size that that percentages very very much irrelevant.
If you even hit 60% in one college football season you are amazing, and I will be paying attention this year to see if even that can be done from you and your system. My guess, is that by about a week seven you'll be right at about 52%. I'll be right here ready to eat crow if I'm wrong
So with Shua, Honestly even the people that come on here bragging about a 64-40 season on college football do not impress me. I have a capper thats a 100 a pick. Had about a 6000 pick cycle of 59% , he is now 52% on his last 1000. I have another site I use with guys that have proven themselves across sports with over 10,000 combined picks. Records are the bottom line, but one must understand statistical significance. I also study deeply game by game the picks. I measure margin and range of cover as well as record.
0
So with Shua, Honestly even the people that come on here bragging about a 64-40 season on college football do not impress me. I have a capper thats a 100 a pick. Had about a 6000 pick cycle of 59% , he is now 52% on his last 1000. I have another site I use with guys that have proven themselves across sports with over 10,000 combined picks. Records are the bottom line, but one must understand statistical significance. I also study deeply game by game the picks. I measure margin and range of cover as well as record.
What is the purpose on coming here and making this an antagonistic exchange?
I have a methodology in how I make picks and if it isn't how you make yours, why would you care and imply that it can't work? Are you coming on here to prove me wrong?
How sad!!
I don't care how you make picks or even if you have a success rate higher than mine....I am not competing against anyone here and claiming that I am better or more successful. My methods have worked and I've made money, will that continue?...we'll see...
Just as in life there are many techniques and ways of making money, so there are different methodologies in handicapping.
The guy who won the Hilton Supercontest two years running used statistical techniques to pick winners after graduating from Carlton University with an advanced degree in statistics. The guys who won last year to my knowledge didn't use statistical analysis at all, in other words they were fundamental handicappers. What way worked best?
The answer is they both did.
0
What is the purpose on coming here and making this an antagonistic exchange?
I have a methodology in how I make picks and if it isn't how you make yours, why would you care and imply that it can't work? Are you coming on here to prove me wrong?
How sad!!
I don't care how you make picks or even if you have a success rate higher than mine....I am not competing against anyone here and claiming that I am better or more successful. My methods have worked and I've made money, will that continue?...we'll see...
Just as in life there are many techniques and ways of making money, so there are different methodologies in handicapping.
The guy who won the Hilton Supercontest two years running used statistical techniques to pick winners after graduating from Carlton University with an advanced degree in statistics. The guys who won last year to my knowledge didn't use statistical analysis at all, in other words they were fundamental handicappers. What way worked best?
Army doesn't have a quarterback, one of the quarterbacks left the program and the other is injured and may not be ready for the week one game against temple. No matter what side of your brain you use to pick these games, you have to factor that in
Do you really think the Army QB is going to be the deciding factor if they cover a +17 spread against Temple? I am curious to know why you think that because of the research that I have done, as long as the Army QB can take snaps from center and hand the ball off his job is 90 % done.
To me this game is all about the Army offensive line and the Army D. In all of their games last year they never completed 10 passes, and in 6 of those games they only had 3 completions or less.
They averaged 9 passes a game, and that is including passes from WR's and RB's on trick plays. 108 pass attempts 10 td's and 8 int's.
I don't like Army they are off my list, but I am very interested to see what Indigo999 has in store for NCAAFB this year.
I hope you have the frame of mind that we are just trying to beat the books, and please don't take my comments as an attack. I have no mission other than wining and throwing out what my work and brain has uncovered.
peace and good luck!
Nothing is ever in the bank until it is in the bank
0
Quote Originally Posted by Shua12collegeFB:
Army doesn't have a quarterback, one of the quarterbacks left the program and the other is injured and may not be ready for the week one game against temple. No matter what side of your brain you use to pick these games, you have to factor that in
Do you really think the Army QB is going to be the deciding factor if they cover a +17 spread against Temple? I am curious to know why you think that because of the research that I have done, as long as the Army QB can take snaps from center and hand the ball off his job is 90 % done.
To me this game is all about the Army offensive line and the Army D. In all of their games last year they never completed 10 passes, and in 6 of those games they only had 3 completions or less.
They averaged 9 passes a game, and that is including passes from WR's and RB's on trick plays. 108 pass attempts 10 td's and 8 int's.
I don't like Army they are off my list, but I am very interested to see what Indigo999 has in store for NCAAFB this year.
I hope you have the frame of mind that we are just trying to beat the books, and please don't take my comments as an attack. I have no mission other than wining and throwing out what my work and brain has uncovered.
Your analysis is of a fundamental nature Shua and if that is how you make your picks, and you win that's great.
I am not trying to talk you into playing my plays,...but as an example, in the Canadian football league this year about 7 out of 9 teams have had their starting qb go out with injury. In I think 6 out of 7 cases the team with their starting qb out has covered their first game with a sub qb.
Will that translate to college football this year?..... I don't know....usually injuries are translated into the line,....Vegas finds out before the general public because it is their business to find out.
I don't use this type of information to decide on my plays. One of my filters in picking games is to go against the majority....if my angles say to play team A, but they have more than 50% of the public on them, it is a "no play" for me unless I've gotten impatient and played the game early in the week before I've seen the consensus.
Playing on underdogs that have a >50% of the public on them has had a cover rate of about 45% of less the past few years.....I use the covers consensus because they have no reason to fabricate their results....I want to know who Joe Sixpack is on, and go against that, most of the time.
So, Army could get crushed by Temple in a couple of weeks because the quarterback plays terribly, but my job is to take teams that have an advantage according to my stats and I'm going to be taking triple option teams almost every time they are away underdogs versus non-triple options teams because most of the time they win the rushing stats, which translates to against the spread wins.
It is like playing the percentage openers in Texas Hold 'Em....the percentages dictate that you play them, but you aren't gonna win every time you play, but over time because you've done the right thing you should come out on top, not necessarily that day or week, but over months and/or years.
Do I want to not play my King Queen suited because I have a strong impression that the guy behind me has pocket aces? No, I'm playing them when the percentages dictate that I do.
0
Your analysis is of a fundamental nature Shua and if that is how you make your picks, and you win that's great.
I am not trying to talk you into playing my plays,...but as an example, in the Canadian football league this year about 7 out of 9 teams have had their starting qb go out with injury. In I think 6 out of 7 cases the team with their starting qb out has covered their first game with a sub qb.
Will that translate to college football this year?..... I don't know....usually injuries are translated into the line,....Vegas finds out before the general public because it is their business to find out.
I don't use this type of information to decide on my plays. One of my filters in picking games is to go against the majority....if my angles say to play team A, but they have more than 50% of the public on them, it is a "no play" for me unless I've gotten impatient and played the game early in the week before I've seen the consensus.
Playing on underdogs that have a >50% of the public on them has had a cover rate of about 45% of less the past few years.....I use the covers consensus because they have no reason to fabricate their results....I want to know who Joe Sixpack is on, and go against that, most of the time.
So, Army could get crushed by Temple in a couple of weeks because the quarterback plays terribly, but my job is to take teams that have an advantage according to my stats and I'm going to be taking triple option teams almost every time they are away underdogs versus non-triple options teams because most of the time they win the rushing stats, which translates to against the spread wins.
It is like playing the percentage openers in Texas Hold 'Em....the percentages dictate that you play them, but you aren't gonna win every time you play, but over time because you've done the right thing you should come out on top, not necessarily that day or week, but over months and/or years.
Do I want to not play my King Queen suited because I have a strong impression that the guy behind me has pocket aces? No, I'm playing them when the percentages dictate that I do.
Do you really think the Army QB is going to be the deciding factor if they cover a +17 spread against Temple? I am curious to know why you think that because of the research that I have done, as long as the Army QB can take snaps from center and hand the ball off his job is 90 % done.
So you are saying the QB isn't important in their option/veer offense? You do realize the QB kept the ball 43% of the time last year when they ran the ball? Lots of decision making as a QB in their offense ... they just don't "take snaps from center and hand the ball off"
GL to you though.
0
Quote Originally Posted by spottie2935:
Do you really think the Army QB is going to be the deciding factor if they cover a +17 spread against Temple? I am curious to know why you think that because of the research that I have done, as long as the Army QB can take snaps from center and hand the ball off his job is 90 % done.
So you are saying the QB isn't important in their option/veer offense? You do realize the QB kept the ball 43% of the time last year when they ran the ball? Lots of decision making as a QB in their offense ... they just don't "take snaps from center and hand the ball off"
So you are saying the QB isn't important in their option/veer offense? You do realize the QB kept the ball 43% of the time last year when they ran the ball? Lots of decision making as a QB in their offense ... they just don't "take snaps from center and hand the ball off"
GL to you though.
His point was simply a backup can run that offense efficiently with a summer camp to prepare to do so. Running the triple is not overly complicated. Most of the guys on the roster who are eligible to play qb have run it most of their life. On top of that, it's simple reads and perfecting the timing of the motion and handoffs. Nothing overly complicated. He doesn't have to read overages, check down receivers or any of the more difficult stuff other offenses have qb's do.
Army's offensive production will mostly fall on it's o-line. Just like it does every other year
0
Quote Originally Posted by ArbyMelt:
So you are saying the QB isn't important in their option/veer offense? You do realize the QB kept the ball 43% of the time last year when they ran the ball? Lots of decision making as a QB in their offense ... they just don't "take snaps from center and hand the ball off"
GL to you though.
His point was simply a backup can run that offense efficiently with a summer camp to prepare to do so. Running the triple is not overly complicated. Most of the guys on the roster who are eligible to play qb have run it most of their life. On top of that, it's simple reads and perfecting the timing of the motion and handoffs. Nothing overly complicated. He doesn't have to read overages, check down receivers or any of the more difficult stuff other offenses have qb's do.
Army's offensive production will mostly fall on it's o-line. Just like it does every other year
Dont believe in Army this year versus Temple, dont believe in system plays like you describe. Do not believe that Canadian backup quarterback tiny sample size means a darn thing. That said I am not betting Temple now that the line is 17.
0
Dont believe in Army this year versus Temple, dont believe in system plays like you describe. Do not believe that Canadian backup quarterback tiny sample size means a darn thing. That said I am not betting Temple now that the line is 17.
I use technical data to make plays...a left brained approach......at least 90% of handicappers use their right brain....both ways can work, and one way is not inherently better than the other. If your methodology works, and you are up money at the end of the season, then your wallet will tell you if you are successful at what you do, or not. I've used this methodology to have a successful year so far in the Canadian Football league and I expect it to work in NCAA football.
1) North Texas +10
2) San Jose State +5
3) Army +17
4) Toledo +3
5) S. Miss +6-
In regards to the Army game, triple option teams have been historically successful as away dogs with the exception of when they're playing other triple option teams.
Army and New Mexico haven't had the success rate of as say Navy, Georgia Tech and Georgia Southern, however, Army and New Mexico have new coaches that have had a year or more to implement their systems and their defenses have also improved over what they'd had in previous years.
Army returns a high number of players from last year, an unusually high number for a service academy.
They covered against similar teams to Temple last year in Penn State and UConn as away dogs.
In my database which covers 26 years of data, teams that outrush their opponent as away dogs cover 76% of the time and have a record of 86-25 in week 1.
Teams that rush for >200 yards as an away underdog cover 76% of the time also. Army rushed for >300 yards/game on the road last year, so it's not a stretch to think that they'll be able to get 200 against Temple ...they rushed for 260 versus Penn State and 180 against UConn.
In regards to North Texas, they are putting in a spread offense similar to what Texas Tech has run. That means lots of plays, and perhaps lots of points. It will be interesting to watch how fast this team can successfully utilize this system.
Teams that score >27 points as a home dog cover 80% of the time and the OVER hits 80% of the time when scoring >27. So, two games in particular to watch the first week would be North Texas and Houston who are both home dogs and could conceivably score >27 points on their week one opponents.
Good fortune this season.
why not look to the over north texas /SMU? smu may be able to cover that themselves and it covers you if north texas takes its time picking up the new system
thanks for sharing !
0
Quote Originally Posted by Indigo999:
I use technical data to make plays...a left brained approach......at least 90% of handicappers use their right brain....both ways can work, and one way is not inherently better than the other. If your methodology works, and you are up money at the end of the season, then your wallet will tell you if you are successful at what you do, or not. I've used this methodology to have a successful year so far in the Canadian Football league and I expect it to work in NCAA football.
1) North Texas +10
2) San Jose State +5
3) Army +17
4) Toledo +3
5) S. Miss +6-
In regards to the Army game, triple option teams have been historically successful as away dogs with the exception of when they're playing other triple option teams.
Army and New Mexico haven't had the success rate of as say Navy, Georgia Tech and Georgia Southern, however, Army and New Mexico have new coaches that have had a year or more to implement their systems and their defenses have also improved over what they'd had in previous years.
Army returns a high number of players from last year, an unusually high number for a service academy.
They covered against similar teams to Temple last year in Penn State and UConn as away dogs.
In my database which covers 26 years of data, teams that outrush their opponent as away dogs cover 76% of the time and have a record of 86-25 in week 1.
Teams that rush for >200 yards as an away underdog cover 76% of the time also. Army rushed for >300 yards/game on the road last year, so it's not a stretch to think that they'll be able to get 200 against Temple ...they rushed for 260 versus Penn State and 180 against UConn.
In regards to North Texas, they are putting in a spread offense similar to what Texas Tech has run. That means lots of plays, and perhaps lots of points. It will be interesting to watch how fast this team can successfully utilize this system.
Teams that score >27 points as a home dog cover 80% of the time and the OVER hits 80% of the time when scoring >27. So, two games in particular to watch the first week would be North Texas and Houston who are both home dogs and could conceivably score >27 points on their week one opponents.
Good fortune this season.
why not look to the over north texas /SMU? smu may be able to cover that themselves and it covers you if north texas takes its time picking up the new system
Do you really think the Army QB is going to be the deciding factor if they cover a +17 spread against Temple? I am curious to know why you think that because of the research that I have done, as long as the Army QB can take snaps from center and hand the ball off his job is 90 % done.
To me this game is all about the Army offensive line and the Army D. In all of their games last year they never completed 10 passes, and in 6 of those games they only had 3 completions or less.
They averaged 9 passes a game, and that is including passes from WR's and RB's on trick plays. 108 pass attempts 10 td's and 8 int's.
I don't like Army they are off my list, but I am very interested to see what Indigo999 has in store for NCAAFB this year.
I hope you have the frame of mind that we are just trying to beat the books, and please don't take my comments as an attack. I have no mission other than wining and throwing out what my work and brain has uncovered.
peace and good luck!
Yes I do, because with an army offense their quarterback handles the ball on every single snap. And keeps it for much of the plays. Also they don't have a whole summer camp to prepare. One of the quarterbacks left three days ago, and the other one got hurt five days ago. They have less than two weeks
0
Quote Originally Posted by spottie2935:
Do you really think the Army QB is going to be the deciding factor if they cover a +17 spread against Temple? I am curious to know why you think that because of the research that I have done, as long as the Army QB can take snaps from center and hand the ball off his job is 90 % done.
To me this game is all about the Army offensive line and the Army D. In all of their games last year they never completed 10 passes, and in 6 of those games they only had 3 completions or less.
They averaged 9 passes a game, and that is including passes from WR's and RB's on trick plays. 108 pass attempts 10 td's and 8 int's.
I don't like Army they are off my list, but I am very interested to see what Indigo999 has in store for NCAAFB this year.
I hope you have the frame of mind that we are just trying to beat the books, and please don't take my comments as an attack. I have no mission other than wining and throwing out what my work and brain has uncovered.
peace and good luck!
Yes I do, because with an army offense their quarterback handles the ball on every single snap. And keeps it for much of the plays. Also they don't have a whole summer camp to prepare. One of the quarterbacks left three days ago, and the other one got hurt five days ago. They have less than two weeks
Looks like these boys are STILL scared of a little MATH..... Indigo *nice work and BOL...............
note: the BEST QB on the Army team (that gives them the best chance to win/cover).....is Chris Carter.....all were healthy vs Navy > HC picked Carter.....Army lost both but out-gained Navy and Rutgers.... with Carter at QB > much better passer *Bradshaw was working with 1st unit because Carter has been resting hamstring....should be OK here.... but back-up looks like an issue
The impediment to action advances action - what stands in the way becomes the way.
0
Looks like these boys are STILL scared of a little MATH..... Indigo *nice work and BOL...............
note: the BEST QB on the Army team (that gives them the best chance to win/cover).....is Chris Carter.....all were healthy vs Navy > HC picked Carter.....Army lost both but out-gained Navy and Rutgers.... with Carter at QB > much better passer *Bradshaw was working with 1st unit because Carter has been resting hamstring....should be OK here.... but back-up looks like an issue
Shua and Jason,....I get that you don't like the picks or the method of decision making.....no worries. Stop by anytime and give your alternative views....it's what makes a market after all. I'd be nervous if everyone agreed with me.
You seem to be plenty irritated that someone has a different way of looking at things or that someone would disagree with your opinion of a particular game.
Why would you care? Do you expect that everyone would agree with you?
John Henry, the owner of the Boston Red Sox is worth over 900 million dollars....he is/was a technical trader on Wall Street. He had a methodology of picking stocks based on looking at a chart with certain indicators. He didn't base his plays on knowing the CEO of certain companies or that the rate of interest was going to go up in a week, or looking at financial report of a company, which are fundamental ways of making a decision.
He looked at a chart and saw a trend and made his bets based on certain indicators.....seemed to work for him, though maybe his goal was making a billion and he's disappointed that he's worth 100 million less than that.
0
Shua and Jason,....I get that you don't like the picks or the method of decision making.....no worries. Stop by anytime and give your alternative views....it's what makes a market after all. I'd be nervous if everyone agreed with me.
You seem to be plenty irritated that someone has a different way of looking at things or that someone would disagree with your opinion of a particular game.
Why would you care? Do you expect that everyone would agree with you?
John Henry, the owner of the Boston Red Sox is worth over 900 million dollars....he is/was a technical trader on Wall Street. He had a methodology of picking stocks based on looking at a chart with certain indicators. He didn't base his plays on knowing the CEO of certain companies or that the rate of interest was going to go up in a week, or looking at financial report of a company, which are fundamental ways of making a decision.
He looked at a chart and saw a trend and made his bets based on certain indicators.....seemed to work for him, though maybe his goal was making a billion and he's disappointed that he's worth 100 million less than that.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.