Rays-Jays, Opinion only: Price is the favorite for some very good reasons, but is overpriced (no pun intended) to the max. On the other hand Santana does not impress as a dog, other than taking a flyer on the big bonus bucks. You guys that lean toward the UNDER may have a good call. Good pitching beats good offense and deep pocket totals players have already pushed the opener of 8.5 down to 8. My machine says 7.5 from two different angles so I think the UNDER is the way I would roll. BOL
Nice call on the under Key
Rays-Jays, Opinion only: Price is the favorite for some very good reasons, but is overpriced (no pun intended) to the max. On the other hand Santana does not impress as a dog, other than taking a flyer on the big bonus bucks. You guys that lean toward the UNDER may have a good call. Good pitching beats good offense and deep pocket totals players have already pushed the opener of 8.5 down to 8. My machine says 7.5 from two different angles so I think the UNDER is the way I would roll. BOL
Nice call on the under Key
Diamondbacks: Play to -133: Tough weekend for the Nationals @ the Mets but the situation may not get any better today. Going home cannot be considered an elixir that cures all problems and creates better play and probability all by itself. The Nats are 5-5 last 10 home games and the D-bax are 5-5 last 10 and 10-10 last 20 on the road. For the sake of that guy that thinks I paly too many road teams I will tell him this and we will find out if he reads the posts or just gripes and moves on. HFA on average is worth 11 cents in true value between two comparable teams. The true value can be as low as 0 or as high as 20 cents, but the linemakers know that Joe Six Pack loves his home teams, so the actual built in disadvantage in the line ranges from 20 to 40 cents. No matter the true value you always over pay for the comfort of going with the home team, and that is all you are buying, comfort, not probability. With Godley & the D-bax at 2-0 as a team and the D-bax producing 4.54 earned offensive runs per 9 since the break, versus righty, and the Nats 5-9 with Fister (3-4 home) producing 2.82 earned offensive runs per 9, I fail to see hardly any HFA for the Nats. Obviously the Nats have no prior experience versus Godley and Fister’s only start versus the D-bax was over 14 months ago, so a any trends or “career versus” would be totally irrelevant.
BOL
as I mentioned in one of your previous threads Key, I really do appreciate your constructive contribution to this site BUT....you have to stop with these nonsensical opinions of yours. You seem to come up with them on a weekly basis now.
If youre going to post on a daily basis and think no one is going to call you out on these comments, youre mistaken. For several months I've been reading your threads and finally thought enough is enough.....time to chime in here because youre misleading a lot novice bettors around here.
the above statement is ABSOLUTELY wrong ....plain and simple.
this latest comment is as bad as "trends mean absolutely nothing"
I'm beginning to think you don't really understand HOW linemakers establish lines, because what you stated is without a doubt 100% incorrect.
Diamondbacks: Play to -133: Tough weekend for the Nationals @ the Mets but the situation may not get any better today. Going home cannot be considered an elixir that cures all problems and creates better play and probability all by itself. The Nats are 5-5 last 10 home games and the D-bax are 5-5 last 10 and 10-10 last 20 on the road. For the sake of that guy that thinks I paly too many road teams I will tell him this and we will find out if he reads the posts or just gripes and moves on. HFA on average is worth 11 cents in true value between two comparable teams. The true value can be as low as 0 or as high as 20 cents, but the linemakers know that Joe Six Pack loves his home teams, so the actual built in disadvantage in the line ranges from 20 to 40 cents. No matter the true value you always over pay for the comfort of going with the home team, and that is all you are buying, comfort, not probability. With Godley & the D-bax at 2-0 as a team and the D-bax producing 4.54 earned offensive runs per 9 since the break, versus righty, and the Nats 5-9 with Fister (3-4 home) producing 2.82 earned offensive runs per 9, I fail to see hardly any HFA for the Nats. Obviously the Nats have no prior experience versus Godley and Fister’s only start versus the D-bax was over 14 months ago, so a any trends or “career versus” would be totally irrelevant.
BOL
as I mentioned in one of your previous threads Key, I really do appreciate your constructive contribution to this site BUT....you have to stop with these nonsensical opinions of yours. You seem to come up with them on a weekly basis now.
If youre going to post on a daily basis and think no one is going to call you out on these comments, youre mistaken. For several months I've been reading your threads and finally thought enough is enough.....time to chime in here because youre misleading a lot novice bettors around here.
the above statement is ABSOLUTELY wrong ....plain and simple.
this latest comment is as bad as "trends mean absolutely nothing"
I'm beginning to think you don't really understand HOW linemakers establish lines, because what you stated is without a doubt 100% incorrect.
as I mentioned in one of your previous threads Key, I really do appreciate your constructive contribution to this site BUT....you have to stop with these nonsensical opinions of yours. You seem to come up with them on a weekly basis now.
If youre going to post on a daily basis and think no one is going to call you out on these comments, youre mistaken. For several months I've been reading your threads and finally thought enough is enough.....time to chime in here because youre misleading a lot novice bettors around here.
the above statement is ABSOLUTELY wrong ....plain and simple.
this latest comment is as bad as "trends mean absolutely nothing"
I'm beginning to think you don't really understand HOW linemakers establish lines, because what you stated is without a doubt 100% incorrect.
[/Quote
as I mentioned in one of your previous threads Key, I really do appreciate your constructive contribution to this site BUT....you have to stop with these nonsensical opinions of yours. You seem to come up with them on a weekly basis now.
If youre going to post on a daily basis and think no one is going to call you out on these comments, youre mistaken. For several months I've been reading your threads and finally thought enough is enough.....time to chime in here because youre misleading a lot novice bettors around here.
the above statement is ABSOLUTELY wrong ....plain and simple.
this latest comment is as bad as "trends mean absolutely nothing"
I'm beginning to think you don't really understand HOW linemakers establish lines, because what you stated is without a doubt 100% incorrect.
[/Quote
if you think linemakers set a line with the intention of anticipating how joe public is going to respond, you are dead wrong.
Believe me.....I know !!
youre saying the actual built in disadvantage in a line ranges from 20-40 due to perceived HFA........cmon man. This is PURE nonsense LOL
I've got news for you.......linemakers don't think like you.
if you think linemakers set a line with the intention of anticipating how joe public is going to respond, you are dead wrong.
Believe me.....I know !!
youre saying the actual built in disadvantage in a line ranges from 20-40 due to perceived HFA........cmon man. This is PURE nonsense LOL
I've got news for you.......linemakers don't think like you.
lajohn – you had something to say and got it said, no harm, no foul
WhoIN1 – I think there is value in Atlanta but not enough to push me over the edge
Beetlebum – I call an occasional total but I don’t think it is necessarily any easier than sides versus distorted lines. I think there is a more select group of solid players doing totals and most often the better looking over/under (in my opinion) will be carrying the juice, so, no big bonus dogs. Undervalued dogs are my bread and butter. There is also my program to be considered, it calls totals with a decent degree of accuracy but usually within a half or full run of the posted total. Hard to go that way when I have an underdog projected to win outright. I also have a strong preference for unders, as it is my attitude (rightly or wrongly) that you start with a winner, someone has to take it away from you.
elmenhorster – Pollock is listed as in
Getty3 – Don’t hold your breath (jk)
wmi799 – that is the type of thing to ignore, please
lajohn – you had something to say and got it said, no harm, no foul
WhoIN1 – I think there is value in Atlanta but not enough to push me over the edge
Beetlebum – I call an occasional total but I don’t think it is necessarily any easier than sides versus distorted lines. I think there is a more select group of solid players doing totals and most often the better looking over/under (in my opinion) will be carrying the juice, so, no big bonus dogs. Undervalued dogs are my bread and butter. There is also my program to be considered, it calls totals with a decent degree of accuracy but usually within a half or full run of the posted total. Hard to go that way when I have an underdog projected to win outright. I also have a strong preference for unders, as it is my attitude (rightly or wrongly) that you start with a winner, someone has to take it away from you.
elmenhorster – Pollock is listed as in
Getty3 – Don’t hold your breath (jk)
wmi799 – that is the type of thing to ignore, please
lajohn – you had something to say and got it said, no harm, no foul
WhoIN1 – I think there is value in Atlanta but not enough to push me over the edge
Beetlebum – I call an occasional total but I don’t think it is necessarily any easier than sides versus distorted lines. I think there is a more select group of solid players doing totals and most often the better looking over/under (in my opinion) will be carrying the juice, so, no big bonus dogs. Undervalued dogs are my bread and butter. There is also my program to be considered, it calls totals with a decent degree of accuracy but usually within a half or full run of the posted total. Hard to go that way when I have an underdog projected to win outright. I also have a strong preference for unders, as it is my attitude (rightly or wrongly) that you start with a winner, someone has to take it away from you.
elmenhorster – Pollock is listed as in
Getty3 – Don’t hold your breath (jk)
wmi799 – that is the type of thing to ignore, please
yup..........figured.
Not everyone on this site is novice bettor Key, you're going to get called out on your ignorance.
lajohn – you had something to say and got it said, no harm, no foul
WhoIN1 – I think there is value in Atlanta but not enough to push me over the edge
Beetlebum – I call an occasional total but I don’t think it is necessarily any easier than sides versus distorted lines. I think there is a more select group of solid players doing totals and most often the better looking over/under (in my opinion) will be carrying the juice, so, no big bonus dogs. Undervalued dogs are my bread and butter. There is also my program to be considered, it calls totals with a decent degree of accuracy but usually within a half or full run of the posted total. Hard to go that way when I have an underdog projected to win outright. I also have a strong preference for unders, as it is my attitude (rightly or wrongly) that you start with a winner, someone has to take it away from you.
elmenhorster – Pollock is listed as in
Getty3 – Don’t hold your breath (jk)
wmi799 – that is the type of thing to ignore, please
yup..........figured.
Not everyone on this site is novice bettor Key, you're going to get called out on your ignorance.
yup..........figured.
Not everyone on this site is novice bettor Key, you're going to get called out on your ignorance.
yup..........figured.
Not everyone on this site is novice bettor Key, you're going to get called out on your ignorance.
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.