All Forums | NBA Betting

Bulls in 5

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 5453
Posts: 59
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2003
Posts: 34757
Posted: #26
Bulls win series 4-0 +2600
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2008
Posts: 10367
Posted: #27
Quote Originally Posted by kaponofor3:

I effed up and didn't play this but I really should have in hindsight. Only thing I'd be worried about depeche is that they sweep. 

Excellent call though 

It's a excellent call after 1 game ???????????

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2004
Posts: 2565
Posted: #28

nice hit.

 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2008
Posts: 10367
Posted: #29

With Miami getting the win in Chicago now Bulls need to win 3 straight with 2 straight in Miami, for a 4-1 series win, highly, highly unlikely to happen.

Bulls played an almost perfect game in game 1, getting 41% of the offensive rebounds available, believe it or not but that's the highest % of offensive rebounds gotten by any team  in "any game this season".

Miami got just 18% of their offensive rebounds available, but in game 2 Bulls got just 33% to Heats 29%.

What was a 23% difference in game 1 became a 4% difference in game 2.

Combined that with the Bulls 47% shooting from 3's in game 1 and it's easy to see why Bulls won't duplicate that game.

When you look at the ratio of pts scored off offensive rebounds, game 1 was the Bulls 5th best game of the entire season.

 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2002
Posts: 67006
Posted: #30
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw:

With Miami getting the win in Chicago now Bulls need to win 3 straight with 2 straight in Miami, for a 4-1 series win, highly, highly unlikely to happen.

Bulls played an almost perfect game in game 1, getting 41% of the offensive rebounds available, believe it or not but that's the highest % of offensive rebounds gotten by any team  in "any game this season".

Miami got just 18% of their offensive rebounds available, but in game 2 Bulls got just 33% to Heats 29%.

What was a 23% difference in game 1 became a 4% difference in game 2.

Combined that with the Bulls 47% shooting from 3's in game 1 and it's easy to see why Bulls won't duplicate that game.

When you look at the ratio of pts scored off offensive rebounds, game 1 was the Bulls 5th best game of the entire season.



Or you could consider that the Bulls shot only 34% in Game 2.  They missed a boatload of easy shots.  Probably their worst shooting night in months.  Rose shot 0-7 on shots inside 9 feet.  Only 16/26 at the line and 3-20 behind the arc.  Despite all of that the game was still tied with 4 minutes left.

And as for the first game, Miami had still outshot the Bulls 47-43%.

There are two sides to every coin.
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2007
Posts: 35430
Posted: #31
depeche -- I still like the CHI side here
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2002
Posts: 67006
Posted: #32
But the funny thing is fair value on this bet now not much higher around 15-1, despite basically the worst case scenario of a split.  If the Bulls had won Game 2 this bet would have oodles of value.  This all re-confirms my opinion that 11-1 was a great play.
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2010
Posts: 759
Posted: #33
Consider the chances of the Bulls winning by two or less.  I know this happened once this year in Miami but the chances are low that it happens in a single home game.  Consider the Bulls win game 1 and 2 SU and ATS.  A SU win is likely a ATS win on the -2 spread.

Let's look at a scenario where I take game 1 and 2 against the spread.
1 units Bulls -2 (-110) Game 1 results in 1.91 units
1.91 units Bulls -2 (-110) Game 2 results in 3.65 units

Now let's assume a +180 Chicago ML in Miami Game 3 and 4.  Assume a Miami Game 4 -210 ML if they lose Game 3.  Assume a -230 ML in Chicago Game 5.  I will divide the money after Game 2 so that I will win money in the case that the Bulls lose either Game 3 or Game 4 (but not both).  I will allow the case where the Bulls lose Game 3 give the +1100.

Solve this equation (x is the percentage of money I wager on Game 3)
3.65 * (1 - x) * (1 + 180/100) * (1 + 100/230) = 12
I get x = 0.18 (technically I get 12.02 when doing this)
So Bulls W, W, L, W, W results in +1102

I then consider Bulls W, W, W, L, W.  You will place a Miami ML wager on Game 4 in this case.
(3.65 * x * (1 + 180/100) + 3.65 * (1 - x)) * (1 + 100/210) * (1 + 100/230) | x = 0.18 = 10.24
So Bulls W, W, W, L, W is +924

Average the two cases and we get +1013.  Your bet had approximately .87 units (8.6%) more value than playing this way.

I can also maximize the aforementioned method with x = 0 to get an average value of +1020 and your bet has 7.8% more value.   For the most part I overestimated these ML's and the only assumption I made as a SU win was an ATS win in games 1 and 2.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2007
Posts: 1561
Posted: #34
Quote Originally Posted by depeche2:

+1100



MARK MY WORD ........ HEAT THE CHAMP !!!
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2007
Posts: 1561
Posted: #35
HEATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2008
Posts: 2304
Posted: #36
Quote Originally Posted by depechedouche22:

 

 

-1100 on a terrible bet, you should of had Heat in 5 now theres the value you fucken retard with your shitcago sports,suck dick teams





Over/Under on your age is set at 12....and the Under is juice to -150
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2002
Posts: 7112
Posted: #37
Chicago in 5 is out of the question now down 1-2, so maybe in 6?  I really doubt it with at least 2 more games in Miami.  It is possible but highly unlikely.
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2009
Posts: 10705
Posted: #38
Quote Originally Posted by nepatriots_12:





Over/Under on your age is set at 12....and the Under is juice to -150





UNDER here 
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 5634
Posted: #39
nice call
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2007
Posts: 1723
Posted: #40
bulls LOSE in 5, you mean




 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2009
Posts: 10705
Posted: #41
Quote Originally Posted by ILL:

bulls LOSE in 5, you mean










   series is history. Lack of experience really showing plus the buls bench isn't contributing much at all, i.e. Korver, hello anyone there??? Bulls never wanted him but had to settle because ORL matched on Reddick.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2011
Posts: 25
Posted: #42
Quote Originally Posted by kaponofor3:

I effed up and didn't play this but I really should have in hindsight. Only thing I'd be worried about depeche is that they sweep. 

Excellent call though 

Excellent Call?  Really?????

 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2007
Posts: 35430
Posted: #43
king -- I still think it was an excellent call, he was getting a solid price for CHI to close it out at home and given the history between the teams at that point.


 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2007
Posts: 1723
Posted: #44
Quote Originally Posted by kaponofor3:

king -- I still think it was an excellent call, he was getting a solid price for CHI to close it out at home and given the history between the teams at that point.





 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2009
Posts: 1506
Posted: #45
          and rose is mvp   most valuable box
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2005
Posts: 5634
Posted: #46
nice call. LMAO
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2010
Posts: 68
Posted: #47
HAHHAHA love when people bring up old posts...good pick scum...HEAT IN 5 YOU SHOULDVE TOOK PRICKO
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2007
Posts: 1723
Posted: #48
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2006
Posts: 9634
Posted: #49
Heat in 5, you sir, are a genius.
 
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2009
Posts: 16299
Posted: #50
Boy are ppl dumb 2 think bulls hade chance in this series
All Forums | NBA Betting
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2024 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

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.