I think +3 or +3.5 could be a good value if the public pushes it up might be just enough cushion. Just like the Wizards in game 3 bit of course the Hawks are not the Cavs..
Still llove the home dogs..
I got on it early thinking it would go to PK. But yea +3 is great value!
0
Quote Originally Posted by Digitalkarma:
I think +3 or +3.5 could be a good value if the public pushes it up might be just enough cushion. Just like the Wizards in game 3 bit of course the Hawks are not the Cavs..
Still llove the home dogs..
I got on it early thinking it would go to PK. But yea +3 is great value!
I actually studied statistics/mathematics with application to gambling. All gambling is devised in such a way to give the gambler up to 90% of their money back. So if I bet $1,000 (whether it's in one wager or divided into smaller wagers over several months) the most the house will give me is 90% back. So in the end I'll be down 10% from what I started. The interesting thing is this "90% return" is dictated by a cycle (almost like a sine-wave). A smart gambler would know when to gamble when the house is in payout phase. A degenerate would gamble every single day which usually results in both winning and losing streaks and an eventual loss of money on juice (the 10%).
In addition if Vegas won all the time we as human beings will feel "learned helplessness" whereby further encounter with gambling will be an aversive stimulus (i.e. fear of losing more so avoiding gambling all together).
Vegas has basically swept the floor in NBA the past 3 days with public hemorrhaging money from all orifices of the body. If this continues not only will the public not have enough money to gamble, but they will become afraid of gambling and avoid it all together. Vegas needs to give some back in order for the cycle to continue.
If you're talking about how a slot machine works, or how scratch offs work, where there is, for all intents and purposes, a guaranteed profit for the casino, then the bold sentence applies.
It is completely irrelevant in sports gambling, and for you to think today's game is a 'set-up' is ludicrous. What about Gasol's status? Do you think the books would gamble with that? Does he come back in one game or two, or even three? No one knows the answer to these questions. How in the world are the books going to give Cavs bettors money today for bigger and better spots tomorrow, when we don't even know if one of the Bulls bigs is playing tomorrow. And what about an injury today that could change everything?
There are no 'set the bettor up so we can take their money later' games in sports betting.
It only appears to work that way because virtually every bettor is undisciplined and gives back all their profits after a win.
0
Quote Originally Posted by fadeORdie:
I actually studied statistics/mathematics with application to gambling. All gambling is devised in such a way to give the gambler up to 90% of their money back. So if I bet $1,000 (whether it's in one wager or divided into smaller wagers over several months) the most the house will give me is 90% back. So in the end I'll be down 10% from what I started. The interesting thing is this "90% return" is dictated by a cycle (almost like a sine-wave). A smart gambler would know when to gamble when the house is in payout phase. A degenerate would gamble every single day which usually results in both winning and losing streaks and an eventual loss of money on juice (the 10%).
In addition if Vegas won all the time we as human beings will feel "learned helplessness" whereby further encounter with gambling will be an aversive stimulus (i.e. fear of losing more so avoiding gambling all together).
Vegas has basically swept the floor in NBA the past 3 days with public hemorrhaging money from all orifices of the body. If this continues not only will the public not have enough money to gamble, but they will become afraid of gambling and avoid it all together. Vegas needs to give some back in order for the cycle to continue.
If you're talking about how a slot machine works, or how scratch offs work, where there is, for all intents and purposes, a guaranteed profit for the casino, then the bold sentence applies.
It is completely irrelevant in sports gambling, and for you to think today's game is a 'set-up' is ludicrous. What about Gasol's status? Do you think the books would gamble with that? Does he come back in one game or two, or even three? No one knows the answer to these questions. How in the world are the books going to give Cavs bettors money today for bigger and better spots tomorrow, when we don't even know if one of the Bulls bigs is playing tomorrow. And what about an injury today that could change everything?
There are no 'set the bettor up so we can take their money later' games in sports betting.
It only appears to work that way because virtually every bettor is undisciplined and gives back all their profits after a win.
I think they could play better though. They usually have slow starts. It takes them a bit to get warmed up. So I like that they had a high scoring 1st...now I expect them to do even better. They missed some point blank layups already.
0
I think they could play better though. They usually have slow starts. It takes them a bit to get warmed up. So I like that they had a high scoring 1st...now I expect them to do even better. They missed some point blank layups already.
I am taking this huge. Too many people are going to to be on CLE tomorrow. The whole they can not lose approach is not going to fool me. Bulls are playing great and ppl are taking credit away from the Bulls D. I can see CLE going down two games and then making a comeback to make go to game 7.
So would you take in game +1.5 bulls?
0
Quote Originally Posted by Big_Hersch:
I am taking this huge. Too many people are going to to be on CLE tomorrow. The whole they can not lose approach is not going to fool me. Bulls are playing great and ppl are taking credit away from the Bulls D. I can see CLE going down two games and then making a comeback to make go to game 7.
If I had about 10 more fingers I could start to count how many relatively uncontested layups Chicago has missed. Wow. And as I have seen discussed here and there, their hoops IQ has to be near the bottom. Definitely not an edge for them against any remaining opponent. So odd with such a seemingly smart coach.
0
If I had about 10 more fingers I could start to count how many relatively uncontested layups Chicago has missed. Wow. And as I have seen discussed here and there, their hoops IQ has to be near the bottom. Definitely not an edge for them against any remaining opponent. So odd with such a seemingly smart coach.
If I had about 10 more fingers I could start to count how many relatively uncontested layups Chicago has missed. Wow. And as I have seen discussed here and there, their hoops IQ has to be near the bottom. Definitely not an edge for them against any remaining opponent. So odd with such a seemingly smart coach.
They had the big game against the Bucks but for the most part their offense is an embarrassment. From what I hear the coach is gone anyway.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Bizzey:
If I had about 10 more fingers I could start to count how many relatively uncontested layups Chicago has missed. Wow. And as I have seen discussed here and there, their hoops IQ has to be near the bottom. Definitely not an edge for them against any remaining opponent. So odd with such a seemingly smart coach.
They had the big game against the Bucks but for the most part their offense is an embarrassment. From what I hear the coach is gone anyway.
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.
Hot Forum Topics
