Great write up. I'll be tailing this one. Looks like the line opened at +9.5 with a total of 224. Now it's at +11 with a total of 226.
My book is still not offering it, but will jump on it as soon as it does.
WOW. +9.5. In a game the lakers can win! Looks like the books are taking the +2.5 from the last game and adding the traditional 6.5 for the road swing! With no adjustment to bounce back from this loss (probably because of d'Angelo being out). Well I'm glad I'm not the line-setter because I would have shorted myself big time! Gonna have to make this is much larger play if this is over 10 points which seems insane.
Jrod- i post for everyone.
0
Quote Originally Posted by swanbomb:
Good to see you back, Scal.
Great write up. I'll be tailing this one. Looks like the line opened at +9.5 with a total of 224. Now it's at +11 with a total of 226.
My book is still not offering it, but will jump on it as soon as it does.
WOW. +9.5. In a game the lakers can win! Looks like the books are taking the +2.5 from the last game and adding the traditional 6.5 for the road swing! With no adjustment to bounce back from this loss (probably because of d'Angelo being out). Well I'm glad I'm not the line-setter because I would have shorted myself big time! Gonna have to make this is much larger play if this is over 10 points which seems insane.
Scal, beautiful stuff. Really. Lakers are +11 on betonline.
Thanks As always BB. Holy shi+!!!! +11 ina game they can win outright! Wow. Get the wheelbarrows out of my garage. (And great Warriors Rockets thread! Glad to see you dropped 2K on such a rock solid cap!)
0
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy:
Scal, beautiful stuff. Really. Lakers are +11 on betonline.
Thanks As always BB. Holy shi+!!!! +11 ina game they can win outright! Wow. Get the wheelbarrows out of my garage. (And great Warriors Rockets thread! Glad to see you dropped 2K on such a rock solid cap!)
Very nice right up and angle. have been coming in here lookin for you and BB (big thanks to that man for providing some profitable action)
Not a fan of buying teams without the starting PG, especially one that has shown the propensity to blow chunks without him...this team got real bad real quick without him. however i believe in the angle and believe in your cap so i will ride and sprinkle the ML as well cause why not...4/5-1 is a beautiful thing. Appreciate the early heads up as well!
Thanks as always sir and BOL to us.
0
Very nice right up and angle. have been coming in here lookin for you and BB (big thanks to that man for providing some profitable action)
Not a fan of buying teams without the starting PG, especially one that has shown the propensity to blow chunks without him...this team got real bad real quick without him. however i believe in the angle and believe in your cap so i will ride and sprinkle the ML as well cause why not...4/5-1 is a beautiful thing. Appreciate the early heads up as well!
not sure if you were aware of it but this will be a nationally televised game on espn .. i know some people are scared of espn/tnt games but in this case when your using an embarrassment angle you would think it helps the lakers not wanting to be embarrassed on a nationally televised game
0
not sure if you were aware of it but this will be a nationally televised game on espn .. i know some people are scared of espn/tnt games but in this case when your using an embarrassment angle you would think it helps the lakers not wanting to be embarrassed on a nationally televised game
Monster can't have it all on a silver platter. We'll have to do it with D'Angelo.
Biller - even better. Thanks for the info.
Thaler - I typically deal with bad teams and small conferences so no, no super bowl pick, the biggest game for any bet that can be made. I will have some CBB coming up.
0
Monster can't have it all on a silver platter. We'll have to do it with D'Angelo.
Biller - even better. Thanks for the info.
Thaler - I typically deal with bad teams and small conferences so no, no super bowl pick, the biggest game for any bet that can be made. I will have some CBB coming up.
I see more value in the full game line (and even the ML since it's a game they can win) than I do quarters. But a quick start is desired if not essential, I'll say that.
What gives me pause about a quarter line is that some of this same Laker team came out very slow last year for Kobe's last game a 'must-win' in Laker lore at least. Then they came back to cover the +6 and win outright. But this Laker team has better coach and better roster from top to bottom obviously.
Nunong tigers
0
Quote Originally Posted by Tigers2013:
Good play scal
Any value in the first quarter or player props
I see more value in the full game line (and even the ML since it's a game they can win) than I do quarters. But a quick start is desired if not essential, I'll say that.
What gives me pause about a quarter line is that some of this same Laker team came out very slow last year for Kobe's last game a 'must-win' in Laker lore at least. Then they came back to cover the +6 and win outright. But this Laker team has better coach and better roster from top to bottom obviously.
You are WRONG to say +130 - they are "paying" the juice - we always "pay" the juice - and you said at +105 you still get a 5% ROI. These are mathematically FALSE statements.
For example, let's say you and I are picking a card from deck. I let you have clubs. I get spades, hearts, and diamonds. I give you odds of +170. That doesn't mean I am "paying" the juice - you are. The true line is +300 (300/400 = 75%, 100/400 = 25%). So if I offer you less than +300 you are paying the juice. (Obviously if I offer u +400 I am idiot and paying juice). But, just b/c you got the bet at +105 doesn't mean they are paying juice - you still are (assuming the midpoint is fair price).
Also, if line moves BADLY against you - ie from +140 to +105 - yes +105 might be good bet b/c there is 71.4% chance you think fighter wins so true line should be -250 (250/350 = 71.4%) - but from a "finance" perspective you are getting worse price than recently widely available - that doesn't mean it is BAD - but you should acknowledge it.
GOOG is at $810 - at one point it was at $85 (IPO) - and sure it shoot up to $150 quickly - it is still more expensive than the week before at $85 - but yes it still can be good trade. So yes +105 can still be good (obviously it was, she won) - but doesn't mean it is worse price than recently available (but it moved b/c market price is efficient).
I have so much access to hockey props, NBA totals, etc - you would learn something. And I want to learn from you - as you have great "non mathematical" insight that I need/want to know.
And I will effectively be PAYING YOU $$$.
Make it happen :)
0
It is FREE $$$. Make it happen :)
BTW, another comment on your fight win.
You are WRONG to say +130 - they are "paying" the juice - we always "pay" the juice - and you said at +105 you still get a 5% ROI. These are mathematically FALSE statements.
For example, let's say you and I are picking a card from deck. I let you have clubs. I get spades, hearts, and diamonds. I give you odds of +170. That doesn't mean I am "paying" the juice - you are. The true line is +300 (300/400 = 75%, 100/400 = 25%). So if I offer you less than +300 you are paying the juice. (Obviously if I offer u +400 I am idiot and paying juice). But, just b/c you got the bet at +105 doesn't mean they are paying juice - you still are (assuming the midpoint is fair price).
Also, if line moves BADLY against you - ie from +140 to +105 - yes +105 might be good bet b/c there is 71.4% chance you think fighter wins so true line should be -250 (250/350 = 71.4%) - but from a "finance" perspective you are getting worse price than recently widely available - that doesn't mean it is BAD - but you should acknowledge it.
GOOG is at $810 - at one point it was at $85 (IPO) - and sure it shoot up to $150 quickly - it is still more expensive than the week before at $85 - but yes it still can be good trade. So yes +105 can still be good (obviously it was, she won) - but doesn't mean it is worse price than recently available (but it moved b/c market price is efficient).
I have so much access to hockey props, NBA totals, etc - you would learn something. And I want to learn from you - as you have great "non mathematical" insight that I need/want to know.
You are WRONG to say +130 - they are "paying" the juice - we always "pay" the juice - and you said at +105 you still get a 5% ROI. These are mathematically FALSE statements.
For example, let's say you and I are picking a card from deck. I let you have clubs. I get spades, hearts, and diamonds. I give you odds of +170. That doesn't mean I am "paying" the juice - you are. The true line is +300 (300/400 = 75%, 100/400 = 25%). So if I offer you less than +300 you are paying the juice. (Obviously if I offer u +400 I am idiot and paying juice). But, just b/c you got the bet at +105 doesn't mean they are paying juice - you still are (assuming the midpoint is fair price).
Also, if line moves BADLY against you - ie from +140 to +105 - yes +105 might be good bet b/c there is 71.4% chance you think fighter wins so true line should be -250 (250/350 = 71.4%) - but from a "finance" perspective you are getting worse price than recently widely available - that doesn't mean it is BAD - but you should acknowledge it.
GOOG is at $810 - at one point it was at $85 (IPO) - and sure it shoot up to $150 quickly - it is still more expensive than the week before at $85 - but yes it still can be good trade. So yes +105 can still be good (obviously it was, she won) - but doesn't mean it is worse price than recently available (but it moved b/c market price is efficient).
I have so much access to hockey props, NBA totals, etc - you would learn something. And I want to learn from you - as you have great "non mathematical" insight that I need/want to know.
And I will effectively be PAYING YOU $$$.
Make it happen :)
Kvs,
Getting Nunes at +135 or even +225 isn't even remotely comparable to paying me for picking a card from a deck, because your "true line" in the card example is not equivalent or even analogous to the Nunes odds, in a fight where I believed she should have been favored. So I would have taken Nunes at any +ML odds and would have been getting value. The same can't be said of the card picking obviously.
And the fluctuations of lines cloud caps and prevent many people from taking winners all because they had knowledge of a previous line, which is simply market based and not tangible. I opened my account saw Nunes at +135 and took it for significant value and gave a hand wave to any previous fluctuations, simply because I had no access or knowledge of them. And walked away a winner a little after the second hand on a watch passed the 8 after starting at 12.
0
Quote Originally Posted by kvs23:
It is FREE $$$. Make it happen :)
BTW, another comment on your fight win.
You are WRONG to say +130 - they are "paying" the juice - we always "pay" the juice - and you said at +105 you still get a 5% ROI. These are mathematically FALSE statements.
For example, let's say you and I are picking a card from deck. I let you have clubs. I get spades, hearts, and diamonds. I give you odds of +170. That doesn't mean I am "paying" the juice - you are. The true line is +300 (300/400 = 75%, 100/400 = 25%). So if I offer you less than +300 you are paying the juice. (Obviously if I offer u +400 I am idiot and paying juice). But, just b/c you got the bet at +105 doesn't mean they are paying juice - you still are (assuming the midpoint is fair price).
Also, if line moves BADLY against you - ie from +140 to +105 - yes +105 might be good bet b/c there is 71.4% chance you think fighter wins so true line should be -250 (250/350 = 71.4%) - but from a "finance" perspective you are getting worse price than recently widely available - that doesn't mean it is BAD - but you should acknowledge it.
GOOG is at $810 - at one point it was at $85 (IPO) - and sure it shoot up to $150 quickly - it is still more expensive than the week before at $85 - but yes it still can be good trade. So yes +105 can still be good (obviously it was, she won) - but doesn't mean it is worse price than recently available (but it moved b/c market price is efficient).
I have so much access to hockey props, NBA totals, etc - you would learn something. And I want to learn from you - as you have great "non mathematical" insight that I need/want to know.
And I will effectively be PAYING YOU $$$.
Make it happen :)
Kvs,
Getting Nunes at +135 or even +225 isn't even remotely comparable to paying me for picking a card from a deck, because your "true line" in the card example is not equivalent or even analogous to the Nunes odds, in a fight where I believed she should have been favored. So I would have taken Nunes at any +ML odds and would have been getting value. The same can't be said of the card picking obviously.
And the fluctuations of lines cloud caps and prevent many people from taking winners all because they had knowledge of a previous line, which is simply market based and not tangible. I opened my account saw Nunes at +135 and took it for significant value and gave a hand wave to any previous fluctuations, simply because I had no access or knowledge of them. And walked away a winner a little after the second hand on a watch passed the 8 after starting at 12.
Point is you thought Nunes should be -150 (60%) or whatever so +135 or +105 is value. But if Nunes is "true" -150 - then even if you get at -130 - they are paying juice b/c line is bad.
My point is the - or + does not determine who is paying juice. if line is right, we are. if not, they are. even if NY Giants +3 -110 - if line is wrong they paying juice.
0
I bet it too and won big.
Point is you thought Nunes should be -150 (60%) or whatever so +135 or +105 is value. But if Nunes is "true" -150 - then even if you get at -130 - they are paying juice b/c line is bad.
My point is the - or + does not determine who is paying juice. if line is right, we are. if not, they are. even if NY Giants +3 -110 - if line is wrong they paying juice.
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.
seriously, they WIN not just cover.
Very nice right up and angle. have been coming in here lookin for you and BB (big thanks to that man for providing some profitable action)
Hot Forum Topics
