Looks like you were right on wiz game. Wiz played half assed and magic seem to want it more. Can't count how many bricks wiz put up. Good job being on the right side though. 5 was a lot but might not even need it wiz went to sleep after 1q
0
Looks like you were right on wiz game. Wiz played half assed and magic seem to want it more. Can't count how many bricks wiz put up. Good job being on the right side though. 5 was a lot but might not even need it wiz went to sleep after 1q
Big difference on betting on teams that suxk and teams that are flat out awful which the lakers celtics magic sixers bucks and jazz are
And those terrible teams you just mentioned will likely go 2-2 ATS tonight, 50/50, just like the good teams usually do.
It's a matter or choosing the right one just like any other bet, essentially putting all the teams, terrible or good, on an even playing field when the spread is applied. This is capping 101. This completely negates your comment about 'shi t teams.' There are only shi t bets.
0
Quote Originally Posted by ShootDaClubUp:
Big difference on betting on teams that suxk and teams that are flat out awful which the lakers celtics magic sixers bucks and jazz are
And those terrible teams you just mentioned will likely go 2-2 ATS tonight, 50/50, just like the good teams usually do.
It's a matter or choosing the right one just like any other bet, essentially putting all the teams, terrible or good, on an even playing field when the spread is applied. This is capping 101. This completely negates your comment about 'shi t teams.' There are only shi t bets.
Good luck putting your money on one of those teams , because i sure as hell wont
you must like giving your money away to the bookie then.
it's the NBA.... these are pros vs. pros. Any team can beat another team on a given night. So far sixers already covered. And they covered EASILY. And Utah is winning by 8 points midway through the 3rd as a 9 point dog.
I dunno I guess you can't see value even it punched you "square" in the face....
0
Quote Originally Posted by ShootDaClubUp:
Good luck putting your money on one of those teams , because i sure as hell wont
you must like giving your money away to the bookie then.
it's the NBA.... these are pros vs. pros. Any team can beat another team on a given night. So far sixers already covered. And they covered EASILY. And Utah is winning by 8 points midway through the 3rd as a 9 point dog.
I dunno I guess you can't see value even it punched you "square" in the face....
Each team scores 19 to began and to end the game. The total is middled. There's no capping for that situation that I'm aware of. Great job LC and the profit more than made up for the losses.
0
Each team scores 19 to began and to end the game. The total is middled. There's no capping for that situation that I'm aware of. Great job LC and the profit more than made up for the losses.
This is the quintessential essence of the 'square' mentality.
"Why would you bet the shi t teams when you can bet the good and even GREAT ones night in, night out!"
This guy, along with millions of other squares, literally put the bubbles on the buxom babes in Steve Wynn's hot tub.
My only defense of this guy, Scal, is that you shouldn't bet on any team (good or bad) simply based on a trend, a favorable line or some other number related fact that doesn't take into account the mindset of a team. If you fade the Spurs just cause you're hoping they're not gonna show or they're gonna be in relax mode you are asking for trouble. Why? Cause unlike most teams the Spurs have a bench full of starters. Guys who don't ever relax, unless, of course, they are playing the Bulls and Pops has such respect for Thibs that he doesn't wanna run up the score.
In other words, you gotta think about these games from multiple angles and then be ready to toss out what you know or think you know when/if you get new information. Orlando almost blew that cover today (and it was an easy cover). Why? Cause they're a bad team. Good teams don't beat themselves (or not as often as bad teams) that is also something a capper needs to consider when there is such a small margin of error.
0
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
This is the quintessential essence of the 'square' mentality.
"Why would you bet the shi t teams when you can bet the good and even GREAT ones night in, night out!"
This guy, along with millions of other squares, literally put the bubbles on the buxom babes in Steve Wynn's hot tub.
My only defense of this guy, Scal, is that you shouldn't bet on any team (good or bad) simply based on a trend, a favorable line or some other number related fact that doesn't take into account the mindset of a team. If you fade the Spurs just cause you're hoping they're not gonna show or they're gonna be in relax mode you are asking for trouble. Why? Cause unlike most teams the Spurs have a bench full of starters. Guys who don't ever relax, unless, of course, they are playing the Bulls and Pops has such respect for Thibs that he doesn't wanna run up the score.
In other words, you gotta think about these games from multiple angles and then be ready to toss out what you know or think you know when/if you get new information. Orlando almost blew that cover today (and it was an easy cover). Why? Cause they're a bad team. Good teams don't beat themselves (or not as often as bad teams) that is also something a capper needs to consider when there is such a small margin of error.
My only defense of this guy, Scal, is that you shouldn't bet on any team (good or bad) simply based on a trend, a favorable line or some other number related fact that doesn't take into account the mindset of a team. If you fade the Spurs just cause you're hoping they're not gonna show or they're gonna be in relax mode you are asking for trouble. Why? Cause unlike most teams the Spurs have a bench full of starters. Guys who don't ever relax, unless, of course, they are playing the Bulls and Pops has such respect for Thibs that he doesn't wanna run up the score.
In other words, you gotta think about these games from multiple angles and then be ready to toss out what you know or think you know when/if you get new information. Orlando almost blew that cover today (and it was an easy cover). Why? Cause they're a bad team. Good teams don't beat themselves (or not as often as bad teams) that is also something a capper needs to consider when there is such a small margin of error.
Well I agree with your first paragraph but no need to defend him as he wasn't making such an in-depth assessment when he made the statement about 'shi t' teams.
And Orlando in my view didn't really blow the cover for all intents and purposes. They lead by 6 with under 2 minutes, which is an 11 point cushion with the +5. When you are getting 5 and it goes into OT, that is a bad beat plain and simple as only OT could prevent you from covering in such a close game with so little time left.
good pick with the suns btw. Took em at -5 which is what it opened at on my end.
0
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy:
My only defense of this guy, Scal, is that you shouldn't bet on any team (good or bad) simply based on a trend, a favorable line or some other number related fact that doesn't take into account the mindset of a team. If you fade the Spurs just cause you're hoping they're not gonna show or they're gonna be in relax mode you are asking for trouble. Why? Cause unlike most teams the Spurs have a bench full of starters. Guys who don't ever relax, unless, of course, they are playing the Bulls and Pops has such respect for Thibs that he doesn't wanna run up the score.
In other words, you gotta think about these games from multiple angles and then be ready to toss out what you know or think you know when/if you get new information. Orlando almost blew that cover today (and it was an easy cover). Why? Cause they're a bad team. Good teams don't beat themselves (or not as often as bad teams) that is also something a capper needs to consider when there is such a small margin of error.
Well I agree with your first paragraph but no need to defend him as he wasn't making such an in-depth assessment when he made the statement about 'shi t' teams.
And Orlando in my view didn't really blow the cover for all intents and purposes. They lead by 6 with under 2 minutes, which is an 11 point cushion with the +5. When you are getting 5 and it goes into OT, that is a bad beat plain and simple as only OT could prevent you from covering in such a close game with so little time left.
good pick with the suns btw. Took em at -5 which is what it opened at on my end.
Well I agree with your first paragraph but no need to defend him as he wasn't making such an in-depth assessment when he made the statement about 'shi t' teams.
And Orlando in my view didn't really blow the cover for all intents and purposes. They lead by 6 with under 2 minutes, which is an 11 point cushion with the +5. When you are getting 5 and it goes into OT, that is a bad beat plain and simple as only OT could prevent you from covering in such a close game with so little time left.
good pick with the suns btw. Took em at -5 which is what it opened at on my end.
I hope you took the Cavs, too. I did a little write-up on them today, fading my dubs.
0
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
Well I agree with your first paragraph but no need to defend him as he wasn't making such an in-depth assessment when he made the statement about 'shi t' teams.
And Orlando in my view didn't really blow the cover for all intents and purposes. They lead by 6 with under 2 minutes, which is an 11 point cushion with the +5. When you are getting 5 and it goes into OT, that is a bad beat plain and simple as only OT could prevent you from covering in such a close game with so little time left.
good pick with the suns btw. Took em at -5 which is what it opened at on my end.
I hope you took the Cavs, too. I did a little write-up on them today, fading my dubs.
I hope you took the Cavs, too. I did a little write-up on them today, fading my dubs.
Damn I didn't see that one until now.
I did take the Clips to beat them the other night as you suggested though. Fading them two in a row huh? I guess you see an extended downturn coming apparently...
0
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy:
I hope you took the Cavs, too. I did a little write-up on them today, fading my dubs.
Damn I didn't see that one until now.
I did take the Clips to beat them the other night as you suggested though. Fading them two in a row huh? I guess you see an extended downturn coming apparently...
I did take the Clips to beat them the other night as you suggested though. Fading them two in a row huh? I guess you see an extended downturn coming apparently...
Yeah, I guess I'm finally getting a feel for the dubs. I'm also learning when to fade my team and not just when to back them. I put 50 bucks on the ML to win 200. Didn't bother with the line as I figured if the cavs covered they would win. It was strength against strength (cavs guards against dubs guards) and the dubs were missing a guy. And the fact that they let Klay miss this game meant they were overlooking the Cavs.
0
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
Damn I didn't see that one until now.
I did take the Clips to beat them the other night as you suggested though. Fading them two in a row huh? I guess you see an extended downturn coming apparently...
Yeah, I guess I'm finally getting a feel for the dubs. I'm also learning when to fade my team and not just when to back them. I put 50 bucks on the ML to win 200. Didn't bother with the line as I figured if the cavs covered they would win. It was strength against strength (cavs guards against dubs guards) and the dubs were missing a guy. And the fact that they let Klay miss this game meant they were overlooking the Cavs.
Yeah, I guess I'm finally getting a feel for the dubs. I'm also learning when to fade my team and not just when to back them. I put 50 bucks on the ML to win 200. Didn't bother with the line as I figured if the cavs covered they would win. It was strength against strength (cavs guards against dubs guards) and the dubs were missing a guy. And the fact that they let Klay miss this game meant they were overlooking the Cavs.
ML was smart.
This play was similar to the Wolves/Knicks which started their win streak and the line was also 9 there. Points were completely irrelevant and the ML was the play if you though the dog would win.
0
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy:
Yeah, I guess I'm finally getting a feel for the dubs. I'm also learning when to fade my team and not just when to back them. I put 50 bucks on the ML to win 200. Didn't bother with the line as I figured if the cavs covered they would win. It was strength against strength (cavs guards against dubs guards) and the dubs were missing a guy. And the fact that they let Klay miss this game meant they were overlooking the Cavs.
ML was smart.
This play was similar to the Wolves/Knicks which started their win streak and the line was also 9 there. Points were completely irrelevant and the ML was the play if you though the dog would win.
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
