Posted:
#26
Line move has to do with Zeke and the books shading the line to protect themselves. Why would anyone think otherwise?
0
GIANTS @ DALLAS: The line is moving three MONTHS before the game which means Sharp Money
GL 
Posted:
#30
I'm sorry to report the game is effectively over. A cover would be a miracle honestly.
I think I'd have to go back about 9 years to find a half the Giants were so woeful offensively.
Terrible weekend and I'll simply have to take my lumps and move forward.
Disgusting result through and through and they may get shut out.
Not playing the half. Just going to eat this one. Beckham with the late scratch made a bad offense worse. FAR too much pressure on a defense that can't even get a breather.
42-44 and we'll right this wrong with low volume. 
0
Posted:
#32
Eusebio,
Better yet, now that you are saying it. I.am going to take week off from everything.
These picks are NOT hitting. Hovering around .500 is a waste.
If the Giants miraculously cover I'll post next week. If not I am self-deporting
from Covers for one week and then tunneling my way back through flashlight in hand, back to the site (with a family of 7 just piss off everyone who supports Trump's incredibly bigoted immigration policies).
from Covers for one week and then tunneling my way back through flashlight in hand, back to the site (with a family of 7 just piss off everyone who supports Trump's incredibly bigoted immigration policies).Mexico WILL PAY for the wall. Ok....
0
Posted:
#35
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
Papa how do we fade this SOB going forward. I know she's getting surgery on the sinuses. Who is next for Nunes?
Thanks Wmi.
Probably either Rocky Pennington, Holm, or Shevchenko again. Pennington would be very interesting. She made me a nice amount against Tate. She would probably be a big, intriguing, dog. Wouldn't love Holm against Nunes.
0
Posted:
#36
The genesis of this losing bet (there's still a quarter to play so still hope for you) was a massive overreaction to a small line move months before the game was played, and the belief that you can you can read 'sharp and square' money and therefore you have an edge.
You know why people talk about sharp and square money? (always in the belief that they're part of the 'sharp' crowd, obviously) - its because they need a kind of lucky charm, a linus blanket, a lucky gonk to validate their picks. I mean, if you know who the sharps are betting, then you're halfway there right? I mean who would back a square play, squares are losers...
You made a great case for big blue in points 2 thru 6, well argued and supported, i;d stick to that kind of research for your picks, and leave the abstract 'square' and 'sharp' BS for the people who can't make their minds up about a pick and need morale boost from the ether.
While you dissected the NYG schedule with aplomb you then overreached with your conclusion which led you to one of the worst lines of reason in sports betting 'They gotta have it'...
Your original post reads like a a conclusion was reached and then the evidence dug up later, I think you saw the line move, leapt on it then went about making a case later.
Stay away for the 'sharp' and 'square' money nonsense that the masses use as a crutch, use the motivation angle more lightly (this was week 1 for god's sake) and trust yourself and your own research and insight instead. I really don't think you need crutches.
Stick to solid capping and rid yourself of the delusion that you can find winners by interpreting what other people tell you about what some other groups of people (groups of people that don't actually exist, but are a construct of the gambling industry) may have bet on.
'Sharp' and 'Square' it's all a load of BS, that's all it is.
0
Posted:
#39
Trafalger - don't read a title and think that was the impetus for a bet. It was ONE point in research. You NEED a title and I can't elucidate the finer points there. There was no MASSIVE overreaction as you call it. It is simply something I saw and consider and used as a title. ONE POINT of many.
Further there is a thing called line reading. Whether you think it's BS 99% of the capping community uses it, sharps and squares alike. and it has been used forever just like revenge games. It's real and can be used to assist in a bet.
You can disregard it. I choose not to.
0
Posted:
#40
Quote Originally Posted by PapaShango:
Probably either Rocky Pennington, Holm, or Shevchenko again. Pennington would be very interesting. She made me a nice amount against Tate. She would probably be a big, intriguing, dog. Wouldn't love Holm against Nunes.
Holm??? Give me a break. She gets a title shot? F That. She is at the bottom of the list for a title shot!
0
Posted:
#44
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
Holm??? Give me a break. She gets a title shot? F That. She is at the bottom of the list for a title shot!
Bottom of the list? She lost a fight in the 5th to Tate where she was up 4-0, lost a tough 5 round decision to Shevchenko, then lost that BS 145 lb championship fight to de Randamie, then had a vicious KO to Correia. She's definitely in the mix. Nunes, Shevchenko, Holm, Pennington are the top 4 at 135 in whichever order you deem fit. Shevchenko beat Holm, but Holm beat Pennington, so it's a weird mix at the top. They may give it to Holm because Holm and Nunes have never fought and neither have Pennington and Shevchenko. Should be like a mini 4 woman tournament for the title.
0
Posted:
#47
Papa you think a fighter 1-3 in the last 4 (the correia fight was a JOKE as Holm went off in the high -300's low -400) deserves a title shot, even losing to De Randamie a fight I tailed YOU ON BECAUSE YOU POSTED de Randamie to Win!!!. You think after all that Holm is suitable competition????
She is NOTHING after Rousey! Nunes will win easily and will win at high odds so we will make NO MONEY. So to answer your question aYES she is at the bottom of the list (not the LITERAL BOTTOM as I was being facetious) but the bottom of the top. It's not a money maker for me or you at all and I don't want to see it. I am PIST OFF she would even be suggested! That's all. Not your fault but I want to fade Nunes with dutiable competition!
On a more interesting note mbialowas actually complimented my write up! Lol.
0
Posted:
#49
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
Trafalger - don't read a title and think that was the impetus for a bet. It was ONE point in research. You NEED a title and I can't elucidate the finer points there. There was no MASSIVE overreaction as you call it. It is simply something I saw and consider and used as a title. ONE POINT of many.
Trafalger - don't read a title and think that was the impetus for a bet. It was ONE point in research. You NEED a title and I can't elucidate the finer points there. There was no MASSIVE overreaction as you call it. It is simply something I saw and consider and used as a title. ONE POINT of many.
Further there is a thing called line reading. Whether you think it's BS 99% of the capping community uses it, sharps and squares alike. and it has been used forever just like revenge games. It's real and can be used to assist in a bet.
You can disregard it. I choose not to.
It clearly was the impetus as you made the bet in June after the line adjustment, i think you thought you 'read' the line and wanted to get in with 'sharp' money. 'Line reading' is what you led you down this path in the first place.
99% of sharps and squares use line reading? where's the evidence for that? Even if we accept that figure what% of that 99% ends up winning $$$ long term, or even breaking even?
With so much real info out there, why bother trying to read the tea leaves, if a line moves one way significantly there's usually a solid reason for it, like Dallas hammered to -6 after the OBJ news broke.
As for all those 'Dallas' squares, they're laughing right now after a cruise control blowout win against all those 'sharp' NYG bettors.
You do realize that all this 'sharp' and 'square' BS is the gambling industry muddying the waters, right?
Ignore all that sharp/square noise and cap the games yourself, don't let this abstract guesswork lead you away from the solid capping and well thought out approach you clearly already possess.
0
Posted:
#50
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
The de randemaie win was not BS! I tailed you and we both won! Holm did little in that fight and de randemaie showed her up to perfection!
The de randemaie win was not BS! I tailed you and we both won! Holm did little in that fight and de randemaie showed her up to perfection!
Yeah, I get that. It was a pretty damn close fight though. And that was also at 145, so KINDA need to disregard it when talking about 135. But, I get 1-3 probably shouldn't get a shot and I doubt she will. Pennington or Shevchenko probably get the next crack. Pennington is on the MMA Hour today, so I'm sure she'll make a push on there for it. 
0
Hot Forum Topics
