Hard analysis of the browns game

2 min clip of the raw story.

I'm good I'll hold my winnings and wait for ivy league yo return to the court.... 

Let's go yale. Havard. Columbia. Brown. You have any thoughts besides double up incantation chant of the fix. Cause like to have something besides I am betting the see Monday night raw rerun...

interesting except the books claim to have lost a ton of $ on that play 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/id/30525720/last-play-safety-baltimore-ravens-cleveland-browns-game-swings-millions-sportsbooks%3fplatform=amp

@Mangowoman

 Exactly. Paranoic guys cry out conspiracies whenever there is an unexpected play or result. But those conspiracies would only make sense if there was somebody benefitted who is orchestrating everything. There are two candidates: 1. The "League"; and 2. The "Books". The "League" is idiotic. No owner would accept that his team is given a loss like the  Browns had on Monday, putting at risk their playoff appearance and especially almost eliminating their chance to fight for one of the top 2 seeds. 

The "Books" is almost even more idiotic for the same reason and stated above, and also because this result did not favor them. The public is always on the over... and more so during live betting. Can you imagine how bad of a result that match was for the books in terms of live in play totals. 

"Vegas" doesnt know anything.

Credit is to the power of crowdsourcing and markets.

People make lines.  Vegas doesnt.

And Greenberg says the "line moved from 3 to 3.5 an hour before gametime".  Just a misunderstanding of how PRICES + LINE = REAL LINE.  If you leave price or line out, you are missing the point.  It was always an expensive 3 or a cheap 3.5.  They are basically the same thing - there is no line move when you go from -3 -120 to -3.5 EV.

@gutinstinctus

 they are professionals for a reason getting paid mega millions contract...what do U think?

prime example cam Newton not jumping on the fumble in the Super Bowl....he sold his soul never been the same player ever since...but hey he will never have to worry about money in his lifetime 

One last thing from the video. 

Greeny is cherry picking. It seems as if the books are geniuses because of how the Browns game went. 

But they missed the spread by 16 points in the Pats vs Rams game, by 16 pts in the Giants vs Cardinals, by 20 pts in Dallas vs Bengals, by 9 points in Denver vs Carolina, by 30 in Chicago vs Houston, and I could keep on. 

Conspiracists are cherry pickers. They find that with too many coincidences and call out a fraud. But what about the other 14 games in the card?! It is not only possible, but even reasonable or expected to have this type of games every season. Last year I was on the one where the AZ lineman was down and threw the ball 20 yards back, and then SF made a TD to cover. Shit happens. Just as I lost that one, many guys with SF won it. 

THIS

Everyone looks at the example that confirms their bias.  Like how the American Dream is still alive because one person made it out of poverty, put to sad music, and goes viral on the internet.  What about the million who don't?

Or the one stock guy who beat the market is now a genius.  But we don't talk about the hundreds who don't.

Or the guy who smokes his whole life and never gets cancer.

The list goes on and on and on.

@For_The_Books

 He might with those rediculous outfits. 

Seriously, fuck Greeny. He kept saying that the safety happened "on a play that meant nothing"

Piss off! The Browns were trying to win the damn game on that play. Albeit it being a play that I'm sure had less than 1% of scoring, it's all that they could try. Teams do not practice a lateral drill, ever.

Great posts by gutinstincts and vanzack. They should be on espn explaining to the feeble minded how sports betting works. Not Greeny, who millions of people listen to. "How does Vegas always get it right?" he says, lmao.

I'll tell you how often they get it right, in the last 30 years, the point spread matters only 16.5% of the time. In other words, when the fav wins, but the dog covers. That's like a baseball player hitting .165, wow that's fucking good.

How often has a spread pushed in the last 30 years? 2.5% 

Vegas is amazing.

Here's a quote from Nick "The Greek" Dandolos

"Remember this: The house doesn't beat the player. It just gives him the opportunity to beat himself."

Sac speaking great reason as usual.  Dummy gamblers and fantasy ho's forget that the Browns might actually try to win the game and thats their only chance. . how about blame spiking the ball with more than 3 or 4 seconds. .  It was the ravens fault they even had 2 seconds in the first place

People still follow EPSN in 2020?

See you can ask double up I simply do not care of the purist value in sports action. I would like to find a simple algorithm that suggest that a line is not right due to privileged circumstances.

And my entire deductive reasoning another closely guarded secret is Vegas wins a good deal more than statically capable. 

So to deduce a winner you must bet with Vegas.

As for the validity of expressed argument Monday night football and this commentator both reside within espn. 

Not sure that angle but something seems to be emerging...

Dealing with motive to allow this feature to be produced and aired....