All Forums | NFL Betting

LV Super Contest Week 6

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 7902
Posts: 46
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2001
Posts: 59772
Posted: #26
Quote Originally Posted by Kidmancer:


Thanks for the answer van, no its not idiculous, every point counts men! I see your point!

Stilll tailing your SC picks! BOL this week 6! we got this!

I say this with all sincerity, if you are following my SC picks - then I am sorry about them so far.

Green Bay, Denver, New England, Cincinnati, and Arizona are a combined 21-3 ATS.  I AM NEVER GOING TO WIN AGAINST NUMBERS LIKE THAT.

I am just not that type of bettor.  And add to it - that Denver and AZ were two of my major "go against" teams this season - and it just spells doom.

Obviously hoping for a correction to the mean - and I have made some major adjustments (point 3 to why I didn't take Pitt in the contest is because I made a rule not to pick against Denver or AZ for a couple of weeks) to how I pick my games for the SC until some things start changing.

Still time to turn it around - but the runway is getting short.

GL

Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2001
Posts: 59772
Posted: #27

To continue that point....

The way I handicap is best suited for seasons where a lot of teams finish around 8-8 against the spread.

In 2013 when I finished in 9th in the SC, more than 50% of NFL teams were between 7-9 and 9-7.

I am just not going to do well when there are so many teams doing great and so many doing terribly against the spread.  If this continues - I have to adapt - but my NFL model is in large part based on parity (for ATS at least).

Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2011
Posts: 30124
Posted: #28
Quote Originally Posted by MrWhatsItToYa:

I love Balt in this spot,i cant believe I haven't seen this angle mentioned anywhere.But John Harbaugh is gonna have the chance to avenge the way this organization treated his brother,i think to him,thats is a big deal.Thats gonna give him a ton of motivation to put it to SF,plus the 9ers are a complete disaster,right now.
  you are gonna need it.
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2011
Posts: 30124
Posted: #29
BOL Rudy 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2014
Posts: 159
Posted: #30
Its okay buddy! im not tailing blind in here, last 2 years in SC you prove a lot to be one of the best bettors here in covers, its not just the year that the way you handicap is doing well (i think were the same in the strategy when betting teams that they were going even like what you said), I see whats your point changin a bit in your strategy. its just week 6! you can still flip the table and win it all buddy!

BOL

 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2014
Posts: 159
Posted: #31
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:

To continue that point....

The way I handicap is best suited for seasons where a lot of teams finish around 8-8 against the spread.

In 2013 when I finished in 9th in the SC, more than 50% of NFL teams were between 7-9 and 9-7.

I am just not going to do well when there are so many teams doing great and so many doing terribly against the spread.  If this continues - I have to adapt - but my NFL model is in large part based on parity (for ATS at least).


Its okay buddy! im not tailing blind in here, last 2 years in SC you prove a lot to be one of the best bettors here in covers, its not just the year that the way you handicap is doing well (i think were the same in the strategy when betting teams that they were going even like what you said), I see whats your point changin a bit in your strategy. its just week 6! you can still flip the table and win it all buddy!

BOL
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 16675
Posted: #32
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:

To continue that point....

The way I handicap is best suited for seasons where a lot of teams finish around 8-8 against the spread.

In 2013 when I finished in 9th in the SC, more than 50% of NFL teams were between 7-9 and 9-7.

I am just not going to do well when there are so many teams doing great and so many doing terribly against the spread.  If this continues - I have to adapt - but my NFL model is in large part based on parity (for ATS at least).


I'm struggling with this as well.  For me, it seems like this started last season.  I'm too stubborn to change my patterns and routines and it's costing me.  I've been recently trying to weight X's & O's much heavier than I have in the past.  I've always put a big emphasis situations and it's just not working out anymore.  I'm also hoping for a regression to the mean.  
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2013
Posts: 1415
Posted: #33
big blue  
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2013
Posts: 15769
Posted: #34
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:

I say this with all sincerity, if you are following my SC picks - then I am sorry about them so far.

Green Bay, Denver, New England, Cincinnati, and Arizona are a combined 21-3 ATS.  I AM NEVER GOING TO WIN AGAINST NUMBERS LIKE THAT.

I am just not that type of bettor.  And add to it - that Denver and AZ were two of my major "go against" teams this season - and it just spells doom.

Obviously hoping for a correction to the mean - and I have made some major adjustments (point 3 to why I didn't take Pitt in the contest is because I made a rule not to pick against Denver or AZ for a couple of weeks) to how I pick my games for the SC until some things start changing.

Still time to turn it around - but the runway is getting short.

GL



dude,dont be stupid..no need to apologise..i am tailing and its no big deal watsoever.anyone childish enuff to follow sumone then blame them for any losses that may occur deserves to lose all day everyday...i dont follow gridiron at all but tail a few guys on covers with 0.25 of a unit on each play and am definitely up overall......please keep posting no matter how supersticious you feel...i expect a regression to the mean naturally but if not,who cares??..its gambling after all....cheers anyhow
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2014
Posts: 1270
Posted: #35
Well, I went 3-2 once again to go 14-15-1 overall. Was inches from a 4-1 week,until Andrew Luck chucks that late TD pass with less than a minute left. Jeez, wasn't he thinking of my supercontest card?

Oh well, close to .500 now and ready for a strong 11 more weeks!
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2015
Posts: 124
Posted: #36
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:

Didn't post my picks last week because they have just been absolutely toxic...

But these are my SC plays for week 6:

6.   Bills +3.5
10.  Jaguars PK
19.  Seahawks -7
22.  Chargers +10.5
28.  Giants +4.5
 
I also am wagering on Pitt +5 (my biggest game of the day), and the Colts +10.
 
GL all
 

I think this isn't your year. Bills and Jags were tough picks especially Jags. Cin is the better team, only thing that could stop them was a let down in a spot before a bye on the road.

I can't say I think Seattle was a bad pick but there were easier picks like MIA and Jets imo. I like Chargers with the hook but I am not sure about Giants. Think Philly could win easily. 

Even if someone has a great year, they could have a down year. Though I think you contributed to it with poor picks and not taking the easier sides.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2015
Posts: 124
Posted: #37
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:

I say this with all sincerity, if you are following my SC picks - then I am sorry about them so far.

Green Bay, Denver, New England, Cincinnati, and Arizona are a combined 21-3 ATS.  I AM NEVER GOING TO WIN AGAINST NUMBERS LIKE THAT.

I am just not that type of bettor.  And add to it - that Denver and AZ were two of my major "go against" teams this season - and it just spells doom.

Obviously hoping for a correction to the mean - and I have made some major adjustments (point 3 to why I didn't take Pitt in the contest is because I made a rule not to pick against Denver or AZ for a couple of weeks) to how I pick my games for the SC until some things start changing.

Still time to turn it around - but the runway is getting short.

GL


The thing is you are supposed to back teams that are very good against weaker teams if the spread is not too much. Don't back teams that are bad for the most part.

How can you go against Ari, NE when they keep covering? How can you back teams that have a lot of issues, can't score, etc. You have to have a good idea how good a team is relative to another. 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2007
Posts: 4043
Posted: #38
Quote Originally Posted by NFLCap:


The thing is you are supposed to back teams that are very good against weaker teams if the spread is not too much. Don't back teams that are bad for the most part.

How can you go against Ari, NE when they keep covering? How can you back teams that have a lot of issues, can't score, etc. You have to have a good idea how good a team is relative to another. 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2014
Posts: 3177
Posted: #39
So much for that harbaugh avengeing his brother angle,oh well 2-3 for the week,16-14 for the year.I hope you do well with the giants tonight Swolesbee,good job..
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2001
Posts: 59772
Posted: #40
Quote Originally Posted by NFLCap:


The thing is you are supposed to back teams that are very good against weaker teams if the spread is not too much. Don't back teams that are bad for the most part.

How can you go against Ari, NE when they keep covering? How can you back teams that have a lot of issues, can't score, etc. You have to have a good idea how good a team is relative to another. 

Oh dear.

Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2015
Posts: 6055
Posted: #41
It's become more and more a quarterback's league every year. Backing elite quarterbacks has become more profitable than it ever has.  Would have been nice if I made that observation before the season started.

Usually reversion to the mean starts happening in game 6 or 7.  We saw that yesterday as the Pats, Falcons, Packers, Broncos and Cardinals all failed to cover...the only great  team that covered was the Bengals.

Injuries, fatigue and weather brings reversion to the mean.....and makes it easier for dogs and bad teams to cover.  That being said, I am having a very hard time wanting to place wagers on bad quarterbacks on the road in the NFL....re; the Redskins, etc.  Cost me yesterday.  On the other hand you have one team with 3 offensive linemen out and an elite quarterback, whose team plays it like a flag football game in the Chargers, who almost beat the Packers.  If you don't have a great qb and do that, you have to pray you win the turnover game.

Eli will be chuckin' it tonight, we'll see what happens.
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2002
Posts: 11128
Posted: #42
Quote Originally Posted by vanzack:

Oh dear.



 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2013
Posts: 2406
Posted: #43
2-3 again. Piff. 15-14-1.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2007
Posts: 262
Posted: #44
Quote Originally Posted by NFLCap:


The thing is you are supposed to back teams that are very good against weaker teams if the spread is not too much. Don't back teams that are bad for the most part.

How can you go against Ari, NE when they keep covering? How can you back teams that have a lot of issues, can't score, etc. You have to have a good idea how good a team is relative to another. 

You really are a simpleton.

Head out to Vegas and team up with CG--you two will clean up! 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2007
Posts: 262
Posted: #45
Let me see if I have this straight. Bet the stronger team over the weaker team? But only if the spread is not too high?

That makes a lot of sense.

Thanks for the tip!
 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2013
Posts: 2406
Posted: #46
Quote Originally Posted by Snake30:

Let me see if I have this straight. Bet the stronger team over the weaker team? But only if the spread is not too high?

That makes a lot of sense.

Thanks for the tip!

All Forums | NFL Betting
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2024 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

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.