All Forums | NFL Betting

MNF 10/8/12 JETS vs TEXANS By RazorSharps ***POY***

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 73077
Posts: 363
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2012
Posts: 1101
Posted: #326
Close but not the whole cigar with the ML miss! But you had the call hella early before anyone else was on it. 
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2012
Posts: 931
Posted: #327
Quote Originally Posted by bunny651:

Chivas -- you either didn't read or bet dogs on ML/Alt line before. Both of the bets were hugh +money so how could he lost juice?


because he didnt win the ml and alt line you munter
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2006
Posts: 5855
Posted: #328
Another lesson of buying low and selling high...inflated line due to perception and injuries. Jets Oline was solid and if it wasn't for JJ Watts , Jets probably win the game 
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2011
Posts: 8116
Posted: #329
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2012
Posts: 117
Posted: #330
still positive goood look razor!
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2011
Posts: 214
Posted: #331
Great pick, sir!
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2012
Posts: 558
Posted: #332
Quote Originally Posted by chivashoolio:

i dont know how anyone can congraluate this guy? this was his michael angelos david and his moneyline and -3 never even came close, plus he probably lost like 20 units on juice

Oh shut the fuck up you scrub. He didn't lose any juice because it was a ML bet and a hybrid that he actually lost. Don't come on here acting like this wasn't a good call because the Jets had plenty of opportunities to pull this one out. He took a stance against a dominant consensus and actually came out even while making aggressive bets. Its you Captain Hindsights that really make this board unbearable at times.




Props to you RazorSharps. I don't think many people would have come out posting Jets +9.5 against their records had you not made your post. Great bet my friend, the Jets just couldn't capitalize on their opportunities. 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2010
Posts: 1946
Posted: #333
JETS...Nice pick
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2012
Posts: 56
Posted: #334
we both won jets +8.5 yea baby
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2012
Posts: 558
Posted: #335
Quote Originally Posted by chivashoolio:



because he didnt win the ml and alt line you munter

You are either unfathomably retarded or new to betting. Either way you should just shut the fuck up. 
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2008
Posts: 577
Posted: #336
[Quote: Originally Posted by RazorSharps]

And to you guys obsessed with the Juice, first of all I have said over n over that I dont count it on here for Covers.

And I don't know how long some of you have been betting but you dont lose juice betting ML Dogs, idiots

I will tell you this you were close then others would have ever thought with this game . I thought the jets were gonna pull it out at the end .  Keep up the good work in ncaaf and NFL. What do you think about the Thursday night game?

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2008
Posts: 4049
Posted: #337
@einyx, post #329 - if it wasnt for the kick-off return for the touchdown, the jets wouldnt have covered.... if you are going to play the "if" game for one side, then you gotta play the "if" game for the other side..... the kick-off return is a much more rare play than anything watts did tonight
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2007
Posts: 5532
Posted: #338
Quote Originally Posted by chivashoolio:



because he didnt win the ml and alt line you munter



HAHAHAHAHA idiot

ML bet is PLUS money

ALT line is PLUS money 

dipshit
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2011
Posts: 1158
Posted: #339
Quote Originally Posted by cam2smitty:


Oh shut the fuck up you scrub. He didn't lose any juice because it was a ML bet and a hybrid that he actually lost. Don't come on here acting like this wasn't a good call because the Jets had plenty of opportunities to pull this one out. He took a stance against a dominant consensus and actually came out even while making aggressive bets. Its you Captain Hindsights that really make this board unbearable at times.




Props to you RazorSharps. I don't think many people would have come out posting Jets +9.5 against their records had you not made your post. Great bet my friend, the Jets just couldn't capitalize on their opportunities. 

 

Agree totally my man.  It is a bummer to break even, but thats why we gamble.  Had the Jets won this would have been very sweet indeed.

 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2012
Posts: 967
Posted: #340
Great work!
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2012
Posts: 931
Posted: #341
so you guys are telling me there was no juice on that +9 line?
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2011
Posts: 3965
Posted: #342
The +9 line hit genius
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2012
Posts: 558
Posted: #343
Quote Originally Posted by chivashoolio:

so you guys are telling me there was no juice on that +9 line?

Haha he cashed +9

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2012
Posts: 0
Posted: #344
Quote Originally Posted by cam2smitty:


Haha he cashed +9


Are you really this slow?

If he bet 250 units on +9, I doubt he won 250 units. Points spreads are -110.
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2003
Posts: 868
Posted: #345

Your post made me pretty scared since i was all over Houston and the overs....Even with the injuries the JEts played with some pride coming off a big loss.  Congrats to the Jets ATS backers.

Keep up the good work Razor!

 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2012
Posts: 931
Posted: #346
Quote Originally Posted by alurista:


Are you really this slow?

If he bet 250 units on +9, I doubt he won 250 units. Points spreads are -110.


thats what im getting at, im obviously using the wrong terminology i'm not american. what im getting at is that this guy still lost he didnt break even, because he had 250 units on a -110 option and lost 250 units, i thought juice was that 10 dollars you lose every hundred you bet but my lingo must be wrong
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2011
Posts: 551
Posted: #347
Quote Originally Posted by alurista:


Are you really this slow?

If he bet 250 units on +9, I doubt he won 250 units. Points spreads are -110.

I don't know about you, but my bookie only takes juice when I lose the bet.

Some of the people posting in this thread are HIGHLY intelligent, I see.
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2012
Posts: 558
Posted: #348
Quote Originally Posted by alurista:


Are you really this slow?

If he bet 250 units on +9, I doubt he won 250 units. Points spreads are -110.

I'm assuming he risked 275 units for his wager which profited him 250 thus a wash. Even if it is the reverse I still give him props and think it's stupid to argue over such a small difference. 
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2012
Posts: 558
Posted: #349
I'm not here to argue seblantics with you
 
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2012
Posts: 931
Posted: #350
Quote Originally Posted by cam2smitty:


I'm assuming he risked 275 units for his wager which profited him 250 thus a wash. Even if it is the reverse I still give him props and think it's stupid to argue over such a small difference. 


in his post it says 250...breaking even is like kissing your sister anyway, nobody wins. this was not michael angelos david
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.