Hey Porky would you mind explaining how your system works? I would be interested in the theory behind it.
Basically the theory in a nutshell is I am looking for a middle of 10+ points between the original line and the 2H line. I have found that the majority of the time the games don't fall in those 10+ point middles...so considering that theory I bet the side in the game that is most likely. So for example let me give you an exageration to explain it.
Lets take the Eagles tonight vs the Giants, the game was 3.5 and 48. For just talk sake, let's say the Giants were up 28-0 at the half. That would mean the eagles would have to be -31.5 in the 2H to cover the original spread. Now let's say they made the eagles -3. Someone who had the Giants +3.5 for the game could now turn around and bet Eagles -3 2H and if the game ends with either the Giants winning by 24 points or less or the eagles won by 3 points or less they would win both bets risking very little money. Over the years I have found that games that have these nice big middles rarely land in these middles, so if you know that, who are you more likely to bet in the 2H??? Giants +3 because the theory is if the eagles are going to cover the -3 they are also going to cover the original line also....Now that does happen sometimes in my bets where I bet one side and the other side not only covers the 2H but the original line...Example look at Bills today. They were down alot to the Bengals at the half so I took Bengals PK 2H as the theory was it wouldn't fall in that middle, the theory was correct as it didn't fall in the middle the Bills covered the 2H as well as the game line, I was just on the wrong side
0
Quote Originally Posted by lotj1:
Hey Porky would you mind explaining how your system works? I would be interested in the theory behind it.
Basically the theory in a nutshell is I am looking for a middle of 10+ points between the original line and the 2H line. I have found that the majority of the time the games don't fall in those 10+ point middles...so considering that theory I bet the side in the game that is most likely. So for example let me give you an exageration to explain it.
Lets take the Eagles tonight vs the Giants, the game was 3.5 and 48. For just talk sake, let's say the Giants were up 28-0 at the half. That would mean the eagles would have to be -31.5 in the 2H to cover the original spread. Now let's say they made the eagles -3. Someone who had the Giants +3.5 for the game could now turn around and bet Eagles -3 2H and if the game ends with either the Giants winning by 24 points or less or the eagles won by 3 points or less they would win both bets risking very little money. Over the years I have found that games that have these nice big middles rarely land in these middles, so if you know that, who are you more likely to bet in the 2H??? Giants +3 because the theory is if the eagles are going to cover the -3 they are also going to cover the original line also....Now that does happen sometimes in my bets where I bet one side and the other side not only covers the 2H but the original line...Example look at Bills today. They were down alot to the Bengals at the half so I took Bengals PK 2H as the theory was it wouldn't fall in that middle, the theory was correct as it didn't fall in the middle the Bills covered the 2H as well as the game line, I was just on the wrong side
Today there were 7 games that had 10+ point middles between the original line and the 2H lines...of those 7 games 5 of them didn't land in those 10+ point middles....
0
Today there were 7 games that had 10+ point middles between the original line and the 2H lines...of those 7 games 5 of them didn't land in those 10+ point middles....
Basically the theory in a nutshell is I am looking for a middle of 10+ points between the original line and the 2H line. I have found that the majority of the time the games don't fall in those 10+ point middles...so considering that theory I bet the side in the game that is most likely. So for example let me give you an exageration to explain it.
Lets take the Eagles tonight vs the Giants, the game was 3.5 and 48. For just talk sake, let's say the Giants were up 28-0 at the half. That would mean the eagles would have to be -31.5 in the 2H to cover the original spread. Now let's say they made the eagles -3. Someone who had the Giants +3.5 for the game could now turn around and bet Eagles -3 2H and if the game ends with either the Giants winning by 24 points or less or the eagles won by 3 points or less they would win both bets risking very little money. Over the years I have found that games that have these nice big middles rarely land in these middles, so if you know that, who are you more likely to bet in the 2H??? Giants +3 because the theory is if the eagles are going to cover the -3 they are also going to cover the original line also....Now that does happen sometimes in my bets where I bet one side and the other side not only covers the 2H but the original line...Example look at Bills today. They were down alot to the Bengals at the half so I took Bengals PK 2H as the theory was it wouldn't fall in that middle, the theory was correct as it didn't fall in the middle the Bills covered the 2H as well as the game line, I was just on the wrong side
Thanks Porky! I'll take your theory into consideration on my 2h plays. Cheers!
0
Quote Originally Posted by NJPorky:
Basically the theory in a nutshell is I am looking for a middle of 10+ points between the original line and the 2H line. I have found that the majority of the time the games don't fall in those 10+ point middles...so considering that theory I bet the side in the game that is most likely. So for example let me give you an exageration to explain it.
Lets take the Eagles tonight vs the Giants, the game was 3.5 and 48. For just talk sake, let's say the Giants were up 28-0 at the half. That would mean the eagles would have to be -31.5 in the 2H to cover the original spread. Now let's say they made the eagles -3. Someone who had the Giants +3.5 for the game could now turn around and bet Eagles -3 2H and if the game ends with either the Giants winning by 24 points or less or the eagles won by 3 points or less they would win both bets risking very little money. Over the years I have found that games that have these nice big middles rarely land in these middles, so if you know that, who are you more likely to bet in the 2H??? Giants +3 because the theory is if the eagles are going to cover the -3 they are also going to cover the original line also....Now that does happen sometimes in my bets where I bet one side and the other side not only covers the 2H but the original line...Example look at Bills today. They were down alot to the Bengals at the half so I took Bengals PK 2H as the theory was it wouldn't fall in that middle, the theory was correct as it didn't fall in the middle the Bills covered the 2H as well as the game line, I was just on the wrong side
Thanks Porky! I'll take your theory into consideration on my 2h plays. Cheers!
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
