All Forums | NFL Betting

Record Numbers Coming in on Green Bay

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 27765
Posts: 173
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2012
Posts: 5
Posted: #26
What site was used for the original statistics?
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2011
Posts: 12243
Posted: #27

Quote Originally Posted by tuco:



well, i happened to play hockey in college and had an MCL tear.
I was able to play within a week after diagnosis and my doctor and rehab regiment were not nearly as good as what cutler has.

in any case, money talks.. mine is on the bears.

Ive never played hockey, but Im guessing an injury for a hockey player and NFL QB are a bit different and have different results....

The QB handles the ball every snap of the game, so if you think a tear will not effect him moving, stepping, bracing, running, as leverage, then so be it. 

 

Good luck with your wager.  There is a reason GB went from +110 to 1-5 to win the divison this week

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2012
Posts: 26914
Posted: #28
Keep asking. He might divulge. 

Doubtful
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2012
Posts: 5
Posted: #29
it is true that 92% of the $ is on GB, however...
https://www.scoresandodds.com/casinogrid.html

but no idea where the particular amounts came from, or if that info is public (if it is, I want it!)
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2005
Posts: 3561
Posted: #30
I agree but it doesnt work every time, some weeks I have noticed over the years will happen like this....Vegas lets the public have all the games with 90% on a side and takes all the others that have 70% and 60% and still make out ok. its not an exact science but If I believed the NFL were completely real how could I not bet my entire life on GB this week
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2004
Posts: 22937
Posted: #31

There is no site, period, where you can obtain the dollar amounts that have been wagered. If I am wrong, please show me the site and I will gladly say I was wrong.

 

The numbers you posted are completely fictitious.

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2011
Posts: 9317
Posted: #32
Quote Originally Posted by HoustonSports:

There is no site, period, where you can obtain the dollar amounts that have been wagered. If I am wrong, please show me the site and I will gladly say I was wrong.

 

The numbers you posted are completely fictitious.



Yep, completely fictitious. In fact, like another poster mentioned, i'm pulling these numbers right out of my butt.

Denver -2½ -130             $84,150             90.73%
Baltimore +2½ +110        $8,602               9.27%

Detroit -7 +115             $94,361              92.94%
Arizona +7 -135            $7,172                7.06%

Green Bay -3 -110       $565,785            95.50%
Chicago +3 -110           $26,676              4.50%


 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2009
Posts: 16428
Posted: #33
Quote Originally Posted by LeagueCapper:



Yep, completely fictitious. In fact, like another poster mentioned, i'm pulling these numbers right out of my butt.



Why do you refuse to state your source then?
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2010
Posts: 253
Posted: #34
I think the Bears are going to win straight up, but to bet purely based on line movement is insane. It's a football game.
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2007
Posts: 628
Posted: #35
LC must be laughing his behind off

so many people butthurt about not knowing the source.  Pretend you never saw what LC posted and cap your own games...very interesting numbers, but I am still feeling good about my Packers pick.

OMG HE HAS INFO...I WANT IT...WAHHHHHH...SINCE I CAN'T FIND IT, YOU ARE LYING...WAHHHHHH
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2011
Posts: 3117
Posted: #36

Quote Originally Posted by bpbeelen:

I think the Bears are going to win straight up, but to bet purely based on line movement is insane. It's a football game.

Who said anything of this sort??  You sound like some of my friends Ill give them some good info and theyll tell me Im an idiot for betting on just that when I never ever bet on just one thing and never will.  Not to mention i am up about 3 times the amount they are.  I crack up at them fools.   Hope they reading cause they been some retards lately. 

 

 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2011
Posts: 12243
Posted: #37

Quote Originally Posted by theshadynfl:

I agree but it doesnt work every time, some weeks I have noticed over the years will happen like this....Vegas lets the public have all the games with 90% on a side and takes all the others that have 70% and 60% and still make out ok. its not an exact science but If I believed the NFL were completely real how could I not bet my entire life on GB this week

 

 

"Vegas lets the public have all the games with 90% on a side and takes all the others that have 70% and 60% and still make out ok."

 

Vegas doesnt need to profit EVERY GAME.....just everyday as a whole

There are about 60+ games that day, in which Vegas will win their money back

If you think Vegas is going to risk their profits on Cutler against GB  

 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2011
Posts: 12243
Posted: #38

Think of how much money Vegas is already making, by not moving the line and getting Bears action because of it

 

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2010
Posts: 253
Posted: #39
Quote Originally Posted by mrquija27:

Who said anything of this sort??  You sound like some of my friends Ill give them some good info and theyll tell me Im an idiot for betting on just that when I never ever bet on just one thing and never will.  Not to mention i am up about 3 times the amount they are.  I crack up at them fools.   Hope they reading cause they been some retards lately. 

 


Let's say you like the Bears to cover. Wouldn't you rather get them at 3.5 or 4? Or would you prefer the line stays at 3, because if it does, the Bears are the "sharp" pick? Sounds like LC is in the latter category, which I can't comprehend. I'll be on the Bears regardless, but that extra half point could be the difference in this game.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2011
Posts: 3117
Posted: #40
Quote Originally Posted by bpbeelen:


Let's say you like the Bears to cover. Wouldn't you rather get them at 3.5 or 4? Or would you prefer the line stays at 3, because if it does, the Bears are the "sharp" pick? Sounds like LC is in the latter category, which I can't comprehend. I'll be on the Bears regardless, but that extra half point could be the difference in this game.

Is this a trick question?  Of course I would take the points.

I think LC is implying this is a trap game for Green Bay and Vegas knows something we do not and is not scared to lose this bet.  I am not saying he is correct I do not know.  I dont necessarily believe in the Vegas trap angle.  I myself am playing the Bears for other reasons but it is always good encourement to have Vegas wanting you to win.  That can never hurt.  I dont believe in fixing but a little influence does happen from time to time. 

Think about it.  Vegas are the pros we are not.  We all wanna be but they have people involved investigaing everygame etc.   Lets just say they know something the public dont and they fully expect a bears cover with the 3 and there is no need to raise it to 3.5-4.  Regardless if his numbers are accurate we all know 90%+ bets are coming in on Green Bay why would they adjust the spread to lose bets on them if they feel they have an edge.  If they are worried at all about losing this game the spread wouldve budged to at least 3.5.   Obviously for some unknown reason Vegas dont plan on losing this bet is the entire point of this thread in my opinion.  I might be incorrect but that is my take and I agree and was already on the Bears without this information.  But this only reenforces the pick but not the main factor for it.  Like you say if your betting solely on this your just lazy and dumb.

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2011
Posts: 9317
Posted: #41
Quote Originally Posted by mrquija27:

Is this a trick question?  Of course I would take the points.

I think LC is implying this is a trap game for Green Bay and Vegas knows something we do not and is not scared to lose this bet.  I am not saying he is correct I do not know.  I dont necessarily believe in the Vegas trap angle.  I myself am playing the Bears for other reasons but it is always good encourement to have Vegas wanting you to win.  That can never hurt.  I dont believe in fixing but a little influence does happen from time to time. 

Think about it.  Vegas are the pros we are not.  We all wanna be but they have people involved investigaing everygame etc.   Lets just say they know something the public dont and they fully expect a bears cover with the 3 and there is no need to raise it to 3.5-4.  Regardless if his numbers are accurate we all know 90%+ bets are coming in on Green Bay why would they adjust the spread to lose bets on them if they feel they have an edge.  If they are worried at all about losing this game the spread wouldve budged to at least 3.5.   Obviously for some unknown reason Vegas dont plan on losing this bet is the entire point of this thread in my opinion.  I might be incorrect but that is my take and I agree and was already on the Bears without this information.  But this only reenforces the pick but not the main factor for it.  Like you say if your betting solely on this your just lazy and dumb.



Only thing you need to read is right there. Pinny is holding -3 (+105) right now. I'll say it again, if this line closes at -3, i'll be going extremely large on CHI. Still time for it to move though so we'll see.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2010
Posts: 253
Posted: #42
We see this all the time though. Publicly backed team gets juiced and still covers. I think there are a lot of situational angles and football reasons to like the Bears this week, and I pray the line goes to 3.5. If not, oh well.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2011
Posts: 2311
Posted: #43
that other site has em here

https://www.sbrforum.com/betting-odds/consensus/
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2011
Posts: 9317
Posted: #44
Quote Originally Posted by bpbeelen:

We see this all the time though. Publicly backed team gets juiced and still covers. I think there are a lot of situational angles and football reasons to like the Bears this week, and I pray the line goes to 3.5. If not, oh well.


That's just the thing, the Packers aren't being juiced. Books are giving +105 on the opening line of -3 despite 95% of all bets being on them. Look at Pinny, the sharpest book in the industry, still giving out the Packers at -3 with +odds, basically begging for more GB money.
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2012
Posts: 696
Posted: #45

s!llys breakdown sheets show the bears should be a 5 point fav in this game. i unloaded a pretty substantial amount on Da Bears

 

BOL LC 

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2011
Posts: 9317
Posted: #46
Quote Originally Posted by traderjoe13:

s!llys breakdown sheets show the bears should be a 5 point fav in this game. i unloaded a pretty substantial amount on Da Bears

 

BOL LC 



Didn't know he was still posting, where at?
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2011
Posts: 2311
Posted: #47
Quote Originally Posted by LeagueCapper:



Didn't know he was still posting, where at?

www.breakdownsheets.com
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2011
Posts: 9317
Posted: #48
Quote Originally Posted by ChOdaZ:


www.breakdownsheets.com



 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2011
Posts: 12243
Posted: #49

All this talk about a "must-win" for the Bears.....

The Packers could fall from the #3 seed to #6 if they lose this seed....SF, NY and Sea all hold tie-breakers over GB

Kind of important to them too

 
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2012
Posts: 26914
Posted: #50
Twitter as well

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 - 2025 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.