I like them too, but (mostly) in a different, juicy way:CHI TT O 1/2 1P -170CHI TT O 2.5 GM -165Both are plays against Bobrovsky and far from value hunting, Bob has let in 1 or more 1P pucks 9 times in his last 10 starts and allowed 3 or 3+ pucks in 7 of last 10. Let's just hope that Bob is Bob today and that the Hawks weren't basking in that S.FL sun too long yesterday and look to close-out their road trip on an even note. Added - Lucky Day Play: CHI Win by 2 +750 HAWKS PANTS
Rollinnnn
I turn my W's to M's, yeah I flip those.
0
Quote Originally Posted by DrLump:
I like them too, but (mostly) in a different, juicy way:CHI TT O 1/2 1P -170CHI TT O 2.5 GM -165Both are plays against Bobrovsky and far from value hunting, Bob has let in 1 or more 1P pucks 9 times in his last 10 starts and allowed 3 or 3+ pucks in 7 of last 10. Let's just hope that Bob is Bob today and that the Hawks weren't basking in that S.FL sun too long yesterday and look to close-out their road trip on an even note. Added - Lucky Day Play: CHI Win by 2 +750 HAWKS PANTS
For whatever reason, during my whole time tracking this, probably about 10+ exact scenarios(I know not a huge sample size) that for this particular system, when it favors the underdog and they go into OT. They end up losing. Just a recent example of this. NJ vs SJ. The play should have been +.5 at I believe -115 or -130. 2-2 was the score at the end of regulation. +.5 is a winner. They lost in OT 3-2. So yes, +120 for full game is great, but losing money is never good. So I'd rather take the -130/-140/-150 and win rather than +120/+140/+150 and lose. So far it has been profitable. Maybe in those 10+ games I've been extremely unlucky that every time my dogs have went into OT they lost? But I'd rather profit for now until it turns otherwise.
Blackhawks went to OT, luckily they won in the shoot out. But I didn't have to stress it. That is why I take +.5
I turn my W's to M's, yeah I flip those.
0
Quote Originally Posted by ZackofallSports:
Great question.
For whatever reason, during my whole time tracking this, probably about 10+ exact scenarios(I know not a huge sample size) that for this particular system, when it favors the underdog and they go into OT. They end up losing. Just a recent example of this. NJ vs SJ. The play should have been +.5 at I believe -115 or -130. 2-2 was the score at the end of regulation. +.5 is a winner. They lost in OT 3-2. So yes, +120 for full game is great, but losing money is never good. So I'd rather take the -130/-140/-150 and win rather than +120/+140/+150 and lose. So far it has been profitable. Maybe in those 10+ games I've been extremely unlucky that every time my dogs have went into OT they lost? But I'd rather profit for now until it turns otherwise.
Blackhawks went to OT, luckily they won in the shoot out. But I didn't have to stress it. That is why I take +.5
Loose...I do this from time to time in the forums and have doing it for
many years and typically do it when I like the OP's way of
looking at things that may be similar to my method(s) + I rarely ever start
threads. Further, I've had previous forum rapport with the guy + today he was on CHI, of which I had as well, but a diff way and
I passed along my thoughts/plays. I figure a public forum is just that
"public" and pretty sure ZackofallSports see's it the same way. Thanks in advance for your concern and will will be sure to make note of this should I happen to be party to any future future threads that you may join.
0
Quote Originally Posted by LooseNotLose:
Why is Dr.Lump posting picks in Zach's thread?
Loose...I do this from time to time in the forums and have doing it for
many years and typically do it when I like the OP's way of
looking at things that may be similar to my method(s) + I rarely ever start
threads. Further, I've had previous forum rapport with the guy + today he was on CHI, of which I had as well, but a diff way and
I passed along my thoughts/plays. I figure a public forum is just that
"public" and pretty sure ZackofallSports see's it the same way. Thanks in advance for your concern and will will be sure to make note of this should I happen to be party to any future future threads that you may join.
Posting your plays in someone else's threads is weird to me - I've not ever seen anyone actually argue that it's normal until now. As normal as you are claiming it to be, just by looking at say, um, every single forum dedicated to gambling on the internet, it is a practice that certainly demonstrates the exception rather than the rule.
0
Posting your plays in someone else's threads is weird to me - I've not ever seen anyone actually argue that it's normal until now. As normal as you are claiming it to be, just by looking at say, um, every single forum dedicated to gambling on the internet, it is a practice that certainly demonstrates the exception rather than the rule.
Chicago Blackhawks +.5 is a go go. Buffalo Sabres and their Vegas Flu +.5 is a go.Vancouver Canucks +.5 is a go if you want to gamble, but I will be tracking the results of this one.
As always, wait until goalies are confirmed and nothing crazy with lineup locks. I'll post the bets when confirmed for me. Always -.5 or +.5.
When I post my initial takes, they are not confirmed bets. Until I post my bets like this
2/29/20 6:08pm NHL Hockey 69 Chicago Blackhawks (1st 60 min) +½ -117* vs Florida Panthers (1st 60 min)
Sorry for the confusion, I try to be as clear as possible.
I turn my W's to M's, yeah I flip those.
0
Quote Originally Posted by ZackofallSports:
Initial Potential Plays:
Chicago Blackhawks +.5 is a go go. Buffalo Sabres and their Vegas Flu +.5 is a go.Vancouver Canucks +.5 is a go if you want to gamble, but I will be tracking the results of this one.
As always, wait until goalies are confirmed and nothing crazy with lineup locks. I'll post the bets when confirmed for me. Always -.5 or +.5.
When I post my initial takes, they are not confirmed bets. Until I post my bets like this
2/29/20 6:08pm NHL Hockey 69 Chicago Blackhawks (1st 60 min) +½ -117* vs Florida Panthers (1st 60 min)
Sorry for the confusion, I try to be as clear as possible.
No that's fine what you did, I never looked back, I was busy crapping out pureed carrots and broccoli....I see what you did, nothing wrong with sharing early thoughts, so you hit your only play then...good job!
The lion and the tiger may be more powerful, but the wolf doesn't perform in the circus.
0
No that's fine what you did, I never looked back, I was busy crapping out pureed carrots and broccoli....I see what you did, nothing wrong with sharing early thoughts, so you hit your only play then...good job!
I didn’t know it wasn't proper to post picks on other people’s threads ? I thought we are sharing thoughts and ideas . Like on this post suspect lines . I apologize if this is rude.
Funny like a clown? Funny, like I’m here to amuse you ?
0
I didn’t know it wasn't proper to post picks on other people’s threads ? I thought we are sharing thoughts and ideas . Like on this post suspect lines . I apologize if this is rude.
I didn’t know it wasn't proper to post picks on other people’s threads ? I thought we are sharing thoughts and ideas . Like on this post suspect lines . I apologize if this is rude.
Come on over to my daily thread. You post all the picks you want there every damn day !!!
0
Quote Originally Posted by Goodfella333:
I didn’t know it wasn't proper to post picks on other people’s threads ? I thought we are sharing thoughts and ideas . Like on this post suspect lines . I apologize if this is rude.
Come on over to my daily thread. You post all the picks you want there every damn day !!!
Ya, just to be clear...I don't care who posts what in my threads. Goodfella has been doing it since the start and DrLump just started. We are all here to help each other. Not sure why LooseNotLose is so mad/has an issue with it...other than it may clutter things for him. That maybe a personal issue though, IDK.
I turn my W's to M's, yeah I flip those.
0
Ya, just to be clear...I don't care who posts what in my threads. Goodfella has been doing it since the start and DrLump just started. We are all here to help each other. Not sure why LooseNotLose is so mad/has an issue with it...other than it may clutter things for him. That maybe a personal issue though, IDK.
I quickly conclude
that Lose and I are from very different worlds. For years, I have
entered this forum mainly to see what the masses are thinking, keeping
an open mind for posters that may have similar methods that I use and/or
have used over the years, along with the entertaining factor I get from all the
characters that dwell within the Covers forum(s). I never have blindly tailed anyone (ever), but certainly keep an open mind in comparison - especially when I see action based upon a method that is similar to what I use. I only chose to
partake in Zach's thread, based upon his subject matter and his method-in-work,
as I feel that he is touching upon perception basis and posted # variance that
is similar to something that I use; hence my way of oddly agreeing with
his (yesterday) CHI +1/2 play, whereas I posted my CHI plays showing a diff. way of action.....and again posted my (later) EDM
play, where both CHI & EDM were one in the same according to my method. I have
no interest in posting picks for showing someone up, long-term tracking
and/or admiration, it just does not fit with how I approach each day.
My goal is to ONLY to satisfy one (1) person
and this satisfaction is constantly tested via my wagers...that's it.
I have no interest in wasting time going "Black Cannons" or "OCWager"
on Lose even if his tell is that he seems to be a softy-feelings type of
guy that I'm sure I could easily provoke I would chose that route. A guy like Lose doesn't exist in my circle and I'm assuming that he would
more than likely never have broached this via interface, but this is just par for the course in a gambling forum, for we all prob. have done this a time or two .
Zach,
all I can say is that I think that you are onto something and I'm sure that
you will further refine this via other ways to wager that lead to long term %'s that work for your. Also, I feel that there are seasoned / solid hockey minds within this NHL forum that have opened my eyes about ways/methods that were never on my screen, i.e. Lipps, Danger, PB....just to name a few.
Good luck and may HoltCrease allow the Hot-Mild slip in 3 B/T the pipes he guards. Nothing less and nothing more, just 3.
0
My 2 cents...
I quickly conclude
that Lose and I are from very different worlds. For years, I have
entered this forum mainly to see what the masses are thinking, keeping
an open mind for posters that may have similar methods that I use and/or
have used over the years, along with the entertaining factor I get from all the
characters that dwell within the Covers forum(s). I never have blindly tailed anyone (ever), but certainly keep an open mind in comparison - especially when I see action based upon a method that is similar to what I use. I only chose to
partake in Zach's thread, based upon his subject matter and his method-in-work,
as I feel that he is touching upon perception basis and posted # variance that
is similar to something that I use; hence my way of oddly agreeing with
his (yesterday) CHI +1/2 play, whereas I posted my CHI plays showing a diff. way of action.....and again posted my (later) EDM
play, where both CHI & EDM were one in the same according to my method. I have
no interest in posting picks for showing someone up, long-term tracking
and/or admiration, it just does not fit with how I approach each day.
My goal is to ONLY to satisfy one (1) person
and this satisfaction is constantly tested via my wagers...that's it.
I have no interest in wasting time going "Black Cannons" or "OCWager"
on Lose even if his tell is that he seems to be a softy-feelings type of
guy that I'm sure I could easily provoke I would chose that route. A guy like Lose doesn't exist in my circle and I'm assuming that he would
more than likely never have broached this via interface, but this is just par for the course in a gambling forum, for we all prob. have done this a time or two .
Zach,
all I can say is that I think that you are onto something and I'm sure that
you will further refine this via other ways to wager that lead to long term %'s that work for your. Also, I feel that there are seasoned / solid hockey minds within this NHL forum that have opened my eyes about ways/methods that were never on my screen, i.e. Lipps, Danger, PB....just to name a few.
Good luck and may HoltCrease allow the Hot-Mild slip in 3 B/T the pipes he guards. Nothing less and nothing more, just 3.
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.
Blackhawks went to OT, luckily they won in the shoot out. But I didn't have to stress it. That is why I take +.5
Hot Forum Topics
