lotj1

Oak A's+1.5 / +1/ml

Verlander and theTigers could be the sucker bet of the day.

It happened again! I checked the post above and the info was there. How it disappears, I don't know......

A's won last six games and eight of last nine to win AL West. Tigers are 8-2 in last 10 games (all vs Royals/Twins), were beneficiaries of White Sox' collapse to win AL Central. Detroit won season series 4-3; winning team scored 10+ run in four of seven games- Tigers won two of three here Sept 18-20; teams split four games in Oakland in May. Parker is 4-0, 2.65 in his last five starts; he allowed two runs in 5.2 IP in 3-1 loss to Tigers in May, which was his first MLB loss. Verlander is 4-0, 0.96 in his last four starts; he beat Oakland twice this year, allowing one run in 13 IP. He had to throw 122 pitches in only six inning against the A's Sept 19.

Reds-Giants both jogged into playoffs, weren't stressed much in September-- Reds are 10-6 in last 16 games- they were 4-3 against SF this year, splitting a four game series in late July, after winning two of three at home in April. All four games here stayed under total; two of three in Ohio went over. Cueto is 2-0, 2.25 in his last three starts; he allowed three runs (two ER) in six IP in losing his only start against Giants this season. Cain is 3-0, 1.67 in his last five starts; he was 0-2, 5.54 in two starts against the Reds this season. Giants are 11-5 in their last 16 games.

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 

your right my mistake...either way still no play not 10 point difference

Giants vs Eagles

Eagles were 3.5 and 48

at the half eagles lead 13-3

2H lines should be Giants -6.5 and 32

real 2H lines are Pk and 23.5

thus we have NO PLAY!!!

Giants vs Eagles

Eagles were 3.5 and 38

at the half eagles lead 13-3

2H lines should be Giants -6.5 and 22

real 2H lines are Pk and 23.5

thus we have NO PLAY!!!

GL to all see ya Monday night....