| Chicago Fanatics Message Board https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/ |
|
| NFC/AFC Championship lines https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=129&t=17893 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Beardown [ Sun Jan 13, 2008 9:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | NFC/AFC Championship lines |
Patriots -15 Over/Under 50 Packers -7 Over/Under 42.5 I'm shocked Vegas put a line out for the Patriots/Chargers without knowing the status of LT and Rivers. But they're hoping to get money on both sides by putting it out despite the unknown. They don't want to lose any action. |
|
| Author: | good dolphin [ Mon Jan 14, 2008 9:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
That Pat's line seems fat and is dropping. Get on it now if you can play early. The Chargers have covered something like 9 in a row. That cannot be a fluke. Same for the Giants winning 8 in a row on the road. |
|
| Author: | Irish Boy [ Mon Jan 14, 2008 9:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
good dolphin wrote: That Pat's line seems fat and is dropping. Get on it now if you can play early. The Chargers have covered something like 9 in a row. That cannot be a fluke.
Same for the Giants winning 8 in a row on the road. I dunno. The only thing true of trends is that they end. To wit: the Browns went over in 9 of their first ten games, and the other one was a push. They were under in the next six. The only thing true of trends is that they end. |
|
| Author: | FavreFan [ Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
good dolphin wrote: That Pat's line seems fat and is dropping. Get on it now if you can play early. The Chargers have covered something like 9 in a row. That cannot be a fluke.
Same for the Giants winning 8 in a row on the road. Actually look at those 9 in a row the Giants won and the streak indeed seems very fluky. |
|
| Author: | good dolphin [ Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
...except for the fact that they kept on doing it. That was spoken like a true pack fan faver. |
|
| Author: | good dolphin [ Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Irish Boy wrote: [
I dunno. The only thing true of trends is that they end. To wit: the Browns went over in 9 of their first ten games, and the other one was a push. They were under in the next six. The only thing true of trends is that they end. Yeah, but what is that old saying about the only thing true of trends... In all seriousness, I'd jump on that charger one because it is dropping and I think it will drop further as favorable injury reports come out during the week. |
|
| Author: | FavreFan [ Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
good dolphin wrote: ...except for the fact that they kept on doing it.
That was spoken like a true pack fan faver. We'll see, but I think the Packers -7 and OVER 42.5 is a pretty solid bet. Seattle supposedly had a great defense with four pro bowlers and a great pass rush too. I say Pack win 38-17. I agree Chargers +15 seems like a very good bet, try and get it before it falls below 14. |
|
| Author: | Beardown [ Mon Jan 14, 2008 5:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
This site updates the lines in a couple Vegas books. http://www.lasvegas.com/gaming/ You're right Dolphin. Gamblers hit the Chargers hard really quick. They pounded the under in that game even harder. Patriots fell a point. The total in that game dropped 1.5 at some books. It dropped 2.5 at Caesars. That's a huge one day drop. |
|
| Author: | Beardown [ Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
My dad taught me when I was 11 years old that when a line drops that much in such a short amount of time you always go with the book and against the players. So that means take the over in the Pats/Chargers game. I got a buddy going to Vegas. That's gonna be my play. |
|
| Author: | good dolphin [ Tue Jan 15, 2008 8:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Beardown, Coast is really the person to consult about the direction of plays based on line changes. He is over at Ryan's site sportstalkunderground.com. I have a feeling your father was talking about overall action, not action based on a starting line early in the week. There may be a single sharp (to use a term I have read in Coast's posts) at some point this week he throws down big enough on one side that it changes the line. There are also people who tail the plays of these individuals which would further influence the line. I would say your father is using contrarian logic, which is fine. However, don't use one day as your public barometer. Wait until Sunday morning and check the percentage of bets played on each side. |
|
| Author: | good dolphin [ Tue Jan 15, 2008 8:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Beardown wrote: This site updates the lines in a couple Vegas books.
http://www.lasvegas.com/gaming/ You're right Dolphin. Gamblers hit the Chargers hard really quick. They pounded the under in that game even harder. Patriots fell a point. The total in that game dropped 1.5 at some books. It dropped 2.5 at Caesars. That's a huge one day drop. 14.5 still seems a bit much to me. The Pats have not touched the number to cover in their last two games, who were both playoff opponents (Giants and Jax). I would probably still stay on the Chargers unless it drops another .5 or 1 point. Again, I'd ask Coast about this, but at 14.5, it might be a situation where you can middle the book later in the week. |
|
| Author: | Beardown [ Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I remember having this argument with Coast. He did say my old man was wrong. Sports was and is the only thing my father and I ever really talk about. I'm sticking with him even if he's wrong. I know I'm ahead taking his advice. He told me it's probably 70% at least. I never researched it. Maybe I've been lucky. It's only when it's big and quick movement. Doesn't matter if it's early or late. If the line moves 2.5 in a day go against the players. Football lines rarely move 2.5 in a day. So you don't have many opportunites to test the theory. |
|
| Author: | Irish Boy [ Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:47 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Usually a move that big in the middle or end of the week means injury, in the NFL at least. I remember the St. Louis/Cincinatti game and I believe Washington/Arizona game this year where the line adjusted rapidly around Wednesday or Thursday. That may have been the public driving the bet, but more likely it was just the books deciding that they had no fear of a middle because the injured team had no chance of covering (At least one of those games middled though, so the books were wrong, and Beardown's strategy would have worked.) Here's my theory on the SD/NE game. The books tried to take advantage of the uncertainty regarding San Diego. It backfired, and they quickly got out of an untenable position, risking the middle across a somewhat common line. But what's significant is that not only is the public betting one way, so are the books, since they did lower the line significantly. The books bet WITH the public that SD could cover the 15. The real tip-off is when the public is betting one way and the book doesn't budge for any good reason, or actually moves the other direction. The Cincinatti/KC game early in the year is a prime example. The game was in KC, before we knew how bad the Bengals were, and the Chiefs were getting 3 points. 91% of the money online was coming in on Cincinatti. And yet not only did the books refused to budge, they rasied the vig on KC and lowered the vig on Cincinatti (Bodog, for example, had been running the game at -105 KC, -115 CIN until around Thursday or Friday, when they switched and put KC at -115 and CIN at -105. When the book bets against the public on a line or price change, always bet the book. As for this weekend's game, the true advantage went to anyone who locked in SD +15. We've probably reached equilibrium at this point, and the books are completely happy to have the money coming in where it is and on who it is. |
|
| Author: | Beardown [ Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
You make a good point. Of course if a line moves because of injury then you discount the significance of the line change as a tip on who to bet. The LT and Rivers injuries were a factor. Had this been a regular season game they wouldn't have put out a line so quick. They would have waited until their status was more clear. Too much action is at stake to hold back a line. Football gamblers only have 3 games left. They wanted to grab those people leaving Vegas on Sunday and Monday. You're right. Vegas took a shot at throwing a number out and hoped it would still draw even money. It didn't. Some big plays were made. Especially on the under. For these reasons maybe I should disregard my theory. Aww the hell with it. I'll still play the damn over. |
|
| Author: | schmitty1121 [ Sun Jan 20, 2008 1:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Whats everyone taking today? Patriots -14 Under 47 Packers -7.5 Under 41 |
|
| Author: | Beardown [ Sun Jan 20, 2008 1:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I just did one play. Patriots/Chargers Over. I'll stick to my initial thought. I've got it at 47.5. I've got the Chargers getting a garbage touchdown late to get it by one point. |
|
| Author: | FavreFan [ Sun Jan 20, 2008 1:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
schmitty1121 wrote: Whats everyone taking today?
Patriots -14 Under 47 Packers -7.5 Under 41 Packers -7.5 OVER 41 Chargers +14 OVER 47 |
|
| Author: | Chus [ Sun Jan 20, 2008 1:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
San Diego +14 San Diego/New England under 48 NY Giants +7.5 NY Giants/Green Bay under 41.5 |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|