Plays that look bad, but 80% of them will cover

[mdfizzle]

Adding
Kentucky +7

Will discuss why I chose these plays in particular after the weekend. Storm did a number on my house and cars.

[tto827]

I'm with you on your first three plays, then I've got Wake, Oregon St, LT, Fresno St, and ND (all on spread)

[dominate.]

I can tell you everything you want about the Army team and there's no way in hell they're coming close in that game against Air Force.

[tto827]

I can tell you everything you want about the Army team and there's no way in hell they're coming close in that game against Air Force.

I think many people would have said the same thing about the Navy/Air Force game earlier this year. The Armed Forces games just tend to be hard fought battles, where a blowout is unlikely either way, regardless of record.

[dkthrilla33]

dude, slow down. I'm not trying to bust your balls. I love discussing theory/angles but you have to use facts.

You seemed to have a theory that the worst teams have the best ats records, or the "ugly" teams do, and i've just proven that isn't true. The worst teams, are also the worst teams ats. I demonstrated to you that 23 of the 25 lowest ranked teams in college football have losing ats records, on the other hand..

If you look at the top 25-- 20 of the top 25 bcs teams have a winning ats record.

Bottom line. It would be entirely more profitable for you to bet on teams in the bcs top 25, instead of the bottom 25, and it isn't even open for debate.

this guy is a complete idiot!!! All he does is talk shit about your plays and tell u why it will lose!! Then when it wins he gives u a million reasons why it did and that u got lucky!! Complete idiot who is most likely flat broke!!! Fade!! Fade!! Fade!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 11

[dkthrilla33]

this guy is a complete idiot!!! All he does is talk shit about your plays and tell u why it will lose!! Then when it wins he gives u a million reasons why it did and that u got lucky!! Complete idiot who is most likely flat broke!!! Fade!! Fade!! Fade!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 11

dont u know the top teams are harder to cap because the oddsmakers analyze those games harder and the lines are close... The teams that are not ranked and nobody knows about is where all the locks are at!!! Dumbass!!! What are u 12???????????

[dominate.]

I think many people would have said the same thing about the Navy/Air Force game earlier this year. The Armed Forces games just tend to be hard fought battles, where a blowout is unlikely either way, regardless of record.

The cadets for Army simply do not care about the game as much as Air Force does, nor are they in any mood to. I knew the Navy/Air Force game was going to be a hard fought battle, so I took Navy +points, but this Army/Air Force game is completely different. Army knows they aren't in contention for the CIC trophy so they likely won't show up to the game. People like to think that these noble cadets will play their hearts out for these interservice games, but in reality, there are a lot of shit bags on the Army team that could care less. Football for a lot of players on the team is simply a means to a free education, spoken by many members of the team. There is also lots of strife between the players and the head coach, Ellerson, who is in his 4th year and playing with his recruiting senior class. The players want him out and will make a point to lose more games so the administration finds a new coach. With only 1 win this season, they seem to be achieving their goal. The Army team also has little to no support from the actual corps of cadets, many of which actually despise going to the games. Add that on top of the cancelled practices for the team and general anger stemming from Hurricane Sandy due to the mandatory cleanup efforts and NO cancelled classes, this will spell blowout for Army.

[indio]

I think many people would have said the same thing about the Navy/Air Force game earlier this year. The Armed Forces games just tend to be hard fought battles, where a blowout is unlikely either way, regardless of record.

2010: Air Force 42 Army 22
Navy 31 Army 17

2009: Air Force 35 Army 7
Navy 17 Army 3

2008: Navy 34 Army 0

2007: Air Force 30 Army 10
Navy 38 Army 3

2006: Air Force 43 Army 7
Navy 26 Army 14

2005: Navy 42 Army 23

2004: Navy 42 Army 13

2003: Air Force 31 Army 3
Navy 34 Army 6

2002: Air Force 49 Army 30
Navy 58 Army 12

Just curious, when you make statements like this, do you ever even bother to check out the veracity of it before you make an ass of yourself? I would have to say that Army losing 12 of their last 21 armed forces games by 19 or more points kind of debunks your theory, wouldn't you say? Now, Air Force vs. Navy games have been tight for 10 years running, but that really isn't relative where Army is concerned, is it?

[mdfizzle]

East Carolina looking to be straight up winners
as is Army, but we will gladly take the points heading into the 2nd half.
Kentucky an awful team, will likely be the first loss.

[SamDiamond]

Umm, don't think you're going to hit 80%.

[mdfizzle]

That be correct. Still, not a losing week - yet. Let us see how USC finishes. Ain't going anywhere, will be back at it next week.

[SamDiamond]

That be correct. Still, not a losing week - yet. Let us see how USC finishes. Ain't going anywhere, will be back at it next week.

You never explained your reasons for betting on these teams.

You simply said they would win at 80%.

Care to explain yet? I don't even understand your theory. Or if you have one.

[SamDiamond]

That be correct. Still, not a losing week - yet. Let us see how USC finishes. Ain't going anywhere, will be back at it next week.

Actually it is a losing week.

You finished 3-5, 37.5%. That is long ways from the 70-80% you were talking about.

[SlowNsteady]

ouch!

[bane]

You never explained your reasons for betting on these teams.

You simply said they would win at 80%.

Care to explain yet? I don't even understand your theory. Or if you have one.

+1 ... Sharing is caring.

And I wasn't trying to pick on you. I don't know how to select close dogs. If you bolded a couple favorites and explained why you liked 'em, I'd at least try to cap those games on my own and tail. Good practice for me.

[mdfizzle]

Take 2 (bad plays that cover)
Conn +3.5
Indiana +6.5
Syracuse +2.5
Virginia +1.5
Eastern Michigan +2.5
Miami Ohio +6
Illinois +3.5
Buffalo +3
UAB +3
Houston +2.5
Memphis +1.5
Colorado St +2.5
Nevada +2.5

Personal plays

Dogs that win
Northwestern
Oregon St
Texas A&M (not win, def points)
Troy
Nevada

Favorites that cover the spread
Rutgers -18
Florida St -13.5
Tenn -3.5
Clemson -31
Boise St -29.5
Oregon -27.5

[SamDiamond]

Take 2 (bad plays that cover)
Conn +3.5
Indiana +6.5
Syracuse +2.5
Virginia +1.5
Eastern Michigan +2.5
Miami Ohio +6
Illinois +3.5
Buffalo +3
UAB +3
Houston +2.5
Memphis +1.5
Colorado St +2.5
Nevada +2.5

Personal plays

Dogs that win
Northwestern
Oregon St
Texas A&M (not win, def points)
Troy
Nevada

Favorites that cover the spread
Rutgers -18
Florida St -13.5
Tenn -3.5
Clemson -31
Boise St -29.5
Oregon -27.5

Okay so your theory didn't work out.

And you now listed these 13 teams, and only one of them has a winning ATS record. ONE! Indiana.

WHY ARE YOU BETTING THESE SHIT TEAMS?

Just pick one of these teams-- say, Illnois, and tell us why you are betting on them?

Connecticut ATS 2-5-2
Indiana ATS 6-3
Syracuse ATS 3-6
Virginia ATS1-7-1
EMU ATS 3-6
Miami, Ohio ATS 2-6-1
Illinois ATS 2-7
Houston ATS 3-6
UAB ATS 3-6
Memphis ATS 4-5
Colorado State ATS 2-7
Nevada ATS 2-7

[SamDiamond]

Here's the thing mdfizz-- the teams you listed simply do not cover.

And you are telling us that you have the ability to know when they will stop losing and cover on a week-week case study.

Since these forums are 'bout sharing info, why not tell us how you can spot when these teams will win a game ATS?

For the life of me, I can't see how can could ever bet on Illinois, Virginia, Nevada, Miami Ohio,. Help us out here, tell us what you like 'bout these teams?

[possum11]

Teams that look bad but 80% of them will cover at least once this year. Martingale is the key.

[BlitzTheBooks]

** is a dangerous system to run

[bane]

Teams that look bad but 80% of them will cover at least once this year. Martingale is the key.

Jeez, I thought OP expected 80% would cover each week & was curious how he reached that conclusion. In other news, a broken clock is right twice a day.

[mdfizzle]

First losing week ever. Not worried. Plays are posted. See ya all on Saturday.

[SamDiamond]

mdfizzle,

Sorry it took me so long to figure out your "system". I love game theory and testing systems, that is why I had an interest in your thread.

I spotted it this morning.

You simply select every HOME DOG getting 7 points or less.

This week there were 14 such games-- you didn't take Troy with the 1 point, but you did take them on the ML.

Your 13 selections are all home dogs getting 7 points or less.

Interesting. I don't think it's much of a theory, but let's see how it plays out for you.

[SamDiamond]

Take 2 (bad plays that cover)
Conn +3.5
Indiana +6.5
Syracuse +2.5
Virginia +1.5
Eastern Michigan +2.5
Miami Ohio +6
Illinois +3.5
Buffalo +3
UAB +3
Houston +2.5
Memphis +1.5
Colorado St +2.5
Nevada +2.5

Well mdf. That's 7-6. A far far far cry from your guarantee of 80%.

In your last 2 weeks of posting these plays your record is 10-11. That is 47%.

[mdfizzle]

Agreed SamDiamond - not having the same success as last year. One thing I can say is last year when I was doing this, I was posting my plays right before the games started and getting the most points. Now, I post early and am getting the worst line available. It would not have helped me out this week with the blowouts, but maybe in the first week. And the "system" (not really a system more of a trend), is the home dog getting 9 or less with the public heavy on the other side (>60%). Will continue to post and see what happens.

[SamDiamond]

Agreed SamDiamond - not having the same success as last year. One thing I can say is last year when I was doing this, I was posting my plays right before the games started and getting the most points. Now, I post early and am getting the worst line available. It would not have helped me out this week with the blowouts, but maybe in the first week. And the "system" (not really a system more of a trend), is the home dog getting 9 or less with the public heavy on the other side (>60%). Will continue to post and see what happens.

Agreed line shopping is very important, especially in games like these.

One note though, you were smart in taking Virginia early in the week. By kickoff time, UVA was -1.5 to -2, and those UVA backers lost.

Good stuff.

[possum11]

** is a dangerous system to run

I was being sarcastic. Martingale is dangerous. Though I haven't lost more than 3 in a row all year. Still scary.

[mdfizzle]

UCLA +3.5
SALB +7
Rice +3.5
Troy +3.5
Ill +6
Idaho +6
Kansas +4.5
SJST +3

[BlitzTheBooks]

I was being sarcastic. Martingale is dangerous. Though I haven't lost more than 3 in a row all year. Still scary.

Lol gotcha.

And really like the SJSU, Rice and Troy plays (model plays for me). Got them earlier this week.

[SamDiamond]

UCLA +3.5
SALB +7
Rice +3.5
Troy +3.5
Ill +6
Idaho +6
Kansas +4.5
SJST +3

I enjoyed following this mdf. Because I like to see trends/systems.

But in the end, I think it's a coin flip. This was another 4-4 week, and I think you would simply be better off picking your spots and making a play on the ML. UCLA, San Jose State won outright.

[mdfizzle]

Yeah I agree Sam. Had much more success last year. Forgot to look at plays for the week.

Here is what I'd play SAT

SMU +5
Duke +6.5
Minnesota +8.5
FLINT +4
Hawaii +3



OVER/UNDER play Ltech SJST O75