Mizzou-Oklahoma halftime math

No coincidences · 10-23-10, 08:52 PM

In fact, typically, if you can get the original fave SU just to win the game (in other words, if Oklahoma covers in the 2H, they win outright), it's usually a huge trap.

las8 · 10-23-10, 08:55 PM

interesting, should be a good second half. does that mean you are playing mizzou?

Sunde91 · 10-23-10, 08:57 PM

Here we go again with your simple-minded bullshit

There's no adjusting spreads at half from the original, cause the original is absolute, right??

So it should be -6 to match with game spread???

No coincidences · 10-23-10, 08:58 PM

Originally posted by Sunde91

Here we go again with your simple-minded bullshit

There's no adjusting spreads at half from the original, cause the original is absolute, right??

So it should be -6 to match with game spread???

Don't say I didn't warn you.

Mizzou's +2.5 2H at Pinny.

The irony of your "simple-minded bullshit" jab is rich.

Sunde91 · 10-23-10, 09:09 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Don't say I didn't warn you.

Mizzou's +2.5 2H at Pinny.

The irony of your "simple-minded bullshit" jab is rich.

There's nothing ironic about you being a simpleton who spams the board with these threads day after day with the same bizarre notion that the 2h spread is instrinsically related to the game spread, that the former is to be ideally based off the latter, and that one can detect "the right play" according to however far the former deviates from the latter.

And the whole time you think you're being sophisticated offering some profound insight telling posters what to do or not do based off your inane theory...joke.

No coincidences · 10-23-10, 09:16 PM

Originally posted by Sunde91

There's nothing ironic about you being a simpleton who spams the board with these threads day after day with the same bizarre notion that the 2h spread is instrinsically related to the game spread, that the former is to be ideally based off the latter, and that one can detect "the right play" according to however far the former deviates from the latter.

And the whole time you think you're being sophisticated offering some profound insight..what a joke.

We'll see.

I'm sorry you don't get it. I really am. And I'm sorry you obviously fell into the Oklahoma trap tonight.

Sunde91 · 10-23-10, 09:25 PM

You have nothing to say so you're just going to keep give vague allusions to your esoteric theory, of which I am helplessly ignorant of

We'll see what? If Mizzou covers 2h it will somehow validate your garbage??

And didn't know I took Sooners and fell into a trap while doing so

No coincidences · 10-23-10, 09:28 PM

Originally posted by Sunde91

You have nothing to say so you're just going to keep give vague allusions to your esoteric theory, of which I am helplessly ignorant of

We'll see what? If Mizzou covers 2h it will somehow validate your garbage??

Again, I'm sorry you don't get it and I'm sorry you obviously took the bait with Oklahoma. You're frustrated and trying to take it out on me. Go ahead if it makes you feel better.

Nope: if Mizzou covers 2H and game -- allowing the books to clean up on probably the No. 1 public bet of the day (I'm assuming) -- it will all be just a lucky guess on my part!

Sunde91 · 10-23-10, 09:54 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Again, I'm sorry you don't get it and I'm sorry you obviously took the bait with Oklahoma. You're frustrated and trying to take it out on me. Go ahead if it makes you feel better.

Nope: if Mizzou covers 2H and game -- allowing the books to clean up on probably the No. 1 public bet of the day (I'm assuming) -- it will all be just a lucky guess on my part!

Again, didn't know I took Sooners

Anyway..not a very good "trap" either. A "trap" has a "too good to be true" line..this doesn't.

1)Sooners nowhere near #1 public bet of day. I know you play at Sportsbook.com and think their numbers refelect the whole market, but no.

2)Sooners might be the least impressive, least deserving #1 BCS team ever, and are on the road laying 3 against a team that beat-up on shit teams in a most obvious "upset spot" at night with gameday in town. And the perception isn't that OU is some insanely good team.

3)It's the overrated bowl and the spread is exactly where it should be, and even closed with late money to -4 -115 in some spots.

And you sarcastically saying it will be a "lucky guess" typifies how simple you are thinking books magically predict games based on your ingenious 2h deviation theory, and that if they somehow are, they will be necessarily right this time, because they like predict the future and foresee missed FGs, fumbles, etc.

No coincidences · 10-23-10, 09:58 PM

Originally posted by Sunde91

Again, didn't know I took Sooners

Anyway..not a very good "trap" either. A "trap" has a "too good to be true" line..this doesn't.

1)Sooners nowhere near #1 public bet of day. I know you play at sportsbook.com and think their numbers refelect the whole market, but no.

2)Sooners might be the least impressive, least deserving #1 BCS team ever, and are on the road laying 3 against a team that beat-up on shit teams. The perception isn't that OU is some insanely good team.

3)It's the overrated bowl and the spread is exactly where it should be, and even closed with late money to -4 -115 in some spots.

And you sarcastically saying it will be a "lucky guess" typifies how simple you are thinking books magically predict games based on your ingenious 2h deviation theory, and that if they somehow are, they will be necessarily right this time, because they like predict the future and foresee missed FGs, fumbles, etc.

What was the top public bet today?

FTR, I don't play at sportsbook.com, but it's an excellent reference point. And if you don't think Oklahoma was both a trap and a huge public play, I really don't know what to say.

No coincidences · 10-23-10, 10:15 PM

I have to ask you this, Sunde: do you honestly think oddsmakers aren't strategically setting a line where they can get Sooner backers to chase at halftime? Do you believe it's just a coincidence that squares around the country are saying, "oh man, I can get basically the OU money line with this 2H line! Sign me up!!!" Are there free lunches in gambling?

suicidekings · 10-23-10, 10:30 PM

The original line definitely had some opinion in it, dangling -3.5 on the #1 ranked BCS team like it was a bargain, and hence the big imbalance in public betting. No one is predicting the finer points like fumbles, etc, but the books knew full well that Mizzou had the ability (and a solid chance) to beat Oklahoma tonight. The 2H line was a product of those same linesmakers observing the 1H, and knowing that OU wasn't going to run away with it, and it was likely that they would have their hands full trying to contain the Tigers. Their original opinion was reinforced by watching that first half of play. So they do you another favour of offering the OU-3 line trying to suck in some more OU money.

If you think that scenario is unlikely or unreasonable, you're not giving the books enough credit for being good at what they do, and even if OU wins tonight the actual hit the books will take is one of many over the course of the season that will be absorbed by other action where they do win. Their bottom line runs week to week, month to month... Not game by game, at least during the regular season. So they lean a little here and there when they have an opinion. It's how the business works.

IrishTim · 10-23-10, 10:33 PM

Mizz +3 was the right side, upset I didn't bet it.

No coincidences · 10-23-10, 10:41 PM

Originally posted by suicidekings

If you think that scenario is unlikely or unreasonable, you're not giving the books enough credit for being good at what they do, and even if OU wins tonight the actual hit the books will take is one of many over the course of the season that will be absorbed by other action where they do win. Their bottom line runs week to week, month to month... Not game by game, at least during the regular season. So they lean a little here and there when they have an opinion. It's how the business works.

Nah, SK -- it's all just random guesswork. No rhyme or reason to these lines being where they're at whatsoever.

And I'm sure OU game and OU 2H weren't huge public plays either.

ronjon619 · 10-23-10, 10:46 PM

Sharp, Trap, Value are all cute terms to throw around and make guys look like they know what they are doing.

lyon804 · 10-23-10, 11:25 PM

Originally posted by suicidekings

The original line definitely had some opinion in it, dangling -3.5 on the #1 ranked BCS team like it was a bargain, and hence the big imbalance in public betting. No one is predicting the finer points like fumbles, etc, but the books knew full well that Mizzou had the ability (and a solid chance) to beat Oklahoma tonight. The 2H line was a product of those same linesmakers observing the 1H, and knowing that OU wasn't going to run away with it, and it was likely that they would have their hands full trying to contain the Tigers. Their original opinion was reinforced by watching that first half of play. So they do you another favour of offering the OU-3 line trying to suck in some more OU money.

If you think that scenario is unlikely or unreasonable, you're not giving the books enough credit for being good at what they do, and even if OU wins tonight the actual hit the books will take is one of many over the course of the season that will be absorbed by other action where they do win. Their bottom line runs week to week, month to month... Not game by game, at least during the regular season. So they lean a little here and there when they have an opinion. It's how the business works.

Very sharp post and I say your spot on.

You did a nice job of articulating it clearly as well.