[easyliving]

almost half the games spreads determined in the last minute of the game and whether a team chooses to foul or whether certain players can make free throws. Within the last week lost multiple bets due to players missing multiple free throws within the last minute. Same story tonight Aldridge misses a free throw with 12 seconds left when the game is tied. had the under and blazers+1.5. Of course he misses and the game goes to OT. As a person who bets mainly unders I am always on the other side of these free throws and their is no way to handicap in what situations a team will foul or not foul or which player will make or miss free throws. Just a few days ago I lost a bet because Evan Turner went 0/4 the last minute. All I need is 1 free throw to cash and he misses all 4. Its all a coin flip and the littlest things determine whether a team covers a spread or not as well as totals. Done betting the NBA until playoffs.

[wguan2]

almost half the games spreads determined in the last minute of the game and whether a team chooses to foul or whether certain players can make free throws. Within the last week lost multiple bets due to players missing multiple free throws within the last minute. Same story tonight Aldridge misses a free throw with 12 seconds left when the game is tied. had the under and blazers+1.5. Of course he misses and the game goes to OT. As a person who bets mainly unders I am always on the other side of these free throws and their is no way to handicap in what situations a team will foul or not foul or which player will make or miss free throws. Just a few days ago I lost a bet because Evan Turner went 0/4 the last minute. All I need is 1 free throw to cash and he misses all 4. Its all a coin flip and the littlest things determine whether a team covers a spread or not as well as totals. Done betting the NBA until playoffs.

Don't let these games get to you. They even out in the long run. Variance will hit and likely your lucky won't run as bad.

I will say this though, the missed foul shots, fouling under a minute, things like that... most of that should be already included in your modeling. For instance, if a team averages 94 points, shoots 80% from the ft, etc, those things that happen at the end of the game are accounted for. They may not seem like it but they are. Because you account for past games, those past games include the 6 points of free throws at the end of the game, the number of fouls a team commits, etc.

With that said, you are right that there is no way to cap over-time into your model so if you mainly play unders (which is the "sharp" way to bet imo because books know the public like playing overs because it's more fun to cheer for a team to score points), OTs will kill you once in a while. All games involve 4 quarters. Points in the first quarter are just as important as the fourth. With playing unders, we should especially know that because one overscoring quarter can essentially kill the under bet alone. It's not always the 4th, it could easily be the first, second, or third.

Keep your head up

[matt1216]

almost half the games spreads determined in the last minute of the game and whether a team chooses to foul or whether certain players can make free throws. Within the last week lost multiple bets due to players missing multiple free throws within the last minute. Same story tonight Aldridge misses a free throw with 12 seconds left when the game is tied. had the under and blazers+1.5. Of course he misses and the game goes to OT. As a person who bets mainly unders I am always on the other side of these free throws and their is no way to handicap in what situations a team will foul or not foul or which player will make or miss free throws. Just a few days ago I lost a bet because Evan Turner went 0/4 the last minute. All I need is 1 free throw to cash and he misses all 4. Its all a coin flip and the littlest things determine whether a team covers a spread or not as well as totals. Done betting the NBA until playoffs.

i know what u mean..... i started waiting 5 mins befor game time to bet. Ive noticed its worked out bigtime.

Teasers seem to work for me


Bol

[MrXYZ]

Not being a smartass, just interested in why you'd keep taking under bets when it's been easy money so far to roll with the trend and hit overs, with Blazers, Nuggets, Cavs & Rockets, even Celtics. But at some point the tide will turn & the public will start giving it all back. "Sharp" under plays should start hitting in the playoffs for you, good luck.

[brainfreeze0]

I think most people play unders as opposed to overs. Most totals average somewhere around 200 pts in the spread with some 5-10 points o/u. I don't think its playing sharp to always shoot for the unders as its easier to hope there will be enough missed shots to account for the under. Thats the only reason I can see for only playing unders because its harder to tell whether a team is going to feel like playing that day to hit heaters and make it a shootfest. Most of the totals have gone either way so I don't think its a sharp play.

Sharp plays are assessing good D teams vs high % shooting teams or 2 good O teams for the over or 2 good D teams for the under. For example, today Philly/ Chicago played. 2 good D teams with an o/u of 183 1/2. I took the under for that reason whereas I'm sure many ppl thought the total was so low the over looked good. Total score was 181. Another example was Indy/ Golden State, 2 high scoring teams with Indy being a good D team. However Indy was on a b2b and GS was fresh from rest. GS has a high % of 3's so I took the over 190 1/2 with an end total of 195.

Just playing unders to play unders because you hope for lower scoring games will kill you in the long run. It's all about knowing the teams playing and how well they match up and days of rest etc. If you're utilizing that strategy then you won't be playing only unders or overs, you'll be playing the matchups that could go either way depending on the factors mentioned.

[tatddy]

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/nba-basket...y-special.html

Just so you can see the title of my thread. Terrible league. Honestly there is a lot of $ to be made live betting (which I do a lot during the playoffs and primtime games) and spot playing quarters/halfs but for the most part it's a dirty league.

I set an alarm to wake me up for the playoffs. If you want I'll buzz you.

[sando]

Don't let these games get to you. They even out in the long run. Variance will hit and likely your lucky won't run as bad.

I will say this though, the missed foul shots, fouling under a minute, things like that... most of that should be already included in your modeling. For instance, if a team averages 94 points, shoots 80% from the ft, etc, those things that happen at the end of the game are accounted for. They may not seem like it but they are. Because you account for past games, those past games include the 6 points of free throws at the end of the game, the number of fouls a team commits, etc.

With that said, you are right that there is no way to cap over-time into your model so if you mainly play unders (which is the "sharp" way to bet imo because books know the public like playing overs because it's more fun to cheer for a team to score points), OTs will kill you once in a while. All games involve 4 quarters. Points in the first quarter are just as important as the fourth. With playing unders, we should especially know that because one overscoring quarter can essentially kill the under bet alone. It's not always the 4th, it could easily be the first, second, or third.

Keep your head up

This right here is one sharp mo-fo.

[kenshin11x]

Surprisingly for once this NBA season I have been fortunate to be on the winning side a lot from these last second decider buckets. Too bad this is my lowest betting season too = ( . I'm not too keen on sticking to one type of bet like "under". I bet whatever I see value in, and so far has worked out great. Also be weary of those...if it looks too good to be true....

[sando]

I think most people play unders as opposed to overs. Most totals average somewhere around 200 pts in the spread with some 5-10 points o/u. I don't think its playing sharp to always shoot for the unders as its easier to hope there will be enough missed shots to account for the under. Thats the only reason I can see for only playing unders because its harder to tell whether a team is going to feel like playing that day to hit heaters and make it a shootfest. Most of the totals I have seen this season have gone under so I don't think its a sharp play.

Sharp plays are assessing good D teams vs high % shooting teams or 2 good O teams for the over or 2 good D teams for the under. For example, today Philly/ Chicago played. 2 good D teams with an o/u of 183 1/2. I took the under for that reason whereas I'm sure many ppl thought the total was so low the over looked good. Total score was 181. Another example was Indy/ Golden State, 2 high scoring teams with Indy being a good D team. However Indy was on a b2b and GS was fresh from rest. GS has a high % of 3's so I took the over 190 1/2 with an end total of 195.

Just playing unders to play unders because you hope for lower scoring games will kill you in the long run. It's all about knowing the teams playing and how well they match up and days of rest etc. If you're utilizing that strategy then you won't be playing only unders or overs, you'll be playing the matchups that could go either way depending on the factors mentioned.

Overall a very nice comment with sharp analysis that imply you really know what you are talking about. Just one problem mate, Indiana is anything but a high scoring team, they deliberately slow the tempo as they are such a sharp defensive unit and not only that, most of their main scorers have had poor starts to the season offensively. Indiana is statistically the second worse offensive team in the NBA.

Otherwise oustanding analysis...

[MARVEL]

Stay in there bro. I love NBA betting, it took me a year to figure things. I'm not really an over/under guy. I prefer spreads and player props. College bball will have you going crazy, NBA is easier to handicap IMO.

[tatddy]

Overall a very nice comment with sharp analysis that imply you really know what you are talking about. Just one problem mate, Indiana is anything but a high scoring team, they deliberately slow the tempo as they are such a sharp defensive unit and not only that, most of their main scorers have had poor starts to the season offensively. Indiana is statistically the second worse offensive team in the NBA.

Otherwise oustanding analysis...

This is where quarter betting comes in. 4th Q under was an easy bet today. I had it at 39-41 and the line was 47. 2nd and 3rd Q were so drastically over the initially set total projection there was no way this wasn't regressing.

[wguan2]

I think most people play unders as opposed to overs. Most totals average somewhere around 200 pts in the spread with some 5-10 points o/u. I don't think its playing sharp to always shoot for the unders as its easier to hope there will be enough missed shots to account for the under. Thats the only reason I can see for only playing unders because its harder to tell whether a team is going to feel like playing that day to hit heaters and make it a shootfest. Most of the totals have gone either way so I don't think its a sharp play.

Sharp plays are assessing good D teams vs high % shooting teams or 2 good O teams for the over or 2 good D teams for the under. For example, today Philly/ Chicago played. 2 good D teams with an o/u of 183 1/2. I took the under for that reason whereas I'm sure many ppl thought the total was so low the over looked good. Total score was 181. Another example was Indy/ Golden State, 2 high scoring teams with Indy being a good D team. However Indy was on a b2b and GS was fresh from rest. GS has a high % of 3's so I took the over 190 1/2 with an end total of 195.

Just playing unders to play unders because you hope for lower scoring games will kill you in the long run. It's all about knowing the teams playing and how well they match up and days of rest etc. If you're utilizing that strategy then you won't be playing only unders or overs, you'll be playing the matchups that could go either way depending on the factors mentioned.

I agree with you. Of course taking under for the sake of taking unders will kill in the long run. By no means am I advocating taking unders or playing dogs just to avoid the public is considered "sharp". In all honesty, I think the idea of being "sharp" is insane to begin with. With that said though, if we think about it in the book's point of view, of course they set totals at numbers that the public would want to hammer. They want to make money themselves right?

So for instance, the number 183 for Chi/Philly today. Numbers like these are so low that the public will be enticed to hit the over just like you said. However, with a number as high as a game like the Rockets/Utah at 207, it's still hard for the public to think "damn that number is so high, i'm going to hit the under" but instead, they just pass on it. Losing unders is far more frustrating than losing overs in my opinion. That's really what I meant by saying that unders are typically more sharp--just that it's easier for the public to hit overs than unders and the books know this. How they use this knowledge is beyond me lol.

FYI, there has been a long standing trend (and i know how much people hate trends but this one is logical) that you could go through the season and end up winning if you took the under on the lowest total of every nba card. I haven't backtested this but I have seen this trend in several places where they did backtest this. I like some trends myself as you can see in my thread but I'm not such a big fan of this one since there are so many plays. I think a filter to this trend could really go a long way.

[brainfreeze0]

I agree with you. Of course taking under for the sake of taking unders will kill in the long run. By no means am I advocating taking unders or playing dogs just to avoid the public is considered "sharp". In all honesty, I think the idea of being "sharp" is insane to begin with. With that said though, if we think about it in the book's point of view, of course they set totals at numbers that the public would want to hammer. They want to make money themselves right?

So for instance, the number 183 for Chi/Philly today. Numbers like these are so low that the public will be enticed to hit the over just like you said. However, with a number as high as a game like the Rockets/Utah at 207, it's still hard for the public to think "damn that number is so high, i'm going to hit the under" but instead, they just pass on it. Losing unders is far more frustrating than losing overs in my opinion. That's really what I meant by saying that unders are typically more sharp--just that it's easier for the public to hit overs than unders and the books know this. How they use this knowledge is beyond me lol.

FYI, there has been a long standing trend (and i know how much people hate trends but this one is logical) that you could go through the season and end up winning if you took the under on the lowest total of every nba card. I haven't backtested this but I have seen this trend in several places where they did backtest this. I like some trends myself as you can see in my thread but I'm not such a big fan of this one since there are so many plays. I think a filter to this trend could really go a long way.

Personally Im not a big fan of playing totals. You never know how any given team will feel that night. You see Miami playing Denver and the o/u is 203 which seems like an easy over and either Miami has a brickfest, both teams has a brickfest, or Miami completely blows Denver out holding them to a super low TT and you miss the over.

Some trends I will usually always play are 2 solid teams playing I like to play the under. They are more suited to hold each other on defending shots (like Spurs/ Memphis). A solid team playing a scrub team (like Clippers vs Wizards) for the under. I look for blowouts and a lot of held shots on the Wizards to go below. As well as the trends I mentioned above. Most of the time I just pass on o/u's though because even with these factors it's still a crapshoot many times.

BTW, completely agree on the sharp aspect. I remember the start of the season Knicks whooped Philly's ass at home. They were scheduled to play the very next day in Philly against each other again. The sharps crawled out from around the web giving all their reasoning about how all of a sudden a team that got outplayed and outmatched the day before by 16 points would win the next day. As if both teams would fly through some inter dimensional space hole and come out playing the complete opposite. All of a sudden the Knicks were the underdog and Philly the favorite even though both teams had to travel and in fact Philly had traveld twice in 2 days to and from. I argued Philly's arena held no magical powers to all of a sudden make Knicks a 4 point underdog lol. We argued it all day. Knicks whooped Philly's ass that next day by 24 points and all of the sharps disappeared.

Point being, it's retarded logic to just bet the dog or the non-public favorite just because you think the books are secretly aware of something and you forgot to wear your tinfoil hat that day. If you matchup the players and the teams and some solid reasoning you're much better equipped to cap any particular game.

[brainfreeze0]

Overall a very nice comment with sharp analysis that imply you really know what you are talking about. Just one problem mate, Indiana is anything but a high scoring team, they deliberately slow the tempo as they are such a sharp defensive unit and not only that, most of their main scorers have had poor starts to the season offensively. Indiana is statistically the second worse offensive team in the NBA.

Otherwise oustanding analysis...

Sorry I should have said it differently. Im speaking on team stars that can usually deliver points regularly like Hill, West, and Hibbert. Guys that usually don't waste possessions. an opposite example would be someone like the Wizards or Pistons who force many shots because they have a hard time penetrating.

[kenshin11x]

Hibbert does not deliver points regulary, take it from a guy who has him in all my fantasy teams. Guy is shooting under .400. How is that possible for a big man? Guy is having one crappy year except Block wise.

[brainfreeze0]

Hibbert does not deliver points regulary, take it from a guy who has him in all my fantasy teams. Guy is shooting under .400. How is that possible for a big man? Guy is having one crappy year except Block wise.

lol well lets just say in seasons past hes been a dominate figure in the paint. He's starting to follow the likes of Pau Gasol these days

[MrXYZ]

Agree with wguan2's point about taking the lowest under on the card. Ive been looking at it myself and may start a thread for the season. The average punter's maxim never changes: they take the over on the lowest total and the under on the highest.

[Pete0]

Take NY 1H today.


Wait for Jameer Nelson status - if out - Take Lakers 1H. Good luck