Explain to me why MIA-4.5 only without Collison?

Cinquefoil · 04-21-11, 08:30 AM

I thought Miami was playing the 76ers...

Bradyd · 04-21-11, 08:30 AM

This will be the game for Philly to win to have a remote shot at winning this series, so expect them to give it all they have this game.. While some would say they have a little chance now, going down 0-3 would give them NO Chance...

saints1856 · 04-21-11, 08:42 AM

I took MIAMI -200 moneyline for my largest play of the day. Game 2 was an indicator that Philly had a chance to steal a game this series (game 1) and they missed out. Heat sweep the Sixers.

HoulihansTX · 04-21-11, 09:02 AM

Collison?

You talking about the PF that plays for OKC?

Or are you talking about Bulls -4.5, and the PG Collison not playing for Pacers?

chargers4222 · 04-21-11, 09:02 AM

if you thought the miami heat were playing a team with darren collison on it, you should not wager money on sports betting of any kind

kaijunn · 04-21-11, 09:30 AM

Originally posted by chargers4222

if you thought the miami heat were playing a team with darren collison on it, you should not wager money on sports betting of any kind

GTS925 · 04-21-11, 09:42 AM

It's because Collison's not playing for the Sixers.

Muggy · 04-21-11, 09:50 AM

Hmm, seems like I wasn't the only one thrown off here. I was like "There's a Collison on the Sixers?"

demens · 04-21-11, 09:59 AM

Wow, is everyone really that retarded not to understand that he is talking about the Bulls game? My god.

OP, I agree with you. Bulls have good value on their side with Collison out and being a 4.5 fav. The problem is that Indy has showed they can play them very tough in Chicago where the Bulls were expected to dominate. Coming back home 0-2 after 2 close games the Pacers should be a tough out again Collison or no Collison. Maybe best a no play.

yisman · 04-21-11, 06:13 PM

Originally posted by demens

Wow, is everyone really that retarded not to understand that he is talking about the Bulls game? My god.

He didn't know himself which game he meant, plus he gave out bad information.

Collison is playing for the Pacers tonight.

FindTheLock · 04-21-11, 06:17 PM

collison hasn't played for the 76ers all season and they managed to make the playoffs! I think they will do fine without him tonight too!

yisman · 04-21-11, 08:19 PM

Really, demens?

demens · 04-21-11, 08:20 PM

Originally posted by yisman

Really, demens?

What are you asking?

yisman · 04-21-11, 08:22 PM

I'm asking why you're asking if everyone else is retarded when this is one of the worst threads I've ever seen. It failed on three levels. The op got deservedly smacked for it.

demens · 04-21-11, 08:26 PM

Originally posted by yisman

I'm asking why you're asking if everyone else is retarded when this is one of the worst threads I've ever seen. It failed on three levels. The op got deservedly smacked for it.

I guess you're right, retarded people dont know they are retarded so my question was a moot point.

yisman · 04-21-11, 08:28 PM

I don't think that addresses what I was saying.

FindTheLock · 04-21-11, 08:29 PM

if demens is typing you can guarantee nothing valuable is being written. He thinks he's God's gift to sarcasm. Somehow he manages to believe that he is the only one who can truly understand anything. I can't read what he has posted because he's my number one ignored user, but I can guarantee whatever he typed is totally worthless.

migz · 04-21-11, 08:32 PM

Whoops, i meant bulls. LMAO. But really, Mia and Chi lines were too low

demens · 04-21-11, 08:42 PM

Originally posted by yisman

I don't think that addresses what I was saying.

What are you saying? What 3 levels?

I'm not saying the OP is right in anyway, there is no easy line in the play-offs. Collison did play but his coached talked about him not playing for days. Playing head games or not, i had no interest in playing this game so i could care less. I explained how i felt about it in my 1st post. At the end of the Bulls win by 4 on a 4.5 spread with Collison playing. So what exactly was so horrible about this thread?

Granted it would have been a waste of time discussing the game with the OP, but the fact that not 1 idiot here bothered to talk about the right game is just said.

Ohh and Mr TheLock. You know the idea behind putting someone on ignore is that you, you know....ignore them. No one to keep following me around making your snotty little shit for brains comments out of the blue. I'd appreciate if you kept my name out of your posts. Thanks.

yisman · 04-21-11, 08:48 PM

1)It had the wrong team.
2)It had the wrong information about the player.
3)It advocated a pretty bad play, if you ask me.

If you post a thread like that, you should expect people to focus on that rather than discussing the game. If someone posts "Dirk is out tonight, POUND the Lakers" I wouldn't expect any reply to discuss the game, whichever game that may be. There are tons of other threads discussing the game.

demens · 04-21-11, 08:58 PM

Originally posted by yisman

1)It had the wrong team.
2)It had the wrong information about the player.
3)It advocated a pretty bad play, if you ask me.

If you post a thread like that, you should expect people to focus on that rather than discussing the game. If someone posts "Dirk is out tonight, POUND the Lakers" I wouldn't expect any reply to discuss the game, whichever game that may be. There are tons of other threads discussing the game.

1) It had a typo
2) not a single person pointed out that Collison was in fact going to play. Noone even pointed out that Collinson is playing TODAY for a team that had the same line as the title. What a coincidence.
3) Thats just your opinion.

And the game finished in a cover by the hook with the injured player playing. Lucky/Unlucky break for whatever side you were on. I thought it was worth a bit of a discussion. I'm sure other threads discussios are just as insightful as this one in here considering the quality of posters on the board. My ignore list is growing day by day.

I'm not defending the OP btw, i just think the people that responded to his post are way dumber then he is. Which is ironic because they all tried to come off as smartasses.

yisman · 04-21-11, 09:00 PM

Indiana deserved to cover. They were covering basically the entire game and Chicago only got to 4 thanks to a foul.

I feel bad for anyone who was on Indiana +3.5 or +4, rather than the +4.5 at Bodog.

Chicago should not have been favored by more than 4.5.

demens · 04-21-11, 09:05 PM

Originally posted by yisman

Indiana deserved to cover. They were covering basically the entire game and Chicago only got to 4 thanks to a foul.

I feel bad for anyone who was on Indiana +3.5 or +4, rather than the +4.5 at Bodog.

Chicago should not have been favored by more than 4.5.

Should have doesn't matter. Neither does deserving to cover. And just about every other game is covered or not thanks to free throws. It is what it is, thats betting on the NBA in a nutshell.

yisman · 04-21-11, 09:20 PM

Yes, but I'm talking about how the game was played.

If you bet a team +4 and they lead most of the way and lose by 5 thanks to fouling late, that's a bad beat, regardless of how often it happens.