Rhombus plays

[cleaveland]

I'm introducing a new category of plays called "rhombus plays". Look at the shape of a rhombus (below), it's like a square slanted to the side. I'm defining "rhombus plays" as plays where:

1. The plays are anti-square, squares normally wouldn't even think of these plays.

2. There is little real reasoning for picking your side. You may be able to find some trends or stats that make you feel good about your play but when you look at the actual players involved and/or the situation, there's probably not much of a chance your side will cash outside of logic and reasoning such as the "due theory" or "possible backdoor cover". We all know every NBA team has a chance to win every game or win ATS but realistically there aren't many good reasons for your play.

Yesterday I invented the term "rhombus play" and I called the first rhombus play as Raptors +5.5 in this thread (the Raptors lost by 23 points): http://forum.sbrforum.com/nba-basket...s-tuesday.html

My first rhombus play for this thread: Charlotte +14.5 - I think this meets the conditions of a rhombus play. Let's see what happens. BTW: Like all rhombus plays I would never bet on this, I'm just starting this thread for tracking and discussion purposes.

[PR9]

nerd

[monologue]

^

[cleaveland]

nerd

Successful people are those willing to do what everyone else isn't willing to do. You've got to do whatever it takes, if you're successful you'll know that.

[YouHave2outs]

defining a rhombus int his forum is not necessary if you're expecting smart people to tail you. we are aware of what a rhombus is.

gl on this system.

[quant]

IMO i would bet the "Rhrombus" 2h and get a free q of points.

[YouHave2outs]

I'm introducing a new category of plays called "rhombus plays". Look at the shape of a rhombus (below), it's like a square slanted to the side. ..... Yesterday I invented the term "rhombus play"

you have to realize how hilarious this is

anyone who is not chuckling at the words quoted has no sense of humor.

gl on this system

[ShogunRua]

Good luck with the new system.

[cleaveland]

Good luck with the new system.

Thanks! Actually, this is not a system. It's a new category of bettors (right now the only categories I know of are "squares" and "sharps").

Well, this new category explains something that I've never really understood. For example, when Cleveland was on their long losing streak last season I couldn't understand why people were betting on them, especially during their Western road trip when they weren't even coming close to covering spreads.

Now I know it was the rhombuses betting on them and with Charlotte in a similar situation, without their starting point guard it seems hopeless for them against any good team. Who's gonna take them? It's the rhombuses betting on these hopeless teams. I think I've solved one of the great mysteries of my life.

[cleaveland]

I don't see any rhombus plays in the NBA tomorrow. With the Trailblazers up 26 at halftime it looks like my called rhombus played will go 0-2 but there's still time.

[GatorTD]

I want Some circle plays. They are like squares only round.

[cleaveland]

I want Some circle plays. They are like squares only round.

You mean round like a zero as in 0% chance of hitting?

[cleaveland]

Bobcats +14 v. the Celtics is a rhombus play imho.

Please note that I didn't include the Bobcats v. Pheonix as a rhombus, Pheonix can play almost as badly as the Bobcats when they take a night off so that was not a rhombus play.

[cleaveland]

The Bobcats got the backdoor cover in the last game.

I think there's a rhombus play today:

Lakers team total under 86.5

The Lakers have only scored under this total twice in 25 games. That's 8%, anytime people are betting on something at -110 to -120 odds that's only happened 8% of the time during the season, that's a rhombus play in my book.

[TiredPro]

You should play every game that fits into your system while simultaneously fading Betting Wizard........keep us posted on how you are doing.

[illAdelph]

Your thinking too much. Or your not thinking at all. I cant figure it out.