Too good to be true Friday night

[QuantumLeap]

Just wanted to say I was looking at Bowling Green but that doesn't fit my criteria of fading a team with recent success. Akron lost their last game so that game is off the board for me. I'm looking at one of the late games.
Anyone like anything else?

[LtDarsh]

im sort of leaning on iona -6

Also Valparaiso -4.5

[iloseagain]

im sort of leaning on iona -6

Also Valparaiso -4.5

lkid is big on manhattan +6. Id be careful. Not saying lkid cant lose, but hes been hot lately

[LtDarsh]

lkid is big on manhattan +6. Id be careful. Not saying lkid cant lose, but hes been hot lately

I saw that, I will prob stick with Valparaiso

[QuantumLeap]

I saw that, I will prob stick with Valparaiso

I was looking at Valpo too. Probably won't post whether or not I take them though.
Thanks for the input.

[banderso9]

I am leaning Oakland -10..Detroit just got destroyed by valpo. And Oakland is 21-9 against the spread and 10-7 ATS as fav and 7-6 ATS at home. I have Detroit 72 - 88 Oakland. Thoughts?

[QuantumLeap]

Just wanted to say I was looking at Bowling Green but that doesn't fit my criteria of fading a team with recent success. Akron lost their last game so that game is off the board for me. I'm looking at one of the late games.
Anyone like anything else?

I was looking at taking Rider in the late game but will probably lay off since Monmouth has motivation to do well because they are in the middle of a conference championship chase.

[QuantumLeap]

I am leaning Oakland -10..Detroit just got destroyed by valpo. And Oakland is 21-9 against the spread and 10-7 ATS as fav and 7-6 ATS at home. I have Detroit 72 - 88 Oakland. Thoughts?

I was looking at Oakland too but got scared away due to their home ATS record.

[iloseagain]

I am leaning Oakland -10..Detroit just got destroyed by valpo. And Oakland is 21-9 against the spread and 10-7 ATS as fav and 7-6 ATS at home. I have Detroit 72 - 88 Oakland. Thoughts?

i hope thats the score.. i have under 184. if you think that will be the score, take the under

[banderso9]

i hope thats the score.. i have under 184. if you think that will be the score, take the under

I took small play earlier on under 184 w/ reasoning that Oakland would have game put away halfway through the 2nd and just protect the lead. Is true their home ATS record not reassuring but detroit's road record equally scary. I'll Most likely take another small play on oak-10. Also looking into Valpo -5 although the public love makes me nervous on both plays. bOL

[Birdman557]

OK, I'll try contribute as usual:

Chi - lost last 3 games, Green bay - won last 3, Chi 2-3 last 5, Green Bay 4-1 last 5, Chi lost to GB last game(possible revenge), line moved 1 point in Chi favor.

Play:

1. Chicago first half +9
2. Chicago +16

[iloseagain]

OK, I'll try contribute as usual:

Chi - lost last 3 games, Green bay - won last 3, Chi 2-3 last 5, Green Bay 4-1 last 5, Chi lost to GB last game(possible revenge), line moved 1 point in Chi favor.

Play:

1. Chicago first half +9
2. Chicago +16

I think the reasoning he uses here is to find spreads that look sketchy, based on certain factors. I do not think a team that is -16 can really look TGTBT.

[Birdman557]

I think the reasoning he uses here is to find spreads that look sketchy, based on certain factors. I do not think a team that is -16 can really look TGTBT.

ok.

[iloseagain]

ok.

jus so u know im not saying not to take them, but just for this thread i dont think that play makes a ton of sense

[QuantumLeap]

I think the reasoning he uses here is to find spreads that look sketchy, based on certain factors. I do not think a team that is -16 can really look TGTBT.

Yeah, that's pretty much it. It's hard for me to think a spread that big is TGTBT. Believe me, I looked at this line and considered it. But another filter that I like to use is to never bet on a bad team to cover a spread, especially this time of year. Many bad teams have given up and have no problem getting beaten badly (*cough* BC *cough*).

[Calgunner23]

I just parlayed Valp and Oakland, $200 to win $140. I do also like Akron, but ML only. I don't like to lay points too often.

Good luck QL! Lets get it

[LtDarsh]

Under in the Valp game would have been a good choice with how they are playing

[Calgunner23]

Kinda like Rider +9 too. Fucken Valpo needs to wake the hell up!

[iloseagain]

Kinda like Rider +9 too. Fucken Valpo needs to wake the hell up!

Valpo is up 2 in the 1h and they are fav by -4.5... they are doing fine, what do you mean they need to wake up lol?

[Birdman557]

UIC is one of the best example of too good too be true line, gonna be 3-0 in your thread bud, let's keep it going , tomorrow should be a plenty of candidates.

[LtDarsh]

valpo shoots so many 3's and fouls too much

[iloseagain]

UIC is one of the best example of too good too be true line, gonna be 3-0 in your thread bud, let's keep it going , tomorrow should be a plenty of candidates.

no actually it is not a good example. hence why the threadstarter even said it wasnt. just because it won, doesnt mean it fits the TGTBT factors he is using. You can start your own TGTBT thread if youd like

please do explain how a team that is favored by 16 is TGTBT LOL.. Id love to hear it. Good job on the play though even tho its only half and GB could EASILY outscore them by 15 in the 2h. I mean look at the iona game, they up 20 in the 2h on the ROAD.. Pretty sure it can be done at home vs an awful team like UIC.

A good example would be a home team that is say 14-14 and they are -8 over a team that is 20-6.. the 20-6 team looks TGTBT getting +8, so you would take the team -8. Not sure what you dont understand here haha

im not here to argue, but just because you think you are right doesnt mean you are right.

[Calgunner23]

Valpo is up 2 in the 1h and they are fav by -4.5... they are doing fine, what do you mean they need to wake up lol?

They were down early, that's when I wrote that. It's a 2 point game with 3 minutes left! Lol

[Calgunner23]

Did you take Akron QL?

[iloseagain]

They were down early, that's when I wrote that. It's a 2 point game with 3 minutes left! Lol

yea i noticed your post was at 7:10 after i said that, nvm dont pay attention to me haha. I have valpo ML as well lets go!

[QuantumLeap]

UIC is one of the best example of too good too be true line, gonna be 3-0 in your thread bud, let's keep it going , tomorrow should be a plenty of candidates.

Bird is the word! Keep up the good work!

[QuantumLeap]

Did you take Akron QL?

No.

I did put a little on Valpo -4.5.

Edit: I was hoping for OT. Now maybe Valpo can win by 5 or more.

[QuantumLeap]

no actually it is not a good example. hence why the threadstarter even said it wasnt. just because it won, doesnt mean it fits the TGTBT factors he is using. You can start your own TGTBT thread if youd like

No, it's cool to have differing opinions. Your post of a few days ago outlining teams with similar records helped me see another angle.

[iloseagain]

No, it's cool to have differing opinions. Your post of a few days ago outlining teams with similar records helped me see another angle.

i agree. just dont like people that try to seem like they know everything. I can, in no way, shape, or form, understand how a team that is -16 looks too good to be true, but to each their own

[Birdman557]

no actually it is not a good example. hence why the threadstarter even said it wasnt. just because it won, doesnt mean it fits the TGTBT factors he is using. You can start your own TGTBT thread if youd like

please do explain how a team that is favored by 16 is TGTBT LOL.. Id love to hear it. Good job on the play though even tho its only half and GB could EASILY outscore them by 15 in the 2h. I mean look at the iona game, they up 20 in the 2h on the ROAD.. Pretty sure it can be done at home vs an awful team like UIC.

A good example would be a home team that is say 14-14 and they are -8 over a team that is 20-6.. the 20-6 team looks TGTBT getting +8, so you would take the team -8. Not sure what you dont understand here haha

im not here to argue, but just because you think you are right doesnt mean you are right.

Dude, don't wanna be rude, but if you're clueless just learn, I provided all the necessary pointers BEFORE the game, a 16 point spread or a PK doesn't matter here, what matters if you understand how the lines are made which you probably don't, so try to learn - if you want of course...

[iloseagain]

Dude, don't wanna be rude, but if you're clueless just learn, I provided all the necessary pointers BEFORE the game, a 16 point spread or a PK doesn't matter here, what matters if you understand how the lines are made which you probably don't, so try to learn - if you want of course...

lol dude are u serious? You pointed out that an awful team lost their last 3 games and a good team won their last 3 games. Good teams win games and bad teams lose games, how does this mean anything? How does that make the play TGTBT? Now go ahead, and please explain.

By your theory, you would just bet every bad team against every good team because its likely the bad team lost their last 3 and the good team won their last 3. If the spread was like -9 then i would agree with you, but at -16, im sorry but you are just wrong. Plus you still cant explain why you would consider the -16 too good to be true... The fact that GB beat them last time has absolutely nothing to do with it. There is no "revenge" factor when 1 team is substantially better than the other. Revenge factors come when, say WVU beats Okla at home, and then they play the next game @ Okla. Two semi-evenly matched teams

If you realy think this is good reasoning then so be it, but its not. What do these "stats" prove here? That one team is good and the other is bad? Cool, so how does that relate to the -16 being too good to be true?:

"OK, I'll try contribute as usual:

Chi - lost last 3 games, Green bay - won last 3, Chi 2-3 last 5, Green Bay 4-1 last 5, Chi lost to GB last game(possible revenge), line moved 1 point in Chi favor.

Play:

1. Chicago first half +9
2. Chicago +16"



Yes Mr. Teacher, I do want to learn! So please explain your reasoning other than a bad team lost 3 games in a row and a good team won 3 games in a row.. Go ahead bud.. What, so when a line moves ONE point towards the dog, its TGTBT? LOL ok man. Keep posting useless info

[LtDarsh]

I need a miracle

[iloseagain]

GB up 9.. Lets get it GB!!

[Birdman557]

lol dude are u serious? You pointed out that an awful team lost their last 3 games and a good team won their last 3 games. Good teams win games and bad teams lose games, how does this mean anything? How does that make the play TGTBT? Now go ahead, and please explain.

By your theory, you would just bet every bad team against every good team because its likely the bad team lost their last 3 and the good team won their last 3. If the spread was like -9 then i would agree with you, but at -16, im sorry but you are just wrong. Plus you still cant explain why you would consider the -16 too good to be true... The fact that GB beat them last time has absolutely nothing to do with it. There is no "revenge" factor when 1 team is substantially better than the other. Revenge factors come when, say WVU beats Okla at home, and then they play the next game @ Okla. Two semi-evenly matched teams

If you realy think this is good reasoning then so be it, but its not. What do these "stats" prove here? That one team is good and the other is bad? Cool, so how does that relate to the -16 being too good to be true?:

"OK, I'll try contribute as usual:

Chi - lost last 3 games, Green bay - won last 3, Chi 2-3 last 5, Green Bay 4-1 last 5, Chi lost to GB last game(possible revenge), line moved 1 point in Chi favor.

Play:

1. Chicago first half +9
2. Chicago +16"



Yes Mr. Teacher, I do want to learn! So please explain your reasoning other than a bad team lost 3 games in a row and a good team won 3 games in a row.. Go ahead bud.. What, so when a line moves ONE point towards the dog, its TGTBT? LOL ok man. Keep posting useless info

No comment, SBR finest...

[iloseagain]

I'll help you out:

Nebraska 4-7 on the road, Penn 9-3 at home. Nebraska lost last 2, Penn won last 2. Line is even, enjoy!

Braska +1.5 WINNAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!

Also how are you 3-0 in his threads when you say the Nebraska line is a PK, and then when they lose by 1, you say it was +1.5... LOL you are the definition of a joke

No comment because you cant explain yourself. Exactly. Your reasoning is horrible bud. I picked apart your terrible reasoning and now you cower away once you realize. And i know what you will say next, "no i didnt respond because you are an idiot" or something of that manner. Well if you can explain why Im wrong, then I will admit Im the idiot, but until then, that title belongs to you my friend

FRAUD city bitch, FRAUD FRAUD city bitch..