Ucla/usc over 65.5!

[TPowell]

guy, you have to look at point diff at half. Good fortune but I did plan on this happening since it was a decently close game at half

[TPowell]

with points to spare!!

[Jonah]

Wow, thanks for all the fouling and making the occasional shot, UCLA!

[No coincidences]

guy, you have to look at point diff at half. Good fortune but I did plan on this happening since it was a decently close game at half

Normally I would agree with you, but as you can see, both of these teams are brutal offensively, making the mid-60s in one half a shaky proposition at best.

[flyingillini]

May Jesus Christ be with the over on the rest of your 2nd half plays

[TPowell]

still mid 60's with a solid chance of overtime and fouling was a good play in my eyes. They put up around 60 in the first half without the fouling and didnt really shoot it that well.

[No coincidences]

still mid 60's with a solid chance of overtime and fouling was a good play in my eyes. They put up around 60 in the first half without the fouling and didnt really shoot it that well.

The first time these horrific teams played, they combined for 113 points.

[TPowell]

I saw that and UCLA shot the ball like shit. Judging from the first half (what I mostly look at), I thought they could do better offensively (they didnt) but I also thought that since the game was close, there would be fouling and possibly overtime

[No coincidences]

I saw that and UCLA shot the ball like shit. Judging from the first half (what I mostly look at), I thought they could do better offensively (they didnt) but I also thought that since the game was close, there would be fouling and possibly overtime

See, that's the point, though. Only in college basketball can a three-possession game be considered "close." Teams start fouling who knows how early, even when they're down 7-10 points and really have no chance in hell of winning.

Again, that's why rolling the dice with O/U in CBB is just plain dumb in my book. You never know when you're going to get a game that's cruising along way under, only to see 15-20 in the last 2 minutes.

[No coincidences]

This game was 63-52 with 56 seconds left. UCLA had no chance of winning this game at that point. Zero. Yet they keep fouling, down 11, which led to 17 irrelevant points in the last 56 seconds.

[TPowell]

of course I was lucky but the intent behind the bet was fine

[No coincidences]

of course I was lucky but the intent behind the bet was fine

I just don't think, in the long run, betting totals -- especially in halves -- is a winning proposition, because you never know how much these teams are going to decide they need to foul, when they're going to foul, etc., etc. That totally takes the skill out of wagering on a game.

But hey, you cashed here, so maybe you do know what you're doing and I'm just talking out my ass.

[tltaylor89]

slow start

[Shortstop]

Congrats T!

[Shortstop]

This game was a perfect example as to why I very rarely play Unders...

[No coincidences]

This game was a perfect example as to why I very rarely play Unders...

Agreed. Theoretically, this game should've landed right around the 118. Maybe a little over. 115 points in the first 39:04, and 17 in the last 0:56.

[ZetaPsi808]

omg 18 points in the final minute

[ZetaPsi808]

and then a bullshit foul with 3 seconds left to decide the cover.

[ZetaPsi808]

how the fukk can you cap that shyt?

[WonTooManyBets]

still mid 60's with a solid chance of overtime and fouling was a good play in my eyes. They put up around 60 in the first half without the fouling and didnt really shoot it that well.

[whatsgood5]

omg 18 points in the final minute

Wow, must have took about 10 minutes to finish that minute