NFL spreads don't factor in result very often

mtofell · 10-10-17, 12:01 PM

Interesting info - thanks for sharing.

This week was a bit of an odd one. I remember all but one of the morning games were less that 2 points spreads. I think one was 8.

The number of spread mattering games this year does seem quite low. I tend to lean towards the money line when picking the underdog. I'll also often times place incremental bets on higher spreads since when a favorite covers they'll often win by a large margin.

For example, KC/TEX game Sunday night I took KC -3.5 (-110), KC -7.5 (+165), KC -10.5 (+260). I lost the -10.5 in the last minutes but almost cashed them all. I hedged with TEX +12.5 part way though so it came out nicely. I won 3/4 bets with 2 of those 3 @ +150 or better.

Anyone interested, check out the Behind the Bets Podcast on ESPN radio. This time of year they have the head book maker from Boyd Gaming on and he shares a lot of insight into how lines are made. The biggest things I've learned is that books DON'T set lines where they think the game will end up. They set them where they think 1/2 the money will land on each side. Hacks like me help out the pros by always taking the "sexy" flashy picks, leaving a lot of value on sides that nobody wants. In general, the public loves to bet on teams like the Cowboys, Packer, Steelers, etc. It's not as much fun throwing down money hoping CLE only gets killed by 12 points.

CY892 · 10-10-17, 01:50 PM

Even looking at last year--the spread factored into only about 2 games per week...

Jnelson1182 · 10-11-17, 04:27 PM

When I cap my games I really only look at a teams overall perfornence and the injury report. I use injury report to see if any of the key players on that team are going to miss the next game or of they are banged up to the point that it may make a difference in there performance. I use the teams overall performance in the last fee games to give me an idea ofhow they have been playing. Sometimes teams have slumps an sometimes they have hot streaks n looking at those games helps give me an idea of which one the team maybe having.

CY892 · 10-12-17, 12:33 AM

Teasers

Also- makes teasers look like mostly bad bets..

CTOWNsCAPPIN · 10-12-17, 02:13 AM

Thank you very much for this. The Behind The Best podcast is interesting.

Originally posted by mtofell

Interesting info - thanks for sharing.

This week was a bit of an odd one. I remember all but one of the morning games were less that 2 points spreads. I think one was 8.

The number of spread mattering games this year does seem quite low. I tend to lean towards the money line when picking the underdog. I'll also often times place incremental bets on higher spreads since when a favorite covers they'll often win by a large margin.

For example, KC/TEX game Sunday night I took KC -3.5 (-110), KC -7.5 (+165), KC -10.5 (+260). I lost the -10.5 in the last minutes but almost cashed them all. I hedged with TEX +12.5 part way though so it came out nicely. I won 3/4 bets with 2 of those 3 @ +150 or better.

Anyone interested, check out the Behind the Bets Podcast on ESPN radio. This time of year they have the head book maker from Boyd Gaming on and he shares a lot of insight into how lines are made. The biggest things I've learned is that books DON'T set lines where they think the game will end up. They set them where they think 1/2 the money will land on each side. Hacks like me help out the pros by always taking the "sexy" flashy picks, leaving a lot of value on sides that nobody wants. In general, the public loves to bet on teams like the Cowboys, Packer, Steelers, etc. It's not as much fun throwing down money hoping CLE only gets killed by 12 points.

u21c3f6 · 10-12-17, 06:21 AM

This is not strange at all.

Let's assume an average dog at odds of +150 (no vig). Assuming that on average that the odds are close to reality, that means that the dog will win su 40% of the time. The favorite will cover 50% of the time (definition of the spread) and therefore the spread only affects 10% of the games.

Joe.

terpkeg · 10-12-17, 09:14 AM

That's about 9%, no? Seems often enough to me. It's probably a little low. Variance.

Grivas_Digeni · 10-12-17, 12:01 PM

Originally posted by CY892

Also- makes teasers look like mostly bad bets..

Sharp takeaway. Games like that Redskins@Chiefs where all teasers came in, are a rarity these days.

mtofell · 10-12-17, 01:39 PM

Yeah, books LOVE teasers and parlays. They grab amateur bettors with the chance to win big or the thought of, "how could this teaser possibly lose?" But the odds are so much better for the house with these things that they make a killing. You'll NEVER find a pro bettor putting money down on a teaser or parlay.

The whole sports betting thing interests me and I'd love to have the time and brains to actually make some money someday when I'm working less. For now, though, it's just $25 bets, mainly just to give my impatient mind some reason to care about a game I otherwise would have no interest in.

CY892 · 10-12-17, 02:11 PM

I think the spread has a strong psychological effect--especially as you watch a game or layout your expected outcome before the game. As you watch you see how the spread is affecting the score and those feelings have an impression but in the end, the spread doesn't matter as often as you think.

CY892 · 10-12-17, 10:36 PM

again--NFL spread doesn't factor in result...

DOG SU winner

Eagles 28
Panthers 23

2daBank · 10-12-17, 10:38 PM

It usually comes into play somewhere between 15-20% any given season. Think it was running higher this year until last week.

2daBank · 10-12-17, 10:43 PM

And whether this one does or didn't end up coming into play you should realize that your chances of winning philly ml still significantly less than ats as panthers will have had 2 possessions with a chance to win by less than spread!!

CY892 · 10-12-17, 10:51 PM

Originally posted by 2daBank

And whether this one does or didn't end up coming into play you should realize that your chances of winning philly ml still significantly less than ats as panthers will have had 2 possessions with a chance to win by less than spread!!

You see if you had the +3 w Phi you "feel" much better as you watch---but in the end, the line did not matter--the money-line ultimately & inarguably was the better play...--and if you teased them up to 9---even worse--you have to pick ANOTHER winner to make even $$....

^^^^^^^
"I think the spread has a strong psychological effect--especially as you watch a game or layout your expected outcome before the game. As you watch you see how the spread is affecting the score and those feelings have an impression but in the end, the spread doesn't matter as often as you think."

2daBank · 10-12-17, 10:54 PM

Originally posted by CY892

You see if you had the +3 w Phi you "feel" much better as you watch---but in the end, the line did not matter--the money-line ultimately & inarguably was the better play...--and if you teased them up to 9---even worse--you have to pick ANOTHER winner to make even $$....

It far from inarguably the better play. Panthers had 2 drives w a chance to beat the ml. Odds ml cashed were far less than odds ats cashed. Just cause it ended the way it did doesn't mean what you saying correct. Spread was never in doubt, ml needing a lot of things to go right to cash.

CY892 · 10-12-17, 10:55 PM

Originally posted by 2daBank

It far from inarguably the better play. Panthers had 2 drives w a chance to beat the ml. Odds ml cashed were far less than odds ats cashed. Just cause it ended the way it did doesn't mean what you saying correct. Spread was never in doubt, ml needing a lot of things to go right to cash.

You are MAKING MY POINT!!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"I think the spread has a strong psychological effect--especially as you watch a game or layout your expected outcome before the game. As you watch you see how the spread is affecting the score and those feelings have an impression but in the end, the spread doesn't matter as often as you think."

CY892 · 10-12-17, 10:57 PM

Trust me--I USED-TO think the way you do---because I thought too much about how the game "Could-have" or even Should-Have played out...

CY892 · 10-12-17, 11:04 PM

Originally posted by 2daBank

It far from inarguably the better play. Panthers had 2 drives w a chance to beat the ml. Odds ml cashed were far less than odds ats cashed. Just cause it ended the way it did doesn't mean what you saying correct. Spread was never in doubt, ml needing a lot of things to go right to cash.

It WAS INARGUABLY the better play!

can you argue that $100 is more than $140????

What "might" of happend does NOT matter.....

"Just cause it ended the way it did doesn't mean what you saying correct." YES IT DOES--you are caught up in what might have happened as opposed to what did!

2daBank · 10-13-17, 08:57 AM

Originally posted by CY892

It WAS INARGUABLY the better play!

can you argue that $100 is more than $140????

What "might" of happend does NOT matter.....

"Just cause it ended the way it did doesn't mean what you saying correct." YES IT DOES--you are caught up in what might have happened as opposed to what did!

You are caught up in the result which ultimately doesn't matter, it just one game that could have gone a number of ways. Fact is the chances of them covering were far greater than winning.

Clearly it arguable since I'm doing a great job of presenting why you wrong.

CY892 · 10-13-17, 11:16 AM

Originally posted by 2daBank

You are caught up in the result which ultimately doesn't matter, it just one game that could have gone a number of ways. Fact is the chances of them covering were far greater than winning.

Clearly it arguable since I'm doing a great job of presenting why you wrong.

"The result ...doesn't matter" HMMMMMMM--LOL LOL

2daBank · 10-15-17, 06:57 AM

Originally posted by CY892

"The result ...doesn't matter" HMMMMMMM--LOL LOL

Shows what a fukkin moron you are if you think the result of one random event proves anything.

CY892 · 10-16-17, 10:44 AM

Originally posted by 2daBank

Shows what a fukkin moron you are if you think the result of one random event proves anything.

I think your response hurts your argument..

CY892 · 10-16-17, 10:50 AM

Even with the large spreads this week---the line only mattered in 2 of 13 games:

2 Favorite covers
Hou -8
Saints -5.5

2 Dog Covers
SF +9
Jets +10

9 STRAIGHT-UP DOG WINNERS
PHI +3
MIA +13
MINN +3
AZ +3
CHARGERS +3
CHI +6
RAMS +1
PITT +3.5
GIANTS +14

CY892 · 10-20-17, 12:40 AM

Yet again--the spread doesn't matter---just pick the winner------

KC 30
OAK +3 31

w Dogs: eschew the points---take ML w Dogs

w Favorites: Lay the points---No Teasers--No ML Fav

CY892 · 10-20-17, 02:41 PM

Originally posted by u21c3f6

This is not strange at all.

Let's assume an average dog at odds of +150 (no vig). Assuming that on average that the odds are close to reality, that means that the dog will win su 40% of the time. The favorite will cover 50% of the time (definition of the spread) and therefore the spread only affects 10% of the games.

Joe.

exactly
w NFL:

w Dogs: eschew the points---take ML w Dogs

w Favorites: Lay the points---No Teasers--No ML Fav