[jayz00]

Bears and the under.

Outdrawed....... can you elaborat on why you playing the unders here please

[jayz00]

with all respect for the smart punters out here. i cant see how a game in 2002 or 2003 is relevant here tonight. the bears dont even look like the same team they were last season never mind five years ago........

[LT Profits]

jayz00,

I agree, I was just answering/rebuking some of the previous comments in this thread.

[jayz00]

haha i know L.T. hey thanks for the hockey tips by the way

[babaoriley]

Stop with all this teaser talk, especially with teasing to 17.5, and the total. You are not 50% more likely to cover a spread teasing from 10.5 to 17.5 or teasing from 43 to 49.

I never said that it made me 50% more likely to cover. Personally, I like Chicago and 10.5 and the Under of 43. I'll probably play a small parlay with Chicago and the Under right before kickoff, then play in-running, but for the time being, I wanted to lock in a teaser. I don't think Minny blows out Chicago and I don't think this game goes over, but I feel more comfortable with the cushion. I get the feeling that we get a 24-14 type of game and I like the extra cushion. Period. The teased total doesn't really help me, I agree, but in the event we get a 28-17 type game, then I'm still good.

[EGGY6199]

okay my book is making a big move on the ML bears coming in....playing bears

[EGGY6199]

Ps LT do you play Finish hockey I am 13-0 last 3 weeks on the ML.... Less quality than the NHL so easier to hit I find

[pavyracer]

3 of the last 5 times they played in Minnesota! 34-10, 24-13, 25-7.

That said, the Bears ARE 4-1 ATS as double-digit underdogs.

All of this aside, I am passing on this game. If I had a gun to my head, I would lean to Bears and Under, but I see better betting opportunities in other sports tonight.

I was only looking at the last two years and last year's loss of 34-10 was at the last game when Bears rested all the starters for playoffs. No team has beat the Bears this year or last year with double digits in their division on a meaningful game. The Bears are still in the playoff hunt and will fight till the end. Anyone saw Eagles last night?

[outdrawed]

I never said that it made me 50% more likely to cover. Personally, I like Chicago and 10.5 and the Under of 43. I'll probably play a small parlay with Chicago and the Under right before kickoff, then play in-running, but for the time being, I wanted to lock in a teaser. I don't think Minny blows out Chicago and I don't think this game goes over, but I feel more comfortable with the cushion. I get the feeling that we get a 24-14 type of game and I like the extra cushion. Period. The teased total doesn't really help me, I agree, but in the event we get a 28-17 type game, then I'm still good.

If you don't think each teaser will make you 50% more likely to cover, it's a bad teaser. Simple math.

[outdrawed]

Outdrawed....... can you elaborat on why you playing the unders here please

One sucky offense. Two decent defenses. The average offense matches up poorly with the defense. The line is inflated due to Minnesota blowing out teams. The line should be 38-39.

[babaoriley]

If you don't think each teaser will make you 50% more likely to cover, it's a bad teaser. Simple math.

Mathematically, it doesn't make the teaser 50% to cover (teasing through the numbers I teased through). However, I believe that it gives me a 50% better chance of winning the game. Does that make sense?
To put it plainly, I realize I'm only knocking out the 14 and 17 (and to a lesser extent the 11 and the 13) in terms of key numbers on the side. That said, I place a fairly large importance on 11-17. So, FOR ME (not through mathematical history) the teaser makes sense. I normally wouldn't tease the total, but I like the Under of 43.5 (which I'm playing separately), but I feel the Under of 49 is obviously better and helps me complete the tease with Chicago.

More important question: Instead of criticizing my picks, why not simply leave it alone? I don't recall soliciting you for your advice, nor do I recall ever giving you unsolicited advice. I was posting my play, plain and simple. If I lose, then I lose. Won't be the last time. But get off my jock about my bets, bro.

I feel at least 51% more confident in my play as a tease. There. Simple math.

[babaoriley]

One sucky offense. Two decent defenses. The average offense matches up poorly with the defense. The line is inflated due to Minnesota blowing out teams. The line should be 38-39.

See, THIS was a solicited opinion.

[outdrawed]

More important question: Instead of criticizing my picks, why not simply leave it alone? I don't recall soliciting you for your advice, nor do I recall ever giving you unsolicited advice. I was posting my play, plain and simple. If I lose, then I lose. Won't be the last time. But get off my jock about my bets, bro.

...

I thought the point of posting picks was to get input from other people. If that's not your intention, then you're only posting picks for self-gratification which is pretty lame.

Edit:

That said, I place a fairly large importance on 11-17. So, FOR ME (not through mathematical history) the teaser makes sense.

So you're smarter than math? Good to know.

[babaoriley]

Sweet, you now have joined Greek as the 2nd person on my "Ignore" list. Congrats.

The purpose of this thread is to post the picks you're playing, not to seek out advice. If I wanted advice, I'd have asked for it.

[outdrawed]

Sweet, you now have joined Greek as the 2nd person on my "Ignore" list. Congrats.

The purpose of this thread is to post the picks you're playing, not to seek out advice. If I wanted advice, I'd have asked for it.

I'm not sure if telling me you're ignoring me is supposed to make me feel stupid or you feel really good about yourself. Either way, congrats on the ignore!

[outdrawed]

Also, my post telling people not to play the teasers wasn't even directed at you, but advice in general. So....yeah

[Dark Horse]

My main angle for this game is 48-17 in favor of the dog.

This is choke city for the Vikings...

Great execution of choke city.


At least so far. Vikings couldn't possibly play any worse in 2H.

[babaoriley]

I have no clue what you're saying because I get this message after every post:
This message is hidden because outdrawed is on your ignore list.

That said, let me try, one more time, to explain what I meant. Then I'll take you off "ignore" simply because Greek doesn't need any company on there. He's in his own class.

In my *opinion* it was significantly worthwhile to tease through the 11,13,14 and to the 17. Personally, I would have put Chi +10.5 at about 50-55% (very slight lean) and the Under of 43.5 at 60-65%. I have NO mathematical basis other than my own knowledge of these 2 teams and my own analysis. That said, after teasing to +17 and 49.5, I felt EXTREMELY confident in my play (let's say 80-85% or so, though that number is arbitrary of course). So, to me, it represented outstanding value (the extra points from the tease, that is).

Now, historically, would it be highly beneficial to tease through 11-17? Maybe not. And is it ever beneficial to tease a total? Sometimes, sure. And this was one of those times for me. I felt confident enough in the Under of 43, but the extra 6.5 made me feel cozy.

In a game in which I figured there would be several FG's, covering 11 (21-10, 24-13, etc.), 13 (27-14, 23-10, etc.) was just as valuable as covering 14 and covering up to 17.

OK? Enough explanation for you?

[outdrawed]

It's like people are more concerned with a higher winning percentage than making money on here.

If I offer you two bets, bet A has a 50% chance of winning and pays 2:1 and Bet B has a 75% chance of winning and pays 1:2, I'm pretty sure the majority of people on this site would choose option B despite it being the worse choice. At least that's the impression I'm getting.

[babaoriley]

It's like people are more concerned with a higher winning percentage than making money on here.

If I offer you two bets, bet A has a 50% chance of winning and pays 2:1 and Bet B has a 75% chance of winning and pays 1:2, I'm pretty sure the majority of people on this site would choose option B despite it being the worse choice. At least that's the impression I'm getting.

A straight wager paying out at -110 and a 6.5 point, 2-team teaser paying out at -120 aren't exactly 2:1 and 1:2.

[outdrawed]

I'm not saying those are the odds you're getting. I'm just saying that people are more concerned with winning a bet instead of making a bet that provides the most +EV so I exaggerated to make a point. Mathematically, it doesn't make sense to tease totals or large spreads higher, and it's impossible to cap a game so precisely that you'll be able to figure out how many FGs a team will score as opposed to TDs.

[pokernut9999]

I'm not saying those are the odds you're getting. I'm just saying that people are more concerned with winning a bet instead of making a bet that provides the most +EV so I exaggerated to make a point. Mathematically, it doesn't make sense to tease totals or large spreads higher, and it's impossible to cap a game so precisely that you'll be able to figure out how many FGs a team will score as opposed to TDs.

why you always arguing with people ?

[outdrawed]

Because people are constantly wrong and I get very bored at work. I liken it to watching porn. It's dirty, you really shouldn't do it, but yet, so satisfying.

[pavyracer]

Bears will not lose by double digits on MNF. I'll take the points any time. Line should have been -4 max. I don't know what Vegas is thinking here. These are the Vikings not the Pats. They are just an injury away from being awful. If Peterson or Jackson get hurt during the game they have noone to carry the load. Another bet I like is under. Teams that are looking to go into the playoffs play conservatively to just get the win.

[SBR Lou]

I think Outdrawed has good intentions, maybe a little too blunt but he makes good points.. Reminds me of a poker pal that is constantly table coaching and arguing about pot odds.

[outdrawed]

I think Outdrawed has good intentions, maybe a little too blunt but he makes good points.. Reminds me of a poker pal that is constantly table coaching and arguing about pot odds.

I do that too, actually.

[babaoriley]

I've got no problem with outdrawed, despite the back and forth banter. I just don't care to get unsolicited advice on how I cap/analyze/bet games. That's all. I'll listen to advice re: what other people are playing and why, but I don't need to be told not to tease through a total. My tease was like sleeping with a 9MM under my bed rather than a baseball bat. They'll both get the job done, but I like the added comfort that the 9MM (or in this case--the tease) provides.

One more time, and then the mods should either close this thread or I'll just quit replying:

I had a slight lean on the Bears at +10.5, but not enough to bet them. I was worried about any variation of 24-13, 21-10 (etc.) and frankly, I was worried about 11 and 14 (not so much 17). I thought the side to play was Chicago, backed up by the public siding with Minny. But, I've f&cking seen Kyle Orton play before. He may very well be the worst of the 3 Bears QB's, but hey, it was his turn. So, that took the side out of the equation.
I played the total (Under 43) for a unit, I even went with a tiny Bears (+pts) and Under parlay for 1/4 unit, but then I went big with my teaser. I felt pretty damn confident in the total falling under 43, but I felt REAL good about Under 49.5 and Bears +17. Good enough that I bet a few units on it and made it my big play for Monday night. Now, would I have rather thrown all 5 units on the parlay and gotten paid off 13 units? In hindsight, sure. But at the time, I wanted what I perceived to be a great chance to gain a few units. I gained a few. I'm happy.

Period. The end.

[LT Profits]

I do that too, actually.

Gee, there's a shock!

Outdrawed, I know I am in the minority here, but I like you (probably because it seems we think alike).

That said, we do express ourselves differently. I guess I am more of a politician.