If you consistently laid -3.5 every time you saw it...

[RMStanley]

... has anybody ever heard of a system like this? The logic is that Vegas is trying to get you to take the hook with a +3.5 "favorable" spread, so if you intuitively took the opposite each and every time you saw it, could you approach a high 50's winning percentage?

I'd love to see a few years' worth of NCAAFB and NFL tallies that show how often a -3.5 team covers (and for that matter a +6.5 team as those seem the key numbers to me).

[RMStanley]

For full disclosure, I'm probably screwed this week because I'm on New Orleans +3.5 and San Francisco -6.5 haha.

[Louisvillekid1]

Your thinking too hard, just pick winners

[Ra77er]

ya nerd

[DudleyDawson]

Vegas has thought of every possible angle that could ever exist. Spot bet and pick winners.

[wantitall4moi]

used to be able to bet all +3.5 dogs on the ML and make a profit, but books screw with vig too much now so its basically break even these days.

[SBR_John]

Over the long haul you'd hit ohh about 50%.

[TheMoneyShot]

Over the long haul you'd hit ohh about 50%.

Exactly what I was thinking.

[Big Bear]

It would NOT take long before you start buying that hook with this strategy.

I always buy the hook. There nothing worse than that half point beating ya

[wantitall4moi]

2008 8-14 SU; 12-10 ATS
2009 12-13 SU; 14-11 ATS
2010 7-15 SU;9-13 ATS
2011 9-16 SU ;16-9 ATS
2012 9-12 SU ;13-8 ATS

So since 08 you'd be 64-51 ATS (55.6%) on the blind betting ON every +3.5 dog. Closers at pinnacle are source numbers. Results may vary obviously.


EDIT, so your strat would kill you.

[seaborneq]

+2.5 seems to the magic blind number.

[wantitall4moi]

+2.5 seems to the magic blind number.

2.5 dogs...

2012 6-9 SU; 9-6 ATS
2011 12-9 SU; 12-9 ATS
2010 9-11 SU; 9-11 ATS
2009 5-8 SU; 7-6 ATS
2008 4-6 SU; 6-4 ATS

No comparison.

[RudyRuetigger]

wanti gives us a tip

[k13]

+2.5 seems to the magic blind number.

Take the ML on every +2.5 and lower dog. Hit ~55% SU the last 2 years.

[wantitall4moi]

Take the ML on every +2.5 and lower dog. Hit ~55% SU the last 2 years.

some lines will vary, but it would take a lot to make it to 55%. I got 54-48, and mostly because +1 and +1.5 were a combined 20-15 SU.

[k13]

some lines will vary, but it would take a lot to make it to 55%. I got 54-48, and mostly because +1 and +1.5 were a combined 20-15 SU.

I have 50-44 based on closing Pinnacle lines but even if you only hit 50% you are still profiting since you are taking every line at + money.

[RMStanley]

2.5 dogs...

2012 6-9 SU; 9-6 ATS
2011 12-9 SU; 12-9 ATS
2010 9-11 SU; 9-11 ATS
2009 5-8 SU; 7-6 ATS
2008 4-6 SU; 6-4 ATS

No comparison.

Interesting. I'd like a longer sample than 2008 for both +2.5 and -3.5 but that's interesting for sure.

[Outhouse Tim]

Never lay 3.5.

[RudyRuetigger]

still waiting for wanti advice

popcorn
coors lights
fleshlight

[wantitall4moi]

Interesting. I'd like a longer sample than 2008 for both +2.5 and -3.5 but that's interesting for sure.

i can go back with closers to 1989 but you dont have to go back before the 2 pt conversion was put back in. But with so many other rules changes like OT change and kick off line move the numbers will be skewed going forward anyway. Thats why you saw a spike last year, the kick off getting moved changed the game completely some coaches have adjusted but many havent so you have to actually look at that rather than an over all result.

[seaborneq]

I take the -2.5 home fave quite a bit and the +2.5 road dog seems to win outright an incredibly large amount of time. I don't need any numbers to prove that.

[wantitall4moi]

I take the -2.5 home fave quite a bit and the +2.5 road dog seems to win outright an incredibly large amount of time. I don't need any numbers to prove that.

-2.5 home favs since 2008...

29-21 SU; 23-27 ATS

So therefore road dogs would be 21-29 SU and 27-23 ATS