It appears this doesn't happen often in the NFL, week one?

[JMon]

A non-divisional home dog? I'm counting 71 situations since 1989?

This is a spot to look at

[JMon]

Anyone think a premature high total in week one?

[JMon]

[slacker00]

I have no idea what you are talking about. What's a premature high total?

Non-division week 1 home dogs are not rare and 36-34-1 ATS is nothing to write home about anyway.

[seaborneq]

Need more information. What do the numbers say? Is it Oakland this week? What do the 71 other instances say?

[JMon]

I have no idea what you are talking about. What's a premature high total?

Non-division week 1 home dogs are not rare and 36-34-1 ATS is nothing to write home about anyway.

not rare? 71 games since 1989?

[JMon]

I have no idea what you are talking about. What's a premature high total?

Non-division week 1 home dogs are not rare and 36-34-1 ATS is nothing to write home about anyway.

did you check the totals?

[JMon]

Need more information. What do the numbers say? Is it Oakland this week? What do the 71 other instances say?

still running them...

[JMon]

[slacker00]

not rare? 71 games since 1989?

That's about 20% of the games within that criteria. Nothing rare about something that happens 20% of the time.

Let me ask again, what are you even getting at? I can't even understand what your angle is.

[JMon]

That's about 20% of the games within that criteria. Nothing rare about something that happens 20% of the time.

Let me ask again, what are you even getting at? I can't even understand what your angle is.

Let me ask you again...have you looked at the totals- O/U....my god!

[JMon]

[JMon]

45-24-2 under since '89

[JMon]

[JMon]

[JMon]

total>=45

[youngfl0yd]

I don't even understand what is going on in here...

[kidcudi92]

I don't even understand what is going on in here...

x2 like what in theeeeee fukkkkk

[NardVa]

At least one dog will cash at home. I'm guessing Buffalo. They have a legit defense and some playmakers on offense.

[DOM_Toretto]

Wtf is jmon trying to tell us?

Speak English not riddles

[newguy]

He's saying bet the over

[dfish]

[JMon]

A non-divisional home dog? I'm counting 71 situations since 1989?

This is a spot to look at

45-24-2 under since '89

total>=45

Just messing around with numbers last night. This seems meaningless, but interesting. I can't think of any good logic why it happens. probably not worth a bet.

Since 1989, in week one - home dogs in a non divisional game have seen the total go under the posted line 65% of the time. 45 unders - 24 overs and 2 push. Totals of 45 and over in this same spot are 14 under and 0 over since '89... thus Bills under and Falcons under.

[JMon]

[ATTACH]84655[/ATTACH]

boom

[slacker00]

45-24-2 under since '89

Why didn't you say this in post #1?

So, to apply this: SF,OAK,WAS,JAX,BUF,ATL are the non-division week 1 home dogs and you want the under.

WagerType:PARLAY (6 TEAMS)
Date:	Team:
Sep 13	NFL [470] TOTAL u45-110 (INDIANAPOLIS vrs BUFFALO)
Sep 13	NFL [472] TOTAL u43-110 (MIAMI vrs WASHINGTON)
Sep 13	NFL [474] TOTAL u41-110 (CAROLINA vrs JACKSONVILLE)
Sep 13	NFL [484] TOTAL u43½-110 (CINCINNATI vrs OAKLAND)
Sep 14	NFL [490] TOTAL u55½-110 (PHILADELPHIA vrs ATLANTA)
Sep 14	NFL [492] TOTAL u41½-110 (MINNESOTA vrs SAN FRANCISCO)
Risking 5 SBR To Win 200.00 SBR (I made this parlay for tracking purposes.)

Interesting idea, we'll see how you do. GL!

[JMon]

slacker...Jmon was hitting the sauce rather heavy last night.

[slacker00]

slacker...Jmon was hitting the sauce rather heavy last night.

Well, grab some coffee and look it over and tell me what you think after you sober up.

[Terps1993]

Gotta love basing numbers from 1990s non divisional home dogs over/unders to decide that this falcons eagles shootout is gonna hit the under.

[Jayvegas420]

I have three of those 5 games over.
This will be Intersting!

[slacker00]

Gotta love basing numbers from 1990s non divisional home dogs over/unders to decide that this falcons eagles shootout is gonna hit the under.

I know its out there. At least he has some stats, unlike most guys on here. We've got 6 solid games to test it.

[JMon]

Well, grab some coffee and look it over and tell me what you think after you sober up.

ya,, only going to be watching for sure. Funny I stumbled on the total trend here, as I was looking to see how non div home dogs did ATS in week one, so just wanted to share. I can't think of any sound logic why they tend to go under.. and after closer review 6 spots today is the most this situation has spit out since '89; so it's going to have to go 4-2 at least. Also btwn 1989-98 it went 13-12 under/over. '99 to current 33-11-2 (under/over), with ave total of 42 and ave final score of 36. I wouldn't play, not trustworthy. I may put a little on the >=45 totals (14-0 under) for action.

[teaserpleaser]

if it wasn't week 1 i'd smash that over in the lions v chargers game ....if it wasn't week 1

[Maddhatter]

Why didn't you say this in post #1?

So, to apply this: SF,OAK,WAS,JAX,BUF,ATL are the non-division week 1 home dogs and you want the under.

WagerType:PARLAY (6 TEAMS)
Date:	Team:
Sep 13	NFL [470] TOTAL u45-110 (INDIANAPOLIS vrs BUFFALO)
Sep 13	NFL [472] TOTAL u43-110 (MIAMI vrs WASHINGTON)
Sep 13	NFL [474] TOTAL u41-110 (CAROLINA vrs JACKSONVILLE)
Sep 13	NFL [484] TOTAL u43½-110 (CINCINNATI vrs OAKLAND)
Sep 14	NFL [490] TOTAL u55½-110 (PHILADELPHIA vrs ATLANTA)
Sep 14	NFL [492] TOTAL u41½-110 (MINNESOTA vrs SAN FRANCISCO)
Risking 5 SBR To Win 200.00 SBR (I made this parlay for tracking purposes.)

Interesting idea, we'll see how you do. GL!

Looks like 5-1. Something to consider next year (if you can wait that long). Nice catch even if you just bet the 2 games on Mon night. Good find JMon.

[Tarboroken]

Good job

ya,, only going to be watching for sure. Funny I stumbled on the total trend here, as I was looking to see how non div home dogs did ATS in week one, so just wanted to share. I can't think of any sound logic why they tend to go under.. and after closer review 6 spots today is the most this situation has spit out since '89; so it's going to have to go 4-2 at least. Also btwn 1989-98 it went 13-12 under/over. '99 to current 33-11-2 (under/over), with ave total of 42 and ave final score of 36. I wouldn't play, not trustworthy. I may put a little on the >=45 totals (14-0 under) for action.

You ou were right. Many thought you would be wrong.

[slacker00]

Looks like 5-1. Something to consider next year (if you can wait that long). Nice catch even if you just bet the 2 games on Mon night. Good find JMon.

Well, we don't have to wait. We can use what we learned here to find another lopsided trend like this.