[Isaiah]

Don't be jealous, just work harder in what you do best.

Jealous? What the f*ck are you talking about? I asked a sincere question, not many 21 yr. old kids have that kind of money so many are curious.

Goodness the quality of this forum has really become dog sh*t in the past year. Idiots trolling with no reading comprehension much less sharp insights. Pathetic.

[LucyTheApe]

Bol man, I know ari got a really bad secondry and CJ n GT will get theirs in the open field, but ari are really good at stopping the run. I just can't see det making a run for it. Stafford is really hit or missed, yeah he'll throw some TDs but he'll throw some ints as we'll. Ari got a really good coach, yeah they lost their starting QB but everyone in that team is capable to fill the lead role at anytime. I'm really feeling the cardinals is gonn take it.

About the comment with being a new dad will decrease your performance in a game, that's just BS man. It really depends on the person, you can't base your wager on that, especially if you gonna put that much money down.


best of luck to you, I really hope you win this bet.

[pavyracer]

Defense will win this game.East teams rarely win in the West.

[White Widow]

Zona looks solid to me, GL

[jjgold]

Detroit not a well known on road to play well


Zona or no play as of now

[Zenyatta 19-1]

Where did you get $7,000 to gamble with as a 21 yr. old kid?

I was down 2200 to the bookie when I was 16 lol...I been working since I was 13 in the Family Liquor store up in Flint, Michigan. Heart of the projects..Working and saving allowed me to place a 7,000 bet. I'll never forget that day...sitting at Kansas City Radisson hotel downtown in their lobby. Once game was pretty much over walked up to a vase sitting on the table and penetrating kicked that mother F as hard as I could shattering it to pieces and just walked the F out to indulge in some comfort food. 21 years old and a 35 year old nurse flew me out there and put me in a hotel to F my brains out all weekend...needless to say I didn't want to speak to anyone so I never even answered her calls when I was there!

[Eddy Munny]

Naw, I heard you blew a guy in a suit for the 7k.

You took a load in your eye.

You wore a patch.

You were dubbed "One-eyed Willie."

You swore... never again.

[Playmaker]

The Cardinals have overachieved this year and are due for Some type of regression but I'm not sure if it comes this week... Good Luck with this

[Isaiah]

I was down 2200 to the bookie when I was 16 lol...I been working since I was 13 in the Family Liquor store up in Flint, Michigan. Heart of the projects..Working and saving allowed me to place a 7,000 bet. I'll never forget that day...sitting at Kansas City Radisson hotel downtown in their lobby. Once game was pretty much over walked up to a vase sitting on the table and penetrating kicked that mother F as hard as I could shattering it to pieces and just walked the F out to indulge in some comfort food. 21 years old and a 35 year old nurse flew me out there and put me in a hotel to F my brains out all weekend...needless to say I didn't want to speak to anyone so I never even answered her calls when I was there!

Yeah okay. I almost believed your first post but now I know you are a tale weaver. Nonetheless, good luck on your air wager.

[Eddy Munny]

Yea, OP is full of shit... but I do like the Lions.

[RickyRoma]

never and i do mean NEVER BET THE LIONS ON THE ROAD THAT IS NOT a reliable team to place any kind of money, they seem like a good squad this year and then watch them nosedive, good luck man but even with no palmer and the arizona shaken, i still dont see the lions win

[TDKJET1717]

Flint, Michigan.

i wish i could save 7k(easily)

i hate living in san francisco

[Shocked]

Good luck, I hope you win!

[Checkerboard]

prick's on ari, det is a prick fade

[House]

The more I look at this game the more I like the Lions

[I rike 2 bet]

DET wins, good bet Zenyatta.

[Harold Baines]

I'd tread carefully here. For a long time, the Cardinals have had the Lions number, especially in Arizona. Even when the Cardinals have had some garbage teams, they have handled the Lions at home. In fact, the Lions have lost to squads with Ryan Lindley and Matt Leinart as QB. Detroit hasn't won there in over 20 years, 0-7 over that span. I actually think Stanton is a tougher matchup for the Lions, Palmer is a statue in the pocket.

[coitus_maximus]

I love it when people say things like "the books want you to take...." as if they have a freaking clue what goes on at Vegas headquarters when the lines debut each week. These are the same people that throw buzzwords like "trap" or "fishy" around when they look at the odds and can't make sense of it.

Unless you have a special phone-line to the Vegas war room, where odds are set, and some insider is inexplicably willing to spill all their secrets to you, don't tell me what "Vegas wants." I'm sure if Vegas wanted all of us to unload on the Lions, they'd give us more than a point or two. In fact, as of this post, the spread has moved to a pick'em.... Yeah, they're trying really hard to get us on the Lions.

The spread is what it is... nothing more. Bet who you like to cover. If you can't figure it out, move along.

I could just as easily say that Vegas wants you to take the Cards. Think about it... you get the home team who is 8-1 and facing a one dimensional dome team who lost to the Panthers on the road and nearly lost to the punchless Falcons as well. Sure, Palmer is out, but Stanton has three starts this year under his belt, including a win over the 49ers... and the Cards aren't laying any points?

Wow, it looks like free money!!! Cardinals all day! Oh wait, that's what Vegas wants you to think... I won't be outdone by those cigar-chomping hucksters. If that's what they want, then I'm on the Lions.

All bullshit aside, I like the Lions here a lot. The Cardinals have had some close shaves, including last week's misleading final score. Even with Palmer in the lineup, the Cardinals have sputtered on offense more than you'd expect from a team with as many weapons as they have, and facing an improved Lions D won't be any picnic. Furthermore, the Cards pass defense hasn't been up to snuff and will face a potent attack who have their All-World receiver back in the fold.

If Vegas wants me to take the Lions, then I'm more than happy to oblige.

Guess they didn't want the public to take LSU yesterday. For today, see Denver and SF as stay away, but sweet to the public eye. Especially Frisco.

[TheMoneyShot]

This game is PK for one reason only... it's a 50/50 call...Can the Lions screw with Stanton's head? If they do... Lions win. If they can't... Lions lose.

The Lions can figure out Arizona's defense... that's not the issue here.

[SOCALSCOTT]

Lions=5-15 on grass last 20 games...yes that field is rolled in and is GRASS!!

[Eddy Munny]

Guess they didn't want the public to take LSU yesterday. For today, see Denver and SF as stay away, but sweet to the public eye. Especially Frisco.

Not sure what the meaning of this post is... There was no baiting in the LSU game.

The public just simply often fails to read the waters beyond the surface. If you look at records and rankings, which is a mindless, superficial way of handicapping a game, then I could see how LSU looked enticing. But more astute cappers realize that Arkansas is a quality team who couldn't quite catch the breaks to finish off some close games this season... a team better than their record. They had Alabama and Mississippi State on the ropes this year, so what's not to like?

Furthermore, LSU is a team that is offensively challenged and was coming off back to back physically and emotionally draining games against the likes of Ole Miss and Alabama... the latter of which went to overtime. Meanwhile, Arkansas was fully rested and game-planned for LSU, having had a bye. On top of all this, the Hogs get the home field advantage... so of course Vegas wasn't going to make LSU the favorite under these circumstances, hence there was no "trap."

If they had released a number that you personally would have deemed fit, LSU -6 for example, maybe they still generate some public backing on the Tigers (although it would have been considerably less), but the sharps would have come in and absolutely murdered them. Even as a smaller chalk, say LSU -3.5, Vegas would have been in a vulnerable spot. On a neutral field, LSU is probably laying that number, but on the road, especially given the intangibles of the previous week, Arkansas becomes the slight favorite, and understandably so.

So thank you for mentioning this game. This serves as a prime example as to why the public sees a line that doesn't compute with their square paradigm and automatically get paranoid that they're being duped i.e. "Looks too easy, therefore fishy..."

We can't confirm that Vegas wanted people backing LSU before the game because we can't see their ledger. What I do know is that the spread placed on the game was more or less accurate, all things considered. For the record, I bet Arkansas 1H as a pick'em because of facts I already laid out, not because I was trying to sidestep some perceived landmine set by the books.

As for the NFL games you mentioned, SF does not look sweet to me at all. I'm either taking Giants +4 or laying off the game altogether. And although the Rams have clipped a couple of good teams, and almost a couple more, I'm not getting in the way of that freight train known as Peyton Manning, especially in a dome. Broncos or nothing for me. You could say that's what Vegas wants me to think, but I could counter with the fact that I thought what they "wanted me to think" last week (-11 @ Oakland) and it didn't end well for them.

[chico2663]

dave frowarth has detroit on both tickets. don't think he has lost a double pick yet . not sure so don't rip me.

[Barnes & Whine]

People are idiots. Stanton is not better than palmer.

Maybe not. But that doesn't mean that Stanton is luckier than Palmer. And in the NFL, it is all about luck anyway.

[BIGDAY]

The Cardinals have overachieved this year and are due for Some type of regression but I'm not sure if it comes this week... Good Luck with this

Same me could be said for the Lions.

Taking the home squad.

[TheMoneyShot]

Not sure what the meaning of this post is... There was no baiting in the LSU game.

The public just simply often fails to read the waters beyond the surface. If you look at records and rankings, which is a mindless, superficial way of handicapping a game, then I could see how LSU looked enticing. But more astute cappers realize that Arkansas is a quality team who couldn't quite catch the breaks to finish off some close games this season... a team better than their record. They had Alabama and Mississippi State on the ropes this year, so what's not to like?

Furthermore, LSU is a team that is offensively challenged and was coming off back to back physically and emotionally draining games against the likes of Ole Miss and Alabama... the latter of which went to overtime. Meanwhile, Arkansas was fully rested and game-planned for LSU, having had a bye. On top of all this, the Hogs get the home field advantage... so of course Vegas wasn't going to make LSU the favorite under these circumstances, hence there was no "trap."

If they had released a number that you personally would have deemed fit, LSU -6 for example, maybe they still generate some public backing on the Tigers (although it would have been considerably less), but the sharps would have come in and absolutely murdered them. Even as a smaller chalk, say LSU -3.5, Vegas would have been in a vulnerable spot. On a neutral field, LSU is probably laying that number, but on the road, especially given the intangibles of the previous week, Arkansas becomes the slight favorite, and understandably so.

So thank you for mentioning this game. This serves as a prime example as to why the public sees a line that doesn't compute with their square paradigm and automatically get paranoid that they're being duped i.e. "Looks too easy, therefore fishy..."

We can't confirm that Vegas wanted people backing LSU before the game because we can't see their ledger. What I do know is that the spread placed on the game was more or less accurate, all things considered. For the record, I bet Arkansas 1H as a pick'em because of facts I already laid out, not because I was trying to sidestep some perceived landmine set by the books.

As for the NFL games you mentioned, SF does not look sweet to me at all. I'm either taking Giants +4 or laying off the game altogether. And although the Rams have clipped a couple of good teams, and almost a couple more, I'm not getting in the way of that freight train known as Peyton Manning, especially in a dome. Broncos or nothing for me. You could say that's what Vegas wants me to think, but I could counter with the fact that I thought what they "wanted me to think" last week (-11 @ Oakland) and it didn't end well for them.

I use this rule when wagering college football... it works around 70% of the time.

When a ranked college football team's line OPENS as a clear underdog against an unranked team. I always take the unranked team. I don't look at statistics... home or away.... or anything. The linesmakers already did the research for you. No reason for LSU to be an underdog against a below .500 club. I wish more games were like this one. Didn't even have to sweat this one.

[chico2663]

I tried to say this earlier and bear and house couldn't understand

[Eddy Munny]

I use this rule when wagering college football... it works around 70% of the time.

When a ranked college football team's line OPENS as a clear underdog against an unranked team. I always take the unranked team. I don't look at statistics... home or away.... or anything. The linesmakers already did the research for you. No reason for LSU to be an underdog against a below .500 club. I wish more games were like this one. Didn't even have to sweat this one.

While I disagree with your remark about "no reason for LSU to be an underdog..." I understand your point. Many times a line that looks "off" to someone just indicates that maybe they haven't done their homework. So you could, so to speak, fade your own intuition and trust that Vegas has done their homework and bet accordingly. I wouldn't recommend doing this, or anything for that matter, blindly, but it can turn a profit.

This "bet the unranked team favored against ranked team" strategy seems to work particularly well in college hoops.

[Heandog]

I like Det as well , but I get a kick out of these guys coming in here saying they are betting 10 k---100 k a game give me a break first off you would not be posting on a forum you would be in Vegas sitting in the sports lounge smoking a cigar with a shot and a beer in hand and some whore smoking your cigar. com on man enough of the BS . but I do like Det@ pk

[CallMeMrOMac]

I bit and bet $200 on Lions -1

I'm pretty confident. Then it's off to Green Bay for Packers -4 which I've had locked in all week.

I think the Cards are better than the Lions and Eagles better than the Packers. On neutral ground. This isn't neutral ground.

GL all

[Zenyatta 19-1]

I am not an air bettor. Just like 4 years ago I posted I will be going to vegas for 93 days and I posted pics there. I'm not sure if anyone else remembers this but I am not an air bettor. Who makes up a lie about being in kc when I'm from michigan??? Come on guys. Decided I was putting 5500 on game only. If stafford gets hurt I'm f. Just like Clemson game yesterday

[Zenyatta 19-1]

I wouldn't be sitting in vegas if I was betting 10k a game. I'm not a rich guy but I save my money well and feel like taking a shot. If I lose this 5500 I'll have 7k left in bank to my name. I do however own my house and is paid off so I can't sweat off a loss

[JMUplayer]

People look at that one pass he made last week and think stud...... He's not that good plain and simple

[PickoMoff]

I love it when people say things like "the books want you to take...." as if they have a freaking clue what goes on at Vegas headquarters when the lines debut each week. These are the same people that throw buzzwords like "trap" or "fishy" around when they look at the odds and can't make sense of it.

Unless you have a special phone-line to the Vegas war room, where odds are set, and some insider is inexplicably willing to spill all their secrets to you, don't tell me what "Vegas wants." I'm sure if Vegas wanted all of us to unload on the Lions, they'd give us more than a point or two. In fact, as of this post, the spread has moved to a pick'em.... Yeah, they're trying really hard to get us on the Lions.

The spread is what it is... nothing more. Bet who you like to cover. If you can't figure it out, move along.

I could just as easily say that Vegas wants you to take the Cards. Think about it... you get the home team who is 8-1 and facing a one dimensional dome team who lost to the Panthers on the road and nearly lost to the punchless Falcons as well. Sure, Palmer is out, but Stanton has three starts this year under his belt, including a win over the 49ers... and the Cards aren't laying any points?

Wow, it looks like free money!!! Cardinals all day! Oh wait, that's what Vegas wants you to think... I won't be outdone by those cigar-chomping hucksters. If that's what they want, then I'm on the Lions.

All bullshit aside, I like the Lions here a lot. The Cardinals have had some close shaves, including last week's misleading final score. Even with Palmer in the lineup, the Cardinals have sputtered on offense more than you'd expect from a team with as many weapons as they have, and facing an improved Lions D won't be any picnic. Furthermore, the Cards pass defense hasn't been up to snuff and will face a potent attack who have their All-World receiver back in the fold.

If Vegas wants me to take the Lions, then I'm more than happy to oblige.

Couldn't have said it any better!

[UnderDog_Philip]

GL to you but I really like the UNDER in this one.

[CallMeMrOMac]

I took under 43, too. Hope there's no late bombs thrown to beef up what should be a defensive game. DET/ARZ love those 4Q bomb TDs.