ever laid more than -700 on a single wager?

[zerocage]

Zerocage does not promote NOT BEING confident! If your system works for you, then your system works for you.

[HedgeHog]

Never. Why risk $700 to win a measly $100? I saw alot of people risking -400 on the Pats for the SB. We saw how that turned out. Just this weekend in soccer, Man United lost as a -450 favourite to Man City, a +1050 Dog.

No game is a lock, so you have to find value in lines. You will be much better off if you can find value.

just my 2c.

If you know you have a bet that is 90% likely to win, and you only have to spot 7-1, wouldn't you agree there's value.

[zerocage]

Wasn't New England 90 percent likely to win?? There are lots of variable do you not agree??

[durito]

Zerocage does not promote NOT BEING confident! If your system works for you, then your system works for you.

can i be your bookie?

[durito]

Wasn't New England 90 percent likely to win?? There are lots of variable do you not agree??

What's your point here? If the true odds of them winning that game were 90% then -400 was a great play -- regardless of the outcome of the game.

[pavyracer]

I laid -3000 that Mario DeVito will not leave this forum by March 1st and the book rejected it.

[donjuan]

Some people just don't understand that being results oriented is not a good thing.

[zerocage]

What's your point here? If the true odds of them winning that game were 90% then -400 was a great play -- regardless of the outcome of the game.

So even if it loses, its a good bet?

[zerocage]

can i be your bookie?

I don't want your money

[durito]

So even if it loses, its a good bet?

OK. Let's say I have a fair coin, ie 50% chance of landing heads and 50% chance of landing tails.

I offer you tails for +110. Is this a good bet?

If it lands on heads, was it a good bet?

[durito]

Never. Why risk $700 to win a measly $100? I saw alot of people risking -400 on the Pats for the SB. We saw how that turned out. Just this weekend in soccer, Man United lost as a -450 favourite to Man City, a +1050 Dog.

No game is a lock, so you have to find value in lines. You will be much better off if you can find value.

just my 2c.

So, there can't be value in a game priced at -700?

[zerocage]

Are we going into "bad beats" territory? I don't know what your definition of a good bet is , that is why I asked.

[zerocage]

Please, show me where you've been -700 or more over and over.....................

[durito]

Are we going into "bad beats" territory? I don't know what your definition of a good bet is , that is why I asked.

A good bet is + expected value bet, like tails at +110.


Individual results are irrelevant.

If you put down $10,000 on red at the roulette table and it hits, it was still a -EV bet.

[zerocage]

A good bet is + expected value bet, like tails at +110.


Individual results are irrelevant.

If you put down $10,000 on red at the roulette table and it hits, it was still a -EV bet.

Yes. But having an edge @ -700 on a regular basis, I just don't see. I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong here. I like to get different angles on how people do things.

[donjuan]

Would you offer me -700 on any team in NCAAB today?

[durito]

Yes. But having an edge @ -700 on a regular basis, I just don't see. I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong here. I like to get different angles on how people do things.

OK, so then if there is never an edge at -700, wouldn't betting the underdog on that game then frequently have an edge?

Or, are the bookmakers 100% accurate?

No one is telling you to go bet all -700's. You need to find edges wherever they exist, whether at +200 or -10000.

[Poker_Beast]

I would never bet on a line that high. One loss and it's all over.

[curious]

I dont' like to bet MLB at odds worse than -170. I dont like to give up more than about 15 points in NCAAB. I don't like to give up more than about 10 points in NFL.

[zerocage]

OK, so then if there is never an edge at -700, wouldn't betting the underdog on that game then frequently have an edge?

Or, are the bookmakers 100% accurate?

No one is telling you to go bet all -700's. You need to find edges wherever they exist, whether at +200 or -10000.

[zerocage]

Most would not lay -1000 . No way. If you need to keep your money flowing , I don't see a problem with a -700 every once in a while in spots but I don't see anyone laying -700 all the time!

[RageWizard]

Each unit wagered this year for me is worth $250. On my NFL supernova lock of the moment I lay down 15 units. On any other bet that is over 2.8 units will be at or over the 700 mark.

[tacomax]

I think this thread is a good example why books tend not to go broke.

[TurbanCowboy40]

Georgetown -900 last night was a retarded bet. GTOWN lives in 50 point games which means the opposing team has a very good chance at keeping the game close. GTOWN is overrated this year. Villanova always plays them tight.

To bet 900 to win 100 is stupid, especially in basketball, especially in NBA basketball.

[HedgeHog]

Georgetown -900 last night was a retarded bet.* GTOWN lives in 50 point games which means the opposing team has a very good chance at keeping the game close.* GTOWN is overrated this year.* Villanova always plays them tight.To bet 900 to win 100 is stupid, especially in basketball, especially in NBA basketball.

Not always. Handicap each game individually. Would you lay -900 on Gonzaga (31 point fav) over Loyola-Maramount? Hell yes. Sometimes you can find value in large ML favs.

[TurbanCowboy40]

What 31 point favorite in the history of gambling was -900 money line?

I just came on this forum the other day and I'm really not impressed with the comments and questions of many people on here.

Covers and wagerline destroy this site.

Not always. Handicap each game individually. Would you lay -900 on Gonzaga (31 point fav) over Loyola-Maramount? Hell yes. Sometimes you can find value in large ML favs.

[HedgeHog]

What 31 point favorite in the history of gambling was -900 money line?

I just came on this forum the other day and I'm really not impressed with the comments and questions of many people on here.

Covers and wagerline destroy this site.

None. My point is that if you handicap a game that you feel has a 95%chance of winning, then laying 9-1 is not a bad deal. Normally I wouldn't lay that much wood, but sometimes it makes sense.

[teazeman]

Covers and wagerline destroy this site.

you just lost me.......a couple of sites that discuss gambling but their posters don't really wager actual money.

[durito]

What 31 point favorite in the history of gambling was -900 money line?

I just came on this forum the other day and I'm really not impressed with the comments and questions of many people on here.

Covers and wagerline destroy this site.

Each one of Ganchrow's posts has more relevant information than those boards do combined.

[zerocage]

Each one of Ganchrow's posts has more relevant information than those boards do combined.

I agree

[mofome]

hedgehog, reading this i came away impressed with your knowledge, ability to explain your views, and the way you choose to make your points.

[pavyracer]

None. My point is that if you handicap a game that you feel has a 95%chance of winning, then laying 9-1 is not a bad deal. Normally I wouldn't lay that much wood, but sometimes it makes sense.

You must have met Pats ML on superboel

[mofome]

Each one of Ganchrow's posts has more relevant information than those boards do combined.

truer words i do not recall.

[twtb19]

hedgehog, reading this i came away impressed with your knowledge, ability to explain your views, and the way you choose to make your points.

Couldn't agree more, thanks to Hedgehog and I think it was durito for making the point of this thread very easy to understand for everyone.

[Ganchrow]

Each one of Ganchrow's posts has more relevant information than those boards do combined.

Not this one.