That is, games where the opposite side not only looks "too good to be true", but the spread seems considerably off. This breeds paranoia and people trying to get clever (me on UAB) betting the counter-intuitive, opposite "too good" side, because they think books know something and set a trap, and therefore acquire the belief that they are on the "smart side" with the books, but end up just getting buried with them in the end.
UAB -2.5 (opener, I had -1.5) - unreal SHIT team with zero fuking business being favored. 65%+ had ECU
Heat -7.5 - You're giving 7.5 points to the East Champs and best starting 5 TEAM in the league against a team with zero chemistry and no coach..55%+ had Boston.
Denver +3 - This should be 5 at least. 65%+ had LA.
UAB -2.5 (opener, I had -1.5) - unreal SHIT team with zero fuking business being favored. 65%+ had ECU
Heat -7.5 - You're giving 7.5 points to the East Champs and best starting 5 TEAM in the league against a team with zero chemistry and no coach..55%+ had Boston.
Denver +3 - This should be 5 at least. 65%+ had LA.