When is someone actually gonna talk about how bad SOME lines are?

**Rod1010** · 12-08-10, 08:46 PM

70% boy

**nli07** · 12-08-10, 08:47 PM

LOL, so if I offered you NE at -14 you would've taken it at -110? Please... hindsight is always 20/20 my friend.

**obamaismyuncle** · 12-08-10, 08:48 PM

Originally posted by StackinGreen

Great line Vegas / Market! You really nailed that New England -3.5 game on MNF ...

Seriously, when are people gonna realize that sometimes the line IS NOT EVEN CLOSE = IT WAS A VERY BAD LINE

I've seen several recently, thus winning picks

welcome to sbr! hope you enjoy it here!

**brxbmbers42** · 12-08-10, 08:51 PM

-120 this guy is barreled in living in his parents basement.

**jgray** · 12-08-10, 08:55 PM

I think the OP has a point to make. It's about perception. How often do you see a game come down to the hook and posters marvel at how sharp the line is? When it's a blowout like Monday night there's no similar conversation.

**obamaismyuncle** · 12-08-10, 09:01 PM

Originally posted by brxbmbers42

-120 this guy is barreled in living in his parents basement.

you just described 70% of the posters on SBR

**dodger33** · 12-08-10, 10:56 PM

Originally posted by nli07

LOL, so if I offered you NE at -14 you would've taken it at -110? Please... hindsight is always 20/20 my friend.

Who is in your avatar?

**THE PROFIT** · 12-08-10, 11:09 PM

Originally posted by StackinGreen

Great line Vegas / Market! You really nailed that New England -3.5 game on MNF ...

Seriously, when are people gonna realize that sometimes the line IS NOT EVEN CLOSE = IT WAS A VERY BAD LINE

I've seen several recently, thus winning picks

this is the dumbest fukin thing I've ever read!!! The line is not a stick to measure how much a team will win by, its a stick to measure how much dumbfuks THINK a team will win by!

Just because a team wins by 42 when the line was 3 doesnt mean a fukin thing about the line being sharp. That could have been the sharpest line in the world!!!

A line is to make 100 people take one side & 100 people take the other, when a line accomplishes that it is the sharpest ever, the tip of the fukin sword, I dont care what the outcome of the game

**DrStale** · 12-08-10, 11:11 PM

Well after the game is over certainly seems like the easiest time.

I'll let you prove me wrong by allowing you to identify which games will be about 40 points off the spread next week.

**Masu485** · 12-08-10, 11:42 PM

Originally posted by nli07

LOL, so if I offered you NE at -14 you would've taken it at -110? Please... hindsight is always 20/20 my friend.

i guarantee you tons of people would have taken it.

vegas can make the line whatever they want and still have tons of people bet on both sides.

**Domer** · 12-08-10, 11:49 PM

this thread is terrible...there should be a sandbox for newbies and their AMAZING OBSERVATIONS.

**sickler** · 12-08-10, 11:51 PM

Monday morning quarterback.

StackinGreen, you should've been here before the game telling us how bad the line is.

**GELATINOUS CUBE** · 12-09-10, 04:23 AM

he-has-a-point...

alot-of-times-great-teams-are-only-minus5...

when-it-should-be-minus11...

take-the-fave!!!!....
and-enjoy-the-game!

**Wulfman14** · 12-09-10, 04:31 AM

what are you talking about. of course some lines are going to be off every week , every day for that matter, if oddsmakers were right all the time then no one would ever make any money .

**HauntingTheHoly** · 12-09-10, 05:03 AM

Originally posted by DrStale

Well after the game is over certainly seems like the easiest time.

I'll let you prove me wrong by allowing you to identify which games will be about 40 points off the spread next week.

**jjgold** · 12-09-10, 05:57 AM

not as easy as it looks

Yes many of us are winning right now but it will even out and we will lose everything like you guy

**HotStreak** · 12-09-10, 08:10 AM

I didn't think the line was supposed to represent who was actually going to win the game. I thought it was supposed to induce action on both sides.

**StackinGreen** · 12-09-10, 08:22 PM

Originally posted by jgray

I think the OP has a point to make. It's about perception. How often do you see a game come down to the hook and posters marvel at how sharp the line is? When it's a blowout like Monday night there's no similar conversation.

Finally someone is thinking. Thanks, jgray. Well done bro

**rm18** · 12-09-10, 08:30 PM

Pal are you old enough to remember when the Jets beat the patriots by 14 as 3 point dogs?

These teams will play again this year take Pats -6 and see what happens.

**StackinGreen** · 12-09-10, 08:40 PM

I'm happy to say, at least, a few people realize the idiocy of some of these responders.

Lines aren't ever off? Why bet then?

Think about it.

**rm18** · 12-09-10, 08:46 PM

Yes lines are off, but just because a team covers does not mean they are the right side. What about guys who took Washington +3 at chicago dumb bet but worked out.

**big0mar** · 12-09-10, 08:46 PM

Touts

**DrStale** · 12-09-10, 10:51 PM

Originally posted by StackinGreen

I'm happy to say, at least, a few people realize the idiocy of some of these responders.

Lines aren't ever off? Why bet then?

Think about it.

Of course lines are sometimes off you numbskull. The point us "idiot responders" are making is that you pointed out a line that was way off AFTER the game was over. You have provided the forum with absolutely zero information, but for some reason you think you've discovered something new. That is why you are being ridiculed and treated like the rookie that you are.

**StackinGreen** · 12-10-10, 02:08 PM

Stale,

"The point us "idiot responders" are making is that you pointed out a line that was way off AFTER the game was over."

I also said New England by 17 Pre-Game.

Yes, just because you "cover" doesn't mean it was a good bet. Totally agreed. But when you call it, stand strong, and it's not even close (the favorite CRUSHES the line or dawg wins outright) ... there is nothing anyone else can say when you call out the fact that the bettors (and Vegas) were just flat out wrong.

... especially when a 3.5 point favorite wins by 42.

**big0mar** · 12-10-10, 02:35 PM

Just give out your PayPal address already, so we don't have to deal with weeks of your nonsense buddy

**DrStale** · 12-10-10, 03:07 PM

Originally posted by StackinGreen

Stale,

"The point us "idiot responders" are making is that you pointed out a line that was way off AFTER the game was over."

I also said New England by 17 Pre-Game.

Yes, just because you "cover" doesn't mean it was a good bet. Totally agreed. But when you call it, stand strong, and it's not even close (the favorite CRUSHES the line or dawg wins outright) ... there is nothing anyone else can say when you call out the fact that the bettors (and Vegas) were just flat out wrong.

... especially when a 3.5 point favorite wins by 42.

Congratulations, you got a game right. How quickly im sure you forgot about the times you called a team to win by 2 touchdowns and they lost by 2. That's why it's clear you're a rookie. You win a game and think you've realized some great epiphany. When a seasoned gambler wins a game like this they enjoy the win, but they don't run around telling everyone how bad the line was because they know the pendulum swings both ways. BOL in the future.

**StackinGreen** · 12-10-10, 05:08 PM

Originally posted by DrStale

Congratulations, you got a game right. How quickly im sure you forgot about the times you called a team to win by 2 touchdowns and they lost by 2. That's why it's clear you're a rookie. You win a game and think you've realized some great epiphany. When a seasoned gambler wins a game like this they enjoy the win, but they don't run around telling everyone how bad the line was because they know the pendulum swings both ways. BOL in the future.

Again, you are reading what you want to read into this thread. The point isn't, and never was, about me. It's about the general question of how bad lines are sometimes and yet how no one mentions this here. They ONLY mention when it's "sharp". The fact is that tons of blowouts occur that show that the bettors or Vegas, whomever you prefer to call it, were not anywhere near. As others have said, sometimes people get duped into thinking the Oddsmakers (opening line creators) are sooo good that they get scared from taking advantage of a bad line.

If I didn't realize this or give you the detail I do --- let alone my NFL record --- you might be able to call me a rookie. The fact is, I know the ins and outs very well, and as much as you and others would like to CALL me a rookie, you have no basis to do it and furthermore, it's not true.

The proof is in the pudding.

**big0mar** · 12-10-10, 05:12 PM

Where can we buy your plays Mr. Clairvoyant?

**jgray** · 12-10-10, 07:38 PM

Originally posted by StackinGreen

Again, you are reading what you want to read into this thread. The point isn't, and never was, about me. It's about the general question of how bad lines are sometimes and yet how no one mentions this here. They ONLY mention when it's "sharp". The fact is that tons of blowouts occur that show that the bettors or Vegas, whomever you prefer to call it, were not anywhere near. As others have said, sometimes people get duped into thinking the Oddsmakers (opening line creators) are sooo good that they get scared from taking advantage of a bad line. If I didn't realize this or give you the detail I do --- let alone my NFL record --- you might be able to call me a rookie. The fact is, I know the ins and outs very well, and as much as you and others would like to CALL me a rookie, you have no basis to do it and furthermore, it's not true. The proof is in the pudding.

I get what you are saying. I saw at least three posts last night following the game where a poster commented about how smart Vegas was to set the line with in the point of the outcome.

**StackinGreen** · 12-10-10, 09:53 PM

Big O,

I don't sell picks and I don't call myself clairvoyant. I analyze and my record speaks for itself.

On a different note, I really like your signature. It does have a typo though, which if you fixed, would be even cooler.

**stealthyburrito** · 12-10-10, 10:15 PM

haha, welcome to community

**StackinGreen** · 12-11-10, 09:22 AM

Thanks, stealthy. I don't blame people for being skeptics but reading into stuff that isn't there just ain't kosher. The sheer volume and BS is hard to overcome here, I understand. A few people have PMed me and they can vouch. I just told a recent one that if he shares my success or vouches for me, they'll call him a plant. You can't win.

With this kind of reception, why would someone want to post picks for these peeps? No offense, I'm just saying.

The other problem is that volume is so high here that the threads vanish really quickly. I don't play games every single week, and that's why I've been successful for the past 8 years in the NFL. I like to watch and bet other sports but have never claimed, and never will, positive lifetime ROI (such as in college hoops or baseball). Why? I haven't had +ROI in those games. In the NFL, I do. Period.

**Powderguy** · 12-11-10, 09:33 AM

Get an avatar pic up

**StackinGreen** · 12-11-10, 12:28 PM

Originally posted by Powderguy

Get an avatar pic up

Done and Done. Dick Allen HOF. Should be #1 on the list of top snubs.

A BEAST.