pick an adjusted line on every game and tell me how that works out for you
noob
noob
-
Comment -
Regardless, a blowout does not necessarily mean that a line was bad. Not saying this is what happened in this case, but maybe most times this game gets played it ends at patriots by 3 or 4. Less often Patriots by 14 or Jets by 6. And very very rarely Patriots by 42 or Jets by 35. Even if the line is perfect, there is no telling for sure that the game will end on that number.Originally posted by Dark HorseComment -
BettingWizard, what's your point? Nobody comments on adjusted lines being "on" or "off". Obviously, their prices (which like futures are bad) are conjectures based on the "straight" line. All I have to do is take the spread line, because it has been off many times over the last couple of weeks. It's off this week again (but only on a few games). Can you spot it? That's the whole point of this game.
If you want to get greedy, of course you can capitalize on adjusted lines but a) they aren't offered ubiquitously and b) there's no need to eat into expected return. Pats -14 probably was a nice payout, but I would tell you as someone who said Pats by 17 prior, whatever the price they offered likely wasn't worth it. Get it?
Stale, I agree, as I have said what you did right here, before. The way you prove yourself is by exposing "bad lines" over and over. Thus, my other post.
Best to all. Get the game this week. When I win big, as I did last week, I don't overreact the following week. My experience in that situation has taught me ... only play what you love. I only love 1 game this week.
That's all for now.Comment -
my point is that you're saying a lot of lines are bad. Why not capitalize and just do adjusted lines instead of regular spread?Comment -
Just to clarify, I've said that there have been glaringly bad lines as of late (last 2-3 weeks).
Chargers -6.5 was a decent line, but was still open for the taking at some sites when the knowledge of the Cassell appendicitis came to fore (now it's -9.5 on most). That's the kind of line move one can middle if they don't already love backup QB coming in for KC and SD having to win. The reason I mention that is because it's typical of the slow movement/inaction of the lines lately that has been sloppy. The Chicago -3 status post Hill injury (for 3 days!) was another.
My overarching point is that there are about 2-3 games a week that are solid to great plays, if someone follows and has a knack for the NFL. Sometimes there are 1 or none. The key is to realize that out of 15 games these are few, but very real opportunities. The recent BAD lines that I've mentioned are more particular to this season, and I was just astonished when I saw them. People can dispute it but every single one I've pointed out so far has hit. I can't really say anything else, nor can the naysayers, because the result only indicates one thing. If you are a skeptic, yes, you don't have to believe it, but you have no real evidence to support the contrarian position.
Finally, regarding the adjusted lines, my feeling (again) is that they aren't fair prices even considering something might be off. I gave the example of futures prices. Casino hits those with a HUGE edge --- they aren't square at all.
I don't see any horrible lines this week at this point, but I do think I have my 65-70% play. Since I am up lately, I also tend to play money lines with some spreads for bigger payouts than teasers. I've found that's the way to do it, because most of the time you get the ATS anyway and don't need the points on your stronger plays.
Best,
SGComment -
Gilbert,
Obviously you don't realize the idiocy of that post. It's not idiotic because it's wrong per se, rather it is idiotic because it doesn't have to do with this thread. It also talks about different ideas, again, ideas not brought up in this thread. So its hollow attacks are not only futile, they are foolish and say the same about the poster.
The problem with most people in the world is that they:
a) see/hear what they want into a situation vs. paying attention to what is said (or not said)
b) do not pay attention to the critical details, mostly because they have their minds made up, largely due to (a)
Now, let us examine a few statements:
1) Because there is a blowout it doesn't mean the line wasn't sharp.
This statement is true. I never used the reasoning that this game was a blowout THUS the line was way off. No one ever asked actually what my reasons were for supporting my position. Of course, there are many, and I said what they were before the game (even 2 weeks before). See the intellectual laziness?
2) Balanced action on both sides means the line is "sharp."
While it is true that bookies themselves try to balance action for vig purposes and consistent profits, unless that is your definition of "sharp", you are of course sadly mistaken. In fact, and please pay attention, this statement actually proves my point. LINES AREN'T SHARP WHEN THE PUBLIC IS WRONG.
Over the long term, yes, the public is very very good. But in instances, specific games, they are absolutely off. This fact is PRECISELY why people are professionals in horse racing and sports gambling. If the lines were always "sharp" why are you betting? You have no chance to win if the public is always right, always balanced, etc. whatever you want to call it. That's why it's a horrible definition of the word sharp.
I won't get an answer to "Why are you betting if the lines are sharp?". Why?
It contradicts you even being here. And at this point we separate the men from the boys. Either you recognize what I'm saying and move on, or you continue with name calling. It's up to you, but please realize that I've done my job here; I've clarified my points and tried to help, spending time to show you why I say what I say so everyone can get better.Comment -
I am now 4-0 since mentioning this. FYI
Naysayers have been muted (for now).Comment