-
Comment -
can't get em all. Congrats raptors followersComment -
2H could have gone either way....ORL down by 18 with .45 left to go and ended up losing by 14. As well as ORL played in the 2H, they only outscored them by 7. But no way in the world a line of -7.5 would ever come out in that situation. To be honest, I thought -4 was shaded a bit high.
I am glad you cashed, but really it is a bad bet. I don't mean it in any condescending way, but the numbers just don't lie. CLEV/WSH is a perfect example of that tonight.....Comment -
Yes. Bad bets win all the time. Just b/c you win a bet does not mean it is a "good bet." Most people will never understand this logic b/c it is not something they care to listen to...it's all about how many wins and how many losses which is fine for many people, but I am just trying to explain why it's not a good bet from a numbers perspective. Plus I consider BO'R a very solid poster and he knows I intend no offense by this.
Make this same exact bet 1000 times you will come out a loser more times than not. It's called expected value. Every bet has an EV attached to it. Just the way it goes.....Comment -
It's OK, I know what BB means, but the thing is: I played this game perfectly. I didn't play Wash/Cle at all and yes, that game was the sign of a team giving up. I had a gameplan of TOR 1H, ORL 2H, and talked myself into TOR 1Q after talking about their 1H prospects. I liked the 2H line at -4 (it closed at -4.5) and while it got a little hairy at the end, the -4 hit with 3 to spare.
And BB, I didn't expect the 2H line to come out at -7.5, I just saw that as my actual "fair line", all things considered. If the line was Orlando -5.5, I'm not sure I'd have played it and at -6 I certainly wouldn't have played it, but -4 was value, at least with regards to my expectations of the 2H. And I would've been surprised if the line was any lower than 4.Comment -
Absolutely took no offense. In fact, I think it was obvious from my first post that I was taking a defensive stance on my 2H play because I knew that it could be considered both naive and square. That didn't change the fact that I thought there was value in the line. With a 1-trick pony like Cleveland, I wouldn't have considered playing a 21 point halftime deficit. With Orlando, I just didn't see the case for NOT playing what I already planned on playing. I was hoping that the line would come out at -6 or so and make it a no-play, but it opened at -4 and I knew I had to play it. Agree with the LT prospects of losing heavily in that particular situation, for what it's worth...Comment -
Okay, thanks for clearing it up BO'R. I've know BO'R and consider him one of the sharper posters on here.
When I see guys loading up (or possibly chasing) on a play thinking it is the easiest play in the world (especially one wiht a -EV), I don't have to tell you what usually happens.Comment -
To be perfectly honest, I didn't even watch the 1H or 2H so admittedly I can't make a qualitative assessment of how Orlando was playing.
Good luck fellows the rest of the way!....Comment -
Well, I neither loaded up nor chased (though I suspect many people did). I had 1 unit on 1Q, 3 units on 1H (had 2 originally, then placed another after about 6 minutes before tip as I kept talking myself into the solidity of that play), then threw another unit on 2H. I had a good night in that I went 3-0 on that particular game, but really didn't exactly "take it to the books" or anything. A good run since Tuesday though not nearly as good as iwinyourmoney's.
I do understand what you're saying: the natural inclination would be to write off a bad first half with the (false) general assumption that the team getting killed would turn it on and make it a close(r) game. Normally a losing play (you mentioned two excellent ones: UNC & Cleveland), but tonight there were several factors going into my decision (the 1H FG% differential, the staggering 1H 3pt% differential, the 2-1 turnover ratio, and the admittedly immeasurable versatility of Orlando that I felt was good for a 2H run).Comment -
Completely disagree Orlando +17 for the game vs. Toronto is a good bet, they are the better team and simply shot like 1/20 from 3 pt land to be killed in the first half, they finally made a couple shots and lead the entire 2nd Half, the line I expected at halftime was Orlando -5 1/2, when it cameout Orlando -4 you'd have to be braindead to take the Raptors as they were just going to protect their double digit lead against the better team and assuming Orlando shot better than the 10% from 3 that they shot in the 1st Half they were going to ease back within 10-15 before the Raptors would resume normal offense to insure the win.Comment -
Not going to read through all of this but I use the 1H stats more than anything when playing a 2H line....if a team is shooting 33% at the half and the other team is up 15 points but shooting 52%. Say the line comes out and the team with the lead is a 2pt dog. I would never take the dog in that game and would likely take the 2H favorite because they are likely to shoot better than 33% while the other team is unlikely to shoot 52% in the second half. Of course it depends on who the teams are and how they usually play in the second half. Foul situation, rebounding, and FT advantage are important as well. With all this being said I had Toronto -4 for the game and strongly considered taking Orl in the 2H.Comment -
This is 100% wrong in every which way. How "sharp" did you feel when Orlando was down by 18 with less than a minute to go?
You aren't getting +17 for the game like you might trick yourself into believing....you are laying -4/-4.5 for the 2H instead of getting the +4 for the entire 48:00 minutes. So follow closely: ORL was +4 for the game, so now you want to place a bet where they are laying -4 instead (not for the game, but for just the final 2 quarter) for the same team that was +4 for the game??? If you take ORL -4 in the 2H you are taking a huge huge risk. You guys who watched the game may have seen something and that is a fair point, but I am just telling you from a numbers perspective that the long term EV of this type of bet is an easy loser....
Take the info for what's it worth....Comment -
To be honest, I had TOR and strongly considered taking TOR again for the 2H but decided not to press my luck b/c TOR appeared to be a near guarantee winner. Never did it even cross my mind to take ORL not even for a second.....
I agree with your logic to a large degree. In stats, this phenomenon you are describing is generally referred to as "regression to the mean." If you know the team's true population shooting average, then you would expect them to get to that % after a while. But statistically speaking, on any given night you can have major deviations so it's not a safe assumption to assume they would converge back to that percentage. You are right, more than likely hot shooting teams will fizzle out and cold shooting teams will pick it up, but just some days it does not happen.
Comment