A few Books are giving $$$ away : NBA

[Francis Sollozzo]

-615 to 700 on Boston for series

Great odds for a multiple event wager and who here thinks the Lakers are good enough to defy this :

No team has ever come back from a 3-1 deficit in the finals, and even if the Lakers can stave off elimination and win at Staples Center, they’ll have to play Games 6 and 7 in Boston, where the Celtics are 12-1 this postseason. Since the league switched to the much-debated 2-3-2 format in 1985, no team has won the last two games on the road.

[Wheell]

Do you think the lakers have about a 74% chance of winning this evening? If so, no action tonight. The Lakers were favored for g2. What do you thinks the odds of a Lakers game 6 win are (presuming they win tonight)? I'd say 45% are a fair estimate. Now how about a g7 line? I'll give the Celtics a g7 bump but the Lakers would also be a 2 game winning streak. I'd say g7 is about 43% for the Lakers. That makes the Celtics slightly less than a 6-1 favorite at -598.

In other words, no $$$ is being given away. If you feel any of the game lines are off, feel free to bet.

[Francis Sollozzo]

Do you think the lakers have about a 74% chance of winning this evening? If so, no action tonight. The Lakers were favored for g2. What do you thinks the odds of a Lakers game 6 win are (presuming they win tonight)? I'd say 45% are a fair estimate. Now how about a g7 line? I'll give the Celtics a g7 bump but the Lakers would also be a 2 game winning streak. I'd say g7 is about 43% for the Lakers. That makes the Celtics slightly less than a 6-1 favorite at -598.

In other words, no $$$ is being given away. If you feel any of the game lines are off, feel free to bet.

you math guys never bet , just talk a good gm , thats what JJ says

[Francis Sollozzo]

btw

same math guys told me and Nicky that Bos +180 wasnt a good series bet either

[SBR Lou]

you math guys never bet , just talk a good gm , thats what JJ says

Agree, these guys are great theorists but actually making money gambling requires more.

[Francis Sollozzo]

Agree, these guys are great theorists but actually making money gambling requires more.

last time Ganchrow place a bet was during college FB when he thought he had a correlated side/total , 10.00 to win 28.00. he lost

[Ganchrow]

you math guys never bet , just talk a good gm , thats what JJ says

A more accurate way to phrase this might be that "we math guys" try to avoid placing -EV wagers.

And, of course when we do find a +EV wager (and many of us easily place 30 or more such wagers a day) our first thought is generally to bet it rather than crow about it.

Just my 2¢.

[Francis Sollozzo]

if it weren't for CROWS there would be no SBR

i think i hit a nerve

[louisvillekid]

btw

same math guys told me and Nicky that Bos +180 wasnt a good series bet either

i wish i would of got +180, i got +160 a couple days before the series started.

[SBR Lou]

+180, or + anything was clearly the right bet. The overly math oriented guys will say that even though the Celtics have shown they can win on the road, have shown that they'll not falter at home, that the series would need to be played 3495398593 times to admit they made the wrong wager.

That's the only gripe people have with overly math oriented guys, they never seem to admit that a wager that they deem as +EV is -EV.

[WonTooManyBets]

Who cares, bet what you want and however much you want.

[Ganchrow]

+180, or + anything was clearly the right bet. The overly math oriented guys will say that even though the Celtics have shown they can win on the road, have shown that they'll not falter at home, that the series would need to be played 3495398593 times to admit they made the wrong wager.

That's the only gripe people have with overly math oriented guys, they never seem to admit that a wager that they deem as +EV is -EV.

This sounds rather like a strawman argument.

[Francis Sollozzo]

i love you all

[SBR Lou]

This sounds rather like a strawman argument.

Yeah, I'm not the best technical know-how as it relates to math, but what I do know is I believed going in that the Celtics should've been favored, and the series so far cements that in my head.

Maybe it needs to be played 20 more times to determine that for sure, but the Lakers IMO really needed Bynum in this series, they have no real dominant low post type presence. Gasol has gotten outright abused like many thought he would, and Doc Rivers hasn't been outcoached at all.

The Celtics defense was simply the best in the league all year long. When Ray Allen found his stroke, everything else clicked together offensively for them.

[Wheell]

Crazyl: If you truly feel that way then the Celtics +7 tonight is value. Similarly if the Lakers win tonight the Celtics will almost certainly be value in game 6 (again, presuming you are right about the relative strengths of the teams).

[rake922]

Does Ganchrow post picks?

[Wheell]

Ganchrow posts sound investment advice. He also posts mathematical tools you can use for fun and profit.

However, I hear that Lupa the cat has picked 9 out of the last 10 Super Bowl winners striaght up. I don't know how she called NY over the Pats or the Pats over the Rams, but she is SHARP when it comes to making picks. That is what you look for in someone posting on a board, picks!