I love it 
-
-
Looking like a big night for the books hereComment -
I've been getting hit going against the public the first two month. Patience and continuing to fade them has paid off nicely the last two weeks
Comment -
I love it that people love when people lose. Don't get that whole mentality at all. I gamble to have fun, relax and make money.
A lot of 'squares' still made money today, it matters what games you bet. Still a-lot to make.Comment -
Squares and sharps can win each week, any week......really depends which games you pickComment -
Big win for the books, 2nd week in a rowComment -
A bookie I knew was been getting destroyed the past few weeks, majority the heavy plays on the most obvious games on the board. It's about that time of the year where the lines are going to be super sharp, especially in November.Comment -
why not just look for soft lines, instead of "fading the public" (whatever that nonsense means)???
exploiting soft lines are the only way to make money long term in sports bettingComment -
All this talk about soft/ sharp lines......one fukkin side every game is winning, just gotta have good instincts and do your homework.....every game there is always someone winningComment -
majority of games are coin flips dude, that's why the best sports bettor in the world will never do any better than maybe what?? 51% if he bets on every game
u gotta look for games where the line is off by as much as possible (which is what I consider a soft line - think STL being only 14 point dogs @ green bay 2 weeks ago)Comment -
Squares got bailed out by Stanford's back, back, backdoor cover.Comment -
People are more concerned with what the right pick seems to be BEFORE the game, rather than what the actual winner isComment -
I agree, but that's what I'm talking about
you gotta avoid games where there's too many variables and look for soft lines. I made a thread on Baylor/OK st total being only 79 earlier - that was covered by 4 points even despite a game where Baylor seemingly had the ball in the red zone half a dozen times and only scored 1 TD in those situations. That's a game that should have opened at 82 and closed around 86Comment -
"Soft Lines" are a matter of opinion......You say this game should have opened here & that game should have opened there, that's your opinion dude. It's easy to say what the lines should have been after the game. If Baylor doesnt punch in that late score should the total still have opened 83??
Your opinion & formula for dictating lines may vary from mine. You talk as if you're the authority on what lines should be. If so why aren't you on their side making the lines for them then??Comment -
^^^ Exactly.....if it was that easy picking out the "soft lines", we'd all be fukkin rollin in the cashComment -
I agree to an extent, but there are some lines that are just soft if you look at it with any sort of an objective view
for example - Oklahoma St @ Texas. Okst beat texas on the road last year by 17 points, yet opened up as only 7 point favorites at Texas after UT received a 38 point drubbing by Oklahoma. Okie St played a sht game at Texas and still ended up covering because the line was soft. That should have been 14 points
and there's no doubt that all this stuff is about opinion - but that's what defines a good gambler. A good gambler is one who is able to outsmart the books by finding overpriced/underpriced lines (kind of like a good investor in the stock market)
You say this game should have opened here & that game should have opened there, that's your opinion dude. It's easy to say what the lines should have been after the game. If Baylor doesnt punch in that late score should the total still have opened 73??
you mean 76???
and no the line should have closed at 86+ because that is the likely outcome if both teams play to their normal capacity. Hell, baylor was averaging 40+ points per game heading into this one and they were just miserable on offense in the red zone. I think if these 2 teams play a 100 games, the average outcome would be something like 55-38. Baylor's uncharacteristically miserable game on offense was the only reason the total was so close anyways. You're talking about a game that had 1200 yards of total offense. Go back into college CFB history and try to find games that had that many yards of offense and I guarantee you that the overwhelming majority of them had 85+ points
if the total was not covered, I would still tell you it was a soft lineComment -
LOL, brahma is back.Comment -
i don't know why anyone even contributes to this thread. this dude starts threads every week laughing at the "squares"...and whoever lost money. clearly he is just an angry loser himself...thus the happiness when other people lose. i think the entire point of this forum is for people to talk out games and share info...with a little ribbing and smacktalking to make it fun. anyone always starting threads like this bashing people all the time should be treated like the loser he is. sorry if that is rude man. you are part of the "public"...and half the shit you say is wrong anyways. gn all...and gl next week.Comment -
btw...that was for the loser who started this thread. not you brah...tho you are a nutsack sometimes too...lol.Comment -
Some books lost...................reports just in.Comment -
USC - Stanford landing on 8 was likely a disaster for most shops.
They loved Ohio State, Georgia Tech, and Nebraska winning outright / covering however.
Definitely a winning day for the books.Comment -
A lot of the so called sharps were on Clemson and USC today. So I guess saying the squares lost their ass is a matter of opinion.Comment -
Actually, I meant 83 not 73. Don't get me wrong cause I was on the over as well & thought it was a good bet. And yes they "should" have scored alot more. But in a full game alot of things can happen. To cover an over of 83 you have little margin of error. Without the help of big plays & turnovers for td's & freak plays it's tough to get over 83. I mean how many times have you bet a total that you thought should have flew over but both teams struggled to score. Or thought the under was a lock & the final was 45-42?? it happens. Not in this game today but it does happen.
I do agree w/ alot of what you say but just like the other guy said in this thread if picking soft lines were that easy we'd all be rich & books would be out of business. In the end it's still your opinion & yours may vary from the next guys.
GL pal
Comment -
I'd imagine most of them got it at 7.5 and then claimed to get it at 8.Comment -
Clemson losing to Georgia Tech was so blatantly obvious I'm surprised it wasn't the square play. Leaving aside for a moment the fact that there is no such thing as a consistent ACC football team, virtually every single human being on Earth was waiting for Clemson to pull a Clemson, especially after their near-blowout loss to Maryland.Comment -
Getting a good number is HUGE. I don't get why people don't understand this.
Heck, look at the stanford game earlier, you could have had -7/+7, -7.5/+7.5, -8/+8, -8.5/+8.5
if you play it at the right time/shops. It doesn't need to happen a lot to make a big difference in your win/loss.Comment -
Ohio State ML parlayed with Cardinals +220 to win the world series.... Cash itComment -
WTF is with so many people on this forum calling others a square if they bet on a favorite or the over.
Favs win and cover everyday..games go over the total everyday.
So to those who "think" there a sharp or a wise guy PLEASE keep betting on the dogs and under all the time and we will soon be visiting you in the poorhouse.Comment
