You know what bothers me? When bettors think its better to take the +3 instead of ML

rm18 · 03-31-12, 01:00 AM

I usually like to take the ML but sometimes the odds almost force you to take the points, especially if you do not have a lot of outs. I was in Vegas was going to take the Giants ML vs. SF but had to take the +2.5 EV instead of +115 because there was so little extra payout. I know that is football but really is the saem thing probably won't come into play but sometimes the payout is so close you have to take the points.

SpreadSniper · 03-31-12, 02:05 AM

+3 home dog vs +3 road dog very different scenarios....

no harm 75-25'n a strong +3 lean....

and if you can ACTUALLY say "how often have those 3 points saved your bet" and ACTUALLY mean it, well... thats a different conversation

Jayvegas420 · 03-31-12, 02:29 AM

I tend to lose at M/L as opposed to +3 more often in the NBA than in college.

HoulihansTX · 03-31-12, 03:27 AM

You know what bothers me? Every shit thread you make.

CrazyCarl · 03-31-12, 04:14 AM

Originally posted by HoulihansTX

You know what bothers me? Every shit thread you make.

Lol'd.

Smoke · 03-31-12, 07:19 AM

Always take the points

jjgold · 03-31-12, 07:30 AM

You can go crazy with all these theories
If not tested hard to say

The key is to pick winners not matter what positions you take

Domestic · 03-31-12, 07:43 AM

I will always take the points when on offer, always makes things a bit easier to hedge out of if you want and any game can end on a buzzer beater type play.

geebert74 · 03-31-12, 08:15 AM

Cuz were all a bunch of squares... There, I said it!

wantitall4moi · 03-31-12, 08:31 AM

well a quick check of closers only shows that since 2000 there have been 834 games that closed -3. Dogs are/were 355-479 SU. 399-401-34 ATS. Even if you wanted to be fairly generous and give them a +130 ML average youre still a loser long term off those numbers. If you line shop and get those 34 pushes on your side that can make you 433-401, maybe more if you can turn some of the losers into pushes or even wins with line shopping and timing of bets.

The thing about ML plays is you either win or you you lose, the only thing you can shop around for is the price which in the NBA is going to have a large variation.

k13 · 03-31-12, 08:58 AM

Taking +1.5 instead of +120 is funnier.

wantitall4moi · 03-31-12, 09:08 AM

Originally posted by k13

Taking +1.5 instead of +120 is funnier.

Since 2000 dogs of +1.5 closers are/were 267-298 SU; 284-281 ATS. But youre not very often going to find +120 on a 1.5 dog, more than likely it will be +110 maybe even less depending on spread vig. I could do a search and see how many 1.5 spreads had a +120 ML associated with them but it would only be back to 2005. But I dont want to get all that out right now. But I would sat it would be less than 75 games.

thetrinity · 03-31-12, 09:25 AM

i think consistency matters when doing this, unless ur getting an extra good ml price for some reason.

smoke a bowl · 03-31-12, 09:32 AM

Originally posted by Lazy-Man

In basketball. How often does it come into play. It annoys me when they say itssafer to get the 3 points. That's bs.those 3 points will more than likely not come in to play. And another thing, when posters post their play for example "my play is hawks -3.5" and some idiot replies with "would you still take it at -4". No shit he would take it. so many moron of bettors these days

I'll bet the books enjoy the phuck out of your action. This post is just turrible(that's for you Charles) from start to finish.

k13 · 03-31-12, 09:48 AM

Originally posted by wantitall4moi

Since 2000 dogs of +1.5 closers are/were 267-298 SU; 284-281 ATS. But youre not very often going to find +120 on a 1.5 dog, more than likely it will be +110 maybe even less depending on spread vig. I could do a search and see how many 1.5 spreads had a +120 ML associated with them but it would only be back to 2005. But I dont want to get all that out right now. But I would sat it would be less than 75 games.

So that would be ~47% and a small profit at +120.

Memphis opened +1.5 and +120, are you only talking about the NBA?

I don't think anyone would take every +1.5 ml blindly anyway,

baskets · 03-31-12, 10:00 AM

they have +3 in China?

jstblaze · 03-31-12, 10:02 AM

Unless the difference in value is forcing you to take ML, then the +3 usually is better to take.

onlooker · 03-31-12, 10:16 AM

Originally posted by HoulihansTX

You know what bothers me? Every shit thread you make.

TheMoneyShot · 03-31-12, 11:37 AM

Originally posted by Lazy-Man

In basketball. How often does it come into play. It annoys me when they say itssafer to get the 3 points. That's bs.those 3 points will more than likely not come in to play. And another thing, when posters post their play for example "my play is hawks -3.5" and some idiot replies with "would you still take it at -4". No shit he would take it. so many moron of bettors these days

The theory is simple... Risking 500 To win around +650 on a ML (which in all essence you're making an extra $150) try doing that 3-4 times in a row though with ML +130. I bet you it lands on 1 or 2 on the 3rd or 4th game. The extra +150 doesn't do you any justice if you lose your 500 risk. Remember that.

Originally posted by k13

Taking +1.5 instead of +120 is funnier.

San Antonio Spurs At L.A. Lakers -1.5 I believe in the early 2000's ring a bell? I think vegas admitted they made the most on that game than any game ever in the history of sports wagering. All it takes is one time. But... that was just a bolt of lightning... apparently?

chachi · 03-31-12, 11:48 AM

Originally posted by TheMoneyShot

San Antonio Spurs At L.A. Lakers -1.5 I believe in the early 2000's ring a bell? I think vegas admitted they made the most on that game than any game ever in the history of sports wagering. All it takes is one time. But... that was just a bolt of lightning... apparently?

Mar 31, 2002 96-95 ?

It always sucks to lose by the hook

k13 · 03-31-12, 11:52 AM

Originally posted by TheMoneyShot

San Antonio Spurs At L.A. Lakers -1.5 I believe in the early 2000's ring a bell? I think vegas admitted they made the most on that game than any game ever in the history of sports wagering. All it takes is one time. But... that was just a bolt of lightning... apparently?

No it does not. I don't bet the NBA very often.

I assume Lakers won by 1.
I would not care as I would have the ML on either team and it be just another win/loss among 1000's of games that year.

BettingWizard · 03-31-12, 11:56 AM

$200 swing if your team loses by 1 or 2. $100 loss if they lose by 3 instead of a push

all for an extra 20 bucks or so? No thanks.

Smoke · 03-31-12, 12:17 PM

A sucker is born every minute

DrStale · 03-31-12, 12:18 PM

Originally posted by Lazy-Man

In basketball. How often does it come into play. It annoys me when they say itssafer to get the 3 points. That's bs.those 3 points will more than likely not come in to play. And another thing, when posters post their play for example "my play is hawks -3.5" and some idiot replies with "would you still take it at -4". No shit he would take it. so many moron of bettors these days

If you're shooting for "squarest thread of the day" then well done.

BernardMadoff · 03-31-12, 12:24 PM

Yeah because their arnt many 1 or 2 point games in basketball(sarcasm), if you like +3 sprinkle a little on the moneyline too, but nothing wrong with taking +3.

Romanov · 03-31-12, 12:36 PM

Considering a difference in final score of 3 IS THE MOST FXCKING COMMON DIFFERENCE, I would think that getting 3 has probably more value than a ML bet on the same team. Books will shave cents of the dog +3 moneyline because people love short dogs.

TheMoneyShot · 03-31-12, 12:41 PM

Originally posted by chachi

Mar 31, 2002 96-95 ?
It always sucks to lose by the hook

Yes sir!

Originally posted by k13

No it does not. I don't bet the NBA very often.

I assume Lakers won by 1.
I would not care as I would have the ML on either team and it be just another win/loss among 1000's of games that year.

It was a Nationally Televised Game on a Sunday. San Antonio miraculously had no timeouts left... San Antonio player fouled a Laker player with 1 second to go. I forget which Laker player it was... he missed the first free throw. You could hear Phil Jackson in the background Mics yelling... "MISS IT!" Or "MISS THE 2nd Free Throw" The Player kind of looked puzzled. Was it Robert Horry??? He misses the 2nd free throw. Ultimate classic for Vegas... I'm sure all the books were jumping up and down. A BIG TIME MIDDLE for the books...

I'll never forget this game. I realized that sports wagering was fixed. It wasn't just the final play of the game... it's how everything went down in the final minute. It was a big soap opera. It's the eye contact the players were giving each other... like everyone knew something was going down. Players were being hacked/molested and the refs weren't calling anything. If anyone has the footage of this game... take a good look at it. It's WWE entertainment at it's best in the NBA.

paranoyd androyd · 03-31-12, 01:27 PM

^^ you're way over analyzing that situation. jackson wanted him to miss it so they couldn't have time to inbound it and throw a deep pass for a winning 3. game was not fixed.

TheMoneyShot · 03-31-12, 05:31 PM

Yes PA... that's the logical explanation. It's what went down during the final minute that caused it to stay on 1 is what concerns me. I had San Antonio ML... Lakers could of opened up a 3-4 point lead easily... Refs kept it close.

Jaug · 03-31-12, 05:37 PM

Take the points. ML is inflated due to ppl like you.

rm18 · 03-31-12, 05:38 PM

The last 3 NBA games to go final have been decided by 1,2, and 3 points respectively.