One incredibly sharp football teaser

[SBR Lou]

Louisiana Tech +8.5
Wyoming +36.5

I can't take credit for this one entirely, but I was given the OK to post it and try to make you guys money without mentioning names. However, this one is sharp..

[LT Profits]

NEVER tease a 30-point underdog, it's not worth it.

[VegasDave]

Sharp isn't the word I'd use.

[LT Profits]

Nothing wrong with La Tech tough, crossing the 3 and 7

[SBR Lou]

Well, you gentlemen may feel free to fade this one. Regardless of the "rule of thumbs" with teasers, in this instance this tease is fairly sharp..

Let's see what happens.

[LT Profits]

the distribution frequency of huge underdogs does not vary enough to make teasers worthwhile. You gain virtually nothing statistically going from +30.5 to +36.5.

[durito]

Let me guess, the sharp was BBD.

[pavyracer]

Good luck. I don't like it.

[SBR Lou]

Let me guess, the sharp was BBD.

It wasn't, but now that you mention it I would've liked Bigboydan's advice too. He's a consummate professional in every sense of the word.

[Capybara]

Let me guess, the sharp was BBD.

Durito, your sig is hilarious. I assume that's a response to one too many miserably misspelled posts?

[HedgeHog]

the distribution frequency of huge underdogs does not vary enough to make teasers worthwhile. You gain virtually nothing statistically going from +30.5 to +36.5.

Agree--unless you find a book that let's you tease the side and total in the same game. Wyom +36.5 and Under 47 would be a +Ev teaser.

[HedgeHog]

Let me guess, the sharp was BBD.

May want to add this to your sig:

To
Too
Two

[SBR Lou]

May want to add this to your sig:

To
Too
Two

Are you talkin' too me?

[DeluxeLiner]

When
Win

[durito]

What specifically may I ask, leads you to believe that this particular teaser is "sharp"?

[SBR Lou]

What specifically may I ask, leads you to believe that this particular teaser is "sharp"?

I won't pretend I follow college markets or the sport much, but the money behind this one is fairly sharp.. Draw of that what you will, or wait to see how it does.

I understand guys really like to use their "OPTIMAL TEASER BETTING CHARTS", but sometimes you must deviate from the robotic, predictable little graphs. There's a reason these things don't win more than [x]% of time, and that's because there are going to be losers sprinkled in. So, deviate from the norm if for but a few weekends out of the year, and your wallet may thank you for it.

Nothing is a sure thing, so bankroll management is a must, but this teaser looks the part.

[AgainstAllOdds]

In everyone of Crazyl's plays, hes seems to think they are sharp. When in all actuallity, they are the worst and quite possibly the farthest thing from being sharp.

[laxdjock]

What specifically may I ask, leads you to believe that this particular teaser is "sharp"?

I was wondering that too. Wyoming is horrid this year, truly bad.

[SBR Lou]

I was wondering that too. Wyoming is horrid this year, truly bad.

Exactly.

[SBR Lou]

In everyone of Crazyl's plays, hes seems to think they are sharp. When in all actuallity, they are the worst and quite possibly the farthest thing from being sharp.

Go through my NFL threads for this year and tell me if there are more winners than losers overall. Thanks.

[apk2k6]

It's the reverse line movement. They both moved a full point.

[durito]

I won't pretend I follow college markets or the sport much, but the money behind this one is fairly sharp.. Draw of that what you will, or wait to see how it does.

I understand guys really like to use their "OPTIMAL TEASER BETTING CHARTS", but sometimes you must deviate from the robotic, predictable little graphs. There's a reason these things don't win more than [x]% of time, and that's because there are going to be losers sprinkled in. So, deviate from the norm if for but a few weekends out of the year, and your wallet may thank you for it.

Nothing is a sure thing, so bankroll management is a must, but this teaser looks the part.

This doesn't make any sense.

The point LT makes is if Wyoming is +ev at +30.5 -110(and i actually believe it is), then it has less value(likely -ev) at +36.5 -263

If you want to play Wyoming here, play it straight.

[AgainstAllOdds]

Go through my NFL threads for this year and tell me if there are more winners than losers overall. Thanks.

Wow. I think this proves you have no idea what the hell you are talking about. It doesnt matter weather you have more winners than losers. It matters you are getting the best lines and numbers. And this thread proves you have no idea what the best line is or even how to tease for that matter.

One word of advice would be to stop calling your plays sharp. There is nothing worse than when someone says "sharp play today" and everyone clicks on the thread only to see a play that is the exact opposite.

[SBR Lou]

Wow. I think this proves you have no idea what the hell you are talking about. It doesnt matter weather you have more winners than losers. It matters you are getting the best lines and numbers. And this thread proves you have no idea what the best line is or even how to tease for that matter.

One word of advice would be to stop calling your plays sharp. There is nothing worse than when someone says "sharp play today" and everyone clicks on the thread only to see a play that is the exact opposite.

I made Indy a play at +1 and it closed at what, -2.5 some places? Whether that individual play won or lost, it's an indication that the above post of yours is grossly inaccurate.

[SBR Lou]

This doesn't make any sense.

The point LT makes is if Wyoming is +ev at +30.5 -110(and i actually believe it is), then it has less value(likely -ev) at +36.5 -263

If you want to play Wyoming here, play it straight.

One of the above posters had the right idea. Like I said though, I'm the wrong man to argue for this play, I just thought it'd be cool to hook everyone up with a solid teaser who maybe was on the fence or undecided about one this football weekend.

Let's let the chips fall where they may, and understand that the money behind this one is indeed sophisticated.

[AgainstAllOdds]

I made Indy a play at +1 and it closed at what, -2.5 some places? Whether that individual play won or lost, it's an indication that the above post of yours is grossly inaccurate.

Its funny how you managed to turn a +ev play into a -ev play all in one teaser.

But nonetheless, you are a sharp.

[durito]

10/23/2008 by ONLINE at 03:04 PM
[Ticket #: 46425193] STRAIGHT BET
10/25/2008 @ 03:00 PM CFB [169] WYOMING +31½-110

[big joe 1212]

Teasers in college football

[AgainstAllOdds]

10/23/2008 by ONLINE at 03:04 PM
[Ticket #: 46425193] STRAIGHT BET
10/25/2008 @ 03:00 PM CFB [169] WYOMING +31½-110

[laxdjock]

10/23/2008 by ONLINE at 03:04 PM
[Ticket #: 46425193] STRAIGHT BET
10/25/2008 @ 03:00 PM CFB [169] WYOMING +31½-110

I really like TCU as a team, but that is a ton of points to cover for anyone not named USC. I may jump on a similar line.

[SBR Lou]

Pinnacle:

Sat 10/25 169 Wyoming +30.5 +105

[donjuan]

So, deviate from the norm if for but a few weekends out of the year, and your wallet may thank you for it.

So you're hoping that you'll get lucky over a small sample size knowing that a bet has -EV? That's pretty much the opposite of sharp.

[SBR Lou]

So you're hoping that you'll get lucky over a small sample size knowing that a bet has -EV? That's pretty much the opposite of sharp.

No need to be a blind sheep. Yes teasers can be very profitable, however, college football teasers aren't really intended for "WONG" teasers, and as such you are free to mess around with them some more. This play fits into a very high % situation that I'm not at liberty to discuss in depth since it's not my work, I just thought it'd be cool to exchange a teaser with everyone and hope someone would do the same.

Good luck this weekend.

[Panic]

I'd be very weary taking Wyoming. Even @ +36.5. They only avg. 8 pts/gm on offense. TCU just knocked the piss out of #9 BYU by 25 points.

[laxdjock]

CL, we appreciate the post either way....I'm going to look into it a bit more.