View New Posts
123
1. Originally Posted by Point Blank
Nothing disconcerting coming from the Colorado injury reports so the +14 is being accepted, and also a small pinch of +425, which can be found in a couple of stores now.
Thanks Dave, went ahead and took some CU +14. Made the line 10.5 myself so looks like decent value, hopefully the Buffs bring it on Saturday. I know they have tried to fabricate a rivalry with Utah based on geography since joining the Pac-12, but if there is one program I think they would likely be gunning for that would be to knock off USC.

2. Dave, were you aware that CFB underdogs of more than 30 are 47-25-3 (65.3%) ATS so far this season? 2017 marks the fourth straight season of increasing returns backing these big dogs (see below). Is there any logical explanation (perhaps related to college football playoffs?) or just pure randomness and we can expect a regression to the mean soon? Historically speaking, such dogs have been a coin flip since 2000, so there was some awfully lean years in there as well.

season=2017 and D and line>30 ATS: 47-25-3 (3.22, 65.3%)
season=2016 and D and line>30 ATS: 47-35-2 (1.57, 57.3%)
season=2015 and D and line>30 ATS: 51-39-0 (2.23, 56.7%)
season=2014 and D and line>30 ATS: 35-43-2 (-2.61, 44.9%)
season=2013 and D and line>30 ATS: 34-54-3 (-2.44, 38.6%)
season=2012 and D and line>30 ATS: 45-43-2 (1.52, 51.1%)
season>=2000 and D and line>30 ATS: 535-527-21 (0.08, 50.4%)

3. Originally Posted by Ocho Cervezas
Dave, were you aware that CFB underdogs of more than 30 are 47-25-3 (65.3%) ATS so far this season? 2017 marks the fourth straight season of increasing returns backing these big dogs (see below). Is there any logical explanation (perhaps related to college football playoffs?) or just pure randomness and we can expect a regression to the mean soon? Historically speaking, such dogs have been a coin flip since 2000, so there was some awfully lean years in there as well.

season=2017 and D and line>30 ATS: 47-25-3 (3.22, 65.3%)
season=2016 and D and line>30 ATS: 47-35-2 (1.57, 57.3%)
season=2015 and D and line>30 ATS: 51-39-0 (2.23, 56.7%)
season=2014 and D and line>30 ATS: 35-43-2 (-2.61, 44.9%)
season=2013 and D and line>30 ATS: 34-54-3 (-2.44, 38.6%)
season=2012 and D and line>30 ATS: 45-43-2 (1.52, 51.1%)
season>=2000 and D and line>30 ATS: 535-527-21 (0.08, 50.4%)
This has gotten some attention from the guys behind the counter, and this morning there was even speculation as to whether this is what caused some folks to try to bet Ball State last night, despite the Cardinals being on what may be the single worst ATS run in NCAA history - it has only been an 0-6, but they have lost to the spread by 155 points in the process, for 27.5 per game. I doubt if any team in any sport has ever had a 6-game stretch of losing to the spread by more than that. Of course, because there was money to the Cardinals, it also dropped that closing line below 30, so I am not sure how most folks will trek that.

I have not seen anything particular that tells me why 2017 should have been so much different; there were no rule changes this season, or alterations in the way the playoff committee is gauging anything. If there is any hint of logic it is that as more and more teams go to uptempo passing attacks, teams that are getting blown out can still keep throwing it around to make some plays from behind, but I would need to see some specific research on game flows before attributing merit to it.

SBR
Sharp
Bettor

\$\$\$\$\$

4. To the person that acused me of only posting here and no where else .
I admit it's basically true when it comes to handicapping theory and possible edges .
This is pretty much the only place PB . that I share some of my stuff . in return i get some good scouting reports and music and dining suggestions .I read other resources but mainly only have time to write in one place .

5. anyone know of something driving this BYU money? this has been a 5.5 pt move in their favor this week.......and qb magnum out for byu.....rogers is in for unlv (though not starting; stanton is qb)

6. Originally Posted by puffkit
anyone know of something driving this BYU money? this has been a 5.5 pt move in their favor this week.......and qb magnum out for byu.....rogers is in for unlv (though not starting; stanton is qb)
It is a big mystery, and to end some of the speculation is isn't necessarily BYU backers heading to the betting windows before they go to the game - the highest lines I see across the board right now are in the Las Vegas properties, UNLV still sitting at -1.5 in a few of them, despite the Cougars going to -1 at some key precincts beyond the state lines. I do not have a good answer for this one.

SBR
Sharp
Bettor

\$\$\$\$\$

7. Originally Posted by Point Blank
It is a big mystery, and to end some of the speculation is isn't necessarily BYU backers heading to the betting windows before they go to the game - the highest lines I see across the board right now are in the Las Vegas properties, UNLV still sitting at -1.5 in a few of them, despite the Cougars going to -1 at some key precincts beyond the state lines. I do not have a good answer for this one.
Better mindset. Right. Now for UNLV .bowl maybe after terrible start .playing well with back up qb
BYU the traveling team on short week .after traveling to Fresno last week
aside from the. Mindset and travel issue is
.I have UNLV -1 on neutral .my PR . Line should be UNLV -4 .
REBELS wash away the Howard embarrassment on national TV .

8. Unlv +1 at diamond sports book now

9. Originally Posted by Point Blank
This has gotten some attention from the guys behind the counter, and this morning there was even speculation as to whether this is what caused some folks to try to bet Ball State last night, despite the Cardinals being on what may be the single worst ATS run in NCAA history - it has only been an 0-6, but they have lost to the spread by 155 points in the process, for 27.5 per game. I doubt if any team in any sport has ever had a 6-game stretch of losing to the spread by more than that. Of course, because there was money to the Cardinals, it also dropped that closing line below 30, so I am not sure how most folks will trek that.

I have not seen anything particular that tells me why 2017 should have been so much different; there were no rule changes this season, or alterations in the way the playoff committee is gauging anything. If there is any hint of logic it is that as more and more teams go to uptempo passing attacks, teams that are getting blown out can still keep throwing it around to make some plays from behind, but I would need to see some specific research on game flows before attributing merit to it.
Ball St. has already been recorded as a loss in the database and that leaves three teams left on the docket for this week: Uconn, Rutgers, and Kansas. I try to make a habit of not betting on any team in the bottom 25 of my power ratings which eliminates both Kansas and Uconn. That leaves Rutgers in a play on spot catching 31 in the early time slot against a Penn St. team coming off back to back heartbreaking losses.

10. 0-0 end of 1 St . Q
But Rebels look to be the better team so far

11. Hey Dave, I know this is a busy day so it was most likely lost in the shuffle. But there were some earlier inclinations towards the Notre Dame under. 57.5 was the number talked about, and the logic sounded really good behind it. This is a gigantic game with huge implications. Winner is easily on the path to be in the final 4. Miami made the list of long stretches without a bye. But the atmosphere should bolster any fatigue. And like you said, they do a great job of not letting explosive plays happen. But ND with that elite line still should have some success and I see many more runs than passes since they are probably more confident running than passing. And on the defensive side ND is very solid. Fezz always likes to go under in championship style games. Conservatism is the policy, as nobody wants to make the first big mistake. And now we have some added value as 59, even 59.5 is out there. Much better than the original post talked about at 57.5. Do you see this as a full play now? Or possibly even hold out for 60 and hope whoever is hitting it, keeps it up? Excellent call on Clemson. Many thanks.

12. Originally Posted by jakedittler
Hey Dave, I know this is a busy day so it was most likely lost in the shuffle. But there were some earlier inclinations towards the Notre Dame under. 57.5 was the number talked about, and the logic sounded really good behind it. This is a gigantic game with huge implications. Winner is easily on the path to be in the final 4. Miami made the list of long stretches without a bye. But the atmosphere should bolster any fatigue. And like you said, they do a great job of not letting explosive plays happen. But ND with that elite line still should have some success and I see many more runs than passes since they are probably more confident running than passing. And on the defensive side ND is very solid. Fezz always likes to go under in championship style games. Conservatism is the policy, as nobody wants to make the first big mistake. And now we have some added value as 59, even 59.5 is out there. Much better than the original post talked about at 57.5. Do you see this as a full play now? Or possibly even hold out for 60 and hope whoever is hitting it, keeps it up? Excellent call on Clemson. Many thanks.
59.5 is when it starts going into pocket, that being a key number in the target area, one that allows for a win with 8 TDs and a FG hitting the board.

SBR
Sharp
Bettor

\$\$\$\$\$

13. what is with everyone speaking in full sentences?

14. Originally Posted by Matt Landes
For those interested, my NFL Week 10 post is now live at http://bzfd.it/2iNDQAE. As always, the quest for edges goes on....
Your CLE/DET write-up says CLE is the home team twice. It's hard to take your column seriously after such an egregious error.

15. Hey Dave,

You picked up early on the improved play of Boston College, and today they take on NC State at home. The young BC playmakers (Freshman at QB, RB & WR) are gaining confidence, and should come into this game rested off of their bye. The money is coming in on the Wolfpack, and I wanted to know if you saw value on BC +4, or did you need more to back the Eagles?

16. Originally Posted by ligastar
Your CLE/DET write-up says CLE is the home team twice. It's hard to take your column seriously after such an egregious error.
Shows you what a USC degree is worth...

SBR
Sharp
Bettor

\$\$\$\$\$

17. Originally Posted by benjy21
Hey Dave,

You picked up early on the improved play of Boston College, and today they take on NC State at home. The young BC playmakers (Freshman at QB, RB & WR) are gaining confidence, and should come into this game rested off of their bye. The money is coming in on the Wolfpack, and I wanted to know if you saw value on BC +4, or did you need more to back the Eagles?
I think BC will keep working and improving to the final whistle, and the timing is good to be in play today - the Wolfpack had two major target games vs. Notre Dame and Clemson the past two weeks and didn't get either of them; they may find it difficult to find a proper spark for this trip. +4 will go into pocket.

SBR
Sharp
Bettor

\$\$\$\$\$

18. David- Any weather hindering some games?
I’m in pocket with a lot of unders today
Under 59.5 ND
Under 68 WF
Under 66 Louis

19. Originally Posted by Point Blank
Shows you what a USC degree is worth...
I don't like to be critical because I know a lot of effort goes into publishing content. Does BuzzFeed employ editors?

20. Originally Posted by spindoc932
David- Any weather hindering some games?
I’m in pocket with a lot of unders today
Under 59.5 ND
Under 68 WF
Under 66 Louis
Here is a good place to go for weather tracking across the board, sone one-stop shopping; if others have some preferred sites they can pass them along...

SBR
Sharp
Bettor

\$\$\$\$\$

21. I mean who is betting Florida? Is there an injury I'm missing. My goodness did they watch the last 2 games? And now you have a solid S Carolina team, and their head coach an ex Florida coach. Most doubtedly teams will relish kicking the gators while they are down. Dave, is it go time yet? I was considering the 6.5.

22. Originally Posted by jakedittler
I mean who is betting Florida? Is there an injury I'm missing. My goodness did they watch the last 2 games? And now you have a solid S Carolina team, and their head coach an ex Florida coach. Most doubtedly teams will relish kicking the gators while they are down. Dave, is it go time yet? I was considering the 6.5.
South Carolina chimes begin to ring at -4. Florida drew plenty of money last week, including some charitable donations to the Bookmakers Retirement Fun by myself, but I have certainly not been a part of that party this week. But I need it to get to -4 because of some South Carolina weaknesses that have become apparent over the course of the season.

SBR
Sharp
Bettor

\$\$\$\$\$

23. I was right there with you. Loved the play. I watched that game and it was ugly. If they were ever gonna bring it it was that game. And they didn't. So I don't know what makes them bring it this week.

24. UCF/uconn 1st half ov/un is 37. The full game is 64. Think they were thinking right along the same lines as you Dave. Has to be the craziest split I've ever seen.

25. Ole miss back up to 22 now . so 2 tickets in pocket now
We jumped the gun yesterday

26. i love the mizzou tm total o37 today....... revitalized mizzou playing for bowl chance and tenn put up 63 on them last year so may be a bit of revenge factor. that tenn offense horrible on 3d conv which only gives mizzou more possessions.

27. Layette with 4 players out due to suspension

28. Originally Posted by Champthinks
Layette with 4 players out due to suspension
I usually don't get much chance to look in while the early games are going on but that is what led to the late Ole Miss money - 4 key contributors for ULL suspended this morning, including leading rusher Trey Ragas (more than twice as many rushing yards as any other Cajun player). And since the game has started, they have also lost another starter at LB for a targeting penalty.

SBR
Sharp
Bettor

\$\$\$\$\$

29. Originally Posted by ligastar
I don't like to be critical because I know a lot of effort goes into publishing content. Does BuzzFeed employ editors?
But there's a GIF of a Browns lineman busting Dave's signature move on the dance floor...how can that not be taken seriously?

Correction made. This is a prohibitive underdog to be the only error I'll make, and corrections are always welcome.

30. Originally Posted by Matt Landes
But there's a GIF of a Browns lineman busting Dave's signature move on the dance floor...how can that not be taken seriously?

Correction made. This is a prohibitive underdog to be the only error I'll make, and corrections are always welcome.
I appreciate the effort Matt. I'm a J-school major, so I was serious about questioning the editing process. It does beg the question though, is CLE in pocket as the road team?

Best of luck this weekend to you sir.

31. Originally Posted by ligastar
I appreciate the effort Matt. I'm a J-school major, so I was serious about questioning the editing process. It does beg the question though, is CLE in pocket as the road team?

Best of luck this weekend to you sir.
Perhaps the more egregious error was implying that I only had one move on the dance floor that could be termed signature. It just doesn't do justice to the depth and sheer brilliance of the repertoire...

SBR
Sharp
Bettor

\$\$\$\$\$

32. Originally Posted by ligastar
I appreciate the effort Matt. I'm a J-school major, so I was serious about questioning the editing process. It does beg the question though, is CLE in pocket as the road team?

Best of luck this weekend to you sir.
As a journalism grad myself, in all seriousness I take "getting it right" to heart as much as anyone I know. I misread the seriousness of the previous question about the editing process - the reality is that there is none, with my day job falling outside of the editorial scope. With the post being a side hustle, I'm often scrambling after a long workweek to get the post up in the early Saturday morning hours (hence the 1:18 a.m. timestamp this week). I can promise every single handicapping factor I touch thought through as thoroughly as my capacity allows, and every bet I post is one I have made myself.

I do my best to get the other basics right, but not having a second set of eyes available leaves the door open to occasional errors such as the one you rightfully called me out for, and I'm always happy to make a correction when one is called for.

33. Syracuse has an absolutely awful defense. I really thought Babers would have them ready to play today. That defense a complete no-show.

34. Originally Posted by timd
Syracuse has an absolutely awful defense. I really thought Babers would have them ready to play today. That defense a complete no-show.
It was 43-5 Wake in the second half, and if not for the blocked PAT that was returned for 2 points, it would have been 44-3. That was a major domination when it came down to Clawson vs. Babers in terms of halftime adjustments.

SBR
Sharp
Bettor

\$\$\$\$\$

35. Tons of over steam. Took some u30 1h

Originally Posted by Point Blank
I believe you make a good case there. Notre Dame's ground game is an unusual case, a team getting explosion plays without running much option, 7 TD runs of 50 yards or more already. That is a great OL overpowering the opposition, and taking advantage of what happens when opponents are forced to load the box. But Miami has enough talent and tactics on that side of the ball to limit big plays from being made. I chart "home run" touchdowns as plays of 40 yards or more and the Hurricanes haven't allowed one all season, after only giving up 2 LY, both on pass plays. It isn't that Miami will win the battle at the line of scrimmage, but that by preventing big plays they turn the Irish ground game into a machine that generates first downs and grinds the clock, rather than quick strikes. I don't think it ever gets higher than 57.5, so I would get in play now.

First 123 Last
Top