"Evidence" might be too strong a word based on some fluff piece written by a local news station. I doubt half the money wagered will be on prop bets, maybe in Vegas. Maybe. I know a lot of locals that don't take them at all. Even at some offshore shops they take them but limit what you can bet. At several places I can only bet $100 max on props but can bet several times that on the side. And if this game lands on 3 (with Pats winning) then that will crush a lot of the books. They won't write a winner on the side, they will pay everyone that laid the 2.5, pay everyone that took the +3.5, push everyone else. You'd think if 50% of their action was props it wouldn't kill them but you would think wrong.
Looks like you need help with your reading comprehension too. I still haven't said the Giants are the right side, nor have I decided what my final wager will be (other than the shit ton I already have out on props).
You, and The Chaffing Pundiff need to join a reading group together so that you can read and process sentences correctly. The reading rainbow is waiting.
Does it make me feel better that I tried to provide a piece of truthful information, only to have it attacked just because it maybe went against what somebody wants to happen?.....No, not really.Maris, does this make you feel better?
Oh, it's you again. Still think the Pats aren't considered a public team? Can't wait to hear it.
http://www.therxforum.com/showthread.php?t=890681&page=3
Go ahead. Go back in and eat some more crow.
If it lands on EXACTLY 3....ya probably they'd be f*cked no matter what. But that's a very specific scenario you're presenting. My point is, with props and total bets, the side of this game isn't mega important as people are trying to make it out to be.
Please, you have enough trouble processing sentences correctly. Don't hurt yourself trying to decipher insightful analysis.
I know how it works guy.....I did it you in that other thread that you won't return to because you were proven wrong. Did you dirty.
Ya.
http://www.therxforum.com/showthread...=890681&page=3
All I'm saying is people are acting like its way more lopsided than the 60/40 it has been all week. We both know people all over this forum are basing their play solely off that. I didn't say you, but then this post wasn't for YOU. You just chose to respond. It was just to let people know that either side can win, and Vegas/books can still make money.
And no, I don't really care who's on what, especially since my bet on either side will end up being way less than what I've got on props.
And no, I don't really care who's on what, especially since my bet on either side will end up being way less than what I've got on props.
I agree with you that the side action is much more even than people realize, however one of these talking heads I heard on satellite radio (also read an article that I can't find now) is claiming that the Giants have been one of the most heavily backed ML plays ever. Obviously this is speculation and there's no proof based on dollars bet, but it does make sense from a value perspective to take the Giants to win straight up if that's what you like. The ML is where Vegas will be exposed.
maris is correct you can here jay say it for yourself here:
http://www.therxforum.com/showthread.php?t=891070
http://www.therxforum.com/showthread.php?t=891070
Very true. I do agree that they're in a spot with the big money they allowed to be bet on Giant's futures after that losing streak they had. But you have to think they're making at least some money on all the other futures that won't win.
But I think if we're going purely based off of Giants won't win because Vegas has a few big money futures bets out there, then we're assuming Vegas can 100% decide the outcome of the Superbowl. Not sure I can stretch it that far.
I don't think Vegas will have any influence on the game. I never yell fix
I do, however, think the refs can fuck up a game with bad calls.
