OK we will agree to disagree. The game will be won by the players who perform the best together straight up against the man on the opposite side. It is team versus team, not who has the best QB. Was Peyton Manning the better QB? Going in a lot of people thought so. The better team won. That will be the case on Sunday. Enjoy and good luck to everyone whichever side you are on.
glad to see Fezzik has managed to pack up his pompous attitude from SSB and ship it all the way over here to the RX...
Maybe Fezzik is right, maybe he is wrong. We will see on Sunday. But to assume that everyone else is wrong because they do not agree with your way of thinking (as you have posted in others' threads here) is pompous at best. There is more than one way to skin a cat...
I have already thrown my opinion out a New England rout. Again, perhaps I am right, or perhaps I am wrong. But, the way I see it, any of us has at best a 57-60% chance of being right.
By the way, the squares are on Carolina +7. There are many ways to show it, but the fact of the matter is every Joe Schmo is taking the +7 in this game and siding with the emotional pick. To assume that NE bettors are as square as (any geometrical figure you can name) is ignorant at best. The early line movement confirms this. Of course, you can make it into a "my brain is bigger than yours" argument, but that doesn't do anything. Some "sharps" will be on NE, and other "sharps" will be on Carolina, for a variety of different reasons.
There are 2 sides to every story. A good capper will evaluate the reasonable arguments from both sides, and, at the very least, give other decent cappers the benefit of the doubt before thinking they are stupid and berating them...
Maybe Fezzik is right, maybe he is wrong. We will see on Sunday. But to assume that everyone else is wrong because they do not agree with your way of thinking (as you have posted in others' threads here) is pompous at best. There is more than one way to skin a cat...
I have already thrown my opinion out a New England rout. Again, perhaps I am right, or perhaps I am wrong. But, the way I see it, any of us has at best a 57-60% chance of being right.
By the way, the squares are on Carolina +7. There are many ways to show it, but the fact of the matter is every Joe Schmo is taking the +7 in this game and siding with the emotional pick. To assume that NE bettors are as square as (any geometrical figure you can name) is ignorant at best. The early line movement confirms this. Of course, you can make it into a "my brain is bigger than yours" argument, but that doesn't do anything. Some "sharps" will be on NE, and other "sharps" will be on Carolina, for a variety of different reasons.
There are 2 sides to every story. A good capper will evaluate the reasonable arguments from both sides, and, at the very least, give other decent cappers the benefit of the doubt before thinking they are stupid and berating them...
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Charlie Maxwell:
Java, these articles are only pinned for about two hours during a 24-hour period and are designed to get more page views to the home page.
The more page views we get on the home page the more we can please the advertisers. The more the advertisers are pleased, the more we can be sure this site is financially strong and can support the posting forum. The posting forum cannot support itself.
Charlie<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
There are advertisers at the top of the RxForum pages. This is where everybody spends their time. Who checks the Prescription page 10-times a day, and who checks the forum 10-times a day? Since the forum has important issues (like a potentially stiff book, that used to advertise, and be heavily promoted here), I think that Shrink's, Nover's and Fezzik's opinions/touts are a lot less important. I don't they they deserve "pin" status at the top of the forum.
I think " The Rx -What level of accountability does it have with Pan AM" would be a better choice for top position.
Java, these articles are only pinned for about two hours during a 24-hour period and are designed to get more page views to the home page.
The more page views we get on the home page the more we can please the advertisers. The more the advertisers are pleased, the more we can be sure this site is financially strong and can support the posting forum. The posting forum cannot support itself.
Charlie<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
There are advertisers at the top of the RxForum pages. This is where everybody spends their time. Who checks the Prescription page 10-times a day, and who checks the forum 10-times a day? Since the forum has important issues (like a potentially stiff book, that used to advertise, and be heavily promoted here), I think that Shrink's, Nover's and Fezzik's opinions/touts are a lot less important. I don't they they deserve "pin" status at the top of the forum.
I think " The Rx -What level of accountability does it have with Pan AM" would be a better choice for top position.
Minus 6.5 vs. Minus 7.
I don't think I've expressed myself properly on why I'm so critical of those liking the Pats minus 7.
It's fine to have disagreement in handicapping. We all will be right and wrong on certain games, and there are always reasons to support either side in a game.
The bottom line though is that the difference between 6.5 and 7 is enormous. It's worth around 12 cent.
Now, I could easily be wrong on my opinion on Carolina. The Pats could win the game 30-6, and if they do I'll rightfully feel and look stupid. My key point is that most successful bettors out there simply would not touch NE at -7. They know that winning with NFL favorites when playing into full vig is difficult. But winning with bad numbers is downright impossible. Trying to win laying over -120 requires you to identify games that cover over 55%.......it is my experience that only the most gifted of all the bettors out there can identify such gems out there on NFL favorites, and I am certainly not one of them.
So maybe that NE -6.5 was such a 55% gem. I feel strongly that this was a best case scenario (and very optimistic). So at NE -7 we have a best case scenario of only a 52% cover. Again, that's best case.
Again, too many people comb over the data and truly believe NFL games are mislined by more than a fg. They could use the OAK/Tbay game last year as an example. But I will continue to disagree with them. Oakland -3 was a line that was close to being correct BASED ON ALL INFO. AVAILABLE AT KICKOFF. Of course, after we saw Tampa's D crush them, we would love to get in our time machine go back 1 year and unload on Tampa +4. However, the only reason this was such a great bet is that we would have info. that was only available AFTER the game kicked off.
I've found that breakeven and losing bettors believe there are many, many games that are clearly mislined by touchdowns. Winning bettors rarely feel that way, and no that advantages ATS come from typically finding lines off by 1.5-2.5 points, and taking advantage of slight mispricings and reduced vigs.
I don't think I've expressed myself properly on why I'm so critical of those liking the Pats minus 7.
It's fine to have disagreement in handicapping. We all will be right and wrong on certain games, and there are always reasons to support either side in a game.
The bottom line though is that the difference between 6.5 and 7 is enormous. It's worth around 12 cent.
Now, I could easily be wrong on my opinion on Carolina. The Pats could win the game 30-6, and if they do I'll rightfully feel and look stupid. My key point is that most successful bettors out there simply would not touch NE at -7. They know that winning with NFL favorites when playing into full vig is difficult. But winning with bad numbers is downright impossible. Trying to win laying over -120 requires you to identify games that cover over 55%.......it is my experience that only the most gifted of all the bettors out there can identify such gems out there on NFL favorites, and I am certainly not one of them.
So maybe that NE -6.5 was such a 55% gem. I feel strongly that this was a best case scenario (and very optimistic). So at NE -7 we have a best case scenario of only a 52% cover. Again, that's best case.
Again, too many people comb over the data and truly believe NFL games are mislined by more than a fg. They could use the OAK/Tbay game last year as an example. But I will continue to disagree with them. Oakland -3 was a line that was close to being correct BASED ON ALL INFO. AVAILABLE AT KICKOFF. Of course, after we saw Tampa's D crush them, we would love to get in our time machine go back 1 year and unload on Tampa +4. However, the only reason this was such a great bet is that we would have info. that was only available AFTER the game kicked off.
I've found that breakeven and losing bettors believe there are many, many games that are clearly mislined by touchdowns. Winning bettors rarely feel that way, and no that advantages ATS come from typically finding lines off by 1.5-2.5 points, and taking advantage of slight mispricings and reduced vigs.
A quote from me yesterday.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Fezz from what I can tell the betting has been about even although I agree with your theory...If the line stays at 6.5-7 that means the betting stays even my guess is the line is correct, which devalues the +pts. ...I am not saying that there is no value...I am just sayin the value isn't as great as one would think for the Cats...Good value at +7 would be a 60/40 chance of them covering...from what I have gathered from the betting so far it is split with the line at +7 (with little movment) making it 50/50 for either team to cover <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The Boston Herald today.
Jay Kornegay, sportsbook director for Imperial Palace in Las Vegas, said action has been split this week between the Panthers and the Patriots, which has kept the line steady.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Fezz from what I can tell the betting has been about even although I agree with your theory...If the line stays at 6.5-7 that means the betting stays even my guess is the line is correct, which devalues the +pts. ...I am not saying that there is no value...I am just sayin the value isn't as great as one would think for the Cats...Good value at +7 would be a 60/40 chance of them covering...from what I have gathered from the betting so far it is split with the line at +7 (with little movment) making it 50/50 for either team to cover <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The Boston Herald today.
Jay Kornegay, sportsbook director for Imperial Palace in Las Vegas, said action has been split this week between the Panthers and the Patriots, which has kept the line steady.
I saw a stat on ESPN that the average margin of victory of SB games to date is 16.2 pts. Willheim's data above and the comments above on the matter can be summed-up with this number. I think it is significant and am happy that we could discuss it rationally, even if with differing opinions. I also think Drunkguy is correct that more squares are on CAR than on NE, but that is almost always based on anectdotal info and I have nothing more than that myself here. My anectodal evidence on the matter is how many meatheads I have heard on the sportstalk shows offering their opinion that everybody but them has counted out Carolina's chances.
I may be wrong, but I think we have a fade-the-faders situation here and as long as I can convince myself I am fading the majority (which is different than the $$), I am confident to go with my own instinct and analysis and hammer the sucker at the window.
I may be wrong, but I think we have a fade-the-faders situation here and as long as I can convince myself I am fading the majority (which is different than the $$), I am confident to go with my own instinct and analysis and hammer the sucker at the window.
