PATS D Should Get Torched

captain_vood · Feb 3, 2017

I agree on the 'no lean' technology. If the books set the line to trick people into betting on Team A so that when Team B wins they would take everyone's money, it wouldn't take long for everyone to catch on and bet on Team B. Or any team in any game for that matter. We all know they want equal money on both sides. If it was lopsided enough they would change the number. Since they haven't, it isn't... regardless of what anyone says. The number appears correct (to them), so they move the juice to keep it even. They may claim there is more money on Pats, but just $1 more could always be considered more money on the Pats. They are certainly not going to produce any hard numbers as to how much money they have bet on each side, and since they have no clue as to what will end up happening, they really don't have to care much after they set the number so long as the money is balanced so that they get to keep around half of it.

Bettors have to worry about stats and standings and schedules and yards per this or that, and all that jazz, but books don't, if you really get down to brass tacks.

X-Files · Feb 3, 2017

PatsFan1283 said:
I've replied to a few of your threads. I dunno which ones are the serious ones and which aren't.

And Pinnacle shading 1 way doesn't mean anything more than they are adjusting the line by a few %. It doesn't mean they have some inclination that the Falcons are the "right side". There is no lean to the Falcons, it's just a lean towards them being the better side at a 3 point spread. If the line was -2.5 but NE -120 would that be a lean to the Patriots? You're using the term incorrectly.

I suppose that is valuable info if you have square books and just want to bet rogue #'s, but not many books that don't just move on "air" these days.

I've seen your replies, PatsFan. You seem to know NE well & make many excellent points.

Re your question the line on the drop down menu is now -2.5 -120 at Pinnacle. Alternately -3 +105. These are not a lean to the Pats, but rather the opposite, a lean to the Falcons compared to square book Bovada which has Atlanta at +3 +100 (+105 earlier this week).

IME it would be profitable longterm to take the NFL plus money side at the square book in situations like this, especially when they occur near to game time. Although the NE historical ATS record with Brady is another factor that could influence one to lay off this game.

For a recent example of another Pinnacle lean, Atlanta vs GB in the final four saw very similar line moves to the Super Bowl with Pinnacle pointing strongly to Atlanta as the ATS & ML winner.

bigwang · Feb 4, 2017

Well shit...not sure why they should even bother playing the game much less why we should handicap it since the outcome has been decided already according to the pinny lean. You guys crack me up with the pinny leans. Most of you can't even bet with them and have no documented long term evidence that the pinny lean means anything. A recent game is always cited but never long term data.

midnightpirate85 · Feb 4, 2017

Belichick and the coaches probably will try to slow things down pounding Blount and dink and dunk short passes, which will get long drives that will keep the High Flying Falcons O off the field which will in turn not allow the Defense to get torched...

X-Files · Feb 4, 2017

big wang said:
Well shit...not sure why they should even bother playing the game much less why we should handicap it since the outcome has been decided already according to the pinny lean. You guys crack me up with the pinny leans. Most of you can't even bet with them and have no documented long term evidence that the pinny lean means anything. A recent game is always cited but never long term data.

Nobody said the Pinnacle lean guarantees a winner. If it were that easy i'd be on my own jet flying to a paradise full of stunners eager to do my every pleasure, not posting on the Rx responding to comments like this.

Show me a site that records historical line movements & you'll have your "documented long term evidence". Otherwise one can research the comments of concurring online sources that acknowledge the Pinnacle lean. Or begin tracking the results for oneself.

Being able or unable to bet at Pinnacle is irrelevant. You would be making your bets at one or more square books. Until they booted you for winning too much.

bigwang · Feb 6, 2017

X-Files said:
Nobody said the Pinnacle lean guarantees a winner. If it were that easy i'd be on my own jet flying to a paradise full of stunners eager to do my every pleasure, not posting on the Rx responding to comments like this.

Show me a site that records historical line movements & you'll have your "documented long term evidence". Otherwise one can research the comments of concurring online sources that acknowledge the Pinnacle lean. Or begin tracking the results for oneself.

Being able or unable to bet at Pinnacle is irrelevant. You would be making your bets at one or more square books. Until they booted you for winning too much.

So basically the pinny lean is a bunch of bullshit, losing gamblers talk about so they seem like "sharp" losing gamblers?