THURSDAY

[WhatsHisNuts]

its just not what it once was. vegas is installing too many 'false favorites' over the last year or two. there are teams that really dont have any business being favored, yet as soon as vegas installs them as -1.5 or -2, lots of general trend players make plays on games they normally would avoid. theres an almost 'against the grain' element with oregon tomorrow, especially without brooks. while there is something to be said for the risk in fading the general premise of the system, there is also a risk in backing a washington team that is playing for nothing right now. they could easily pack it in until the pac10 tourney because their regular season is just about done.

Seriously, I don't get you at all. If you are going to make a case, make it against the actual spread and not the theory. You tore me up for my Illinois over Indiana pick and you act like books are trying to get even action on every side... that's just BS and you know it.

 

[WhatsHisNuts]

Wash would be a 1 or 1.5 fav if brooks was playing!
They are 11-1 at home!

FWIW: I have Oregon -5 with a healthy squad.

 

[Nickelback]

I think Gman is being careful but you can't argue with the system this year. If the books are trying to weaken the success of the system, it certainly doesn't show this year!

I have no idea what he said about Illinois/Indiana but clearly that game was a pinnacle of this system and worked out the way it should have (in theory).

 

[gman2]

Seriously, I don't get you at all. If you are going to make a case, make it against the actual spread and not the theory. You tore me up for my Illinois over Indiana pick and you act like books are trying to get even action on every side... that's just BS and you know it.

i actually had to go back and search your post on indy/illinois because i dont ever recall 'tearing you up' (<- what the fu.ck?) over illinois and indy. i simply said i disagreed with the contention that 'the books know something'.

guys who dont have faith in their handicapping are the ones who act like the books are omniscient and have some stake in every damn game.

do you realize how many d-1 teams there are? and how many games they have to line? and how many numbers are simply 'bad'?

guys need to start trusting their stuff more.

its ridiculous how many people make plays on games they dont even LIKE or intend to bet, simply because they think they have to 'be different' by convincing themselves theyre siding with the books.

keep in mind, this is a general statement. it really has nothing to do with you whatsoever.

and i absolutely stand behind vegas installing a lot of false favorites. a few years ago, this whole ranked/unranked thing would pop up a few times a month. now its a few times a week. and overall, it was much better a few years ago. now its become almost squarish in a sense. i really believe that. now that doesnt mean that its not successful lately. and the fundamentals behind it are solid.

but youd be amazed at how often it pops up in true tout publications and from people who are as square as they come.

the sharpness of the system is still there. but its popping up too much for me to think there arent a handful of false favs in there. and putting in the time that i do, i can definitely say that, win or lose, there is a higher frequency of bad numbers than in the past.

lets be honest -- cover or no cover, the books have been putting out BAD numbers on illinois all year. and you can make the case that they still overrated the illini the other night. illinois scored 51 points .... at HOME. people make too much of final scores. thats only part of it. there was no reason for illinois to be favored in that game. but the books keep giving them all this respect because of how strong their home court has been in the past. well theyre horrible this year. they just happened to be 'less horrible' than indiana on tuesday.

 

[gman2]

to take it a step further, a guy like nickelback is a sharp handicapper. ive known that for the handful of yrs ive been on the forum. he knows his basketball.

but there are so many people who just mindfu.ck themselves into thinking the books 'know something' in a sport where there are 20, 30, 40, and on saturdays, 100 games a night.

you see people mindfu.cking themselves and betting games they dont even like because they think a big sky game or missouri valley game is 'begging for so and so money'.

people dont even handicap games any more.

guys are handicapping one side .... AND THEN BETTING AGAINST THEMSELVES, because they are saying 'gosh, my handicapping cant possibly be correct. i mean, ive put in all this time and ive come up with team A. but the books must know something on this big sky game, so ill bet team B"

 

[gman2]

my most recent above post obviously has nothing to do with wash/ore or unranked vs. ranked. its just more general handicapping.

basically, its like people dont want to believe that there are a ton of bad numbers out there on games every week.

it doesnt mean that you go put a blindfold on and bet north carolina every game.

but its like guys waste all this time handicapping, only to bet against themselves or on games they dont even like, just because they are so afraid that the books know some big secret about montana and weber state.

 

[Jorgesca]

respect everyone's opinion but if you think they are installing false favorites, you are contradicting your statement that they are not omniscient. Anyway the system hits more often than not and you would be ahead counting the vig blindly betting on it, and there have been more games now than in years past, but in my opinion it will more often than not be more action on the ranked dog than on the unranked favorite just because of people who dont handicap their games based on other stuff than schedules and standings and believe me there are a lot of players like this everywhere.

 

[gman2]

one thing i will say is that on this stanford/usc game, you will inevitably hear a handful of people say that the usc line looks 'off' and that 'vegas must know something'.

when the reality is that stanford SHOULD be favored. the books dont know anything about this game. theyre not setting some kind of elaborate trap.

stanford should be favored by a bucket at home.
and they are.

usc could easily win the game and cover. or they could lose by 10. thats not being equivocal. thats being realistic. win or lose, stanford minus a short number is correct. its not some 'trap' or some shady line.

a lot of people dont even know usc is in the top 25. hell, i didnt know until i just looked. the bottom part of the top 25 changes every week anyways.

 

[WhatsHisNuts]

Whatever, we'll just have to agree to disagree. If I was confident in the outcome of a game and I ran a book, I'd probably try to take advantage of it. If you want to believe in bad lines, that's fine. I believe in information advantage.

There are a lot of games, and I am confident that 95% of the lines are as tight as they can make them...but I look for the ones that are off. If that's not handicapping to you, so be it.

I could be way off base, but I think Nickleback is cut of the same cloth as I am.... he just doesn't describe the parts of the theory that you disagree with.

-Gary

 

[RIGHT SIDE]

Big Papi is gonna wake up in the morning and wonder WTF happen to my thread!?? :mj07:

This is great stuff......

 

[WhatsHisNuts]

one thing i will say is that on this stanford/usc game, you will inevitably hear a handful of people say that the usc line looks 'off' and that 'vegas must know something'.

when the reality is that stanford SHOULD be favored. the books dont know anything about this game. theyre not setting some kind of elaborate trap.

stanford should be favored by a bucket at home.
and they are.

Well, I agree with you here in that Stanford should be favored. I actually show them as a 4pt favorite at home and will probably be passing on this one. You're right in the sense that betting every time condition A is met isn't necessarily handicapping, but that is the hole in that approach. I'll be the first person to say that I don't know crap about the teams I bet on, and in most cases, can't name a player or coach on either team...but,that doesn't mean my approach to capping is wrong. I believe in information advantages and will try to decipher "bad lines" as best I can. When that falls through, I side with the book. Personally, I think people that use trends and statistics are knuckleheads....but that's just me.

 

[gman2]

im not 'believing' in anything. the reality is that illinois traditionally has one of the strongest home court advantages in the country.

well the reality is that illinois is horrible this year.

so the books kept putting out a bad line against maryland. a bad line against ohio state. a bad line wisconsin. and even a bad line against indiana.

but back when they played maryland, you heard people saying 'the books must know something'

they didnt.

... and then when they played ohio state, you heard people saying 'well, the books must know something'

they didnt

... and then when they played wisconsin, you heard people saying 'well, the books must know something'

they didnt.

so at what point do people just accept the fact that the books are overrating illinois home court based on what it was in recent years as opposed to what it is right now? win or lose, illinois against indiana was another bad number. but at some point, illinois was bound to win one of those games. but it sure wasnt because the books 'trapped people'.

 

[Jorgesca]

i agree there are going to be inflated lines on some teams all the time, like duke, the yankees, etc, thats why i like playing this situation when the favorite isnt such a high profile team like duke or like illinois

 

[WhatsHisNuts]

so at what point do people just accept the fact that the books are overrating illinois home court based on what it was in recent years as opposed to what it is right now? win or lose, illinois against indiana was another bad number. but at some point, illinois was bound to win one of those games. but it sure wasnt because the books 'trapped people'.

Do you think posting Illinois as a 2.5 point favorite was designed to get even money on both sides? I don't. I also doubt the books were trying to piss money away on Illinois in those previous games...they were just wrong.

Like I said before, we're just going to have to agree to disagree in our approach to line interpretation.

 

[gman2]

Well, I agree with you here in that Stanford should be favored. I actually show them as a 4pt favorite at home and will probably be passing on this one. You're right in the sense that betting every time condition A is met isn't necessarily handicapping, but that is the hole in that approach. I'll be the first person to say that I don't know crap about the teams I bet on, and in most cases, can't name a player or coach on either team...but,that doesn't mean my approach to capping is wrong. I believe in information advantages and will try to decipher "bad lines" as best I can. When that falls through, I side with the book. Personally, I think people that use trends and statistics are knuckleheads....but that's just me.

... and really, thats my whole point. take for example maryland vs clemson two saturdays ago.

there were some people who were baffled by the fact that maryland was favored over clemson by 4.

and i have to ask .... why? why the heck WOULDNT maryland, a former top 25 team themselves and talented team, be favored by a few points over clemson?

so there were a lot of people siding with maryland but really not sure why they were doing it. so they convinced themselves that the books 'knew something'

when in reality, all they were doing was backing a certain team at a correct number. once the ball was thrown up in the air, anything could have happened. maryland was correctly lined at -4. but they could have easily lost by 10 and it was still the right number.

 

[RIGHT SIDE]

Just saw this on another site....this capper has been following the ranked vs. unranked plays. Not sure for how long, but the scenerio where you have a ranked team as dogs vs. an unranked home team he has his record as 8-0 for the home unranked team!!! I don't care who believes in what.....that's making $$$$ BOTTOM LINE!!

 

[gman2]

Do you think posting Illinois as a 2.5 point favorite was designed to get even money on both sides? I don't. I also doubt the books were trying to piss money away on Illinois in those previous games...they were just wrong.
Like I said before, we're just going to have to agree to disagree in our approach to line interpretation.

... so then you would agree that there are games that simply have bad numbers then?

the books lining illinois at -2.5 was simply another case of them overrating this mediocre illini team. and illinois certainly played a mediocre game. 51 pts at home is pathetic. but on that night, it was good enough to win. it certainly doesnt justify the number.

 

[WhatsHisNuts]

Gman2: If you goto the MadJacks SuperBowl Party, I'll buy you one of the free beers. Our screen-names are so close, we must have something in common....lol.

-Gary

 

[WhatsHisNuts]

Just saw this on another site....this capper has been following the ranked vs. unranked plays. Not sure for how long, but the scenerio where you have a ranked team as dogs vs. an unranked home team he has his record as 8-0 for the home unranked team!!! I don't care who believes in what.....that's making $$$$ BOTTOM LINE!!

To piggyback onto this, I'm 8-2 when taking an unranked team that's favored over a ranked team. I don't have the breakdown of how many were home/road favorites, but it is what it is.

For funzies, here are the two losers -
Akron -2.5 over Nevada #25 22-Dec
Georgia -1 over Wisconsin #4 31-Dec

Here are the eight winners -
Notre Dame -2 over Bama (4) 7-Dec
BC -1.5 over Maryland (23) 10-Dec
Georgia Tech -3 over Duke (11) 10-Jan
Florida St -2.5 over Va Tech (23) 17-Jan
Villanova -4.5 over Notre Dame (20) 17-Jan
Villanova -5.5 over Texas (21) 20-Jan
Arkansas -3.5 over LSU (16) 20-Jan
Illinois -2.5 over Indiana (24) 23-Jan

 

[Wise and Wiser]

The Huskies are favored by 4 for two reasons:

1) They're at home.
2) Brooks is out.

Plain and simple. Don't overthink this one fellas! I'll take the better team getting four points. I think Oregon has a good shot of winning this game straight up. Washington isn't playing good basketball right now. Good luck to everyone who decides to play this game!