Watching first half hoping for over, then we'll get a number around 78 and take the under.
More to come...
More to come...
Louisville second half...
- Thread starter Nelson
- Start date
Wow, just wow. Should have gone way Over 1h, then stops, refs refuse to call fouls, then last second 3 puts 72 on 70'. I had no bet, was waiting for 2h under, if we can get around 77 or higher. Only concern is the refs will call touch fouls. They were allowing murder in 1h.
Line opens at 77'. Going to wait. I think it should move down, but don't mind a tie, and it might go to 78.
Should be under. A little worried about refs switching up in 2h. Have seen that more than once. They won't call muggings in one half, then switch to touch fouls in 2h.
Big swing. Figured 5d would drop back to 77', but it's sticking at 78.
Wsex closes at 77' under -115.
BTW, I pick almost exclusively on tv games. Mostly unders. Mostly 2h, some game and some 1h. Should be more picks on Saturday. College basketball totals are the easiest bets out there, bar none. I didn't say they are easy, I said they are easier than any other kind of bet.
- Dec 11, 2008
- 163
- 0
- 0
Just wondering what your approach is when handicapping those second half totals. Obviously if you think its the easiest bet out there you know what you are doing. I, on the other hand, have no confidence in making total picks. Any tips would be appreciated. Thanks.
Sure thing, Zlovell. Try the below. I love this stuff and think about it for hours.
This is my basic approach:
Over is a sucker bet. Only bet over if you have an overwhelming, specific reason or combination of reasons. By contrast, assumption, general bias, and first view should always be toward the under. Look for reasons not to bet under, and more often than not you won't find them.
There are only two college tv teams that, year in and out, can often beat a total on shooting alone: North Carolina and Duke. The rest cannot often, regularly or routinely do that. For all Dickie V's effusions, there are only a handful of truly high-skilled college basketball players in the country and they all play for NC or Duke. The rest are so many dullards who can jump four feet in the air and race the court in three seconds but almost always fail the finish. The tiny, tiny, tiny minority who can finish a play, or simply grasp the very concept of percentage play, goes to Duke or NC. The rest of the teams in the country just flat cannot keep up a 4-pt/minute pace, yet most televised 2h totals are within a few baskets of 80!
Pure meat, man. Pure gold. Given to you free of charge. With apologies to Damone, bank accounts have died to obtain this valuable information!
All you have to do is avoid known situations of high-scoring danger, and you can make money on college totals betting under.
The only reasons overs ever occur are:
- whistle-horny reffing (uncommon in recent years)
- fouling (as opposed to reffing - uncommon except after mid-February, with the 'bubble')
- overtime (essentially a tax on us under players)
- excess energy (not expended in 1h)
- pace change (related to energy but not the same thing)
- freak shooting
First, you ingrain the basic bias, as outlined above. Then you apply these general rules to specific games. Assume reversion to mean: that what you saw in the first half is likelier to reverse or lessen than continue. If you can develop a feel for this, you've got it made. In tonight's game, there was some serious syncopated reffing in 1h. The refs swallowed their whistles and allowed things that normally would be called fouls to go unchecked. Expecting reversion to mean in 2h means expecting more ref activity in that 2h. Which was the case. But it was not a HUGE amount more, as it was the other night when the refs single-whistledly caused the Ten game to go over by one fucking point (84 on 83 for me). Which was about my sixth loss of the hoops year against about 25 wins. None posted save last two, so dismiss me as a liar or braggart and I won't blame you. This is the Internet after all.
Know the basic factors related to scoring, as outlined above. Watch them in the first half, and develop a feel for how they will change in the second from what you observed in the first. The first half might have 83 points. Most bettors are numerologists. They believe numbers are magic in and of themselves, rather than outcomes of processes which must be analyzed. Why was the number 83? What produced that number? Those are the relevant questions. But the mass public will always take the 83 as the key. You must analyze in order to predict. Why 83? Because some guy hit five threes? Or because it was played at maniacal pace? Maybe refs called touch fouls for fifteen out of twenty minutes? I hesitate to use easy, but it really isn't all that difficult to guess how these things will change in the second half. Even the unpredictable can be figured in, to an extent. There's always going to be technicals, OT, non-percentage play that cause us to lose the odd game. But not as often as one would think. Not as often as in other sports, I find. In fact, a very good percentage of these games can be predicted.
Basketball takes a LOT of energy, and it's unrelated to points. Very rarely, almost never, is a game frenetic from start to finish. But the big racy high-scoring 1h will help the 2h under - the players tire. If the teams are equal weight, they may go another ten minutes full speed then clench up. Slow out the last ten and make it a last shot or close game. By contrast, no matter the pace, if there's a 25-pt gap at halftime, energized subs may enter, and the game stay wild the whole way. Or the starters may stay, but both sides relax and play funball since the outcome is decided - as in the Evansville-NC 2h over the other night. That's where knowing teams and tendencies comes in. And these tendencies do tend to carry over from year to year, regardless of players.
You are betting on one period, not a series. A strong specific indication outweighs a general rule. You're not betting on a group of 100 events, you're betting on one specific play period. Anything you've picked up, as from watching the 1h, that applies to the specific period/event in question applies more strongly to that potential bet on the 2h than a general rule which forms the backdrop for your considerations. Weighing these things and developing a feel. And if the number is way off what you think, why, that just means there's some factor you aren't aware of it. And you can trust the linesmakers - they have to get this stuff right, it's their job! In time you will become able to tell when a number is wrong. Vegas will post a 79, and you will know that it should be posting a 77, and that the actual number will very likely be around 73. Then again you will see a 79 and it is so much higher than what your observation and knowledge of patterns tells you it ought to be that you will know for sure that there is some statistical factor you're ignornant of that is causing Vegas to post such a high number.
Final key is never to get too deep to see over the furrow, as the technical guys are apt to do. Look up from your stat sheet. ALWAYS keep the biggest picture in mind. Look from the farthest outside in. The emotions, the circumstances, the particulars, the behavior of refs, crowd, etc., all figure in. What does the league need to happen? What does the coach? The tv station? The referee? None of these can be captured on a stat sheet. All games are unique. The stats sheets only tell you part of what happened after it happened. Your eyes tell you what is happening. Which is more important? There are certain people on this site who are cocksure that theirs is the only or only legitimate way to handicap. Silly and wrong. There is no one way. I'm describing a way that has worked for me for years. That's the full extent of my claim. In general, your ability to perceive before the public produces profits. Is San Diego a good football team? No. Is Tennessee a high-scoring basketball team? Not like the last couple years. Have the lines adjusted to these facts? Not so much.
Just getting warmed up but got a busy day. Always like to read thoughtful analysis as guys like Save It provide, but they usually end up being driven off by the mouthbreathers.
Last edited:
- Dec 11, 2008
- 163
- 0
- 0
I appreciate all the insight, you made a lot of valid points. I'm going to start making picks on 2H totals and see what I can do. I already watch a lot of college basketball so it shouldn't be too much extra work. Thanks again for the info, and I'll be keeping an eye on your plays.
