2-28 Big 12... and a big play out of it...

[Jayhawk_Thor]

Updated record:


February: Through
Big 12: 24-11-2 (+$1,890) -
Other: 11-4 (+337) -
Total: 35-15-2 (+$2,227) -


Yesterday update: Went 1-1. WV beat Pitt., but I was on the wrong side of the OU-OSU game...

Will uncharicteristically start out outside of the Big 12:

Minnesota +4 (Ill.), -110, 110/100
Minnesota ML+170, 20/37
---- I saw the line at 3 this morning, started to put a wager in, thought better of it, knowing the line would go up. I wake up and see I will get an extra point, which I will take, of course.
Again, don't mean to sound conceited, but I have made a ton of money in college Bball this season with games prescisely like this, where the home team appears far inferior to the road team but is giving a small amount of pts. (Wis @ Min, MSU @ Min, Fla @ Ala, Ten @ Ala, Il. @ Iowa, etc. off the top of my head). I figure I can throw a small amount of that back on the Gophs tonight.
As for the thought that the Illini is so much better than the Gophs... Illinois, in my opinion, is very overrated, and I think the U if underrated. I think this matchup is closer than people realize.
This will be the biggest play out of the Big 12 that I have made this year... That distinction will last until the NCAA Tournament... :talk: LOL...

Big 12--------------------------------

Miz. +11 (@ISU), +100, 100/100
--- 83% of public money is currently on ISU! 83%! :scared The line has only budged a half a point. So, yeah, this is a big public fade play.
I am going to let Pinny keep the extra half point, and I will stick with the 11 points, and not pay any vig.
Despite what you've heard, this Missouri team isn't God-awful... just mediocre... I still contend that they will not quit.
ISU has been so-so at home this year, and you can essentially flip a coin to decide whether or not they will show up and play a decent game.
I think Mizzou has enough in the backcourt to slow down Stinson and Blalock, and McKinney and Gardner should play well enough to keep this one respectable.

GL tonight, everyone...

 

[Dr. Fade]

You've got some real ballz taking Mizzou. This team has mailed it in. I'm personally not playing the game, but I wouldn't invest my enemies money with this sorry a$$ squad.

 

[Jayhawk_Thor]

Fade, I know what you mean...

Was unsure about this one until I studied the public money/line movement... Have been successful thus far this season when doing this...

ISU frequently mails it in as well... probably the second most disapointing team in the Big 12, next to Mizzou...

Should be an interesting game.

 

[gman2]

to claim that 80%+ of the public is on isu (or even betting this game between two garbage teams) is downright nuts, but the play should be a winner regardless as the cyclones should win comfortably. gl.

 

[Jayhawk_Thor]

Gman...

I am not claiming... It is on a website that I frequent that shows public betting patterns... What use would I have for making that stat up?

As an aside... I think you meant the play will be a loser... I am on Mizzou.

 

[gman2]

whoops. certainly didn't mean to denigrate the play itself. im not sure how i misread it for iowa state. for that i do apologize. i tend to lean iowa state here, but am going nowhere near the game. because of that, i really do hope the play wins for you as i'll have no dog in the race.

i probably could have chosen a better verb than 'claimed', as im not doubting that you are gathering the numbers from somewhere. i am, however, questioning the legitimacy of such numbers. there is no way that 83% of the public is betting a 5-9 team in the big 12 against a 4-10 team in the big 12. again, this has nothing to do with your capping whatsoever. youre putting the work in and i respect every guy who makes an effort to find winners. but id be very very leery of a site that is claiming such ridiculous numbers. it goes along with seeing (from time to time) people post that "94% of the public is on so and so...", which is almost mathematically impossible with any reasonable sample size. sorry for the poor wording all around on my post. certainly meant nothing by it. but do stand behind what i said about the veracity of those numbers (and the site thats posting them)

 

[murphman]

I have it at 60-40 for Iowa St...

 

[_Symmetrical_]

Sportsbook consensus says for Iowa State 86 to 14

dont shoot the messanger

 

[murphman]

Not shooting the messenger...just giving you what I had on the site that I follow...could be useful

 

[_Symmetrical_]

i was referring to the....

but id be very very leery of a site that is claiming such ridiculous numbers. it goes along with seeing (from time to time) people post that "94% of the public is on so and so...", which is almost mathematically impossible with any reasonable sample size. sorry for the poor wording all around on my post. certainly meant nothing by it. but do stand behind what i said about the veracity of those numbers (and the site thats posting them)

... not that I put much value in taking fades, but I dont think they are making up numbers on Sportsbook

 

[gman2]

i was referring to the....






... not that I put much value in taking fades, but I dont think they are making up numbers on Sportsbook

i will strongly, strongly disagree. those numbers are phony as shit at sportsbook. that was actually the place i was referring to when i said that from time to time, people say "94% of the public is on so and so....", and it will be the most obscure game possible - like an ovc game between eastern illinois and jacksonville. books can encourage whatever side they'd like with bogus numbers such as the ones they post.

 

[wox11]

how believable is spotrsbook consensus?

is has after 1,986 bets placed: 83% on IOWA ST. :scared

 

[hawkeye]

Which ISU team will show up--last home game-place a rocking-but ISU has not palyed that well at home-I'll pass. GL to how every anyone bets it.

 

[CogentSage]

In agreement

In agreement

I totally concur with Gman. Most of these sites slant the numbers in a way that coincides with what they want the public to know and in essence what might entice them into placing a bet that is in their favor. From close contacts, I know the numbers that are posted are not technically lies, but they structure them in a way that it is completely disceiving. Sportsbook is a perfect example. In any case good luck with Mizzou. It is a game I will be staying away from. Stay with your capping style Jayhawk, it has been working well for you. GL


Grayden

 

[Destructor D]

I took Misery +15 against Colorado last weekend. They were up 15 after 10 minutes and still lost by 18. They Tigers are 2-8 ATS on the road and 1-9 ATS their last 10. You have mighty balls taking this sorry bunch of losers.

 

[Jayhawk_Thor]

Thanks for the info guys, I appreciate it...

Gman, simply misunderstanding... I knew what you meant... No problem...

Whether or not that much public money is going on one side is irrelevant. I know the public is hitting ISU, to what extent, really is not the point to me.

I realize nobody thinks this is a solid bet. But nobody thought Baylor against ISU was a solid bet last week (Clem, and many other very good cappers were on ISU). Nobody thought Baylor against KU was a solid bet. I hope that doesn't sound conceited... I am just trying to say that I think I cap differantly than a lot of guys here... it has been working recently... maybe tonight it won't...

 

[Jayhawk_Thor]

Adding plays:

I am going to add on to my Minnesota play...
I am going to add another unit and a half at +4. So now I will have 275/250 on it.

Also making another play out of the Big 12...

South Carolina -1.5 (LSU), -110, 55/50
--- Same reasons as why I like Minnesota.

Interestingly the Mizzou line has dropped back down to 11... despite public being heavy on ISU... stay tuned...

 

[Jayhawk_Thor]

Last play, I promise...

Don't often play parlays, but this one is fun if Minnesota comes through:

Minnesota ML (+170), Boston College ML (-750)... 20/41.20
--- Pays better than 2/1. Lets give it a shot as well.

 

[Willie the Whip]

gman,

When those sites post that 83% or whatever is on a certain team, they dont mean 83% of all betters they mean 83% OF BETTERS THAT BET THAT TEAM THRU BOOKS THEY TRACK. By reading your post it looks like you thought they mean a percentage of ALL betters. Just some clarifying if im reading you right??? Good Luck!

Whip!

 

[Jayhawk_Thor]

Hey Whip, when are you going to start posting in the NHL forum again?

I miss your picks!