Did the books middle the players tonight?

[Korn]

So many people were mentioning that Sac -2 was a trap, and then some would say its a reverse trap and it seems to have ended in a double trap with the books middling alot of us...

Those that took Sac, most likely took the -2, while a lot that took LA probably passed on the +2 and went with the ML, therefore the books winning both of those...

When the dog is +2 or lower how many of you take the ML compared to taking the +2? I personally take the ML everytime... I'd rather take the +120/+130 over laying -110 and getting 2 points... Although tonight those that took the ML wish they'd have taken the +2....

Korn

 

[DCJ311]

REVERSE MIDDLES

REVERSE MIDDLES

Korn,

You're absolutely right. Any time a -2 or -1.5 favorite wins by 1 point in the NBA, the books make out like bandits.

Most people either had: SAC -2 (I shopped for SAC -1.5).

Or LAL +115 or +120 on the money line. LAL +2 was a better play than LAL money line, but SAC -2 was better to buy a half point to -120 probably, rather than take a -135 or -140 ML.

In regular season NBA games, teams usually do not win by 1 point, at least not nearly as much as they do by 2 pts. But when it happens, the books make a killing!

 

[Steve's plays]

THE BOOKS ARE SMILING TODAY, BUT WE'LL HAVE TO GET THEM BACK TONIGHT.

 

[hildog]

When I am playing a dog that it is only +2 (like last night), what I'll do is take half of what I was going to bet and put it on the money-line and take the other half and put it on +2. I thought that the Lakers were going to win last night, and I was very tempted to save a little juice and put it all on the ML. As it turned out, I broke dead-even and was glad that I played a little conservative.

 

[Magic_01]

I am with a lot of people. I always the the ML when a team is +2 or less. and Always take a team to cover as a fav. I had Lakers, and this time I should of took the points, but not offen with a small spread will it fall between the numbers.