Interesting Info.....

[taker02000]

I believe this was brought up before the season started this year, but during the first two weeks of the season, there is an interesting way to cap your Pro football card each week.

There have been a total of 32 games played thus far this season.

If you were to pick just a winner without looking at the spread at all, 28 out of 30 would cover.

The only exceptions to this so far this year are the Carolina -3' over Jacksonville with Carolina winning 24-23 in Week 1 and Oakland -13 over Cincinnati 23-20.

The other two games were pushes involving the Washington Redskins and New York Jets in Week 1 and the St. Louis Rams and San Francisco 49ers in Week 2.

If you used this system thus far this year, you would be hitting at a 93% clip so far. Just thought this was interesting that if you can pick a STRAIHGT-UP winner on the games, 93% would have covered so far.

Taker

 

[GM]

And if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle...

In other words, it's meaningless to state this.

This thing surfaces over and over again, year after year after year, people pointing out that the spread doesn't matter. It DOES. Where is this guy that can pick the straight-up winner 93% of the time? That's all we are missing.

Since that guy doesn't exist, handicap the games, and get just enough wins on dogs covering but not winning outright that you end up in the black. If you pick dogs all the time, and 40% of the time they win outright...and an additional 15% of the time they cover via the spread ONLY...the spread HAS made a huge difference. It's the difference between making and losing money. (And these %'s aren't far off what actually happens).

Sorry 'bout the grumpiness, but I've read this comment a hundred times (at least), and it never leads to anything but a false assumption that the spread should be ignored.

 

[vinnie]

It does pay how ever if you like the dog to take money line also.

 

[Riskbreaker]

it does

 

[Superbear]

Carolina +400 $$$$$$$$$$$$ :spotting: :yup

 

[Doctor Baseball]

taker0200 you have a point, but I guess it doesnt matter, and dont get me wrong in this one, let me explain you why. This thing of the straight winner is something that jumps all the time on every MNF game and sometimes in the SNF and guess what??? It works, I noticed that a couple of years ago, and I also noticed that it applies to the regular games (but I didnt knew it was that high %, maybe it is like a 80% on the long run).

Ok now lets see if I can explain my point. I guess a couple of years ago someone wrote about that, but he said it doesnt apply to the 10+ points favorites ( Oakland lands on that category). Correct me if Im wrong but I guess only Miami, Oakland and vikings had been a 10+ points favorites, so the "Straight winner system" is 2-1 this season, but only 1 out of 100 pick texans to win straight up, so the system actually should be 1-2 but anyway that doesnt matter.

Now on the pk to 9.5 points favorites, you have a great chance of winning by only picking the straight up winner (maybe 80 to 85 %), but here comes the ugly reality. Honestly what % of people pick carolina to win SU? and Dallas? Minne last week? and I can keep going and going. Yeah I know a couple of people bet on the ML but as they said its only a long shot. I dont know if I make my point, your "system" does work, but as I always said, sometimes is harder to pick a SU winner than a ATS, because I loved Carolina +9 last week, but if I had to pick the SU Tampa Bay would had been my call.

Anyway good luck in the future, and we are here to share info and answer questions.

 

[johnnyonthespot]

This trend is brought up quite a bit and I have spent a good deal of time thinking about it. I DO think that there is value in knowing this trend, but not from the perspective that you should think you can realistically predict over 90% (like Jessi mentioned: who the hell would have ever thought Houston would beat Miami?). I think the value in this is that, at the beginning of the year at least when the lines are not as strong, if you're thinking of taking the dog and the points you are better off just taking the dog on the ML. This statistic shows that the vast majority of the time the dog is going to win out or lose by more than the spread. Over 10-20 times doing this, the couple of games that you will lose by not taking the points will be more than offset by the additional odds you receive for taking a dog straight up. What goes along with that thinking is that if you like a favorite, you shouldn't shy away from laying the wood because, once again, odds are that the fav will either win and cover or lose outright.

Of course, this information doesn't in itself give you really any advantage whatsoever, as there is still the minor detail of being able to actually, you know, pick the winner.

Personally, I just think that this statistic is pretty compelling evidence that it is extremely difficult to make money by taking favs on the ML. You seem to be much better off laying the points. The couple of games where the team wins and doesn't cover are more than offset by the amount you save in juice.

Not sure if I've added anything or just repeated what everyone else has been saying.

 

[Skipper]

taker,

Thanks for the info man!! I am with you even though:
CLEMSON SUUUUUUUUUUCKS!!

Keep the winners comin.

 

[taker02000]

Hey Skipper,

Clemson may suck but the Cardinals have pulled the ultimate choke job the last month of the baseball season!! Can you say Bonds MVP and my Yanks World Series Champions???

See ya Saturday and I will buy a Gold Sheet tomorrow and compare your picks against theirs!!!

Taker

 

[D-Rock]

:thefinger :thefinger GM and if your dad was not drunk that one great night.....

taker - good job - every bit of information will always help