My Thoughts on Week 2 NFL Playoffs...

[Big Al]

Last week I said that upsets tend to happen in the first round and favorites tend to win/cover in the second round. With that in mind, lets look at this weekends NFL playoff games:

Indy at N.E.-2: This is the best game of the weekend, not from a betting standpoint but from a viewing/sportsfan standpoint. Two great teams with great players meeting again. From a betting standpoint, a game to stay far away from. Either team can win this. How can you go against Indy and the way they are playing? How can you go against the Super Bowl champs, 14-2 overall, playing at home? Too tough to call, stay away and enjoy. There are some idiots in the sports betting forum touting one team or the other. Dont waster your time-there are much better spots than this game this week.

St Louis at Atlanta -6 1/2: I like Atlanta in this game. I think their defense is better than people give it credit for and their offense is solid with Vick at QB. With the weeks rest, I think they will be ready to fire strong. Take Atlanta and give the 6 1/2.

Minn. at Philly -8 1/2: This is the Vikes third road game in a row, that is usually a killer on a team. Normally, I would say take Phill and give the points, but something in my gut is saying the Vikes might be some team of destiny type crap. Plus, Philly has shown a penchant to choke in the playoffs. Also, I think you have to think there will be one upset this week (I dont count it if Indy wins)and I think this is the strongest spot for it. I think Philly is the play here but not real strong. Also, if you like the Vikes, I would bet them on the moneyline.

NY Jets at Pitt -8 1/2. This is the game of the week for me. This is the Jets third road game in a row, the 2 prvious ones being extended overtime games. They now face the best defense in the league, IMO, that had had a week off. I look for the Jets to get totally smoked. My hat is off to them, they won me a moneyline bet last week, but it ends here in a blowout. Take the Steelers and give the 8 1/2, its Big Al's Shoe In of the Week.

Summary: Shoe In of the Week: Steelers minus 8 1/2.
Decent bet but not overboard: Atlanta minus 6 1/2
Very small bet: Philly minus 8 1/2
Upset/Money line play (if you feel so inclined): Vikes
Game to stay away from: Indy at N.E. Best of luck.--Big Al--

[ftball0000]

Thanks for last week, and thanks again for this week. Good to have you back, I appreciate it and I'm sure many others do also.

-Ftball

[CCx]

Al, I think you psyched yourself out on this game in the SB forum /images/graemlins/grin.gif Also think you're underestimating Philly's defense big time - Philly wins huge - good luck though.

[Izverg04]

Big Al, I know nothing about sports betting, and I am reading your post with naive wonderment. I assume that the four playoff games are the biggest bets in sports this week, with the sports books standing to lose a lot if they handicap them incorrectly. Yet you state that the books got 1/4 correctly, made a slight but exploitable error on 2/4, and completely blew it on 1/4. I assume from your posts that you are a not a recreational (losing) sports bettor, so I ask you -- can this be right??? Are sports books that clueless to get the odds wrong in 3/4 biggest sports bets this week?

This is a generic newb question of the kind that should be asked once in a while, so I respectfully hope you can find some time to respond.

[Big Al]

Hi Iz:

Thanks for the question. I hope I understand it correctly. Also, I may start out saying stuff you already know or sounding a bit simplistic, but I am assuming you dont know a lot about sports betting. In theory, books set a line based on how they think the betting money will fall. Their goal is to have half of the money come in on one side and half on the other. They then collect the 10% vig on the bets and make money. If too much money is coming in on one side or the other, they adjust the line to even out the money coming in. That is why you will see a line change during the week before a game. The theory is as the line changes, it will attract bettors that will then take the other side and thus even out the money coming in. With regards to your question, I assume you think I am saying the Indy/NE line is correct, theres a slight error in the Rams/Falcon and Minn/Philly lines, and a huge error in the Jets/Pitt line. First, the books can and do sometimes put up lines that are out of line. But, when we say they are out of line, we are talking in the 3-5 point range. You may think one team is going to kill another, maybe even the books think so, but they would not put up that number. Let me give an example with the Jets/Pitt game. I think the Jets are going to roll. So does the line maker. Yet, if he put up a number like Pitt minus 24, I guarentee you almost everyone would bet the Jets. Even if he kept lowering the line, people would still take Pitt at minus 18, 17, etc., This is a situation where the book would get killed if Pitt didnt blow them out. The line is set to have an equal amount of money coming in. Now, just because the line is 8 1/2, and lets say Pitt does blow them out, that doesnt mean the linemaker was whacked in setting the line. I can assure you, for every guy like me who thinks the Jets will get smoked, there are guys out there going "Jets plus 8 1/2, what a lock!". Sports betting is different than other forms of gambling in that you have a persons opinion or perception of a situation factored in, their take on injuries, the offensive vs. defensive lines, etc. In blackjack, roulette, craps, you dont have that. Me thinking the Pitt defense is great and someone else thinking its overated is different than me thinking red is coming up next and another guy thinking black is coming up next. With regards to the lines, I think they are all about right from the standpoint of having an equal amount of money coming in on both sides. I obviously think the Jets will get rolled but that doesnt mean I think the line is bad. I hope this answered your question, let me know if it didnt.--Big Al--

[Easy E]

"Let me give an example with the Jets/Pitt game. I think the Jets are going to roll. So does the line maker. Yet, if he put up a number like Pitt minus 24, I guarentee you almost everyone would bet the Jets. Even if he kept lowering the line, people would still take Jets at plus 18, 17, etc"

[Big Al]

Thanks, sorry for the error...

[MicroBob]

To follow up on what Al said....basically, the sports-books want to usually set the line so that they have ZERO interest in who wins the game. They hope to make the same amount of profit whichever team wins.

If the Jets win then they will be paying all those fans, mostly with the money they took in from the Steelers bettors, and then they'll have the 10% juic leftover.
And vice-versa if the Steelers cover the spread.

Kind of similar to poker. The online or B&M casino doesn't care who wins and who loses each night....they just deal them out and drop their $3 profit for each pot. "Click click click" go the chips into the box. It adds up pretty quickly.


Interesting analysis on the games Al. And I mostly agree.
I think PHI wins their game huge though.
I think there might be value in IND because of the problems with the NE secondary that I've heard about....although, like you, I am probably staying away from that one.


I also don't know about the whole 3 road-games in a row thing. this isn't the NBA where they might play 3 road-games in 5 nights.
They get a full week to rest in-between so I think you might be over-stating the effects here (although I don't know).
Also, I don't think there are many situations in the NFL where a team gets to play 3 road-games consecutively.
And, when they do, it would be playoff time and obviously the road playoff-team had the worse record during the season so they should be underdogs anyway just based on performance.

Still, good analysis.

[Oski]

[ QUOTE ]
To follow up on what Al said....basically, the sports-books want to usually set the line so that they have ZERO interest in who wins the game. They hope to make the same amount of profit whichever team wins.



[/ QUOTE ]

Stanford Wong in "Sharp Sports Betting" claims this is a fallacy. In reality, the books are usually looking to take a side.

[Michael Davis]

Yes, I am almost positive that Ed Miller made a post about this awhile back, indicating that sometimes but not always the books were looking to take a side because it increases their EV. This makes complete sense when you think about it. Note that I said almost positive.

-Michael

[Izverg04]

[ QUOTE ]
I hope this answered your question, let me know if it didnt.

[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks -- I just improved from newb to novice. I can see pretty clearly now how books should set the line to optimize risk/return -- just never thought about it at all before. I suppose what you say about evening out the money flow on both sides applies to a larger extent to big games, while the books can afford more risk for a larger return on smaller games.

[Ed Miller]

Yes, I am almost positive that Ed Miller made a post about this awhile back, indicating that sometimes but not always the books were looking to take a side because it increases their EV. This makes complete sense when you think about it. Note that I said almost positive.

Books do take sides. But the more action on the game, the less willing they are to gamble (hopefully that should be obvious). The action on the Super Bowl is damn near balanced, for instance.

[Easy E]

Since the Jets hadn't done much on offense... but I'm sweating it NOW!
/images/graemlins/mad.gif

[CCx]

tough break on the shoe-in, recoup it on the birds tomorrow - my 81 star play of the millenium

[Shawn Keller]

Hi Big Al,

Great post, I really was thinking much of the same this week, My favorite bet was pittsburg, i only got it at -9. I was close to firing real big on the money line too at like -387, that would have been quite a sweater towards the end of the game there. After pittsburg didn't cover I saw that atlanta had moved down to -6.5 and bet on that game. There great special teams and speed against the worst special team in the league made a huge impact in that game, and made it a great value at -6.5 I think. I was surprised that so many people liked the Rams even at -7, I've been putting money on michael vick all season and he hasn't been dissappointing.

Shawn Keller

[CCx]

[ QUOTE ]
I've been putting money on michael vick all season and he hasn't been dissappointing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope you mean the moneyline for each game, because ATL was only 7-8-1 against the spread this year...

[CCx]

Eagles 81 star play of the millenium, hope y'all hooked it up - AL, i hope you made up your money you lost on the steelers on the birds man, it's been my play all week along with the under late, hope you made it up my friend

GO BIRDS /images/graemlins/grin.gif