Bridgejumper Week 2

Webster · #1 10-05-2005, 10:31 AM

0-1 the first week. Picked Minnesota. Problem with that pick was WHO KNEW Tice would rest 5 starters because of the upcoming bye week.

There are 7 picks this wek but only one "C" pick.

I put $$ on New England +3 at -120.

If you REALLY want to see the "D" picks go to

Bridgejumper 252-133 ATS in 12 years - all free, all the time

Indiana · #2 10-05-2005, 11:54 AM

I bet huge against Minnesota. You actually bet real $ on the Vikes?

Wow.

Indy

jedinite · #3 10-05-2005, 12:11 PM

super constructive Indy...

Indiana · #4 10-05-2005, 12:18 PM

Yah, sorry. I was just shocked.

Indy

Webster · #5 10-05-2005, 12:56 PM

Hey - I understand completely. I try to take my brain out of the equation with these picks as I am normally wrong - the worse I feel about a game the more often it wins.

What can ya do. Perhaps bet AGAINST the system. What ever works!!

As I said - the games either lose by 20 tot he spread or win by 3 - the good thing is that they win by 3 over 60% of the time.

Over the years you would not believe the number of times a game like that would actually have Minnesota WINNING the game.

It's just a system that keeps on ticking - this year COULD be it's down fall but . . . . I say that every year.

Joe Public was right last week - go figure.

NoChance · #6 10-05-2005, 01:23 PM

The Vikes were my biggest bet the week they beat up on New Orleans. It's all about situations.

Webster · #7 10-05-2005, 02:53 PM

I was HOPING that going on the road would make them a little more focused - but the Tice effect came into play and they rested 1/4 of their starters.

#8 10-05-2005, 03:18 PM

I think it may be fair to invoke what I call the Wannstedt Rule in the case of Mike Tice, ie if your system says take the Dolphins (Vikings), think twice and/or downgrade your bet.

Webster · #9 10-09-2005, 08:53 PM

4-2 so far.