|
|
#22
12-01-2005, 07:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Minnesota -2.5
[ QUOTE ]
Now, I'll admit I don't know much about sports betting and I'm sure this post will illustrate that, but I just can't see how Minnessota is not a lock. <snip> So, will someone please explain to me how Detroit can possibly be a good play, let alone a LOCK? [/ QUOTE ] Short answer (i'll post more later): #1 - there's no such thing as a sure thing, aka a lock, in sports betting #2 - if a favorite line looks like a lock (to a casual fan) you're almost always wrong. The sports books don't generally give away free money, they set the lines that take all the factors in to consideration. 
|
|
#24
12-01-2005, 08:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Minnesota -2.5
[ QUOTE ]
#1 - there's no such thing as a sure thing, aka a lock, in sports betting [/ QUOTE ] Understood. [ QUOTE ] #2 - if a favorite line looks like a lock (to a casual fan) you're almost always wrong. The sports books don't generally give away free money, they set the lines that take all the factors in to consideration. [/ QUOTE ] Right, but this still isn't an argument for why Detroit is a good bet. I'll be interested to read your future post if it is going to contain real analyses, but all this stuff about sports books and psychology doesn't address the fact that Minnessota just seems like a much better team right now, has good momentum, is fighting for a playoff spot, and was favored, by sports books I might add, to make the playoffs this year. Detroit can't run, can't pass, and can't stop the run. They've played a lot of tough defenses this year but Minnessota's D is not bad either. You'd be amazed how tough it is not to give up yards and points when your QB puts the ball on the ground every other drive. Again, I'm not an avid sports bettor, and I don't claim to know more about it than the regulars here, but I can't see Minessota not covering 7 out of 10 times in this spot. Please tell me why I am wrong and remind me why I don't bet on sports.
|
|
#26
12-01-2005, 09:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Minnesota -2.5
[ QUOTE ]
Again, I'm not an avid sports bettor, and I don't claim to know more about it than the regulars here, but I can't see Minessota not covering 7 out of 10 times in this spot. [/ QUOTE ] The absolute best anyone can ever hope to achieve is 60% ATS - and if you win 60%, you're probably missing a lot of good opportunities. 7 out of 10 is way off. I know nothing about this game, except that the sharper books have better lines on Min which usually means Detroit is the better side of the bet.
|
|
#27
12-01-2005, 11:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Minnesota -2.5
[ QUOTE ]
Please tell me why I am wrong and remind me why I don't bet on sports. [/ QUOTE ] I like Detroit strictly because their computer numbers match up favorably. Computer A Computer B If a line looks too good to be true, and the book KNOWS every public bettor will bet on it, then why are they still okay making it available? The short answer is that the public is wrong. The public's side does not have an edge, and in fact, the other side may well have an edge. There is no free money in the NFL. There have been a number of games this year where everyone in the world has said something like, "Oh man! NO WAY does Detroit cover this against Minnesota!" These are known as the Bar Stool Pundits, or BSP's. And so far this year, betting against the BSP's in these BSP games has been incredibly profitable. Like more profitable than you would believe. It started off something like 13-1.
|
|
#29
12-02-2005, 01:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Minnesota -2.5
[ QUOTE ]
Detroit . . . Both of their QBs suck. They just fired their coach. The entire organization sucks. They can't run. They can't pass. They have no shot at the playoffs. [/ QUOTE ] Every one of those statements was true about the Miami Dolphins last year heading into Week 11. Under interim Head Coach Jim Bates, they finished a strong 3-4 straight up and, more importantly, went 6-1 against the spread. This alone should convince you that Minnessota cannot possibly be a lock this week. [ QUOTE ] Minnessota was picked by many to make the playoffs this year and possibly to go deep into the playoffs. They started out the season playing terribly because of the play of Culpepper. For whatever reason, the guy could not protect the football this year. The Vikings seem to be a much better team with Brad Johnson as QB. Brad Johnson is a guy who has always been smart and solid. The rest of the team is probably about average. [/ QUOTE ] Culpepper was not playing well, but neither is Brad Johnson. The Vikings' turnaround has been keyed by three things: improved defensive play, terrible opponents, and the flukiest win (at New York) that I've seen in years. Detroit stinks, but Minnesota doesn't deserve to be a road favorite against anyone except San Francisco (and perhaps Houston).
|
|
#30
12-02-2005, 02:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Minnesota -2.5
[ QUOTE ]
Well, if Detroit covers, I'll admit you guys are all geniuses! [/ QUOTE ] The thing is, the outcome of the game actually doesn't really matter. I think Detroit is the right side, and I'll think that either way. I'm not smarter if they win, nor am I dumber if they lose. I think that Detroit +3 is profitable, and that is enough. (Well, maybe I'm smarter if they win. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] )
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
