Re: Week 9 Early NCAA Lines
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Mississippi State/Kentucky Under 62

I like Under this week about as much as I did Over last week. Just wish I had been there for openers at BookMaker to get 64. Will post rationale later, been a very long day.

[/ QUOTE ]

So let me get this straight, books. Last week you decided to deposit 5 units in my account by offering me 62 with Kentucky vs. Florida's #23 offense and #95 pass defense. Sure, you [censored] that one up pretty bad - it happens. But then, this week, you offer me the same 62 with Kentucky against Mississippi State's #115 offense and #18 pass defense? When Kentucky is likely to be without Keenan Burton and Dicky Lyons/Tony Dixon will be playing hurt if they play at all? REALLY?

I thought more of you than that.

(I projected 57 before the Burton news.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Well.....................

Certainly not the way I hoped it would go down, but I'll take it I guess.

Re: Week 9 Early NCAA Lines
 

[ QUOTE ]
say, myturn,

i'm a little confused by your oregon selection. you initially supported them strongly, waffled throughout the week--even listing several of their inadequacies as i recall, finally selected them as a 1U bet, then abruptly made them a POTW at 5.5U (that's right ladies and gentlemens, 5.5, the big five0five).

perhaps you could explain your willingness to expose 10% (assuming a unit is 2%; or are we talking dollars here?) of your bankroll on a game that has caused you such indecision?

injuries? was sc's defensive line arrested en mass for breaking and entering, or swearing in church?

perhaps you give the emergence last week of v. hazelton as a bona fide deep threat at wide out less credit in your analysis than it may deserve? or decide sc's #4 defensive ranking against the rush unworthy of your attention? or did you bother to analyze the game whatsoever? is this an intuition? did your models indicate the stupid money (that is, any money not yours) loading up on sc? help me out here, i need to understand how a master goes about his business.

tlt

by the way, i did not use an Universal Quantifier in my statement about fumbles. sometimes folks fumble cuz they's hands is cold.

[/ QUOTE ]

1 unit is approximately 1%

I actually bet Kelly/3, but try to convert it to something more normal

I don't recall any waffling at all

I believe I jumped all over Oregon -2.5 for the max I'll expose on any one game* the second the lines came out.

There was no waffling on this


basically, SC isn't SC.

--Still suffering injuries...guys like Sam Baker are not right and the running backs don't look good in picking up blocking schemes.
--Sanchez's first start in a tough road environment.
--SC hadn't played anybody...the worst 4 Pac10 teams, Idaho, ND, and Nebraska does not make for legit numbers. The SC numbers need to be adjusted verse who they faced.
-then, there is how the teams' schemes interact, but that is very long
--I did think both teams would score more...I missed that


*well, Ohio State -6.5 @ Iowa last year I bet more on (over 8 units) ---documented on this site and fezzik's place



EDIT: Looked it up...my very first post on Sunday after lines came out is
POTW: Oregon -2.5 v USC bet 5.5u to win 5u
also on Georgia +10.5 N Florida bet 2.2u to win 2u

no waffling at all

Re: Week 9 Early NCAA Lines
 

[ QUOTE ]
Bet:
Virgina Tech -3, 2u
Kansas -2, 1u
Oregon -2.5, 1u


[/ QUOTE ]

Meh: 2-1, -.06u
season: 6-1, +4.94u spread, 0-1, -1u ML