***OFFICIAL MNF FOOTBALL 11/26/07 (Miami at Pittsburgh)***
 

I wanted to start this thread to let you know that both Holmes and Polamalu are supposedly out for the Steelers. Not sure if this will move the line any, but I'm already down for 1u on Dolphins +16.

I'm undefeated in picking the spread on Dolphins games, so you should listen to me. (0-0-2)

Re: ***OFFICIAL MNF FOOTBALL 11/26/07 (Miami at Pittsburgh)***
 

Dolphins should be safe for +16... but PIT is a completely different team at home vs. on the road. The most inconsistent team in the NFL - Def is allowing 11 pts per game @ home vs. 18 on the road. Off averaging 31 @ home vs. 23 on the road.

Since Ronnie Brown's departure - Miami averaging 9 pts per game...

Re: ***OFFICIAL MNF FOOTBALL 11/26/07 (Miami at Pittsburgh)***
 

The difference between home Pitt and road Pitt does concern me a bit, but there are very few teams who should be 16 point favorites over the Dolphins. If I've said it once, I've said it 100 times, I'll probably bet the Dolphins in every game until they win one because of the public perception that they are the worst team in the league. Holmes and Polamalu being out is just gravy.

Re: ***OFFICIAL MNF FOOTBALL 11/26/07 (Miami at Pittsburgh)***
 

With the spread at 39% of the over/under, there may be some correlation for a parlay. If you think Miami has some value, then parlaying it with the under could be good.

Re: ***OFFICIAL MNF FOOTBALL 11/26/07 (Miami at Pittsburgh)***
 

[ QUOTE ]
With the spread at 39% of the over/under, there may be some correlation for a parlay. If you think Miami has some value, then parlaying it with the under could be good.

[/ QUOTE ]

*kicks self for not having money at a book that allows parlays and teasers*

Anyways, I think the other thread concluded that there really isn't any correlation between dogs and the under and that this year was merely an aberration, though admittedly I didn't read it in depth.

Re: ***OFFICIAL MNF FOOTBALL 11/26/07 (Miami at Pittsburgh)***
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With the spread at 39% of the over/under, there may be some correlation for a parlay. If you think Miami has some value, then parlaying it with the under could be good.

[/ QUOTE ]

*kicks self for not having money at a book that allows parlays and teasers*

Anyways, I think the other thread concluded that there really isn't any correlation between dogs and the under and that this year was merely an aberration, though admittedly I didn't read it in depth.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I think it is minimal if there.

That thread covered games that were at least 25% of the total. When the percentage gets this high, I am not sure.

Re: ***OFFICIAL MNF FOOTBALL 11/26/07 (Miami at Pittsburgh)***
 

Thanks for starting this, kyro. Sorry i was slacking.

-P

Re: ***OFFICIAL MNF FOOTBALL 11/26/07 (Miami at Pittsburgh)***
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With the spread at 39% of the over/under, there may be some correlation for a parlay. If you think Miami has some value, then parlaying it with the under could be good.

[/ QUOTE ]

*kicks self for not having money at a book that allows parlays and teasers*

Anyways, I think the other thread concluded that there really isn't any correlation between dogs and the under and that this year was merely an aberration, though admittedly I didn't read it in depth.

[/ QUOTE ]

there is a book that doesn't permit such things? honest to god?!

-c

Re: ***OFFICIAL MNF FOOTBALL 11/26/07 (Miami at Pittsburgh)***
 

[ QUOTE ]
Dolphins should be safe for +16... but PIT is a completely different team at home vs. on the road. The most inconsistent team in the NFL - Def is allowing 11 pts per game @ home vs. 18 on the road. Off averaging 31 @ home vs. 23 on the road.

Since Ronnie Brown's departure - Miami averaging 9 pts per game...

[/ QUOTE ]

Miami has been consistent [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: ***OFFICIAL MNF FOOTBALL 11/26/07 (Miami at Pittsburgh)***
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With the spread at 39% of the over/under, there may be some correlation for a parlay. If you think Miami has some value, then parlaying it with the under could be good.

[/ QUOTE ]

*kicks self for not having money at a book that allows parlays and teasers*

Anyways, I think the other thread concluded that there really isn't any correlation between dogs and the under and that this year was merely an aberration, though admittedly I didn't read it in depth.

[/ QUOTE ]

there is a book that doesn't permit such things? honest to god?!

-c

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I wanted to test out analyzing games without delving too much into the actual line-shopping at first. My friend suggested this place and it's been pretty bad. I have another $100 or so in bets I have to make before I can withdraw but once I can, I won't be betting there.