Help me understand this weird line

[Jazzy3113]

thanks for the brain teaser

[kyro]

Put 2.9u down on Dallas -275 (Don't ask. I wanted to risk 2.66u to win 1u and ended up looking at the payout instead.)

Put 0.5u down on Jax +260.

going solely on the fact that the lines are well of pinny/MB, although I think I forget to take juice into account. Oh well, still learning.

[hedgie43]

Don't forget that when the public is on an underdog it prefers taking the ML over the points.

[kyro]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't forget that when the public is on an underdog it prefers taking the ML over the points.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? Most lines are set that taking the ML is a better investment than taking the points I thought. That seems counterintuitive.

[hedgie43]

Try going up to ten people who you would consider squares and ask if they would rather have GB +7 or GB +265.

[kyro]

[ QUOTE ]
Try going up to ten people who you would consider squares and ask if they would rather have GB +7 or GB +265.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's assume that's true for the sake of argument. Why do the books offer more favorable moneylines on underdogs than they do on the spread?

[youtalkfunny]

No one has mentioned yet:

The Packers are a "square" team.

[youtalkfunny]

or an even better way to express my point:

[ QUOTE ]
Try going up to ten people who you would consider squares and ask if they would rather have Dal -325 or GB +265.

[/ QUOTE ]