|
|
#11
01-12-2007, 06:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NFL Divisional Round - Juicy?
[ QUOTE ]
Try looking again. I got New England +5 (+100), not +4.5. Indy was +4.5. Indy +4.5's the best number as it's +4 pretty much everywhere. Besides, I was mainly just comparing to OP's numbers to let him know that better was available in case he hadn't bet them yet. As for my volume, Indy +4.5 was the largest and that was $500. [/ QUOTE ] Damn, you're right... and I really, really suck at numbers and teams today. Excuse me for that one. 
|
|
#14
01-15-2007, 07:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NFL Divisional Round - Juicy?
[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure Sklansky is thrilled that people on his site cite a sample of 4 games as evidence. [/ QUOTE ] Alright, dick: A) I guess you missed where I said "Positive variance, for sure." B) The person whom I quoted didn't give me enough credit to take into account the off week. C) Don't be a [censored] dick, and quit sucking off Sklansky, he gets it enough from underage girls. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#15
01-15-2007, 10:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NFL Divisional Round - Juicy?
Um, as if it's bad enough to gloating about winning 3 out of 4 plays, New England won and covered despite getting outgained 5.2 ypp to 4.4 ypp, benefiting largely from the combination of failing to convert on 4th down but hitting the unlikely combination of an interception PLUS fumble recovery to continue the drive. But, of course that's not luck, that's the skill and mystique of Tom Brady and the Patriots!
As I stated in another thread today, some of the stupidest things said are the results oriented analysis and the "good call!" nonsense that permeates gambling boards.
|
|
#18
01-16-2007, 11:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NFL Divisional Round - Juicy?
[ QUOTE ]
Um, as if it's bad enough to gloating about winning 3 out of 4 plays, New England won and covered despite getting outgained 5.2 ypp to 4.4 ypp, benefiting largely from the combination of failing to convert on 4th down but hitting the unlikely combination of an interception PLUS fumble recovery to continue the drive. But, of course that's not luck, that's the skill and mystique of Tom Brady and the Patriots! As I stated in another thread today, some of the stupidest things said are the results oriented analysis and the "good call!" nonsense that permeates gambling boards. [/ QUOTE ] You're not listening. You have these preconceived notions about why I said what I said. I know allllllllllll about results-oriented thinking. I don't do that. However, a guy called me out for not looking at all angles (the week off), even though I thoroughly looked at everything. That's why I posted what I posted. I ALSO made sure to point out that going 3-1 in those games was positive variance. Get off your high horse and begin to LISTEN to my reasoning. And I don't like that you judge people by thinking that someone is sitting around trying to quantify "Brady's mystique." Your not God's gift to sports betting, so quit trying to act all high and mighty. And the Chargers outgained the Patriots by 25 yards (yes, ypp is important, too) but it wasn't like the Patriots were completely outclassed. I picked the right side, but I'll be honest, I thought the Chargers would win. EDITED TO ADD: Ohhhh, you were the guy who called me out before the games. Got it.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
