My annual commentary:
https://theskepticalgambler.blogspot...eeds-2024.html
Printable View
My annual commentary:
https://theskepticalgambler.blogspot...eeds-2024.html
Red, I am afraid YOU just don't understand what the NCAA (March Madness) basketball tournament is all about.
If it were 32 teams, or 48 teams it would be about picking the top 32 or even 48 teams. The teams that really had any chance at all at winning the whole thing. But it hasn't been 32 or even 48 teams for decades. At 64 teams (now 68), it is about getting the best 35-40 teams in that have any sort of chance, plus being inclusive with 20+ teams from the small conferences that really have no chance to do anything other than maybe pull off 1 David vs Goliath miracle. 1 not 6 like it would take to win it all.
THAT is what makes the tournament so special. That is why on selection Sunday, you see teams and players jumping up and down that have no chance to win the tournament. That inclusiveness is what drives ratings and interest. Every freaking small college in the country, that most people don't even know where they are located or what their mascot is, is included. Even schools with a losing record. All they have to do is get hot at their conference championship and win 3 or 4 games and they are in and everyone is googling to see where the fuck they are even located.
My favorite team Villanova is without a doubt one of the top 68 teams in the country. They could easily beat a dozen teams in the tournament. But they are not in and rightfully so, because they lost 3 games to inferior teams way back in November before conference play even began.
Non bettors, the few that remain, are watching and interested in these games for one reason only. They are looking for that Cinderella, David #16 or #15 that knocks off one of the big boys, a #1 or #2.
As for us bettors, I don't know what you are complaining about. Yes, there are some lines that are out of whack. Find them, bet them and be happy. And in the meantime, lets just enjoy when one of the Davids, slings his rock and befalls a goliath.
That is what the madness is all about, not picking the 68 best teams. And in the end one of the 30-35 "best teams" will win it all. probably one of the 12 "best" teams.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
I'm sorry you missed most of the points.
The seeds are out of whack, not the lines. And my ranting has to do with teams like Sam Houston State and Indiana State being left out while every upright Big 10 team and Virginia were put in. The rant has to do with the former ratings system laying out that Dayton and Drake and San Diego State are all top 10 teams, so the ratings system (RPI) was shelved. Today, Dayton and Nevada had to play each other while Arizona got was what essentially a bye. This screws Dayton/Nevada big-time. The argument can be made, using the RPI system the committee relied on for 20 years, that Dayton should have been a two seed, not a godawful seven with Arizona on deck.
I watched Indiana State probably 4 times during the year. They had a nice team. I enjoyed watching that very unconventional big dude they have. But the rules are simple for someone like them in a small conference. You have to win your conference championship to ensure you get in. They didn't!Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
I'm sorry you missed most of the points.
The seeds are out of whack, not the lines. And my ranting has to do with teams like Sam Houston State and Indiana State being left out while every upright Big 10 team and Virginia were put in. The rant has to do with the former ratings system laying out that Dayton and Drake and San Diego State are all top 10 teams, so the ratings system (RPI) was shelved. Today, Dayton and Nevada had to play each other while Arizona got was what essentially a bye. This screws Dayton/Nevada big-time. The argument can be made, using the RPI system the committee relied on for 20 years, that Dayton should have been a two seed, not a godawful seven with Arizona on deck.
Just the same as the rules are clear for a bubble team like Villanova. You can NOT lose 3 games to Drexel, Penn and St Joe's in November and expect that your conference resume is enough. Those November 'cupcake' games matter.
I also watched both Dayton and Nevada probably 6-8 times during the year (Nevada because they were often a late game in this area). Both had nice teams. teams worthy of being in the tournament. And both were in. Neither had any shot to win this tournament. But both were in and that is all they can and should have expected.
For me being familiar with both teams, I was excited when I saw that first round matchup. And it didn't disappoint.
Along the same lines as Indiana State, Grand Canyon had a fine season. I only saw them play 3 times I think, but they are fun to watch and their fan base is absolutely bonkers. I actually think they are going to give St Mary's all they can handle tomorrow and am looking forward to that game.
But just like Indiana State, if they had not managed to win their conference championship, they would have been out despite their great season. That is the 'unofficial' rules.
The tournament was perfect at 64 teams. I can live with the 68, but those additional 4 are stupid. At 64, the 30-35 "best" teams are in and all the small schools and conferences also have a seat at the party. And not 1 but 2 chances to claim that seat, because they can get hot and win their conference tournament. It's perfect!!! Extending it any further to ensure an Indiana State gets in would ruin it just like the NHL and NBA have ruined their playoffs by trying to include nearly everyone.
One other thing Red. Guessing and fighting (arguing) about seeding is half the fun of this tournament. :D
I have fairly large (for me) futures wagers on 2 teams to win it all. Marquette and Auburn. Both play tomorrow. I don't really think either will win it all, but I think both can advance pretty far and as early as the elite 8, I can start hedging and make a nice profit on either or both.
I though both teams would be a 3 seed, Marquette possibly a 2 seed. This is important because if everything holds 3 seeds will be playing a 2 seed in the sweet 16. But Auburn to my great surprise and disappointment, somehow fell to a 4 seed, despite a fine season and winning their tournament. As a 4 seed, this means in the sweet 16 they will probably play a #1 instead of a 2 or 3. And the 1 seed they will play is Uconn. :rolleyes: All things being equal I wouldn't bet them to beat Uconn. They should be playing a 2 seed and face Uconn in the elite 8, where I could start to hedge. So seeding is part of the "fun" or disappointment in this case.
I didn't read any of this but I will say I found the title fairly clever.
First Cinderella of 2024. #14 Oakland Golden Grizzlies beat #3 Kentucky. :)
Bonuses. Calipari and Kentucky playing the slayed Goliath for the second time in 3 years. (lost to #15 St Peters in 2022)
Half of the country figuring out that The University of Oakland is from Michigan and NOT the SF Bay area. :D
I am usually heavily involved. Really liked 3 games. Bet only iowa state. Other 2 split. Just no time to properly research all year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by regnis
Well done, regnis.
I have four futures, well, had...Kentucky at 28-1 didn't last very long. Man, that dude just does not coach in-game worth a lick. So now I have Gonzaga at 50-1, and my donation plays -- Dayton and Drake at 240-1 or thereabouts. Dayton and Drake got screwed the worst with the seedings, so I made small wagers in their honor.
Heritage has an interesting contest. You rank the teams from 64 to 1. When a team wins a game, you get that number of points as long as they last in the tournament. This takes some cogitatin', as Jed Clampett used to say. Thus far, I'm 137th out of about 2000. Kentucky hurt, as I had them worth 56 points. Ouch.
This first weekend, especially the first 2 days, today and tomorrow are such a fun few days. My favorite time of the year. Hopefully, you can have fun and make a little money. :) It really sucks when you pick a team to go deep, whether a futures bet to win it all or playing a pool and they get upset and knocked out in the first round by a double digit seed.
There really is such a gap in players that this shouldn't happen as much as it does. Charles Barkley likes to say that several of these programs like Kentucky, Kansas, Duke, North Carolina, Arizona always have multiple McDonalds all American, while the team they are playing and sometimes lose to have players that eat and sometimes work part-time at McDonalds. :D That is harsh, but it is true, especially in this day and age of "paid players". These teams have no business losing some of these games and yet certain programs seem to lose to double digit seeds fairly regularly, Kentucky and Arizona being two of them.
I won't pick either to go deep because of this history. But that is what makes these couple days so much fun.
On individual games, I have bet a lot of half time scores, both unders, which is something I have been betting with college basketball for a couple months and underdogs in this tournament (at least the first round). You see so many games that the underdog can keep it close for a half and then the favorite pulls away.
Playing the bonus whoring game, I need some volume betting, more than just a game or two and this seems to be working for several months of college basketball. I haven't had time to do the research and see if it a viable strategy over many years. I suppose Red, can tell me that it is not. :D
Jack Gohlke.
He is the dude from the Oakland team that beat Kentucky that hit 10 3-pt shots. His line 10-20 for 32 points. He took 20 shots, all of them 3 pointers and hit 50%. And that coming off the bench, although he did play 36 minutes. :rolleyes:
Now while that line, 20 3-point shots all 3 pointers, no 2-point shots seems odd, he only made a total of four 2-point shots all year. So this guy is definitely a 3 point specialist. For the year he hit his 3 pointers at 37.4% which is pretty good, but not fantastic.
So here is my question for you Redietz or anyone really that has any interest. Did this guy earn himself some money tonight? I am not suggesting that this game makes him the next Steph Curry by any means. He won't be drafted or likely get any kind of contract, other than maybe a free agent invite, or one of those short 10 day contracts, but even those in this day and age come with 6 figure or more contracts. So did he earn himself that.....some kind of invite, worth some money with this performance tonight?
UNKewlJ back on here pretending that he's doing anything more than tunnel dwelling and turning tricks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Maybe, but probably not, unless you mean Europe. Fletcher McGee was the ultimate. Look him up. I saw him play in person several times. Great player, but not an NBA player.
And speaking of 10-day contracts, quick story. I had the (mis) fortune of playing against a guy who was on the Knicks' 10-day contract rotation. If you're wondering how good those 10-day contract guys are when you're on the court against them, I'll tell you. We were playing in a "small man's tournament" in Hazleton; you had to be 6'2" or less.
We had a good team; I was the co-coach and last guy off the bench. We had a bunch of guys who averaged 20 points in high school and for Division 3 teams and an all-time high school assists leader, but no D-1 players. We were probably the 11th or 12th best team in the field of 32. Unfortunately, we got matched against this guy and his team. We played zone, and opening possession, he split the front of the zone, took off from a foot inside the foul line, and dunked. It got worse from there. I got to guard him for a dozen possessions and probably committed three fouls per possession, although only two total were called. It gave me a real appreciation for the 10-day NBA contract guards. LOL.
We lost by 30. And we played a half decent game.
Oh yeah, the team we played finished second, I think.
.
Kansas got by Samford largely due to a really bad foul call by the ref when the Samford player blocked the Kansas player's shot
you can see on the replay that the Samford player didn't even touch the Kansas player
Samford would probably have gotten the ball back down by 1 with 14 seconds left
(I never even heard of Samford until today)
no reviews - a crying shame
you can see the totally clean block and the ref blow the call at 1:59
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xz-r2-Zb7CI
Yeah, missing a call like that in the final 20 second that will decide the game is unacceptable. They review almost everything including whether they should put 2 tenths of a seconds more on the clock and there is no reviewing that deciding play? Maybe they need 1 coaches challenge for such a critical moment?
But really.... Shouldn't even need that. Just review such a critical call that decides the game. Get it right!
Now, kewlJ, you can't have both Kentucky and Kansas going down the same day. They did, after all, put the blue (uniforms) in "blue bloods."
Samford beat the local squad, ETSU, for the Southern Conference title. I saw the regular season game at ETSU where ETSU gave Samford a good run. Lost by three. Samford spanked them at Samford, then the title game was close. I did not think Samford had the size to deal with Kansas, frankly. Samford is small. They did a good job in this game and a great job for the season.
Terrible call. I guess somebody didn't want to write a second check to the Southern Conference.
.
Zach Edey - 7'4" - 30 points and 21 rebounds as Purdue crushes Grambling
he's way, way too much for college boys - I don't even think NBA pros can handle him
the well known basketball powerhouse GRAND CANYON plays Alabama next_______________:)
.
what odds would you put on GRAND CANYON to win it all____________?
more than 1000/1_________?__________:)
they easily handled Saint Mary's (3900 students) in the first round
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjCLJHWEwBc&t=1s
.
.
on the women's side Audie Crooks - a very large 6'3" freshman for Iowa State is crushing
her game is in the paint - she barely jumps when she scores - no more than one inch off of the floor
you won't see her doing any slam dunks - no chance
and yes - there are some women who can dunk
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9Xcv35cDx0
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLM-UXKqv6M
Zach Edey is a monster. At the college level he completely changes the game for an opponent. It isn't just the scoring 20 some point or grabbing every rebound, but opponents really lose any kind of inside game they might have because he will block or alter shots. teams have to rely more on their outside game and Purdue should be ready for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
I am not sure how that translate to the NBA because the game is faster and he is so "methodical". But with that size, hard to imagine he won't adjust and fit in and have success. he is not the most likeable person from a fan point of view. He doesn't look like he is having any fun at all out there. :rolleyes: Maybe that is just his make-up. It just feels like Purdue will lose a close game at some point.
As for Grand Canyon, I had seen them play and knew they were sort of special. They have a lot of talent, some of it very raw talent for the small school (not really that small @ 100,000 students) and conference they are in. I knew they were going to surprise and when I saw that St Mary's matchup I was all over that with the half time under and GC +points and a smaller bet to win outright. And mentioned it a few days ago.
The upcoming Alabama game looks to be very interesting. Bama is a high scoring team (scored 100 points yesterday), but GC also usually is able to score a lot, despite having to play the game yesterday to St Mary's slower style. I expect a shootout and I expect GC will hold it's own. They may not win, but they will be there for most of the game and maybe, just maybe even at the end.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJZach Edey is a monster. At the college level he completely changes the game for an opponent. It isn't just the scoring 20 some point or grabbing every rebound, but opponents really lose any kind of inside game they might have because he will block or alter shots. teams have to rely more on their outside game and Purdue should be ready for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
I am not sure how that translate to the NBA because the game is faster and he is so "methodical". But with that size, hard to imagine he won't adjust and fit in and have success. he is not the most likeable person from a fan point of view. He doesn't look like he is having any fun at all out there. :rolleyes: Maybe that is just his make-up. It just feels like Purdue will lose a close game at some point.
As for Grand Canyon, I had seen them play and knew they were sort of special. They have a lot of talent, some of it very raw talent for the small school (not really that small @ 100,000 students) and conference they are in. I knew they were going to surprise and when I saw that St Mary's matchup I was all over that with the half time under and GC +points and a smaller bet to win outright. And mentioned it a few days ago.
The upcoming Alabama game looks to be very interesting. Bama is a high scoring team (scored 100 points yesterday), but GC also usually is able to score a lot, despite having to play the game yesterday to St Mary's slower style. I expect a shootout and I expect GC will hold it's own. They may not win, but they will be there for most of the game and maybe, just maybe even at the end.
While I have Purdue as the fourth best team overall in the Heritage contest, the problem with taking them is that the 2024 college game has a lot of possessions compared to 15 years ago, and more borderline calls are made for offenses with the current charge/block and impedance rules. So any team that funnels a lot of action to him might create foul problems for him. That's how they are most likely to lose, I think. I'm not sure they can get through the tournament without hitting games where he sits some minutes.
When I get lost without reference to the position of the sun, I try to through, nay, throw, in the odd left turn to counter the natural tendency of right-handed people to involuntarily veer to the right. Ha.
Is there a reason you post a non sequitur response regarding a topic you know nothing about in a thread that managed to stay relatively focused and on topic? If you want attention, just post a video of you jumping up and down or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garnabby
Okay, Mr. Bond, trying to get laid. Thought that I'd try to point you in the right direction. Ha.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzIs there a reason you post a non sequitur response regarding a topic you know nothing about in a thread that managed to stay relatively focused and on topic? If you want attention, just post a video of you jumping up and down or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garnabby
.
okay - I know everybody has been waiting for this_______________:)
my 5 star pick for today - loosen up on that green stuff for this one
Alabama/UNC
UNDER the total of 173.5 which I'm pretty sure is the highest total set for any tournament game
Alabama has gone over that total in 4 of its last 6 games but they only scored 72 against Grand Canyon in their last game and Grand Canyon got 61 for a total of 133
UNC has gone under that total in all of its last 6 games and in 4 of its last 6 games and in 3 of its last 4 its held the opponent to scoring in the 60s
the most points scored in a UNC game in the last 6 games is 163
edit - I just counted UNC going under that total 33-3 for the entire season
.
.
re the above post -
as KJ indicated it's a better deal if you can get a halftime total very close to 87 - I don't have an account and I can't find any halftime totals
.
.
lost that under - hoping to set things right today
.
I have 3 tourney picks for today
Purdue, the fave -3.5 over Tenn_____________Purdue has beaten all 3 teams they have faced in the tourney by double digits or more
I counted them this season winning every single game that they won by more than 3.5 except for one
I like NC State +7.5 over Duke__________they split this year in their ACC contests__________NC State has won 8 games in a row - and they beat Duke on March 14 in the ACC tourney
I'll take NC State/Duke UNDER 142.5___________in their 2 games against each other they totaled 143 in each game
I think the pressure of the tourney might effect their shooting negatively, and Duke only totaled 105 in its last game and NC State only totaled 125
.
.
Purdue won and Edey was great and that's a big story but Tenn's Dalton Knecht with 37 had one of the greatest games I've ever seen in tourney play
the dude was on fire
.
Very nice. Congrats Half Smoke. Half time under was a little easier than the game under. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
.
KJ - can you provide me with a link where I can see halftime totals______?_________I don't have an account - I just like to make picks -
the one time a saw a halftime total it was Alabama/UNC and the total was 173.5 and the halftime total I saw was 82.5 - way less than half - not a good deal imo - is that typical__? - for the halftime total to be way less than half the game total__?
thanks
.
You can look at the lines without an account at Youwager.com, I believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
For basketball the half time over unders are not half of the totals if that is what you are thinking. The half totals are a little less than half of the game totals because they have already factored in the extra points scored in the last minute or two with all the fouling that occurs at the end of the game.(more so in college than the pros).
But it is still worth it. In a lot of these games the first half and particularly the first half of the first half, are pretty low scoring as the teams are feeling each other out. It is very common to see games that are 12-10, or scores like that 10 minutes in.
The other thing I like about betting the half time unders rather than game under is you don't have to worry about overtime screwing you. Last weekend in the second round of NCAA there were 3 games that went to overtime, one of those went to 2 overtimes. If you like and bet the under for a game and then it goes overtime, you are probably screwed.
That is why I have been betting half unders on those games that I think will be lower scoring games. You don't have to worry about overtime or all that stupid fouling at the end of the game.
.
.
some picks for tomorrow's NIT matchup
it's on a neutral court but Utah is 2-9 away and Indi State is 13-4 away and the game is being played in Indianapolis (but not on Inst home court)
picking INST on the moneyline -142 (draftkings) - giving up about $20 profit compared to the spread
and UNDER 78 - 115 halftime total
.
.
a few hours after I posted the moneyline changed to -162 and the spread went from -2.5 to -3.5__________the early bird gets the worm
DraftKings charges more juice on their halftime totals - 115 instead of -110
UNKewlJ still posting occasionally trying to make it seem like he engages in something other than male prostitution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolf
.
KJ obviously knows quite a bit about sports betting and basketball
I know enough about it to garner that from his posts
.
.
the NCAA is very unhappy about prop bets involving individual players
some players are being harassed if they underperform
and there is the chance of collusion and criminality if deals are made
some states have already banned prop bets on NCAA games
in 2007 the FBI found that NBA ref Tim Donaghy had been betting on games that he officiated
Donaghy was making bets with the Mob
there were allegations that 2 referees fixed an NBA playoff game
Donaghy went to prison
a book was written about this and it later became a movie
https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...lege-athletes/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Donaghy
https://www.amazon.com/Inside-Game-t.../dp/1692360159
.
.
This year I have been using "pace of game" more as a predictive indicator. Pace of game is more than just looking for teams that score in the 60's or score in the 80's (college) or regularly score 125+ a game (in the pros). Pace of game is more about how long each possession is. There are teams that like to get a shot up in the first 10 seconds. If you can slow them down into using 15-20 seconds (college) you are controlling the pace of the game. There are "pace numbers" for each team that are indicative of this. You can still have a game where both teams score in the 70's easily topping the over, even when one team has controlled the pace of the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
One of the factors that can really screw you when looking for a slower paced game is the referee. Without anything suspicious, you will see games where every little bump is called a foul. Both teams are over the bonus half way through either half and the game is an endless parade to the foul line. Announcers will often describe this as calling the game "tightly". Then you will see another game where the players are practically mugging each other on every play and nothing is being called. Announcers will say something like "they are letting them play".
The difference in these two situations can easily add 20 points to either halves total. A game with a slow pace that maybe have been 31-29 at half time becomes a game that is 42-39.
If a referee was going to fix a game, I think this would be the less obvious way to do it, rather than a bunch of one-sided calls that favor one team. (and this probably happens imo).
good pointsQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJThis year I have been using "pace of game" more as a predictive indicator. Pace of game is more than just looking for teams that score in the 60's or score in the 80's (college) or regularly score 125+ a game (in the pros). Pace of game is more about how long each possession is. There are teams that like to get a shot up in the first 10 seconds. If you can slow them down into using 15-20 seconds (college) you are controlling the pace of the game. There are "pace numbers" for each team that are indicative of this. You can still have a game where both teams score in the 70's easily topping the over, even when one team has controlled the pace of the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
One of the factors that can really screw you when looking for a slower paced game is the referee. Without anything suspicious, you will see games where every little bump is called a foul. Both teams are over the bonus half way through either half and the game is an endless parade to the foul line. Announcers will often describe this as calling the game "tightly". Then you will see another game where the players are practically mugging each other on every play and nothing is being called. Announcers will say something like "they are letting them play".
The difference in these two situations can easily add 20 points to either halves total. A game with a slow pace that maybe have been 31-29 at half time becomes a game that is 42-39.
If a referee was going to fix a game, I think this would be the less obvious way to do it, rather than a bunch of one-sided calls that favor one team. (and this probably happens imo).
the tourney games I saw the refs are letting them play - they seem to be calling very few fouls and letting it go in situations that looked like an obvious foul
and of course, Zach Edey gets mugged several times per game and they let it go
I don't ever recall seeing college games called that way before
back in the day I played NCAA Division 1 hoops for a small College
this is not a big brag - just a little brag
I was very good for a h.s. player - 18 p.p.g. my Junior year
but I wasn't great - not even close
a little guy, I could compete well with just about any Division 1 guard - except for the great ones - I was quick and I could be bothersome on D
my claim to fame -
my little College - 3,000 students played Pitt - 30,000 students
this is not uncommon - I think the big colleges do this and think of it as a scrimmage - not a real game
of course Pitt beat us - but surprisingly not by all that much - iirc 12 or 14
in the Pitt game I had a 3 point play on all American and NBA and ABA All Star Billy Knight
the funny thing is - he didn't foul me - he didn't even touch me - but the ref called
other greats I got to get out onto the playground courts with:
John Thompson, Austin Carr - and many other playground greats who are not known names
Austin Carr was by far the greatest player I ever got out onto a court with (playground) - he was totally awesome - just completely unstoppable - no dazzle to his game just rock solid fundamentals
his 61 points in an NCAA Tournament game is a record that still stands from more than 50 years ago and may never be broken
ancient history - but fun to recall
.
You probably know this, but a lot of people don't know that some of the bigger schools actually pay the smaller schools or lesser schools to play them. This can occur even when both are division 1 schools. There was a story here in Vegas a few years back when UNLV football played Ohio State and Michigan away in back to back years, losing both badly, as expected. the thing was it was a big payday for UNLV which allowed them to upgrade facilities and stuff that they otherwise wouldn't have the money for.
This happens regularly in both football and basketball. For the bigger or stronger school it is supposed to be an easy win on their schedule, while the other school gets that payday. problem is that now especially in basketball, that gap between the power schools has closed somewhat. They have to be careful or they could end up with a costly loss to a supposed "cupcake school", AND paying the other school. :D
How can someone who can't count bet sports?
Anything he has to say on any subject is just the result of "studying up" - no actual experience with any of this. He had a lot to say about blackjack too, until he was shown to be a complete fraud.Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
The level of compulsive liar he is, is that he can't even discuss his lies about sports betting without interjecting the lie about that he went to college.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
.
a look back at maybe the greatest NCAA Championship game - 1983
NC State's Derek Wittenburg took a shot and missed it badly - way short
but Lorenzo Charles saw it would be short and dunked it in to get the win by 2 points while Hakeem Olajuwon just stood by and watched
beating Houston - they called that Houston team "Phi Slamma Jamma"
Hakeem "The Dream" had a nightmare that night________:)
Hakeem went on to Hall of Fame greatness and Lo Charles just faded away
but nobody who ever saw that play he made will ever forget him
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGfDRlEDs34
.
.
I talked down N.C. State but actually I would love to see them pull it off -
very improbable but it would be so exciting
they were only 9-11 in their own Conference and were 4-7 away and somehow made it to the Final 4
they've now won 9 in a row
maybe they can pull off some more magic and fell Edey the way they did Hakeem in the 80s
I wouldn't bet on them - but Wow - would I love to see it -
.
.
.
NIT Championship game tomorrow night - Indiana State vs. Seton Hall
Indiana State - 166 moneyline - 2 bets
Indiana State -2.5 spread - 1 bet___________Fan Duel shows the best line right now - it's early
the game is on a neutral court but it's in Indianapolis
INST is 9-4 away and Seton Hall is 7-9 away
INST is averaging 87.3 pts. and their opponents are averaging just 75.9 points
Seton Hall is averaging 74.7 points and their opponents are averaging 71.4 points
might be pretty obvious but anyway, if a player doesn't want to make 3 bets on just 1 game he can divide his normal betting amount by 3 - as long as his normal betting amount is at least 3 times greater than the minimum bets - and I believe most books have pretty low minimums
that's what I would do - so if it's a loss - I would count it as losing 1 bet instead of 3 - in terms of amount lost
.
.
for tomorrow's semifinal -
NC State + 9.5
Ala/UConn___________over__________160.5
.
If this were NOT the final four and these two games were talking place last week in the elite 8, I would like and be betting these two games the exact same way you are picking. BUT, it is the final 4 and that means the games are in a football stadium with the raised court. Over the last decade 75% of the teams in the final 4 games and final games, with were played in football stadium shot a lower percentage of 3 pointers than they did during the rest of the tournament. This has become known as the "dome effect". But what it really is, is that the 3 point shooters, especially corner shots, look very different than players are used to. The background and depth perception throws them off.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
The exception was 2016 when Villanova and North Carolina both shot over 50% from 3 point line in Energy stadium in Houston. Not sure what about that stadium or set up didn't seem to bother shooters like it does in almost every other final four.
Just thought I would throw this out there in case you are not familiar.
If there is a "dome effect" in play this year, I suspect it will hurt NC state. They like to throw the ball into their big guy and when he is doubled he kicks it out for a 3. If those 3's aren't hitting at their normal rate, they might be in trouble. Purdue relies less on the threes.
In the other game, Bama, and Uconn, I just think this effect may keep the score down some as well. I am going with the under in both games and halftime under in both games (to avoid that parade to the foul line in the final 90 seconds). I think I Like the unders in the Purdue.NC state game a little more and will be betting more on that game.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
very insightful postQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJIf this were NOT the final four and these two games were talking place last week in the elite 8, I would like and be betting these two games the exact same way you are picking. BUT, it is the final 4 and that means the games are in a football stadium with the raised court. Over the last decade 75% of the teams in the final 4 games and final games, with were played in football stadium shot a lower percentage of 3 pointers than they did during the rest of the tournament. This has become known as the "dome effect". But what it really is, is that the 3 point shooters, especially corner shots, look very different than players are used to. The background and depth perception throws them off.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
The exception was 2016 when Villanova and North Carolina both shot over 50% from 3 point line in Energy stadium in Houston. Not sure what about that stadium or set up didn't seem to bother shooters like it does in almost every other final four.
Just thought I would throw this out there in case you are not familiar.
If there is a "dome effect" in play this year, I suspect it will hurt NC state. They like to throw the ball into their big guy and when he is doubled he kicks it out for a 3. If those 3's aren't hitting at their normal rate, they might be in trouble. Purdue relies less on the threes.
In the other game, Bama, and Uconn, I just think this effect may keep the score down some as well. I am going with the under in both games and halftime under in both games (to avoid that parade to the foul line in the final 90 seconds). I think I Like the unders in the Purdue.NC state game a little more and will be betting more on that game.
I googled it several different ways and didn't find anything about this
so you may very well have found something that has not been factored it to the lines
Edit - I did find one story about this - linked
because of your post I'm going to change one of my picks -
I will stay with NC State +9.5 but I will pick NC State/Purdue under 146.5 and Ala/UConn under 161.5
and I'll go with your picks on the halftime unders - NC State/Purdue under 68.5 and Ala/UConn under 76.5 (DraftKings)
https://www.si.com/college/purdue/to...uickly-in-dome
.
I didn't mean for you to change your pick and take no responsibility for that decision.
The data I saw, and I will try to find it again was interesting. It covered a 10 year span. The overall 3 point shooting numbers were down for the teams as a group but not terribly so. Bit there was an outlier. It was the previously mentioned 2016 final 4 at Energy stadium in Houston. Both Villanova and North Carolina shot 60% in that championship game and Villanova shot 59% for both games. So for whatever reason this bias is in effect, it didn't seem to matter at that location.
But if you remove that outlier game from the mix, the overall numbers for the entire group are significantly lower.
Now that I have posted this data, today and bet based on it, teams will probably shoot lights out today. ;)
no problemQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
you are in no way responsible for my picks posting
I changed because I thought your analysis was better than mine - something I hadn't considered and that seems pretty significant
whatever the results I guess we'll both be alive tomorrow to make some more picks_________:)
UConn has been under that full game total for almost all of its games
Bama will push the pace and the o/u I think will depend on whether or not UConn tries to match their pace
.
Unders, both half and game, were fairly easy in the first game. These were my big bets for the day. NC state shot 24% from 3 point line. Purdue shot a decent 40%. Not sure if you can attribute NC state to this "dome effect". I am not ready to go there, but the data for more than a decade suggests something. :rolleyes:
I have both unders (half and game for the second game), but am a lot less sure about these bets. They are less than my bets in the first game. Almost wish I had just passed on it. Pace numbers, which I use for college basketball suggests an over game, which conflicts with this "dome effect".
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
Well Half Smoke, both games went under along with the first half of the first game. 3 out of 4 isn't bad, especially hitting my two larger wagers.
Bit since 3 of the 4 teams hit 40% or better from 3 point line, I don't think this "dome effect" had any effect. I think it was just a case of when you get into the big games, playoffs and final 4 type games, defense always seems to take center stage. And not just basketball. Every possession, every play just becomes more important in these closer type playoff atmosphere games.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
yes, very good calls on your partQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
the first game was way, way under - lots of ugly misses
.
women's championship today 3:00 p.m.
under 160.5 - I counted S.C. going 32- 4 under that total - their last 2 games the totals were 137 and 128_______very tough D
probably quite a bit of nervousness or tension that may affect shooting negatively
S.C. is the dominant pick
this is one bet divided into 5 smaller bets - each bet one fifth of usual amount
S.C. on the moneyline -278 4 times for a win if they don't cover
and one time on the spread -6.5
look for the great Raven Johnson of S.C. to get even_________________glta
https://sportsbook.draftkings.com/le...ketball/wncaab
.
.
.
I'll add under 76 first half total -120 to my picks for womens champ game today - S.C./Iowa
https://sportsbook.draftkings.com/le...ategory=halves
.
The Gossage—Vardebedian Papers
Two people pretending to place sports bets, both cheating.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
Here we have MCunt still obsessing over another man.
Total fucking loser
---> Cosmological Letters on the Arrangement of the Universe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keystone
https://anagram-solver.net/Here%20we...r?partial=true
Even with a post a day. Ha.
Keystone Keystone is offline
Gold
Join Date
Feb 2016
Posts
961 --------> 961 = (100*9 + 61) ---> 1961
What we actually have is Keystone following this forum so closely that he has time to comment immediately about someone's obsessing.
I lose track of the forum at times, Keystone clearly does not!
I wasn't even aware of this thread for some time because it is not in the Las Vegas sub-forum.
But,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCgJInzcFo0
That was a tough one Half Smoke. Not because we lost by a point and a half, that kind of thing happens all the time if you bet regularly. It was the way it went down. Much higher scoring first half than expected, mostly because Iowa came out very fast on a huge blitz first 5 minutes. Slowed down after that but that first 5 minutes made it very tough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
If you had doubled down at halftime and took the second half under, you could have won that bet. I did not do that. Thought about it, and it was a good situation to do so, but I always feel like "rebetting" a game at half time is equivalent to "chasing money or chasing losses".
As for Mdawg, everyone should just ignore him, same as 99% of members do at WoV. The guy is absolutely NOTHING but a troll now. Whatever he is or claimed to be, winning player (I don't think so), ultra wealthy ( I don't believe as much as he portrays), or just a guy that like to gamble, (which I do believe), he has shown his true colors now. He is an internet troll to the 10th degree. Just ignore him.
Anyway, I will be leaving Las Vegas (Nicholas Cage movie :rolleyes:) tomorrow for an extended period traveling the country and hitting a specific play. Hopefully for 6 month. So I won't be focusing as much on my sports betting. Will still be making bets throughout the NBA and NHL playoffs to cover my rollover play-through, but won't be watching the games or posting as much. Should be back and focused on sport betting by football season. Especially the first 2 weeks of NFL, using your play Half Smoke. :)
deleted
hey, hey - please don't forget that I correctly picked the winner - S.C. on the moneyline and spread - at least________________:)Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
.
tomorrow night -
one bet - one unit divided up as such:
80% on UConn on the moneyline -275___________a smallish win if they don't cover
20% on UConn -6.5__________if they do cover the bet as a whole will profit by a little bit less than 1/2
can't see anything I like on the o/u
.
What I like about forum sports betting discussions is after all the machinations of a season if someone wins it's like, "I'm up 2 units for the year" or something like that. The ones that get ReKT just fade off into silence.
Winning 2 units would be ok, if you are betting tens of thousands of dollars as a unit. :cool:
But I don't know anyone doing that. For most of us doing sports betting right now it is about the bonuses and rollover requirements. You want to negotiate good bonuses and low rollover and the just be as close to even with your betting as you can be. Winning a bit would be even better. :)
The key to sports betting being +EV is identifying credible sports books that will pay (networking can help with this) and negotiating bonus and rollover. And yes you can get significantly better than advertised.
You don't even have to enjoy or know much about sports. Although I happen to.
if you are saying that constructing bets on one game to win at most about 1/2 is not a good strategy (and I'm actually not sure if that is your meaning) then I disagree with that point of viewQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
they key is whether or not you are + EV or not imho
Romes, at WOV posted a bet that was -425 - and most including me felt that he had a very good bet
to many it's not much fun to make a bet like that - and I would sometimes refuse to myself, for that very reason - but of course in terms of betting for maximum efficiency that is a wrong attitude
at the racetrack sometimes a horse bet to show paying only 1/20 can be a good bet if the horse is obviously much better than the others and the field is very small - just 5 or 6 entries
the racetracks are required by their rules to pay no less than $2.10 for a $2.00 bet even if 100% of the show money was bet on that horse to show
as you probably know, those who usually get the worst of things (there are exceptions) are the longshot lovers - who at the track and elsewhere usually lose much more than the house take or edge in the long run
.
No that is not what I meant. I was simply responding to Maxpen who is making fun of those of us that are betting sports and winning a unit or 2 over a season. Most of us are doing this as some form of entertainment and/or combination of supplemental money. No one on this forum is making a living off exclusively off sports betting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Smokeif you are saying that constructing bets on one game to win at most about 1/2 is not a good strategy (and I'm actually not sure if that is your meaning) than I disagree with thatQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
they key is whether or not you are + EV or not imho
.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPen
I wish I had something negative to say but I just don't care enough about sports to even try.
I probably should start a thread just for this experience, but am not going to. I don't feel like it is hijacking since Red hasn't participated in this thread he started for a long time.
Today was a sport betting day for me. I am not going to have a lot of time for this in the coming weeks/months....some but not like I like to. So my game is volume betting, betting lots of games getting through the rollover which makes the bonuses received +Ev. Today I took this volume betting to the extreme. :D
First, here is the set up in our living room. 3 recliner chairs and 3 wide screen TV's. Also a love seat and sofa, but that doesn't matter. There are 3 of us in the household so we each have our recliner TV in the living room. My brother and BF are gamers, so they are playing video games on their TV''s while I flip around through sports, most evenings and weekends. During football Sundays and March madness I will commandeer one of their TV's and pull in a TV from the bedroom, so I have 3 screens to watch games on simultaneously.
So today, I wagered had 67 different wagers going each for several hundred dollars. (That is working through the rollover at warp speed). I had bets on games, over-unders, halftime scores, first quarter scores, and hockey 1st period scores. You name it I had a wager on it today. :D I had my 3 TV set up going and my clipboard with all bets written down, ready to go.
So I start off losing 10 of my first 11 wagers that were completely. I am thinking this is going to be a wipeout day of several thousand. Early afternoon things changed. I haven't added up how many games I won, but I was winning games so fast and they were ending at the same time, I couldn't keep up for a little while. I am currently just over $1300 ahead for the day with 1 final hockey game (3 bets) and 1 final basketball game (4 bets) just starting. So I should have a winning day. Pretty good day considering how it started and pretty fun and enjoyable for me, betting, watching sports, and making money (+EV from the bonuses and rollover). Great entertainment while making a little extra coin. :cool:
I probably should start a thread just for this experience, but am not going to. I don't feel like it is hijacking since Red hasn't participated in this thread he started for a long time.
Today was a sport betting day for me. I am not going to have a lot of time for this in the coming weeks/months....some but not like I like to. So my game is volume betting, betting lots of games getting through the rollover which makes the bonuses received +Ev. Today I took this volume betting to the extreme. :D
First, here is the set up in our living room. 3 recliner chairs and 3 wide screen TV's. Also a love seat and sofa, but that doesn't matter. There are 3 of us in the household so we each have our recliner TV in the living room. My brother and BF are gamers, so they are playing video games on their TV''s while I flip around through sports, most evenings and weekends. During football Sundays and March madness I will commandeer one of their TV's and pull in a TV from the bedroom, so I have 3 screens to watch games on simultaneously.
So today, I had 67 different wagers going each for several hundred dollars. (That is working through the rollover at warp speed). I had bets on games, over-unders, halftime scores, first quarter scores, and hockey 1st period scores. You name it I had a wager on it today. :D I had my 3 TV set up going and my clipboard with all bets written down, ready to go.
So I start off losing 10 of my first 11 wagers that were completed. I am thinking this is going to be a wipeout day of at least several thousand dollars. Mid afternoon things changed. I haven't added up how many games I won, but I was winning games so fast and they were ending at the same time, I couldn't keep up for a little while. I am currently just over $1300 ahead for the day with 1 final hockey game (3 bets) and 1 final basketball game (4 bets) just starting. So I should have a winning day. Pretty good day considering how it started and pretty fun and enjoyable for me, betting, watching sports, and making money (+EV from the bonuses and rollover). Great entertainment while making a little extra coin. :cool:
Ok, go to it haters! do your thing.
I might have just jinxed my final wagers. :rolleyes:
Lost the 1st period hockey bet and a high scoring basketball game involving the Lakers where I bet the under, probably will result in losing all 4 basketball bets.
Really only 2 possibilities left unless the basketball game really slows down.
So I could have a horrible start to the day and a horrible end, and still be about even or make a couple hundred dollars. And the big thing will be getting significantly through the rollover which is worth 5 figures in +EV.
Still a fun and profitable day.
AxelWolf already publicly and privately stated that he debunked all of UNKewlJ's fraudulent sports bets claims.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
Axelwolf didn't debunk anything. He couldn't have because he doesn't know exactly what terms I got (bonuses and rollover requirements). So happens I got great terms based on several years of recreational sports betting (and mostly losing).
But it was Axelwolf that pushed me towards what I am not doing with the bonus whoring. he made a statement that almost anyone could make 50k bonus whoring sports betting online and without even knowing much about sports betting. (wonder how Redeitz feels about that? :rolleyes:). I mean I was already betting some sports online for entertainment purposes, but never wanted to get too involved with the bonus whoring aspect of it because I just don't trust the online sportsbooks all that much. But based on Axelwolfs statement, I took a shot and it is paying off. So thanks Axelwolf.
All that and still room for an oily surfboard. :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
More delusions from the tunnels...RIP:cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Very obvious kew just couldn't take it anymore. He figured another concocted story about blackjack on the main forum here was out of the question, given the massive humiliations he's suffered after getting caught numerous times making things up just for attention.
His newest, pathetic forum tactic? Non-chalantly pretending to be some sort of wild-spending sports bettor, in yet another silly attempt at relevance and legitimacy in the gambling world. He just couldn't hack the rejection about his bj bs and how his lies and nonsense forced him into falsely claiming he was "done for good" on VCT. No....a loser and phony like him who uses the internet as his virtual safe space could NEVER stop making up these stories about himself....lest he drink the poison. And that "extended nation-wide super duper play" trip he's once again lying about? Let's get some pics again!!!
Hahaha----three reclining fairies watching three tv's? They have a joke about something like that in Poland. :)