Penn State/SMU

[redietz]

Thank God I didn't take SMU -- a decision I made based on weather because I think SMU is as good as or better than Penn State. A first-year starting QB playing on the road in his first 20-degree game is just too much of an albatross for me to have taken SMU.

Anyway, all of that is neither here nor there.

What I am posting about is the old college football stat analysis that says if two int-return TDs occur against you in a game, you have....well, if one occurs, you have about a 12% chance of covering. If two, then you have a 12% of 12% chance. So you are down to SMU having a roughly 1.44% chance of covering unless a similar play happens the other way. These numbers are dated, as of 20 years ago or thereabouts, but things are not much different today.

It'll be interesting to see if SMU can make a run at them with its 1 1/2 percent chance of covering.

[kewlJ]

How odd for Red to tell us his pick and hour into the game when it is 14-0.

[The Boz]

How odd for Red to tell us his pick and hour into the game when it is 14-0.

Well he didn’t say he took PSU.

Speaking of which, how lucky did they get with this draw? Boise next, come on.

[kewlJ]

[
Speaking of which, how lucky did they get with this draw? Boise next, come on.

Only 2 games in, the college football playoff already has been exposed to how fucked up it is and needs work to correct.

The 2 problems I see, are 1, with 12 teams (which is way better than 4), there still is only room to somehow get the 10-12 best teams in. And that is not what they are doing. With basketball and March Madness and 64, now 68 teams, they can afford to have not only the best teams that have a real shot, but can invite and reward all those smaller type schools that have had good seasons, won their conferences, even though they have no shot to really win. And those upsets that occure the Davids beating the Goliath's are the beauty of March madness.

But with only 12 teams there just isn't room for that. You gotta have the best teams, otherwise you are going to have the big mismatches that we have seen these first 2 games.

The second issue is one that I didn't foresee coming and that has been this sudden re-alignment into a smaller number of very large conferences. This is disastrous because teams are only playing 8 conference games, so conferences that have 12, 15 or even more teams, obviously you have unbalanced schedules and can have situations like both Indiana and SMU, where they won their conference games, but they didn't play the better teams in the conference. They just beat up all the bad teams while avoiding the good teams because they weren't on the schedule this year.

The solution to this one would be to reverse this recent trend and go back to conferences that are 10 teams and everyone plays everyone. But I don't see that happening.

So the expanding to 12 teams was great, but still lots of problems.

[redietz]

How odd for Red to tell us his pick and hour into the game when it is 14-0.

My pick was almost SMU. What part of reading do you not grasp? What the fuck is wrong with you?

I mean, are you (pardon the politically incorrect phrase) fucking retarded or can you not read words on a page? I considered SMU. I never considered Penn State. Why would someone who considered SMU as good as or better than Penn State lay 8 points with Penn State? Are you illiterate or just brain dead?

Oh wait, wait, I see his logic. I commented on a game, so I must have bet it. Like an addict. It must be an "AP" thing.

What is wrong with these "kewlJ" people? I mean, besides blatant illiteracy? I guess reading wasn't a requirement to get into Villanova.

[redietz]

How odd for Red to tell us his pick and hour into the game when it is 14-0.

Well he didn’t say he took PSU.

Speaking of which, how lucky did they get with this draw? Boise next, come on.

Yeah. no kidding I didn't say I took PSU. What part of SMU is "as good as or better than Penn State" is untranslatable?

WTF?

Yeah, the PSU draw was ridiculous. The Tennessee draw was ridiculous in the opposite direction.

[kewlJ]

I was out playing a number of casinos late afternoon and early evening, so I only saw bits and pieces of the final 2 college playoff games today. But that combined with the first two games this morning and last night, this current format has changes that need to be made. All 4 teams playing on their home field had a distinct advantage as you would expect. But it made for 3 of the 4 games pretty lopsided. (last nights ND game was lopsided, despite the score with those 2 meaningless late TD in the final 2 minutes).

And 3 of the 4 games were played in temperatures of 30 degrees or less. Is that the new college football weather? That is what is going to occur if you have playoff games being played in cold weather sites in late December. The NFL does it playing into February, but college football is supposed to be a "fall sport".

Now I have already talked about the need to change how teams are picked. You need to somehow pick the 12 best teams, rather than rewarding some teams that had a good season beating up on the lesser teams in a conference, where they missed playing the better teams.

I don't know if picking the 12 best teams, would have changed anything or not as far as how competitive this first weekend of games would have been. But it couldn't have been much worse. We watched 3 lopsided games and the one that was somewhat competitive was still a 14 point game.

[The Boz]

I’m fine with the conference champs getting in, but them getting byes has to go away. And I think it will be addressed quickly this off season.

The Feinbaum’s of the world can bitch about Alabama not getting in but they blew it themselves. Other than them and Miami, not sure anyone had a claim they should have been there. The reality is the difference in quality between the Top 3-6 teams year after year and the 12th best is huge. Results like this shouldn’t be unexpected.

Now as for RED’s take on PSU and SMU being close to even, he wasn’t wrong going in based on this years results. PSU is not Top 4 but will be in the final 4 only based on the draw. They still haven’t beat a good team and won’t this year. The still sad part is they have so much NFL quality talent on the team but something is missing. In my opinion that someone is a head coach, not a Franklin fan here at all.

[redietz]

It's semi-ridiculous that you have teams and players assigned arbitrarily to locations in December to play games in weather they have never played in.

As I said to (name drop, please) Mr. Munchkin, this is not the NFL where players have played two, three, four cold weather games each year. Some of these kids have played zero cold weather games this year. Some have played zero in their lifetime. So to just blithely say, "Arizona State and Boise get byes and get home games; Tennessee and SMU go play in 10 degrees" basically determines the games. If you have QBs and skill players from the SEC who have grown up in the South, they have not EVER played in those conditions. You can't expect them to function well in their first time out. It's ridiculous.

As I told Mr. Munchkin (name drop -- LOL), I lived a half mile from Beaver Stadium for five years. There was an outdoor artificial practice field on University Drive about 200 yards from our apartment. Boz, you probably know where that is. When it was 10 degrees or less, and the wind was blowing, I would go out to the artificial turf field and try jogging and cutting and doing squat thrusts to simulate getting up and down and moving in those conditions. If you haven't done it under those conditions, you have no idea what it's like to try to do athletic things in late December on frozen football fields. Now picture some poor kid trying to play QB for the first time in those conditions. SMU and Tennessee blew up, and it did not surprise me at all. In fact, I said to Mr. Munchkin (name drop) that they had almost no chance because of the weather.


That's a sign-off for me.

Have a good Christmas and New Year's, Boz. If you ever need to get in touch, use the old IntegritySports@aol.com.

[kewlJ]

You name dropped Munchkin 3 times in one post. Good for you, Red.

[mickeycrimm]

You name dropped Munchkin 3 times in one post. Good for you, Red.

It looks like his imaginary meeting with Munchkin went well. He even convinced Munchkin, in his imagination, to give up multi accounting.

[mickeycrimm]

It's semi-ridiculous that you have teams and players assigned arbitrarily to locations in December to play games in weather they have never played in.

As I said to (name drop, please) Mr. Munchkin, this is not the NFL where players have played two, three, four cold weather games each year. Some of these kids have played zero cold weather games this year. Some have played zero in their lifetime. So to just blithely say, "Arizona State and Boise get byes and get home games; Tennessee and SMU go play in 10 degrees" basically determines the games. If you have QBs and skill players from the SEC who have grown up in the South, they have not EVER played in those conditions. You can't expect them to function well in their first time out. It's ridiculous.

As I told Mr. Munchkin (name drop -- LOL), I lived a half mile from Beaver Stadium for five years. There was an outdoor artificial practice field on University Drive about 200 yards from our apartment. Boz, you probably know where that is. When it was 10 degrees or less, and the wind was blowing, I would go out to the artificial turf field and try jogging and cutting and doing squat thrusts to simulate getting up and down and moving in those conditions. If you haven't done it under those conditions, you have no idea what it's like to try to do athletic things in late December on frozen football fields. Now picture some poor kid trying to play QB for the first time in those conditions. SMU and Tennessee blew up, and it did not surprise me at all. In fact, I said to Mr. Munchkin (name drop) that they had almost no chance because of the weather.


That's a sign-off for me.

Have a good Christmas and New Year's, Boz. If you ever need to get in touch, use the old IntegritySports@aol.com.

If you believed the weather was a strong factor why didn’t you bet it?

[redietz]

It's semi-ridiculous that you have teams and players assigned arbitrarily to locations in December to play games in weather they have never played in.

As I said to (name drop, please) Mr. Munchkin, this is not the NFL where players have played two, three, four cold weather games each year. Some of these kids have played zero cold weather games this year. Some have played zero in their lifetime. So to just blithely say, "Arizona State and Boise get byes and get home games; Tennessee and SMU go play in 10 degrees" basically determines the games. If you have QBs and skill players from the SEC who have grown up in the South, they have not EVER played in those conditions. You can't expect them to function well in their first time out. It's ridiculous.

As I told Mr. Munchkin (name drop -- LOL), I lived a half mile from Beaver Stadium for five years. There was an outdoor artificial practice field on University Drive about 200 yards from our apartment. Boz, you probably know where that is. When it was 10 degrees or less, and the wind was blowing, I would go out to the artificial turf field and try jogging and cutting and doing squat thrusts to simulate getting up and down and moving in those conditions. If you haven't done it under those conditions, you have no idea what it's like to try to do athletic things in late December on frozen football fields. Now picture some poor kid trying to play QB for the first time in those conditions. SMU and Tennessee blew up, and it did not surprise me at all. In fact, I said to Mr. Munchkin (name drop) that they had almost no chance because of the weather.


That's a sign-off for me.

Have a good Christmas and New Year's, Boz. If you ever need to get in touch, use the old IntegritySports@aol.com.

If you believed the weather was a strong factor why didn’t you bet it?

Bet what, exactly? There was no line on "the weather will affect the game." LOL.

Bet on the theory that players who have never played in bad weather will suck in it? Or bet the Under? You can't bet the Under -- if you can't figure out why, I'm not going to spell it out. And laying a TD plus because of "the weather?" Sorry, man, not my cup of tea. The prevailing wisdom is always "bad weather equalizes teams of unequal scoring ability."

Of course, the prevailing wisdom never had to deal with the anomalous event of college teams who have never played in frigid weather now playing a playoff game in frigid weather. I tend to steer clear of anomalous events. About half the years, I don't even watch the Super Bowl. Anomalous event. Bad for the neurons. I guess I avoid squinting too hard so I can discern an "advantage play" with "+EV." LOL.

Wise Old Jungle Saying: Squinting is bad for the wallet.

P.S. Mickey evidently is confusing the multi-accounting I think is wrong (multiple names controlled by one person in one sportsbook in one state) with multi-accounting via having separate accounts with the same name in different states for the same sports book, which is absolutely fine and (1) doesn't exploit other people and (2) doesn't run you into accounting troubles when the sports book discovers the multiple accounts.

[mickeycrimm]

It's semi-ridiculous that you have teams and players assigned arbitrarily to locations in December to play games in weather they have never played in.

As I said to (name drop, please) Mr. Munchkin, this is not the NFL where players have played two, three, four cold weather games each year. Some of these kids have played zero cold weather games this year. Some have played zero in their lifetime. So to just blithely say, "Arizona State and Boise get byes and get home games; Tennessee and SMU go play in 10 degrees" basically determines the games. If you have QBs and skill players from the SEC who have grown up in the South, they have not EVER played in those conditions. You can't expect them to function well in their first time out. It's ridiculous.

As I told Mr. Munchkin (name drop -- LOL), I lived a half mile from Beaver Stadium for five years. There was an outdoor artificial practice field on University Drive about 200 yards from our apartment. Boz, you probably know where that is. When it was 10 degrees or less, and the wind was blowing, I would go out to the artificial turf field and try jogging and cutting and doing squat thrusts to simulate getting up and down and moving in those conditions. If you haven't done it under those conditions, you have no idea what it's like to try to do athletic things in late December on frozen football fields. Now picture some poor kid trying to play QB for the first time in those conditions. SMU and Tennessee blew up, and it did not surprise me at all. In fact, I said to Mr. Munchkin (name drop) that they had almost no chance because of the weather.


That's a sign-off for me.

Have a good Christmas and New Year's, Boz. If you ever need to get in touch, use the old IntegritySports@aol.com.

If you believed the weather was a strong factor why didn’t you bet it?

Bet what, exactly? There was no line on "the weather will affect the game." LOL.

Bet on the theory that players who have never played in bad weather will suck in it? Or bet the Under? You can't bet the Under -- if you can't figure out why, I'm not going to spell it out. And laying a TD plus because of "the weather?" Sorry, man, not my cup of tea. The prevailing wisdom is always "bad weather equalizes teams of unequal scoring ability."

Of course, the prevailing wisdom never had to deal with the anomalous event of college teams who have never played in frigid weather now playing a playoff game in frigid weather. I tend to steer clear of anomalous events. About half the years, I don't even watch the Super Bowl. Anomalous event. Bad for the neurons. I guess I avoid squinting too hard so I can discern an "advantage play" with "+EV." LOL.

Wise Old Jungle Saying: Squinting is bad for the wallet.

P.S. Mickey evidently is confusing the multi-accounting I think is wrong (multiple names controlled by one person in one sportsbook in one state) with multi-accounting via having separate accounts with the same name in different states for the same sports book, which is absolutely fine and (1) doesn't exploit other people and (2) doesn't run you into accounting troubles when the sports book discovers the multiple accounts.

Multi accounting, as it's used in social media, refers to controlling multiple accounts in other people's names. Sure, you can refer to having multiple accounts in your name as multi accounting but no one does that. You would always have to explain what you mean because everyone interprets it as having accounts in other people's names.

Perhaps you could explain to us how the books can discover that you are running an account that's in someone else's name, then....ban you for it. I'll be waiting a long time for you to explain how that happens.

You've got it bass ackwards, ditz. Most multi account'ers are already banned. That's why they are multi accounting. The books can get rid of the person whose name is on the account but they can't get rid of the multi account'er as long as the multi accounter can continue to find new accounts to work. Perhaps you may remember every student at Appalachian State being used for multi accounting.

Like I told you, you just don't have the mentality for this stuff.

[redietz]

If you think offshores can't compare/contrast all accounts at the drop of a hat, you are, as Rick was when told to move to Casablanca for the waters, misinformed.

And if you think offshores don't have interlocking directorates in terms of who runs what, you are way overly optimistic. So what one offshore sees, they more or less all see.

I can't speak to any of what you do as alleged "advantage play." What I can tell you for a fact is that you're way overly optimistic from a player perspective when it comes to what you think the offshores can or cannot X-ray in terms of who is doing what with which accounts.

The closest comparison in the non-offshore world I can make is FanDuel and DraftKings. They are absolutely transparent to each other -- mainly because they are, from a pragmatic if not legal view, not separate entities. If you don't get this stuff, I can't help you.

I'm speaking as someone who has a very visible and identifiable profile in terms of gambling, so I am aware that what I do is easily trackable and identifiable. Now do I use "cover," so to speak? Well, kind of, depending on your definition of "cover." I never bet anything as strictly "cover," however. Waste of time; waste of money.

You have to ask yourself -- what is more likely, that all these "APs" have fooled the books into not identifying accounts with overlapping management, or that the "APs" have fooled themselves. Draw your own conclusions.

Mickey's main problem is that when he sits down with his peeps, he's the brightest bulb at the table. That's not a great table. Going through life thinking you have outmaneuvered everyone else is probably wonderful for the ego and blood pressure. As far as sports betting goes, not so great for your wallet.

Merry Christmas, mickey. May you go ashes to ashes thinking you are the best and brightest. That seems to be your goal.

As for me, high IQ and Merit Scholar and top 1% in every intelligence test known to man (SATs, GRE's, Iowa tests, and on and on), I'm pretty clearly the dumbest at my little table. I like it that way. If you're the smartest guy in the room, you are in the wrong room.

Happy Holidays!

[kewlJ]

I don't know about the smartest Red, but you are the most insecure. Although pretty close with a couple others on this forum.

[mickeycrimm]

If you think offshores can't compare/contrast all accounts at the drop of a hat, you are, as Rick was when told to move to Casablanca for the waters, misinformed.

And if you think offshores don't have interlocking directorates in terms of who runs what, you are way overly optimistic. So what one offshore sees, they more or less all see.

I can't speak to any of what you do as alleged "advantage play." What I can tell you for a fact is that you're way overly optimistic from a player perspective when it comes to what you think the offshores can or cannot X-ray in terms of who is doing what with which accounts.

The closest comparison in the non-offshore world I can make is FanDuel and DraftKings. They are absolutely transparent to each other -- mainly because they are, from a pragmatic if not legal view, not separate entities. If you don't get this stuff, I can't help you.

I'm speaking as someone who has a very visible and identifiable profile in terms of gambling, so I am aware that what I do is easily trackable and identifiable. Now do I use "cover," so to speak? Well, kind of, depending on your definition of "cover." I never bet anything as strictly "cover," however. Waste of time; waste of money.

You have to ask yourself -- what is more likely, that all these "APs" have fooled the books into not identifying accounts with overlapping management, or that the "APs" have fooled themselves. Draw your own conclusions.

Mickey's main problem is that when he sits down with his peeps, he's the brightest bulb at the table. That's not a great table. Going through life thinking you have outmaneuvered everyone else is probably wonderful for the ego and blood pressure. As far as sports betting goes, not so great for your wallet.

Merry Christmas, mickey. May you go ashes to ashes thinking you are the best and brightest. That seems to be your goal.

As for me, high IQ and Merit Scholar and top 1% in every intelligence test known to man (SATs, GRE's, Iowa tests, and on and on), I'm pretty clearly the dumbest at my little table. I like it that way. If you're the smartest guy in the room, you are in the wrong room.

Happy Holidays!

Boy, the books caught on to Walters fast. They shut him down in just a year or two, right? Wrong. No matter what they did he was still able to get others to get his bets in. It went on for decades. To bad you couldn't learn that from him because he was essentially multi accounting.

I'm sure you explained to Munchkin, if you really did see him (doubtful), how he is going way wrong multi accounting.

Multi accounting is happening on a large scale but you don't happen to be one of those individuals that can pull it off. You don't have the IQ. You really need to get off this kick that you are something special in the sports betting world. You're just an average dufuss eating the dust of your betters.

Peoplle that brag about how smart they are, intelligence tests and all that, are the most insecure and stupidest people in the room. So I agree with you not being the smartest person in the room.