So I was in an LMS contest at Topbet, and it came down to two of us out of a starting field of 203. LMS contests, unfortunately, are generally NFL contests for those unfamiliar.

I have no real excuses. The other guy was more daring in his team choices early, leaving him with better options later. I'll discuss that briefly in a bit. I had used all of the teams that were double digit faves previously, so the technically correct thing for me to do was to take the biggest remaining favorite available to me. I cringed when I realized it was the Vikings. if there's one thing I never do in LMS contests, it's pick against a winless team after the sixth or seventh week. I just don't do that. But I was faced with either taking the Vikings or taking the Eagles, who were minus their starting QB and RB, and whose line had dropped to -5 while Minnesota was -7 1/2.

I took the Vikings, and sat there as winless Detroit went the length of the field with no timeouts and scored on the final play of the game. Brutal.

I also was eliminated in the Heritage LMS contest, which was down to under 2% of the original entrants.

I can't really complain. The other guy in Topbet did a better job than I did. He was more daring early, which left him with more options later. The question we've debated around here about LMS contests is a semi-math question. If it's true (and it is) that spreads later in the season are more accurate than lines early in a season, then isn't a -7 the first month of the NFL season actually a "soft" -7, while the same line Week 11 or 12 is a "hard" -7. Thus, taking a -7 as opposed to a -10 fave early in the season is really not a big deal, since the lines are more speculative, while taking a -7 versus a -10 late is a much riskier move.

Something to consider in LMS contests down the road.