Professional Sportsbetting

[redietz]

This is week 2 of the 1st 2 weeks NFL underdog play. This play has NOT lost in 15 years. (3 even years and 12 winning years). Last week I went 7-7 with two pickem games that I didn't play. this week I also have two pickem or 1 point games that I saw no advantage in playing, the Eagles/KC and Denver/colts. So after Thursday night's loss, I am 7-8 with 13 games remaining.

I bet this play heavily, in addition to maxing out my online accounts, I spread significant money at a number of sportsbooks in Vegas. I know Redeitz is desperately hoping favorites win and cover so he can make some stupid comment about it not being a winning play. But I just want to pre-emptively say that whether this play shows a small win or a loss this year changes nothing about this play for me. I believe based on 15 years of results, that it is +EV. It will take more than 1 losing year in 16 to change my mind.

It would like going out and counting cards and having a losing day and saying "see counting cards doesn't work", when we know it does.

Good luck to those playing this play.

Kew, you're "+EV" here is rationalized by hope and not math. In-general past results have nothing to do with what may or may not happen with dogs during individual games today. You should know better.

Use your head: the game in KC today for example--you're shying away from it because of the tiny spread. But there is good value in this game. Right now the Eagles are -1.5 favs. You bet on them and you're getting a whole lot of that +EV you like to say you know about.

KC's best two wideouts are out today, Philly destroyed KC in the SB, Kelce has famous tits & ass & billions on his mind constantly, and Mahomes has been on a downward slide for the last 2+ years. Even if Rice and Worthy were playing Philly would cover.

Since you made a reasonable, non-trollish post, I will respond Rob. What you are doing looking at who is playing and matchups is called handicapping the game. THAT is NOT how successful sports bettors operate today. They look at things like how 1.5 dogs do and that type of things. It is all numbers today and less specifically what todays game is about. If you don't beleive me ask Mickeycrimm.

What an idiot. The people at Playbook (and Marc Jr. is a programmer) have been doing this stuff for at least 25 years. 24/7 programs seeking the trends for every sport. There is no Golden Fleece. Sports books are capable of running the same programs, and they do.

What, you think some genius "APs" have uncovered the keys to the kingdom with the kinds of simple trends you're talking about? And you think the books aren't aware of all these trends and do not adjust for them?

See, the books are like people. If you hit them in the head 15 consecutive times, they tend to move their head. You don't get that, do you?

So basically, your "bet the dogs the first two weeks" recommendation was a complete bust. No surprise. Do it again next year. And send some lunch money to any geniuses who listened to you.

Meanwhile, The Riddler won each time he suggested something. You know, kewlJ, have you considered the "trend" that The Riddler wins?

I find it hard to believe a professional blackjack player is this dumb. Bottom line. Naive and dumb and with no blessed idea how trends have been X-rayed, categorized, and analyzed every which way for the last 20 years. It's mind-blowing that an alleged professional gambler allegedly living in Las Vegas would be this out of touch with reality.