Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
Red, the game was an advantage play to me, or I wouldn't have bet it.

It was played in KC, one of the toughest venues for visitors in the NFL. I considered that. And it's not about what the final score was. It's about expectation BEFORE the game.
Rob, you are trying to Analize the game individually based on matchups and such.....just like 100 million other weekend warrior sports bettors. 99.999% will lose money long-term because of the vig. I doubt you are that 0.0001 that can will long-term.

Winning sports bettors today are using computer generated analytics based on years of results that really have little to do with the actual teams playing. And as Deitz will tell you, this isn't new. This has been going on for decades. To win long-term, you have got to get out of that mindset where you are looking at the teams playing and looking at individual matchups. That is like a blackjack player playing a game with a house edge of .5% and thinking he can win long-term just playing basic strategy. (no card counting or anything that gives him an advantage).

Now, here is another little "angle" that half smoke has mentioned based on decades of data provided by Wizard. If you play away dogs plus points, you will win a very small percentage something like 1.5% That is based on decades of data.

If you are looking for a common sense reason why this angle (along with the first two weeks dogs angle) works, it is because the public tends to over bet both favorites and home teams, making away dogs value. (slight +EV over decades).

But what you are doing Rob, is just degenerate sports bettor gambling. Have fun if that is what you want to do. But you are NOt playing at an advantage (+EV) no matter how much you think you are.
Redietz might be able to understand the lessons you're giving but 0 chance with Singer. Just let it go ..
Dumb and dumber....and it's just one loner.

Kew, I have no interest in "long term" sports betting, and other than the bonus-betting I've done in the past I may place 3 or 4 bets a year--all on NFL games, and only when there's a clear advantage. It's the people who find themselves betting multiple sports almost weekly, year-round, who do "degenerate betting". In fact, because of one large parlay win I had in Tahoe maybe 10 years ago now--a bet that was also +EV by a LOT (a rarity in parlay betting) I'll never be a sports betting loser.

Once again, you took a thousand words to say something that could have been articulated in a hundred words, thoroughly exciting the old man with no family. Usually, that means you're struggling to criticize. First I was "handicapping"--then it was degenerate betting. Snap out of it.