Week 1 Gamblers (Anonymous) Thread

[Steeltown Dre]

Feel free to post anything in here about Picks, Advice, Critique or Info. The more accurate information we have at our fingertips, the better off we are.

 

I'll be back w/ some trends and analysis. Looking forward to another successful season, let's get paid.

[tachamp]

thanks steeltown the huddle needs guys like you to help those that pay get good advice and insight. Hay help me out on my post !!

[Gdawg]

Feel free to post anything in here about Picks, Advice, Critique or Info. The more accurate information we have at our fingertips, the better off we are.

 

I'll be back w/ some trends and analysis. Looking forward to another successful season, let's get paid.

 

Looking forward to it Dre, hopefully we can all help each other out again this year!

[TRU SOLDJA 22]

Feel free to post anything in here about Picks, Advice, Critique or Info. The more accurate information we have at our fingertips, the better off we are.

 

I'll be back w/ some trends and analysis. Looking forward to another successful season, let's get paid.

 

Liked the advice here last year. Thanks Steeltown and others. Lookin forward to this year as well

 

 

Good luck to all

[rattsass]

Ok, I'll throw down the gauntlet.

 

Lets start out with the Thursday night game. I say the spread is too high. I heard a statistic, not sure about this one but it sounds right. The Superbowl champion has been losing their first game of the following season at about an 80% clip. Maybe Dre knows if that is a true figure or not. Add to that the fact that the Colts don't figure to be even as good on defense as they were last season, and this one looks like a barn burner. I think the Saints have a real good chance at winning this game outright aside from the previously mentioned first game statistics. Brees has looked unstoppable, Manning always has been, and this game should go over the exceedingly high o/u of 52.5 Last team with the ball wins this one.

 

Give me the 6 points and the over.

[Mojo Rising]

Lets make some money Dre!

 

Last year's insights were great!

[Mojo Rising]

Ok, I'll throw down the gauntlet.

 

Lets start out with the Thursday night game. I say the spread is too high. I heard a statistic, not sure about this one but it sounds right. The Superbowl champion has been losing their first game of the following season at about an 80% clip. Maybe Dre knows if that is a true figure or not. Add to that the fact that the Colts don't figure to be even as good on defense as they were last season, and this one looks like a barn burner. I think the Saints have a real good chance at winning this game outright aside from the previously mentioned first game statistics. Brees has looked unstoppable, Manning always has been, and this game should go over the exceedingly high o/u of 52.5 Last team with the ball wins this one.

 

Give me the 6 points and the over.

 

 

Rattsass I agree with you on the Over but something about the Colts at home that scares me. It would be great to see that trend about Superbowl champion's first games.

[soco]

hey Dre, big Ben or Palmer I know its stupid but will Ben be better vs CLE or Palmer vs BAL.... thanks

[rattsass]

Rattsass I agree with you on the Over but something about the Colts at home that scares me. It would be great to see that trend about Superbowl champion's first games.

Actually I think the last several have won their opening game the following season, maybe that statistic is over a long time frame. Not all that relevant I suppose though. However it would be more relevant than player projections on the gambling thread.

[Mojo Rising]

Actually I think the last several have won their opening game the following season, maybe that statistic is over a long time frame. Not all that relevant I suppose though. However it would be more relevant than player projections on the gambling thread.

 

 

I agree

Edited September 4, 2007 by Mojo Rising

[xMRogers]

First post back after long layoff....made a few bucks last weekend on college and a parlay with the Eagles under (Reid has never covered the total in his last preseason game - he just vanilla's it so bad on both off and def, nothing happens), so starting the season 2 units up which I like

 

Haven't dug in yet on the games other than to laugh a the 3 the Eagles are giving (yes, here's a bit of bias here, but they have been BLOWING out green bay as of late, and while the Eagles run d worries me a bit, the packers run O ain't any better, and every other spot should be a mismatch).

 

Opening day, going with the original - not only do I see a Colts letdown for a few reasons, I also think the Saints will be a great team this year and will use this game to show something (beyond the fact Bush and McCal may go for 300 btwn them). I like them to win and will probably take the ML on this one (assuming it's +200 or better). Total, I can't seem to convince myself that they won't both start off a bit slow and end up right near that total.

 

Hope to be around more than I have and will be searchign this one out...

[Steeltown Dre]

First let me say, it's great to see some familiar faces back here and I have a good feeling w/ this group we can all make some $.

 

First, a little history on the defending SB champs as they fared in their opening game the following season (in response to Ratt’s question):

 

2000-01 Ravens

Sunday 09/09/01 -9.5 vs. Chi W 17-6, ATS=W

 

2001-02 Pats

Monday 09/09/02 2.5 vs. Pit W 30-14, ATS=W

 

2002-03 Bucs

Monday 09/08/03 3 vs. Phi W 17-0, ATS=W

 

2003-04 Pats

Thursday 09/09/04 -3 vs. Ind W 27-24, ATS=W

 

2004-05 Pats

Thursday 09/08/05 -7.5 vs. Oak W 30-20, ATS=W

 

2005-06 Steelers

Thursday 09/07/06 -1 vs. Mia W 28-17, ATS=W

 

As you can see, since 2000 (I didn’t check prior) SB champs in their first game of the year have gone 6-0 ATS.

 

Typically more $ is bet on standalone games, such as Monday night and Thurs night games. The NFL moved the SB champs to primetime starting in 2002, and then decided to start the whole season w/ them (as opposed to wrap up week 1 on Monday) starting in 2004.

 

Some other info which I did not confirm: I have read the losing team in the SB has gone 0-9 ATS in their 1st game the following season. I checked the last 3 years, and all teams (Seattle, Philly, Car) have lost ATS in their opening game.

 

Both trends seem pretty strong, but again, you have to cap each game on its own, but occasionally, putting some money on a system trend play is not a bad move.

 

I’ve got some O/U trends I will post next regarding this Thursday night game.

[Steeltown Dre]

Before I get into the O/U in Thursday's game, I wanted to provide some background:

 

The average total in the NFL is 41, and has been for some time. As we know, the public loves the overs. But how has the over/under fared over time?

 

I posted lessons on underdogs earlier, so here’s one on Totals.

 

The avg line is 41 for the NFL. 51% of the time, the final score is below the total. Not enough to make money betting on all unders. But are there situations when it’s more likely to be an under based on the opening line? Since setting the line is all about perception, what happens when a low line is released? How does the public react, and how do the games usually end?

 

For this study, I am only looking at opening lines, and I am looking at all games from the 2000-2001 season onward. I’ll start w/ the notion that the public loves an Over. And it’s true. Overs and Favorites, the public will eat them up.

 

See my prior work on underdogs, and you’ll see that betting dogs (smartly) will net you some cash, and betting unders (smartly) will do the same.

 

But here I’d like to share a sports wagering slogan you may have heard before: "Take the Under on a low total and the Over on a high total".

 

Think about that for a second. Wouldn't it be the opposite? Well, contrarian thinking goes a long way in sports betting.

 

Now, let’s crunch the numbers to see if it works out: Taking unders in games with a 41 point total or below: (Note – first note that these are opening lines, not closing. If snow was predicted and the line dropped from 40 down to 35, the O/U would show up based on the opening line of 40 in my calculation.)

 

http://bp0.blogger.com/_cOrbgqgQDgs/Rt79tu...00-h/Unders.bmp

 

As you can see, games where the opening number is avg (41) or right around there, between 39 and 41, you are already hitting over 52% (the magic number where you can break even despite the juice) if you take the unders. But once you get lower, between 35 and 38, you see more overs hitting. However, once you cross over into the very low totals of 31 and 32, you are hitting very high % on the unders. Everyone sees a 31 or 32 and would take the over, but that is not a sharp play.

 

Of course, if you look at the # of games that actually post totals that low, you’ll see that only 18 games in the last 7 years have had an opening total of 32 or below. That’s just over 2.5 per season. However, if you took the under on all those games, you would have won 67% of them, which is a solid, solid profit.

 

Now lets take the overs in games w/ a 42 point total or higher:

 

http://bp1.blogger.com/_cOrbgqgQDgs/Rt7-g-...600-h/Overs.bmp

 

As you can see, from 42 points all the way up until 52 point totals, you have to pick your spots if you want an over, as more than half the time the game will go under. Which is why finding those unders may be easier than finding the overs. However, once you get to point totals that open at 53 or higher, you’re in a prime market for making some good $ by taking the overs.

 

Again, like w/ very low totals, you don’t see totals 53 or higher that much, just over 4.25 times per season. But take heed when you do see them…

 

Once again, the public sees an extreme number, and will generally go to the other side.

 

So the lessons here:

1. Opening numbers of 32 and below, don’t be scared to take the under
   
2. Opening numbers of 53 and higher, don’t be scared to take the over
   
3. In between, pick your spots. Unders hit more than overs, but don’t be scared to take either if you have done your homework.
   
4. Last but not least – don’t think that 35 and 36 are so low that it will go under, and don’t think that 50, 51, and 52 are so high that it will go over. Based on historical information, 35 and 36 point totals are more likely to go over than any total less than 52. Likewise, 51 and 52 are more likely to go under than any point total greater than 32. So don’t get carried away and think that “52 is high, take the over”.
   

Edited September 5, 2007 by Steeltown Dre

[Steeltown Dre]

Prompted by info I heard elsewhere (I'm always one to test theory vs. fact), I decided to look into how high scoring teams fared in their opening game of the year.

 

I run my own numbers, so the results you’ll see below are using a database and my parameters, and therefore will be unique to my query terms.

 

Both the Colts and Saints were what I will call “high scoring” teams from last year. Colts scored the 2nd most per game at 26.69 and the Saints scored 5th most at 25.81 points per game.

 

I decided to look at teams that score better than half the league. Last year, half the league averaged more than 20 points, and half averaged fewer than 20 points.

 

These teams are (to the public) known to be able to put points up on the board. So the totals for games where two teams meet that averaged 20 points or more should be high.

 

I wanted to look just at week 1, because a lot of new bettors get in on these games to start the season, and the thing that resonates most in their mind is how productive (offensively) these teams were last season. So I looked at Week 1 meetings between 2 teams who each scored 20 ppg in the prior season, and the total is 45 points or higher.

 

The under in these games has gone 16-4.

 

I then looked at teams who allow a fair number of points. I stuck w/ 20 points again as my split, although 20 teams allowed 20 or more ppg last season (not a 50/50 split). The Colts allowed 22.5 and the Saints 20.12 ppg.

 

So looking at Week 1 meetings between 2 teams who each allowed 20 ppg or more in the prior season, and the total is 45 points or higher.

 

The under in those games went 12-4.

 

Now, the final step is to combine the two. There have been only 9 meetings between 2 teams who each scored 20 ppg and allowed 20 ppg in Week 1 since 1995.

 

The under in those games has gone 8-1.

 

So as you can see, the under here is looking mighty good, based only on these historical trends.

 

Looking at all teams, regardless of what they did the prior season:

 

Since 2000, in all the Week 1 games where the total was at least 45 points, the under has gone 19-5. In those 24 games, the avg line was 46.7 points, and on avg, the final score was 35.6 points. That’s over 10 points fewer than the line. So on avg, the final didn’t come very close to the total.

 

Now, the reason this relates to my prior post is this:

 

The total in this game opened at 51 (50.5 at Pinny, but 51 at most other outlets). It's now at 53 and I've even seen some 53.5s.

 

When games open at 50 or 51, as my prior post showed, only 43% of those games go over. That's 57% on the under.

 

Combine that w/ some of these trends for Week 1 games going under, and I see myself leaning towards the under. In my mind I see a 27-24 type game. However, with such a high total, 27-24 would still give us 51 and an under.

 

Usually I want to see more than generic "historical trends". I like to see hardcore data on the teams playing. I use a fair amount of stats from prior games in the season in my system, and I have much more confidence in those stats and my system then I do in blind trends.

 

That said, I'm still leaning on these trends for this play, and will go for the Under.

 

Note: This game is not based on my system. I need a couple weeks of regular season stats in the database before I start getting confidence in system plays.

[SLAYER]

Best play of the week- Pit -4.5@Cleve.

[HowboutthemCowboys]

For those wagering through a website, which one if you don't mind my asking?

[xMRogers]

THankfully, I have the best of both worlds - "local" guy, so money isn't an issue, but he uses a service that is online (found out from him there's a whole set of these websites that aren't public, but geared to the local guy), so get all the benefits of that. Unfortunately, he's not taking any new players anymore.

 

My buddies use bodog - seems to be the safest of them, but not sure how safe that makes it.

[DawgTalk]

What system or device do most of you go through when placing bets...Basically the best deals without a lot of juice, ect.

[wildcat2334]

Great Read Dre- I love the O/U analysis, good reminder heading into the season........

 

I play on BoDog-

 

more picks for the weekend games- for tonight..........

 

small play on Indy -6

[rattsass]

Thanks for those numbers Dre'. That streak of SB champ covering since the beginning of the decade really is an eye opener. Despite that, I am still rolling with the Saints and the points tonight. And the over.

 

As for those questioning gaming sites, the choices have really been limited thanks to our child molesters / anonymous bathrooms sex perverts / and money scamming scumbags we continue to elect.

 

I feel pretty safe with Bodog, but I wouldn't care to have a huge amount of money tied up in any of them. Luckily, I don't have a huge amount of money so that isn't a problem for me.

 

I have decided to start doing more of my gaming business in the seedy bars and back-alleys, with people that could inflict serious bodily harm to me should I fail to meet my loss obligations.

 

Remember, the government is protecting us.

[i_am_the_swammi]

Bodog now claims to issue payouts in 6-8 weeks... By the time your payment is processed, you are out of the money you kept in your account, and end up contacting them to cancel your withdrawl....or so I am told

 

Anyway, Dre, any numbers for us regarding road favorites in Week 1? I love two of them this week (Philly and Pitt), though am a little unsure if I am going against the trend.

 

Also, every prediction I see concurs with me on the Eagles, with some liking them as by as much as 10-14 points....but the spread is just 3....do I sense a trap??

[Steeltown Dre]

Anyway, Dre, any numbers for us regarding road favorites in Week 1? I love two of them this week (Philly and Pitt), though am a little unsure if I am going against the trend.

 

I'll try to get you info on this tomorrow.

[Steeltown Dre]

Guys, just a warning:

 

Brandon Lang's got 20 dimes on the Saints tonight.

 

I tracked his start to the preseason - he was 0-6 thru the first few weeks. I'm not sure how he ended.

 

He did have Fla State on Monday night for 20 dimes, and we know how that went...

 

He can't lose them all, though, right???? Yea, who knows, but he's certainly losing a hell of a lot more than he's winning. Maybe he puts out some winners early and then you fade him in a few weeks. Or maybe you start right away. We'll see how he goes...

[Goopster24]

Dre, great reads as always. I took the under according to your info and loved it. The Colts were money too.

 

Brandon Lang is a bum, I don't follow that schmuck at all.

 

I too am curious about road favorites. Philly is very appealing. Those GB corners could cause trouble though.

 

And I just started using BookMaker.com for my sportsbook. Early lines and all, solid!

[darin3]

I was pretty sure the Saints would keep it close after reading several sources. So much for that. At least I had the under right, but of course I had it parlayed. Oh well, next time.