Load up the online account behind South Carolina tonight

Q, West Coast Style · Post by **Q, West Coast Style** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 8:53 pm

-4.5 at home v. Kentucky.

I mean, we are talking about Rich Brooks @ Steve Spurrier in a big game on National TV.

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:18 pm

Goll gee, Dad, you're no fun.

L45B · Post by **L45B** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:43 pm

88 wrote:Betting real money on college football games is for losers (or soon to be losers). Put your money someplace where it will do you some good.

Exactly.

Like HERE.

Danimal · Post by **Danimal** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 9:50 pm

88 wrote:Betting real money on college football games is for losers (or soon to be losers). Put your money someplace where it will do you some good.

Gee, get judgmental much? I don't bet because I suck at picking but I know guys that do bet that aren't losers. As long as you are smart-aren't betting anything you can't afford to lose, only betting a small percentage of your bankroll on a particular game, stay away from sucker-bets, and can pick competently you'll have some fun while doing OK financially. You may lose a little but nothing that actually hurts, and considering you had fun over the course of the season gambling a little loss isn't a big deal. Most stuff you want to do costs money. In the age of internet-betting you have a better shot at winning because you can compare lines between sites and sites have to compete with each-other so you get special deals a traditional bookie wouldn't make. The losers are the guys always throwing money at that 5-teamer they can't quite get to come-in or other shitty-odds bets, blowing big money on their "lock" game, or betting something it would hurt to lose. There are a lot of those guys but it doesn't make everyone who bets a loser.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:03 pm

The next time 88 reaches into the convenient store freezer for that case of Bud, I hope he reminds himself "there's something better I can do with this money."

Yeah. I bet that'll happen.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:35 pm

Thing with gambling is...if you're doing it because you think you're going to "get over," then yep, you're pretty much a loser. if you're betting small for pure fun, without the intention of pulling in additional income, then you would qualify as somebody who "gets it."

Bucmonkey · Post by **Bucmonkey** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 2:04 am

Recovering 88?

RadioFan · Post by **RadioFan** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 2:39 am

I love 88's stories.

Could you guys please start calling him out on a regular basis? TIA.

Q, West Coast Style · Post by **Q, West Coast Style** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 4:16 am

You're all very welcome. Those of you who are veterans of this board and its ancestors should know when I take the time to specifically call out a particular game, I'm usually pretty close if not right on target. Weekly pickems however, not so much.

L45B · Post by **L45B** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 5:04 pm

Nice call, Q. You've been pretty $$ over the years.

What's your take on this ASU-Wazzou game? I know you're a Coug fan, so you might be a bit partial but I think ASU will cover the 8.5 spread. WSU just doesn't seem to have it this year and as tough as playing in the Palouse can be, I think the Devils win by at least a couple touchdowns.

Q, West Coast Style · Post by **Q, West Coast Style** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 5:30 pm

L45B wrote:Nice call, Q. You've been pretty $$ over the years.

What's your take on this ASU-Wazzou game? I know you're a Coug fan, so you might be a bit partial but I think ASU will cover the 8.5 spread. WSU just doesn't seem to have it this year and as tough as playing in the Palouse can be, I think the Devils win by at least a couple touchdowns.

Coug D in the worst I've ever seen in 20 years of following Pac-10 football. Your take is correct.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Fri Oct 05, 2007 5:39 pm

Q, West Coast Style wrote:
L45B wrote: I think ASU will cover the 8.5 spread.
Your take is correct.

YES!!!! PLEASE BET THIS HARD AND HEAVY!!!!!! ALWAYS BET AGAINST THE HOME DOG!!!!!!

Sin,
The oldest, most profitable sucker bet in the bookmaker's entire arsenal, which some people never seem to learn

I forget the exact percentage, but home dogs getting more than a TD cover almost every time. Should be considered a "freebie" most of the time.

L45B · Post by **L45B** » Mon Oct 08, 2007 3:19 am

I fell for it, Dins. Took Central Michigan off the board and went with ASU instead in the Pick'em.

I'm going to Vegas this week with little to no momentum.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Mon Oct 08, 2007 4:41 pm

L45B wrote:I'm going to Vegas this week with little to no momentum.

I think the problem is, is you're going to Vegas without a freaking clue.

There's certain bets that are "freebies." You either take the obvious one, or you leave it alone altogether. What you don't ever do is bet the 7+ point road favorite... EVER.

Again, I don't have the exact percentage, but that's always a sucker bet, 100% of the time... I think it's approaching 90% or thereabouts. The bookie is just looking to exploit homers at that point... and I have no idea why anyone would ever fall for it.

If there was a casino game that offered you around a 80+% chance at winning, wouldn't you play it? If you were going to gamble regardless, wouldn't it be foolish to not take those odds? Same freaking thing with large-spread home dogs.

Of course, having said this, if you now follow this rule and bet home dogs, there will probably be the most freakish set of results against the spread in human history, and every bigtime home dog will lose... but in situations in which I won't look foolish by calling my shot, home dogs cover at better than a 70% clip, and home dogs getting more than a TD cover quite a bit more often than that.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Tue Oct 09, 2007 1:56 am

Home Dogs (spread 0-3) 13-6 68.42%

That seems to be where it's at.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:16 pm

88 wrote:
Overall: 19-24 (44.18%)

I'm entirely too lazy to look it up (not much of a gambler at the moment, besides the poker tables), but I'm guessing this season's results are not typical of the "average" year.

Actually, I figured it would be closer to 50%, because the book tries to balance almost everything.

Incorrect. The book wants the wagers to be balanced on both sides -- not the actual results. Not neccessarily the same thing.

The record of 0-3 point home dogs is quite typical of the "average" at ~70%. Working from memory, I believe it usually comes in between 70-75%.

Regardless, I called my shot on Wazzu.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:44 pm

I play in a charity poker tournament in State College, PA every January. I've made it to the final table

I stuck my gum under that table in 1978. You've been warned.

MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan · Sat Oct 13, 2007 8:39 pm

I usually throw $100 in an online account every year just to have a little low-stakes fun throughout the season, but I hadn't bet any real money on football at all this year (a good thing, considering my dismal performance in the Pick 'Em so far). But my sister went to Vegas this weekend, so I sent $50 along with her to place a few bets for me and, lo and behold, I'm officially up on the year!

I took Mich, USF, VT and Northwestern in a $20 4-team teaser, and of course, fucking Northwestern took it down to the wire, but ultimately won me $56 by half a fucking point. I don't think I've ever actually cheered out loud at the CBS Sportsline scoreboard before. heh heh.

I took two other 3-team teasers at $15 apiece: Tex, S Car & BC and Wash, UGA, and Tulsa. But regardless of how those play out, I'm up on the day, so anything else is just gravy.