jwvdcw's betting picks: week 5 (1 Viewer)

[jwvdcw]

Week 1 Record: 5-5, -6 unitsWeek 2 Record: 5-6, +2 unitsWeek 3 Record: 6-5, -1 unitWeek 4 Record: 7-4, +12 unitsWeek 5 Record: 7-3, +64 units Week 6 Record: 6-6, -5 unitsTotal Record: 36-29, +66 unitsFresh of my best week of the season by far(mostly thanks to the Redskins covering and winning me a nice 49 units), here are my week 6 picks:Mia -1.5(1unit)St Louis -3(1 unit)GB -1.5(1 unit)Hous +16(2 units)Cincy/Pit over 43(1 unit)SD +3.5(1 unit)SF +13(1 unit)Buff +3(1 unit)Bal +1 (1 unit)

 

[Double_J]

Oak + 7.5(3 units)

Miami +4(1 unit)

Buff-4(1 unit)

Tenn +7(4 units)

Chi +6.5(2 units)

Car-6(2 units)

TB+6(1 unit)

GB+3(2 units)

Philly-2(2 units)

SF +6(2 units)

You don't think that St. Louis will beat San Fran by more than 6 points?

 

[Bankerguy]

By the way....this line is dropping for some reason. I believe to 4.5.I've seen the other thread talking about St Louis on the road and all that crap. I just don't see it though. St Louis is a lock for me. I know lock is a bad word in gambling.This game will be very one-sided for St Louis. SJax will own the 9ers.

 

[Harry Beanbag]

In before the move to the FFA

 

[jwvdcw]

Oak + 7.5(3 units)

Miami +4(1 unit)

Buff-4(1 unit)

Tenn +7(4 units)

Chi +6.5(2 units)

Car-6(2 units)

TB+6(1 unit)

GB+3(2 units)

Philly-2(2 units)

SF +6(2 units)

You don't think that St. Louis will beat San Fran by more than 6 points?

The Man told me:I have a play for you. It's a team that lost its last five road games last year:

31-14 (to a 4-win team)

37-17

45-17

20-7

31-7 (to a 6-win team)

They've also lost their road openers the last three years by double-digits. And now, unbelievably, that team is actually giving 4.5 on the road!

That's right, it's the St. Louis Rams.

And notice how the line has climbed from 4.5 to 6 since then- The public is all over St Louis, as this is a huge trap game.

 

[jwvdcw]

In before the move to the FFA

Betting threads have always been allowed in the SP.

 

[jwvdcw]

By the way....this line is dropping for some reason.  I believe to 4.5.

I've seen the other thread talking about St Louis on the road and all that crap.  I just don't see it though.  St Louis is a lock for me.  I know lock is a bad word in gambling.

This game will be very one-sided for St Louis.  SJax will own the 9ers.

I really do like the Rams this year as a team, and before I read that, I too was proclaming St Louis -6 as a great play. However, how can you ignore how poor the Rams are on the road? THE RAMS ARE BY FAR THE WORST TEAM IN THE NFL IF THE GAME IS NOT BEING PLAYED IN ST. LOUIS. Not only do they lose, but they lose big and to bad teams. Just curious: Why do you suddenly think that will change?Edited to add: I could be wrong...I'm definitely not "calling you out" or anything like that. I'm just interested in seeing your reasoning. Do you not agree that this game looks exactly like a classic trap game?

 

[Bankerguy]

I've never really understood the whole "Trap Game" saying. The line is what it is.last year I believe St Louis struggled on the road because they were too reliant on the pass game with a banged up O-line. The line is healthy and I believe you will see a somewhat more conservative play calling from Martz. (Martz and conservative don't belong together in the same sentence) With a better ground attack freeing up playaction to Holt/Bruce ...I just do not see the 9ers having an answer.I'd be willing to make a sig bet on the game.

 

[VICK-tory]

49ers over Rams, in a wild upset 34-31 and Coach Martz gets fired by wk. 4The Steelers are a big time lock at -7 so put your $ there.

 

[j3r3m3y]

Miami +4(1 unit)

Denver is stacked and their D is solid. I don't see them winning by just a field goal.

 

[mandersen1]

Can't really say I agree with those picks either. I guess you could call St. L. a succors bet, but I think St. L. covers laying the 6 or 4.5 or whatever. I like Minny laying 6 to TB at home as well and I really like Dallas getting 4.5 at SD. Think Dallas is going to be much improved this year.

 

[MGD Destroyer]

Just one bet for me: Was -6.5, 25 units

 

[Raider Nation]

Just one bet for me: Was -6.5, 25 units

Are the Redskins capable of scoring 7 points?

 

[MGD Destroyer]

Just one bet for me: Was -6.5, 25 units

Are the Redskins capable of scoring 7 points?

That's all it's gonna take...

 

[saintfool]

I've never really understood the whole "Trap Game" saying. The line is what it is.

last year I believe St Louis struggled on the road because they were too reliant on the pass game with a banged up O-line.

The line is healthy and I believe you will see a somewhat more conservative play calling from Martz. (Martz and conservative don't belong together in the same sentence)

With a better ground attack freeing up playaction to Holt/Bruce ...I just do not see the 9ers having an answer.

I'd be willing to make a sig bet on the game.

I am with you. It's not that St Louis is that great but more that SF is really that bad. I just think SF is going to struggle to score, much less keep it close.

 

[jwvdcw]

I've never really understood the whole "Trap Game" saying. The line is what it is.

last year I believe St Louis struggled on the road because they were too reliant on the pass game with a banged up O-line.

The line is healthy and I believe you will see a somewhat more conservative play calling from Martz. (Martz and conservative don't belong together in the same sentence)

With a better ground attack freeing up playaction to Holt/Bruce ...I just do not see the 9ers having an answer.

I'd be willing to make a sig bet on the game.

Since the line is all over from 4.5 to 6, I'd compromise at 5.25. I'll take SF and the points in a sig bet with you. Deal?

 

[seahawk 17]

THE RAMS ARE BY FAR THE WORST TEAM IN THE NFL IF THE GAME IS NOT BEING PLAYED IN ST. LOUIS.

Unless they are playing at their other home...Qwest Field.

 

[mlwinokur]

Isn't there a way you could have posted this as a poll?

 

[j3r3m3y]

Since the line is all over from 4.5 to 6, I'd compromise at 5.25. I'll take SF and the points in a sig bet with you. Deal?

I would try and bump him up to 5.78. 5.25 is a suckers bet .

 

[Bankerguy]

I've never really understood the whole "Trap Game" saying.  The line is what it is.

last year I believe St Louis struggled on the road because they were too reliant on the pass game with a banged up O-line. 

The line is healthy and I believe you will see a somewhat more conservative play calling from Martz. (Martz and conservative don't belong together in the same sentence)

With a better ground attack freeing up playaction to Holt/Bruce ...I just do not see the 9ers having an answer.

I'd be willing to make a sig bet on the game.

Since the line is all over from 4.5 to 6, I'd compromise at 5.25. I'll take SF and the points in a sig bet with you. Deal?

Done.....I'll give you 6.0. Just come back and take your medicine when you lose.

 

[cstu]

I've never really understood the whole "Trap Game" saying. The line is what it is.

last year I believe St Louis struggled on the road because they were too reliant on the pass game with a banged up O-line.

The line is healthy and I believe you will see a somewhat more conservative play calling from Martz. (Martz and conservative don't belong together in the same sentence)

With a better ground attack freeing up playaction to Holt/Bruce ...I just do not see the 9ers having an answer.

I'd be willing to make a sig bet on the game.

Since the line is all over from 4.5 to 6, I'd compromise at 5.25. I'll take SF and the points in a sig bet with you. Deal?

Done.....I'll give you 6.0. Just come back and take your medicine when you lose.

I'm in as well for 6.0.

 

[jwvdcw]

I've never really understood the whole "Trap Game" saying.  The line is what it is.

last year I believe St Louis struggled on the road because they were too reliant on the pass game with a banged up O-line. 

The line is healthy and I believe you will see a somewhat more conservative play calling from Martz. (Martz and conservative don't belong together in the same sentence)

With a better ground attack freeing up playaction to Holt/Bruce ...I just do not see the 9ers having an answer.

I'd be willing to make a sig bet on the game.

Since the line is all over from 4.5 to 6, I'd compromise at 5.25. I'll take SF and the points in a sig bet with you. Deal?

Done.....I'll give you 6.0. Just come back and take your medicine when you lose.

I'm in as well for 6.0.

what side are you on?

 

[Ghost Rider]

Yeah, the Rams looked awfully bad against the Seahawks in Seattle last year in the playoffs, didn't they?

 

[jwvdcw]

Yeah, the Rams looked awfully bad against the Seahawks in Seattle last year in the playoffs, didn't they?

Wanna be a man and participate in the sig bet or are you all talk?

 

[cstu]

I've never really understood the whole "Trap Game" saying. The line is what it is.

last year I believe St Louis struggled on the road because they were too reliant on the pass game with a banged up O-line.

The line is healthy and I believe you will see a somewhat more conservative play calling from Martz. (Martz and conservative don't belong together in the same sentence)

With a better ground attack freeing up playaction to Holt/Bruce ...I just do not see the 9ers having an answer.

I'd be willing to make a sig bet on the game.

Since the line is all over from 4.5 to 6, I'd compromise at 5.25. I'll take SF and the points in a sig bet with you. Deal?

Done.....I'll give you 6.0. Just come back and take your medicine when you lose.

I'm in as well for 6.0.

what side are you on?

STL -6

 

[Bankerguy]

JW,Thought this was between you and me. I want to change jw's sig for a week...that's all I ask. If that is acceptable consider me in.

 

[cstu]

JW,

Thought this was between you and me. I want to change jw's sig for a week...that's all I ask. If that is acceptable consider me in.

You can change it to whatever you want.

 

[TheFanatic]

Oak + 7.5(3 units)

Miami +4(1 unit)

Buff-4(1 unit)

Tenn +7(4 units)

Chi +6.5(2 units)

Car-6(2 units)

TB+6(1 unit)

GB+3(2 units)

Philly-2(2 units)

SF +6(2 units)

You don't think that St. Louis will beat San Fran by more than 6 points?

The Man told me:I have a play for you. It's a team that lost its last five road games last year:

31-14 (to a 4-win team)

37-17

45-17

20-7

31-7 (to a 6-win team)

They've also lost their road openers the last three years by double-digits. And now, unbelievably, that team is actually giving 4.5 on the road!

That's right, it's the St. Louis Rams.

And notice how the line has climbed from 4.5 to 6 since then- The public is all over St Louis, as this is a huge trap game.

I'm trying to figure out how the Rams made it into the second round of the playoffs as a Wild Card team if they lost their last 5 road games This just doesn't make any sense....

I'll take the Sig Bet giving you and the 49ers the 6 points.....

 

[ILUVBEER99]

I'll be betting on all the home teams that are underdogs in week 1.

 

[Raider Nation]

Just one bet for me: Was -6.5, 25 units

Are the Redskins capable of scoring 7 points?

That's all it's gonna take...

I agree. That's why the UNDER 33 is an automatic play in this spot.Every series for both teams will look something like this:

Run, Run, Incomplete Pass, Punt

 

[TheFanatic]

Just one bet for me: Was -6.5, 25 units

Are the Redskins capable of scoring 7 points?

That's all it's gonna take...

I agree. That's why the UNDER 33 is an automatic play in this spot.Every series for both teams will look something like this:

Run, Run, Incomplete Pass, Punt

 

[jwvdcw]

JW,

Thought this was between you and me. I want to change jw's sig for a week...that's all I ask. If that is acceptable consider me in.

It is, but others jumped in, so I let them. How about this stipulation just to make things interesting: If I win, then you have to keep the sig I choose until St Louis wins a game ATS, and if you win then vise versa with SF. And they have to win ATS, not tie. Does that sound good to everyone thats in?

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

St Louis is a lock for me. I know lock is a bad word in gambling.

This is one of those games I'd shy away from, even though St. Louis SHOULD cover. The line was 4.5, but if its up to 6 now I'm even more suspicious.The heavy betting this week is all on New England, Pitt, Buffalo, San Diego and NYG.

FYI, San Francisco has the most inexperienced offensive line in the game. Not only are they inexperienced playing together as a unit, their line has a whole has one of the the fewest games started in 2004.

I consider that very bad.

You know who else has a similar line to San Francisco in terms of experience together? THe Minnesota Vikings. If things fall apart there on offense, blame this not Randy Moss.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Wanna be a man and participate in the sig bet or are you all talk?

Sorry, but I do not need to participate in a silly sig bet to feel like more of a man. How sad that you do.

 

[jwvdcw]

Wanna be a man and participate in the sig bet or are you all talk?

Sorry, but I do not need to participate in a silly sig bet to feel like more of a man. How sad that you do.

Well, then please don't critisize my picks unless you're willing to. TIA.

 

[RedRaiders]

  St Louis is a lock for me.  I know lock is a bad word in gambling.

This is one of those games I'd shy away from, even though St. Louis SHOULD cover. The line was 4.5, but if its up to 6 now I'm even more suspicious.The heavy betting this week is all on New England, Pitt, Buffalo, San Diego and NYG.

FYI, San Francisco has the most inexperienced offensive line in the game. Not only are they inexperienced playing together as a unit, their line has a whole has one of the the fewest games started in 2004.

I consider that very bad.

You know who else has a similar line to San Francisco in terms of experience together? THe Minnesota Vikings. If things fall apart there on offense, blame this not Randy Moss.

Where are you getting this info from? Oakland has been getting a lot of action the last day or so. The vig is heavy on them +7.5. I do agree on the Buffalo and NYG action. Pitt has been in between, its sitting at 7 but opened at 7.5.

 

[TheFanatic]

JW,

Thought this was between you and me.  I want to change jw's sig for a week...that's all I ask.  If that is acceptable consider me in.

It is, but others jumped in, so I let them. How about this stipulation just to make things interesting: If I win, then you have to keep the sig I choose until St Louis wins a game ATS, and if you win then vise versa with SF. And they have to win ATS, not tie. Does that sound good to everyone thats in?

I thought the bet was for a week. I don't have the time nor the inclination to worry about which team wins against the ATS......BTW, gonna address that bonehead comment about the Rams losing their last 5 road games but forgetting that game on the road in the PLAYOFFS that they won? Or would you rather pimp Pinner some more? Either way you look equally ridiculous.....

 

[Ghost Rider]

Well, then please don't critisize my picks unless you're willing to. TIA.

Again, sorry, but there is no rule saying that I cannot make a comment about a game unless I engage in a sig bet with a fellow poster. 2004 was 2004. This is 2005. To assume that the Rams will suck on the road again this year because they did last year is foolish. There is this called parity in the NFL right now and you never know from season to season how good or bad a team is going to be.

And what does TIA mean? English, please?

 

[saintfool]

Well, then please don't critisize my picks unless you're willing to. TIA.

Again, sorry, but there is no rule saying that I cannot make a comment about a game unless I engage in a sig bet with a fellow poster. 2004 was 2004. This is 2005. To assume that the Rams will suck on the road again this year because they did last year is foolish. There is this called parity in the NFL right now and you never know from season to season how good or bad a team is going to be.

And what does TIA mean? English, please?

TIA= Thanks In Advance

 

[Bankerguy]

Hey JW,Looks like you are down 3 units already!!! LMAO.Dude, if you are betting for real....don't vary your bet sizes. It is the fastest way to lose money, or go broke. Honest!!!Think of it this way, it's hard enough to pick at greater than 62.5% which is usually the standard for good a handicapper. If you were to hit this mark which is not easy to do......it would still not be gauranteed that you would be making $$$. You would have to probably hit at close to 75-80% of your higher value bets. This is not a realistic expectation. I call this method the Kevorkian Method.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

St Louis is a lock for me. I know lock is a bad word in gambling.

This is one of those games I'd shy away from, even though St. Louis SHOULD cover. The line was 4.5, but if its up to 6 now I'm even more suspicious.The heavy betting this week is all on New England, Pitt, Buffalo, San Diego and NYG.

FYI, San Francisco has the most inexperienced offensive line in the game. Not only are they inexperienced playing together as a unit, their line has a whole has one of the the fewest games started in 2004.

I consider that very bad.

You know who else has a similar line to San Francisco in terms of experience together? THe Minnesota Vikings. If things fall apart there on offense, blame this not Randy Moss.

Where are you getting this info from? Oakland has been getting a lot of action the last day or so. The vig is heavy on them +7.5. I do agree on the Buffalo and NYG action. Pitt has been in between, its sitting at 7 but opened at 7.5.

How much did the line move? I was going off the initial betting action and it seemed to heavily favor New England.

 

[[icon]]

Just one bet for me: Was -6.5, 25 units

Are the Redskins capable of scoring 7 points?

That's all it's gonna take...

I agree. That's why the UNDER 33 is an automatic play in this spot.Every series for both teams will look something like this:

Run, Run, Incomplete Pass, Punt

Automatic like the Raiders winning outright last night?

 

[jwvdcw]

JW,

Thought this was between you and me.  I want to change jw's sig for a week...that's all I ask.  If that is acceptable consider me in.

It is, but others jumped in, so I let them. How about this stipulation just to make things interesting: If I win, then you have to keep the sig I choose until St Louis wins a game ATS, and if you win then vise versa with SF. And they have to win ATS, not tie. Does that sound good to everyone thats in?

I thought the bet was for a week. I don't have the time nor the inclination to worry about which team wins against the ATS......BTW, gonna address that bonehead comment about the Rams losing their last 5 road games but forgetting that game on the road in the PLAYOFFS that they won? Or would you rather pimp Pinner some more? Either way you look equally ridiculous.....

Ok, a week only.I don't care about hte playoffs. Thats a different monster.

 

[jwvdcw]

Hey JW,

Looks like you are down 3 units already!!! LMAO.

Dude, if you are betting for real....don't vary your bet sizes. It is the fastest way to lose money, or go broke. Honest!!!

Think of it this way, it's hard enough to pick at greater than 62.5% which is usually the standard for good a handicapper. If you were to hit this mark which is not easy to do......it would still not be gauranteed that you would be making $$$. You would have to probably hit at close to 75-80% of your higher value bets. This is not a realistic expectation.

I call this method the Kevorkian Method.

Acutally in real life I'm even since I didn't get my bet in due to this.But yeah, down 3 units. Why is that so funny to you? You never lose?

As for varying my bets...one day, I may try to get very good at sports gambling and actually try to make money, but I'm not betting a ton(1 unit for me is about $20), so I'm in it more to have fun that to really win. Although, as I said, I have considered really studying the subject a lot and trying to become very good at betting and then raising my stakes, but until then I'm just having fun. So I don't dispute what you're saying at all.

 

[jwvdcw]

Hey JW,

Looks like you are down 3 units already!!! LMAO.

Dude, if you are betting for real....don't vary your bet sizes. It is the fastest way to lose money, or go broke. Honest!!!

Think of it this way, it's hard enough to pick at greater than 62.5% which is usually the standard for good a handicapper. If you were to hit this mark which is not easy to do......it would still not be gauranteed that you would be making $$$. You would have to probably hit at close to 75-80% of your higher value bets. This is not a realistic expectation.

I call this method the Kevorkian Method.

I totally don't understand your reasoning though. If you hit on 62.5% of all of your higher bets, then wouldn't that make you a winner? Why do you have to hit on a higher % of those to be aw winner?

 

[Gamblor]

Hey JW,

Looks like you are down 3 units already!!! LMAO.

Dude, if you are betting for real....don't vary your bet sizes. It is the fastest way to lose money, or go broke. Honest!!!

Think of it this way, it's hard enough to pick at greater than 62.5% which is usually the standard for good a handicapper. If you were to hit this mark which is not easy to do......it would still not be gauranteed that you would be making $$$. You would have to probably hit at close to 75-80% of your higher value bets. This is not a realistic expectation.

I call this method the Kevorkian Method.

I totally don't understand your reasoning though. If you hit on 62.5% of all of your higher bets, then wouldn't that make you a winner? Why do you have to hit on a higher % of those to be aw winner?

62% is a good mark. ~55% is needed to break even depending on the juice.

 

[Bankerguy]

Hey JW,

Looks like you are down 3 units already!!!  LMAO.

Dude, if you are betting for real....don't vary your bet sizes.  It is the fastest way to lose money, or go broke.   Honest!!!

Think of it this way, it's hard enough to pick at greater than 62.5% which is usually the standard for good a handicapper.  If you were to hit this mark which is not easy to do......it would still not be gauranteed that you would be making  $$$.  You would have to probably hit at close to 75-80% of your higher value bets.  This is not a realistic expectation.

I call this method the Kevorkian Method.

I totally don't understand your reasoning though. If you hit on 62.5% of all of your higher bets, then wouldn't that make you a winner? Why do you have to hit on a higher % of those to be aw winner?

You might predict the winner correctly 62% of the time, but still could lose money. If you are varying the betting size you could negate your own sucess by getting 1 game wrong (based on a bigger sized bet). What I am saying is you force yourself into needing to be right 75-80% of the time on your higher $$$ bets. If you can pick 75% of the time right ATS.....you are the man. As a strategy for gambling, I would definately not suggest this. Most serious gamblers would agree with me.

 

[jwvdcw]

Hey JW,

Looks like you are down 3 units already!!!  LMAO.

Dude, if you are betting for real....don't vary your bet sizes.  It is the fastest way to lose money, or go broke.   Honest!!!

Think of it this way, it's hard enough to pick at greater than 62.5% which is usually the standard for good a handicapper.  If you were to hit this mark which is not easy to do......it would still not be gauranteed that you would be making  $$$.  You would have to probably hit at close to 75-80% of your higher value bets.  This is not a realistic expectation.

I call this method the Kevorkian Method.

I totally don't understand your reasoning though. If you hit on 62.5% of all of your higher bets, then wouldn't that make you a winner? Why do you have to hit on a higher % of those to be aw winner?

He might predict the winner correctly 62% of the time, but still could lose money. If he is varying the betting size he could negate his sucess by getting 1 game wrong (based on a bigger sized bet). What I am saying is you force yourself into needing to be right 75-80% of the time on your higher $$$ bets. If you can pick 75% of the time right ATS.....you are the man. As a strategy for gambling, I would definately not suggest this. Most serious gamblers would agree with me.

This is incorrect. I could just as easily say that with my method you only need to be successful 45% of the time as long as that 45% hits on the big bets.You still need the same 55%.

 

[Bankerguy]

Yes, you are partially right. If you are highly successful on the bigger bets than you don't need to hit at a good % on the rest of your bets. Let me try an example: Bet 1- 8 units (Loss -8)Bet 2- 6 units (Win -2)Bet 3- 6 units (Loss -8)Bet 4- 4 units (Win -4)Bet 5- 4 units (Loss -8)Bet 6- 2 units (Win -6)Bet 7- 2 units (Win -4)Bet 8- 2 units (Loss -6)Bet 9- 1 unit (Win -5) Bet 10- 1 unit (Win -4)Using this type of style nets you negative 4 units.Using the same # of unit/game Bet 1- 4 units (Loss -4)Bet 2- 4 units (Win 0)Bet 3- 4 units (Loss -4)Bet 4- 4 units (Win 0)Bet 5- 4 units (Loss -4)Bet 6- 4 units (Win 0)Bet 7- 4 units (Win +4)Bet 8- 4 units (Loss 0)Bet 9- 4 unit (Win +4)Bet 10- 4 unit (Win +8)Plus 8 units. (Yes, I know this example could be reversed to your advantage)Again, keep in mind if you don't hit a much greater % on your larger bets, you will consistently lose money.

 

[Bankerguy]

Oak + 7.5(3 units)

Miami +4(1 unit)

Buff-4(1 unit)

Tenn +7(4 units)

Chi +6.5(2 units)

Car-6(2 units)

TB+6(1 unit)

GB+3(2 units)

Philly-2(2 units)

SF +6(2 units)

JW,If you get the Tennesse game wrong too.......you are going to lose money unless you hit at 80-90% of the rest of the picks.