Stone Cold Locks (1 Viewer)

[Beau Tocks]

This is for $$$$. I would like your inputs on this week 3 PICK. You may state your case for your fellow FBG's .

Here we go.

Broncos -5.5 Saints defense depleted, Cutler and the crew will easily cover @ home.

Cha Ching

 

[JohnnyU]

The Giants are a lock -13.5 vs Bengals.

 

[Da Man]

I dont think there are any this week

 

[LHUCKS]

Love the Broncos line as well...if the Broncos D half way shows up it's an easy cover.

I like the Cards getting 3...still flying way under the radar.

 

[JGalligan]

This is for $$$$. I would like your inputs on this week 3 PICK. You may state your case for your fellow FBG's .Here we go.Broncos -5.5 Saints defense depleted, Cutler and the crew will easily cover @ home.Cha Ching

I dunno how much money your putting on that, but if it's a lot -- I personally wouldn't do it. New Orleans and Denver are going to go blow for blow, similar to last weeks DEN/SD game. The Saints defense may be depleted, but their offense is just dandy. Maybe you should take the over?

 

[gianmarco]

No stone cold locks for me this week, but a few I really like. In order of preference:

Carolina +3 @ Minn.

SF -4 vs. Det

Arizona +3 @ Wash

KC +5 @ Atl

Tenn -5 vs. Houston

 

[PACKER 7]

I actually like the Bengals to cover the 13.5 this week. Just a gut feeling.

Bengals wont win, but they have to bounce back at some point.

Also like the Jags at +5.5

Indy, banged up on D, terrible against the run in past 2 games. Jags win straight up.

And I like the Bills at home -9

Oakland going completely across country, banged up McFadden, no Fargas, team turmoil. Bills rolling right now I think Bills in a blow out. 10 points should be no problem.

 

[Fantaholic]

My dad, god rest his soul, took us on a lot of a family trips and bought us some really nice things all made possible by his customers that believed there were such things as "stone cold locks."

 

[SKIDMARK]

My dad, god rest his soul, took us on a lot of a family trips and bought us some really nice things all made possible by his customers that believed there were such things as "stone cold locks."

Amen. These "stone cold locks" have taken a many of men to the poor house.

 

[Routilla]

Giants, Patriots and Titans all cover.

 

[sheerterror]

Something wrong with the wagering thread?

 

[thejag]

New England week 1 vs. KC

Indy week 1 vs. Chicago

'Nuff said.

 

[holmesness]

betting can be hazardous to your wealth.

 

[Islanders rule]

Bronco's seem poised to score 30+ points and cover the 5.5 from what I have seen in their first two games. Their defense will do better this week in my opinion.

I have a fairly substantial wager on them this weekend.



IS

 

[home dog]

New England week 1 vs. KCIndy week 1 vs. Chicago'Nuff said.

Actually these WERE strong plays with New England and Indy both way overvalued. This week I like two dogs with the points...Green Bay and NYJets.

 

[Routilla]

betting can be hazardous to your wealth.

So can investing in the stock market. It's all relative to your willingness to take monetary risk for potential high reward.

 

[Upchuck]

betting can be hazardous to your wealth.

So can investing in the stock market. It's all relative to your willingness to take monetary risk for potential high reward.

Which is why he said 'stone cold lock' ?

 

[[scooter]]

Carolina if ADP sits.

Dallas over Green Bay (Rodgers comes back to earth)

Detroit over San Francisco (the 9ers aren't that great and Detroit isn't that bad)

But of course it all depends on how many units you bet per matchup, which is why I recommend that you bet 8, 25 and 3 units on these matchups (not necessarily in that order).

 

[Raider Nation]

As I said in the N.O./Denver thread, unload on the OVER and take a few months off.

It's currently 51. I got it at 50 earlier in the week.

 

[fasteddie_21]

Surprised to not read the only strong game of the entire weekend. Balt -2.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Surprised no one is on Dallas -3. Yeah it's @GB at night, but while Rodgers has looked good, I don't think he's ready to win a shootout with Tony Romo, and the running game has looked bad with Grant hurting.

I think Rodgers is going to have to throw for 350/4 to win this game, does anyone see that happening at this point?

 

[Raider Nation]

Surprised no one is on Dallas -3. Yeah it's @GB at night, but while Rodgers has looked good, I don't think he's ready to win a shootout with Tony Romo, and the running game has looked bad with Grant hurting.I think Rodgers is going to have to throw for 350/4 to win this game, does anyone see that happening at this point?

Toughest game on the board, IMO.

 

[fasteddie_21]

As I said in the N.O./Denver thread, unload on the OVER and take a few months off.It's currently 51. I got it at 50 earlier in the week.

And strangely, Assani and I are on the opposite side, taking the u51.5.

 

[Raider Nation]

As I said in the N.O./Denver thread, unload on the OVER and take a few months off.

It's currently 51. I got it at 50 earlier in the week.

And strangely, Assani and I are on the opposite side, taking the u51.5.

Do you see the Saints scoring 17 points? Because Denver will get 35, minimum.

 

[JGalligan]

As I said in the N.O./Denver thread, unload on the OVER and take a few months off.

It's currently 51. I got it at 50 earlier in the week.

And strangely, Assani and I are on the opposite side, taking the u51.5.

Do you see the Saints scoring 17 points? Because Denver will get 35, minimum.

I've been trying to tell people about that game too. For some reason, everyone thinks the Saints offense is pedestrian without Colston?

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

The more I look, the more I'm convinced that this is a nice "vacation" week....

 

[tonydead]

Cards

Panthers

and yes the Rams....nice little parlay

 

[fasteddie_21]

As I said in the N.O./Denver thread, unload on the OVER and take a few months off.

It's currently 51. I got it at 50 earlier in the week.

And strangely, Assani and I are on the opposite side, taking the u51.5.

Do you see the Saints scoring 17 points? Because Denver will get 35, minimum.

I've been trying to tell people about that game too. For some reason, everyone thinks the Saints offense is pedestrian without Colston?

Reasons are here.

There's a couple of NFL games totalled in the 50's this week. Games with a 50+ total are 53-65-2, 55.1% going back to 1989 (57.7% since 2002 for those that believe the market has sharpened up in the last few years).

It's only 120 games so not much sample, right? I agree. The thing is though, pretty much every single market I have looked at across the board- even fringe stuff like CFL and WNBA - has always shown the same pattern: high totals go Under >50% of the time AND low totals go Over >50% of the time as well.

At this point it's not about handicapping the game anymore. All these small subsets add up together into one big subset and point to a very clear conclusion: the market in general tends to inflate big totals and "deflate" (couldn't think of a better word LOL) low totals.

I think the tendency should be stronger at the beginning of the year when there's an opportunity to overreact to a small number of games. I went ahead and played NO/Den Under 51 -107 for fear of losing the strong 51.

 

[Man who'd fire the Yorks]

Don't know the point spread in theChargers/Jets game but I'll take the points and the Jets. Hell,they probably won't even need the points.

Rams over the Seahawks

Cardinals over the Redskins

 

[JGalligan]

As I said in the N.O./Denver thread, unload on the OVER and take a few months off.

It's currently 51. I got it at 50 earlier in the week.

And strangely, Assani and I are on the opposite side, taking the u51.5.

Do you see the Saints scoring 17 points? Because Denver will get 35, minimum.

I've been trying to tell people about that game too. For some reason, everyone thinks the Saints offense is pedestrian without Colston?

Reasons are here.

There's a couple of NFL games totalled in the 50's this week. Games with a 50+ total are 53-65-2, 55.1% going back to 1989 (57.7% since 2002 for those that believe the market has sharpened up in the last few years).

It's only 120 games so not much sample, right? I agree. The thing is though, pretty much every single market I have looked at across the board- even fringe stuff like CFL and WNBA - has always shown the same pattern: high totals go Under >50% of the time AND low totals go Over >50% of the time as well.

At this point it's not about handicapping the game anymore. All these small subsets add up together into one big subset and point to a very clear conclusion: the market in general tends to inflate big totals and "deflate" (couldn't think of a better word LOL) low totals.

I think the tendency should be stronger at the beginning of the year when there's an opportunity to overreact to a small number of games. I went ahead and played NO/Den Under 51 -107 for fear of losing the strong 51.

Oh, I see. I've never really put too much stake in stuff like that. I can see how it could offer some valuable information, but it doesn't take into account the now, the two current teams, and all the rest of the intangibles. So I've always been wary of using betting stats from the past because of that. Or am I being too close minded here? Does anyone on here use all of that stuff along with other things when making their picks? And if so, is there a site where I can search through all the games from last year?

 

[Vicktimized]

As banged up as the Saints are, it looks like their best CB, Mike McKenzie, will see his first action this week. Safety Roman Harper is also likely to be back, as is cornerback Randall Gay.

Scott Fujita will miss the game, which should dent the run defense, but the Saints could be in much better shape defensively than a week ago...which would scare me a bit from the assumption that Denver's a lock to push 35-40 points in this one.

Sure, I think it'll be high scoring....but so does seemingly everybody else, which makes me think it could be the under play.

 

[Billy Ball Thorton]

The Giants are a lock -13.5 vs Bengals.

I would disagree 110% with this. This is a sucker bet.

 

[Penguin]

The more I look, the more I'm convinced that this is a nice "vacation" week....

I agree, I don't see anything I really like, and I've been looking all week.

 

[JohnnyU]

The Giants are a lock -13.5 vs Bengals.

I would disagree 110% with this. This is a sucker bet.

You're probably right. I'm not worth a crap at picking games by point spread. Good thing I don't gamble on games

 

[Routilla]

Giants, Patriots and Titans all cover.

I hope no one was listening to me, lol.

 

[BusterTBronco]

This is for $$$$. I would like your inputs on this week 3 PICK. You may state your case for your fellow FBG's .Here we go.Broncos -5.5 Saints defense depleted, Cutler and the crew will easily cover @ home. Cha Ching

Good call, dude. How'd that Denver game work out for ya?

 

[teamroc]

The Giants are a lock -13.5 vs Bengals.

I would disagree 110% with this. This is a sucker bet.

You're probably right. I'm not worth a crap at picking games by point spread. Good thing I don't gamble on games

Should have probably let people know that BEFORE they bet the money.

 

[fasteddie_21]

Surprised to not read the only strong game of the entire weekend. Balt -2.

 

[teamroc]

This is for $$$$. I would like your inputs on this week 3 PICK. You may state your case for your fellow FBG's .Here we go.Broncos -5.5 Saints defense depleted, Cutler and the crew will easily cover @ home. Cha Ching

Cha Ching? Oh you meant Cha Ching for Vegas. I thought it was a personal Cha Ching. My bad.