So I figured out why that ref crew was working that game

[djmika760]

keep telling yourself that, jerkoff...by Friday you'll have the Dolts winning that game by 3 TD's. Idiot.

You fail to address the topic which, once again, shows your lack of knowledge for anything. Your rants reflect the frustration of your own stupidity. I pity you.

 

[mgcolby]

I'm sorry quigon but you are wrong on this. Although the books strive for even money it doesn't work and as discussed in another thread there are times the books don't want even money and they use the lines to encourage the public to bet on the team they think will lose (its a bigger windfall, the juice and the winnings).

Here is a link to the money on the Pats last week. This site tracks the public on every game. Last week it was Pats 75% and the Colts 25%. The books raked in the dough last week after getting killed by the Pats for the past 8 weeks.

http://www.sports.com/vegaslines/lines_nfl.html

 

[mgcolby]

the line never budged from 5...check it out if you don't believe me

now excuse me, I think I see some strange lights in my backyard

It opened at 4 and got as high as 6 in some places, but it held steady for most of the week at 5.5

here is a link check it out if you don't believe me.

http://www.scoresandodds.com/grid_20071104.html

 

[Joker]

You fail to address the topic which, once again, shows your lack of knowledge for anything. Your rants reflect the frustration of your own stupidity. I pity you.

what topic? Your ridiculous takes on those penalties??What about the NON CALLS that were so blatant Simms immediately brought it up?..The Faulk tackle in the open field? Ring a bell, ding dong Dimka?

Take your Peytie blow-up doll back to Indy Star and get yourself some autosatisfaction

 

[mgcolby]

Alright Mulder... What a crack-pot theory.

NE-T.Warren, Neutral Zone Infraction, 5 yards - WARRANTED
NE-A.Samuel, Defensive Pass Interference, 37 yards - QUESTIONABLE
NE-R.Harrison, Illegal Contact, 5 yards - WARRANTED
NE-E.Hobbs, Defensive Pass Interference, 40 yards - Ridiculous
NE-K.Brady, Illegal Formation, declined - WARRANTED
NE-M.Light, Personal Foul, 15 yards - WARRANTED
NE-D.Koppen, Ineligible Downfield Pass, 5 yards - WARRANTED
NE-W.Andrews, Unsportsmanlike Conduct, 9 yards - WARRANTED (THEY MISSED AN OBVIOUS HOLD ON THAT PLAY, VRABEL HAD HIS ARM HELD ONTO BY A COLT BLOCKER WITH BOTH HANDS FOR ABOUT THREE YARDS)
NE-M.Light, Unsportsmanlike Conduct, 15 yards - WARRANTED
NE-R.Moss, Offensive Pass Interference, 10 yards - RIDICULOUS (hardly a setback on this drive)
NE-R.Harrison, Delay of Game, 5 yards - WARRANTED

Indy had a chance to create a lengthy drive that would wind down the clock but picked up 2 penalties that created a 3rd-and-29 which came to be their demise. If the refs favored indy then why would they collect 2 penalties at the most crucial time?

A couple of bad calls...yes. A vast conspiracy to bring down the pats...no. NE played a good game and deserved to win. The paranoia is getting the best of some of the fans though.

I fixed your post for you.

I don't believe it was a conspiracy but you are definitly missing a lot of the bad calls and the non-calls.

Wrong spot after the 2nd down (the play prior to Addai's run).
Forcing us to use a challenge on an obvious catch out of bounds.
Harrison being pulled down by Clarke..etc...

 

[djmika760]

You fail to address the topic which, once again, shows your lack of knowledge for anything. Your rants reflect the frustration of your own stupidity. I pity you.

what topic? Your ridiculous takes on those penalties??What about the NON CALLS that were so blatant Simms immediately brought it up?..The Faulk tackle in the open field? Ring a bell, ding dong Dimka?

Take your Peytie blow-up doll back to Indy Star and get yourself some autosatisfaction

Oh yeah so that proves the conspiracy. Did you consult michael moore before coming up with that one? You are more of a farce than insulting. Keep up the good work!

 

[djmika760]

I fixed your post for you.

I don't believe it was a conspiracy but you are definitly missing a lot of the bad calls and the non-calls.

Wrong spot after the 2nd down (the play prior to Addai's run).
Forcing us to use a challenge on an obvious catch out of bounds.
Harrison being pulled down by Clarke..etc...

I didn't have time to go through every play. The point was that there is no conspiracy in which you, and most intelligent fans agree. Joker is just what his name implies...a joke. I think these theories are really hilarious! Keep it up choker!

 

[loosebearing]

In baseball there is a strike zone defined by the rulebook
However, each umpire has his own definition of what it is. As long as this freedom of interpretation is placed equally on each team is all that pitchers and batters ask.

So, I ask again (since people only read the last page of a thread) - if the calls on Hobbs and Harrison and Moss were interpretations by the crew, then how can they not call defensive PI on the Faulk play and offensive PI on the play were Dallas Clark tackled Harrison in the endzone. I submitt it isn't the calls - it's that they weren't judged with the same aggressiveness from both sides of the ball. Those two non calls in context to the numerous calls were egregious

 

[Joker]

You can spew all the garbage you want, Dimmy but that doesn't change the FACT that the game was a travesty as far as the calls went. Only blind bat Indy homers would even think of arguing that. That's why there's the Indy Star board, so wackenhuts like you can congregate and not INFECT the rest of unsuspecting cyberspace.

 

[djmika760]

You can spew all the garbage you want, Dimmy but that doesn't change the FACT that the game was a travesty as far as the calls went. Only blind bat Indy homers would even think of arguing that. That's why there's the Indy Star board, so wackenhuts like you can congregate and not INFECT the rest of unsuspecting cyberspace.

"Dimmy"? Ooookaaaaay??

I am definitely NOT an indy fan. The thing that gets me is the conspiracy that "wackenhuts" (as you would say) like you come up with. You are a crack-pot who has nothing intelligent to say.

 

[QuiGon]

I'm sorry quigon but you are wrong on this.

Actually, no I am not.

Although the books strive for even money it doesn't work and as discussed in another thread there are times the books don't want even money and they use the lines to encourage the public to bet on the team they think will lose (its a bigger windfall, the juice and the winnings).

Actually, no they don't. They didn't build all them big buildings in the desert by taking chances. I've said it before and I'll say it again: The casinos don't gamble. They hedge their bets and the odds so that either way, they win.

Here is a link to the money on the Pats last week. This site tracks the public on every game. Last week it was Pats 75% and the Colts 25%. The books raked in the dough last week after getting killed by the Pats for the past 8 weeks.

That website looks like it is run by an 8 year old. I find it quite difficult to believe that they are able to accurately track the amounts being wagered on each side in the Vegas sportsbooks.

I mean, according to that link you gave me, right now 95% of people are betting on the Cowboys (giving 1 point) to beat the Giants. Bullsh*t - you can't get 95% of people to agree the sky is blue let alone on who is going to win a football game.

 

[mgcolby]

Actually, no I am not.Actually, no they don't. They didn't build all them big buildings in the desert by taking chances. I've said it before and I'll say it again: The casinos don't gamble. They hedge their bets and the odds so that either way, they win.
That website looks like it is run by an 8 year old. I find it quite difficult to believe that they are able to accurately track the amounts being wagered on each side in the Vegas sportsbooks.

I mean, according to that link you gave me, right now 95% of people are betting on the Cowboys (giving 1 point) to beat the Giants. Bullsh*t - you can't get 95% of people to agree the sky is blue let alone on who is going to win a football game.

So, I provide you a link that tracks the public and you dispute it with "I don't believe it". Good job.

If NE was favored over St Louis by 1 point you don't think 95% of the public would be on it? I mean after all "you can't get 95% of people to agree the sky is blue let alone on who is going to win a football game."

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

So, I provide you a link that tracks the public and you dispute it with "I don't believe it". Good job.

Response edited out of existence.

People are going to believe what they want to believe. Enjoy this thread those still participating.

 

[mgcolby]

Well considering sportsbookspy.com has the public at 80% on the Cowboys gives me two examples against your beliefs. Not sure if this link will work as you need to sign up (free) to see it.

http://www.sportsbookspy.com/eventlistauto.aspx?sport_id=1

 

[QuiGon]

So, I provide you a link that tracks the public and you dispute it with "I don't believe it". Good job.

Well, when the website looks like it was designed by an 8 year old, yeah I doubt the accuracy of the content. I don't even see anything in that website that supports the statement you've made.

If NE was favored over St Louis by 1 point you don't think 95% of the public would be on it? I mean after all "you can't get 95% of people to agree the sky is blue let alone on who is going to win a football game."

Ah, but that isn't what the status is here... we're talking about a 7-1 team on the road against a 6-2 team with virtually no spread. Don't sit there and tell me 95% of the betting public agrees the Cowboys will win that game.

 

[QuiGon]

Response edited out of existence.

People are going to believe what they want to believe. Enjoy this thread those still participating.

Dude, I read you response before you deleted it. It clear, extremely well written and made complete sense. You shouldn't deprive us of your wisdom..!!

The funny this is that the sports.com link just doesn't make sense... according to the link he gave me, the Chiefs opened as a 4 point favorite over the Broncos but the line has moved to 3. That implies that people are choosing Denver. But the very same link says that 73% of the people are taking Kansas City.

There are multiple examples on that one page of this phenomenon, where the data simply contradicts itself.

It just doesn't make sense and these people are too clueless to even realize it..!!

 

[mgcolby]

The link is absurd. Absolutely absurd.

According to this link, 100 percent of the money bet on the over under on the Denver/Kansas City game by the "public" has been bet on the under.

Not even one little dollar bet on the over?

Please.

And this is only one example on this ludicrous list.

The web site you have provided is that of a sports betting site from an off-shore company, located in, of all places, Malta. The notion that they would have confidential betting information for how bets are being placed in Las Vegas a full 21 days before that information has to be disclosed to the gaming authority is freaking absurd, as are the "trends" they have posted, which are probably designed to attract people to the site with "locks." (Not saying this company is not a legit off-shore betting operation. It may very well be highly reputable and deliver on what it says it will do. I have no idea. I'm just saying the notion that they have found some way to obtain this information is very unlikely.)

Come on. Casinos don't gamble. Every single game in Vegas is designed to preserve the house a 5 to 10 percent edge no matter what outcome happens. Point spreads are designed to do the exact same thing. The notion that casinos take a stake in sports outcomes is so fundamentally inconsistent with how they otherwise do business that you're revealing yourself for having no idea what you're talking about. But, if you're really going to promote this absurd idea and pretend you know what you're talking about, let me ask you this: Have you ever seen the S.E.C. filings by these entities? You might want to take a look at how they disclose their sports book operations to their investors. Or is part of the vast conspiracy that apparently involves the refs that they also commit securities fraud that the DOJ and SEC are too dumb to figure out, but this Matla betting company has it all figured out?

They're off shore betting what does the S.E.C have to do with them? Do you think the majority of football money bet is done in Vegas or online? How many people fly to Vegas to make a $200 bet?

Yet the lines the offshore books use are in toe with Vegas, but you are absolutely sure that the public play in Vegas is different the public play online. What proof do you have? Other than you are a self credited expert on this issue and I, in your opinion am a dolt?

I don't bet at this site but use it and one other to gauge the public. But don't let me explain it, because this explains it much better.




"The linemaker is concerned about public perception because even though the line is designed to even the monetary action on wagers bet in the real world, that is not the case, as sports books always get stuck sitting on one side or the other. For simplicity's sake I will use a typical NFL Sunday as an example. Let's say there are thirteen games on an NFL Sunday, a sports book will have little betting action on four of those thirteen games, even money action on five of those thirteen games, where both sides are bet equally, and four games where the casino is sitting on one side of a game, as the public has made a one-sided wager on a particular team they favor. The linemaker has to win half of those four games where the public has bet on one-side to make money for the casino. In this example that means the casino has to win two of the four games the public has significant one-sided wagers on. So the linemaker is very concerned about public perception, as he wants to beat the public on these four games if possible and get at least half of them in the long run."

Source:
http://www.winnersedgeonline.com/point-spread-made.html

 

[QuiGon]

They're off shore betting what does the S.E.C have to do with them? Do you think the majority of football money bet is done in Vegas or online? How many people fly to Vegas to make a $200 bet?

I'll bet you there's a hell of a lot more money wagered in Vegas than on "sports.com"...

"The linemaker is concerned about public perception because even though the line is designed to even the monetary action on wagers bet in the real world, that is not the case, as sports books always get stuck sitting on one side or the other.

A small sportsbook can certainly get screwed... especially a local bookie where everyone favors the home team... There's miles of difference between some small sportsbook having irregular betting on a game versus it funnelling all the way up to Vegas so they put the fix in.

I ask this question before and no one has responded to it: There certainly have been gambling scandals in sports, starting with the Black Sox scandal and going all the way to Tim Donaghy. Which of those scandals involved illicit activity by a casino...?

 

[emoney_33]

I'll bet you there's a hell of a lot more money wagered in Vegas than on "sports.com"...
A small sportsbook can certainly get screwed... especially a local bookie where everyone favors the home team... There's miles of difference between some small sportsbook having irregular betting on a game versus it funnelling all the way up to Vegas so they put the fix in.

I ask this question before and no one has responded to it: There certainly have been gambling scandals in sports, starting with the Black Sox scandal and going all the way to Tim Donaghy. Which of those scandals involved illicit activity by a casino...?

Enough of this whole thing. Quit acting like you know everything as well. Stop arguing it, just prove you are right with some facts, since you have to have the FACTS if you are so sure of yourself, right?


Hey the mafia is in on it!! lol But for real, I'm not saying a casino IS in on it, but if they were to be in on something, they have more than enough resources so that it never gets back to them.


Anyway, bottom line for me is I dont' believe for one second that the calls were innocent. Why they weren't or who was in on anything to do with it... we'll never know.

 

[mgcolby]

I'll bet you there's a hell of a lot more money wagered in Vegas than on "sports.com"...
A small sportsbook can certainly get screwed... especially a local bookie where everyone favors the home team... There's miles of difference between some small sportsbook having irregular betting on a game versus it funnelling all the way up to Vegas so they put the fix in.

I ask this question before and no one has responded to it: There certainly have been gambling scandals in sports, starting with the Black Sox scandal and going all the way to Tim Donaghy. Which of those scandals involved illicit activity by a casino...?

I never said anything about a fix. I simply stated that Vegas is not always looking for even money, especially on every game not to mention its not practical.

One other thing, you were only looking at the money on the spread not the total on ML as well, its also only Wednesday. But what is the point of arguing if all you have is what you believe.