Betting Talk

2015 Football

BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
edited February 2016 in Sports Betting
Life Update:
I don't even know where to begin. I'll have to write another book one day because things have been more surreal than I ever could have imagined them being.
Made three small bets tonight. I want to update here more, but I have no idea ho frequent it can be.
142 TCU-Minny under 56.5 (-105)
146 Ohio-Idaho under 57 (-106)
148 UTSA-Arizona under 60 (-118)
«1

Comments

  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited September 2015
    210 Ohio State/VA Tech under 53 (ev)
  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited September 2015
    Pitt-NE under 50 1/2 (-109)
  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited September 2015
    Going against all public favorites.

    Redskins +4 (-105)
    Raiders +3 (-113)
    Jaguars +3 (-110)

    Love
  • kanekane Senior Member
    edited September 2015
    GL Benny, I'm with you on Oak and Jax
  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited September 2015
    More home dogs. I'm betting very small these days. I'm worried that I don't have it any more. If I ever did.
    Redskins +3 +109
    Raiders +4 1/2 -105
    Jaguars +6 (-108)

    Also might be moving to Memphis soon. So if anyone here is familiar with that area, please let me know.
  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited September 2015
    478 Titans +3 (+105)
    Colts are nowhere near as good as they were last year, and now they get a short week with travel to play a division opponent on their home opener. Tenny's win over Tampa looks a lot more impressive after the Bucs beat the Saints last week.

    488 Detroit +3 (+105)
    Denver off a miracle win and cover traveling to play a game they don't have to win. It's hard to tell how good Detroit is, but they should be the more motivated team here.

    469 New Orleans +10
    Too much of an overreaction to the Brees injury.
  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    258 Tampa +3 (ev)
    Covers has Carolina as being the team with the largest percentage of public money on them. Tampa should be the more motivated team here.

    264 Redskins 3 (-114)
    No public money coming in on Washington. I'm just not sold on the Eagles or their philosophy; generally, whenever a team with a losing record is laying points on the road, you have to put me in a straightjacket to keep me from betting against it.

    252 Miami +1 1/2
    I don't think I've ever won a bet on the London game. These are two teams off a bad loss, but Miami seems like the one more likely to rebound in a must win game for them. If this game had been played three weeks ago, Dolphins would have been favored. Fitzpatrick's career record as a starter is 35-56.
    Worth a small bet.
  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    466 Cincy -3 (-123)
    I can't even remember the last time I bet a favorite in an NFL game. Late to the party, but Seattle has the short week to travel for a 10 am start in a game they don't have to win. I watched the Monday night game closely, and their offensive line looked horrible. A great part of their offense is Russell Wilson creating things out of thin air through scrambling. They were lucky to get 13 points against a Detroit team that's nothing special, and with Lynch out, have to think Cincy's defense comes up in a big way here.

    Also like 461 Saints at +6, and 469/470 under 50 (bookmaker). Too tired to do write ups.
  • kanekane Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    466 Cincy -3 (-123)
    I can't even remember the last time I bet a favorite in an NFL game. Late to the party, but Seattle has the short week to travel for a 10 am start in a game they don't have to win. I watched the Monday night game closely, and their offensive line looked horrible. A great part of their offense is Russell Wilson creating things out of thin air through scrambling. They were lucky to get 13 points against a Detroit team that's nothing special, and with Lynch out, have to think Cincy's defense comes up in a big way here.

    Also like 461 Saints at +6, and 469/470 under 50 (bookmaker). Too tired to do write ups.

    I'm saying the same exact thing Benny, I very rarely play a favorite, but I'm on the Bengals today, gotta back my boy Andy Dalton
  • Dr. HDr. H Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    kane wrote: »
    I'm saying the same exact thing Benny, I very rarely play a favorite, but I'm on the Bengals today, gotta back my boy Andy Dalton

    http://www.bettingtalk.com/forum/showthread.php/178098-Andy-Dalton?highlight=dalton

    http://www.bettingtalk.com/forum/showthread.php/177019-Andy-Dalton?highlight=dalton
  • kanekane Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    C'mon Jeff, wasn't it obvious my statement was dripping with sarcasm. He has played very well so far, then again, it isn't playoff time yet
  • Dr. HDr. H Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    kane wrote: »
    C'mon Jeff, wasn't it obvious my statement was dripping with sarcasm. He has played very well so far, then again, it isn't playoff time yet

    Right, let's overlook his entire body of work and focus on those 3 playoff games. I forgot.
  • kanekane Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    Dr. H wrote: »
    Right, let's overlook his entire body of work and focus on those 3 playoff games. I forgot.

    His entire body of work doesn't impress me, it isn't just the playoffs. Like I said, he's been great this year, it's his fifth season and he seems to be clicking on all cylinders, if the Dalton I've seen so far is the Dalton we'll see moving forward, then good for him for improving his game and the Bengals are SB contenders if he keeps playing like he has. BTW, it's 4 playoff games and he's been brutal in every one of them
  • Dr. HDr. H Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    Oh well forgive me. If it's been 4, then he's clearly a choker.

    You preach "give him time" everywhere else, just interesting that it's different with him . No skin off my back, though. GL!
  • kanekane Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    Dr. H wrote: »
    Oh well forgive me. If it's been 4, then he's clearly a choker.

    You preach "give him time" everywhere else, just interesting that it's different with him . No skin off my back, though. GL!

    First off, I was just informing you that he's been brutal in 4, not 3 playoff games, had I made that mistake, I'm sure you would have corrected me as well. Second, this is his fifth season, I've given him plenty of time, this isn't a coach in his second year with a team that everyone wants fired, like Sark or Strong. I've never been a Dalton fan, but I didn't judge him after one season, it's been four years, and like I said, it looks like he's turned the corner this year, he's been great so far. Everyone down here wants Al Golden fired, I was his biggest defender for the past couple of years, imploring fans to give him some time, but now he's been here five years, and I'm off the Golden bandwagon, I now agree with everyone, he needs to go, five years is long enough to give a coach, but I waited until this year to finally change my mind about him, I can no longer defend him, he needs to go. If Dalton plays anywhere close to how he's played this year, well obviously my thoughts regarding him will change
  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    1729 is the natural number following 1728 and preceding 1730. 1729 is known as the Hardy–Ramanujan number after a famous anecdote of the British mathematician G. H. Hardy regarding a visit to the hospital to see the Indian mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan. In Hardy's words:[1][2][3]

    “ I remember once going to see him when he was ill at Putney. I had ridden in taxi cab number 1729 and remarked that the number seemed to me rather a dull one, and that I hoped it was not an unfavorable omen. "No," he replied, "it is a very interesting number; it is the smallest number expressible as the sum of two cubes in two different ways." ”
    The two different ways are these:

    1729 = 13 + 123 = 93 + 103
    The quotation is sometimes expressed using the term "positive cubes", since allowing negative perfect cubes (the cube of a negative integer) gives the smallest solution as 91 (which is a divisor of 1729):

    91 = 63 + (−5)3 = 43 + 33
    Numbers that are the smallest number that can be expressed as the sum of two cubes in n distinct ways[4] have been dubbed "taxicab numbers". The number was also found in one of Ramanujan's notebooks dated years before the incident, and was noted by Fr?nicle de Bessy in 1657.

    The same expression defines 1729 as the first in the sequence of "Fermat near misses" (sequence A050794 in OEIS) defined as numbers of the form 1 + z3 which are also expressible as the sum of two other cubes.
    1729 is also the third Carmichael number and the first absolute Euler pseudoprime. It is also a sphenic number.

    1729 is a Zeisel number. It is a centered cube number, as well as a dodecagonal number, a 24-gonal and 84-gonal number.

    Investigating pairs of distinct integer-valued quadratic forms that represent every integer the same number of times, Schiemann found that such quadratic forms must be in four or more variables, and the least possible discriminant of a four-variable pair is 1729 (Guy 2004).

    Because in base 10 the number 1729 is divisible by the sum of its digits, it is a Harshad number. It also has this property in octal (1729 = 33018, 3 + 3 + 0 + 1 = 7) and hexadecimal (1729 = 6C116, 6 + C + 1 = 1910), but not in binary.

    In base 12, 1729 is written as 1001, so its reciprocal has only period 6 in that base.

    1729 has another mildly interesting property: the 1729th decimal place is the beginning of the first consecutive occurrence of all ten digits without repetition in the decimal representation of the transcendental number e.[5]

    Masahiko Fujiwara showed that 1729 is one of four positive integers (with the others being 81, 1458, and the trivial case 1) which, when its digits are added together, produces a sum which, when multiplied by its reversal, yields the original number:

    1 + 7 + 2 + 9 = 19
    19 ? 91 = 1729
    It suffices only to check sums congruent to 0 or 1 (mod 9) up to 19.
  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    104 Saints-Falcons under 52 (bookmaker)
    269 Chargers +10 1/2
    274 Colts +7 1/2
  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    Every now and then, I go nuts and severely overbet a game. Today is such a day. Saints-Falcons under 52 1/2 for a large one.
  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    Took a chance with Pittsburgh at +4.
    Arizona off a blow-out win and playing a 2nd consecutive road game with a 10 am start time.
  • ricodotricodot Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    Hannah storm mentioned on sportscenter that Arizona had spent time at the greenbrier resort in west Virginia this week. your body clock analysis may be wrong. love your write-ups. gl
  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    304 San Francisco +6 1/2
    I'm not even going to wait for the touts on this one, even though I'm sure they're all going to sell Seattle on the "must win game" angle. It's a short week to travel and lay points, and Seattle is off a very tough loss. They're better than their record, but they're just not as good as last year's team. 49ers have beaten two teams at home this year, and should be able to get enough of a running game to keep this close. It's been a one-sided rivalry ever since their Super Bowl year, so have to think this is the biggest game of the season, and they should be the more motivated team. Just for fun, I'll call for a 20-17 final.
  • BuckyBadgerBuckyBadger Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    Well, you had the 20 right Benny. I, also didn't think SF would be that totally inept offensively
  • kanekane Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    The Niners trailed 20-3 with 3 minutes left and had fourth down and 3 at about their own 30, and for reasons I'll never understand, they punted. I couldn't believe they wouldn't go for it, but chose to punt instead. When asked about his decision to punt in that spot, Tomsula said, "We were playing for field position". Quite possibly the dumbest fucking thing I've ever heard a coach say in a post game press conference ever
  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited October 2015
    462 Detroit +2
    It seems like the tough loss to the Cowboys in the playoffs was several years ago, but Detroit is still off an 11-5 season last year, and after some hard luck in the first month of the season, they finally might be ready to start regressing to the mean. Minnesota hasn't won a road game this year (small sample size lol), but still don't think they're good enough to lay points on the road in a division rivalry.

    453 Browns +6 1/2
    Rams have won two games this year, beating the Seahawks by 3 and Cards by 2. The line seems too big because it's the team with the worst rushing defense going against a team that ran for 191 yards against Green Bay in their last game. Have to think Cleveland is going game plan to do everything to stop the run and make Foles beat them. He's ranked 30th in total QBR and off a 4 int game, so it's difficult to make a case that he comes up big here. Cleveland should keep it close in the game that will probably have the lowest tv rating.

    475 Baltimore +10 (-123)
    Baltimore is the most underachieving team of the year so far. The biggest loss they've had this year was by 6 on opening day to undefeated Denver. Arizona off a bad loss to Pittsburgh where they abandoned their running game but still threw for 421 yards. Baltimore won their trip to Pittsburgh, so transitive handicapping says the two teams here are closer in talent than the line indicates.
    Ravens should be able to keep this close.
  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited November 2015
    262 Cleveland +6
    West goes east to play a 10 am start after playing on Monday night.

    272 Cowboys +4 1/2
    Missed the line move but still love Dallas after the way they ran the ball against the Giants.

    274 Broncos +3 (-125)
    This is either a trap, or the most mislined game of the year. Broncos shouldn't be a home underdog against anyone except the Patriots.

    If I have to watch one more commercial for Directv, I am going to scream. Therefore, I will scream tomorrow at 10:07 am.
  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited November 2015
    464 Carolina +134
    466 49ers +7 1/2 (-120)
    472 Dallas +3
  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited November 2015
    273 Cardinals +3
    More of a hunch bet than anything else. I've watched several Arizona games, and they look solid. They're a very strong fundamental team that doesn't have any obvious weaknesses. Seattle is still overrated; they just don't look they have the same hunger of the last two years. Both teams should be very motivated, as a Cardinal win gives them a substantial lead in the division race. This has all the makings of a game decided on the last play, so taking three has to be the r right move.

    272 Giants +7 1/2
    The last time I watched these teams play, I was in a monastery near Milwaukee. Now, I'm in my new house in Memphis. Hard to believe how much my life has changed since then. I don't buy the revenge game angle here. New England is coasting, while the Giants are in a fight to win one of the weaker divisions in football, so NY should be the more motivated team. They actually have the third best offense, so there's plenty of potential for a back door cover.

    256 Titans +4
    Underwraps beat me to this one. One pro I know loves to say that the more motivated team always covers the spread. The trick is being able to identify who's more motivated. It's an enormous due-down spot for Carolina.a after the way their last two games ended. Titans look they turned a major corner last week.
  • BennyProfaneBennyProfane Senior Member
    edited November 2015
    464 Green Bay/Minnesota Under 44 1/2
    I rarely bet totals since I've never used stats to handicap. Everything about the feel of this game suggests an under. Three straight losses for the Packers, and in all three games, their running game was non-existent. Minnesota is very much a run first, throw second team, and it's hard to imagine that'll change this week. With the forecast calling for a cold, windy day, there should be a high number of running plays. These teams know each other's playbooks, and there won't be any surprises.

    469 Cincinnati +5
    Very interesting inter-conference game that probably would have been hyped as a potential Super Bowl matchup if the Bengals had pulled out the Monday nighter.
    Bengals off a disappointing performance, and now get to travel to a tough venue. Recreational bettors can only remember the last game, and they always expect teams to play exactly the same way two weeks in a row. Zona is off one of the biggest regular season wins since moving from St. Louis, so have to think this a major due down spot for them. The bottom line is that these two teams are almost identical talent wise, and last week's results have given a small amount of line value.

    474 Chargers +3 (+105)
    Two underachieving teams. KC's win last week was more a product of Denver weakness than Chief strength. Manning played through too much pain. The bye should have helped the Chargers; It's hard to know where they are. Five straight losses, all of which were one-possession games. They're 2-7, but it's too early in the season for them to have given up. They should be focused enough after the bye to play well against a division opponent.
  • kanekane Senior Member
    edited November 2015
    I'm with you on the Bengals and Chargers, GL Benny
Sign In or Register to comment.