Betting Talk

Rook and the NBA Moneyline

12346»

Comments

  • rookrook Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    W Timberwolves -150 vs Cavaliers ($66.67)
    W Lakers -1600 vs Pistons ($6.25)
    W Clippers . -380 vs Knicks ($26.32)

    Record 67-18 ($100 per bet)
    +$352.30 total winnings (avg winning per bet: +$352.30 / 85 = +$4.14 per bet)
  • rookrook Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    Today’s bets:
    Celtics -315 vs Wizards ($31.75)
    Mavericks -500 vs Bulls ($20.00)
    Bucks . -383 vs Spurs ($26.11)
    Pacers -240 Vs Hornets ($41.67)
  • rookrook Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    L Celtics -315 vs Wizards ($31.75)
    W Mavericks -500 vs Bulls ($20.00)
    L Bucks . -383 vs Spurs ($26.11)
    W Pacers -240 Vs Hornets ($41.67)

    Record 69-20 ($100 per bet)
    +$213.97 total winnings (avg winning per bet: +$213.97 / 89 = +$2.40 per bet)
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    What happened to you Rook?
  • rookrook Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    danshan wrote: »
    What happened to you Rook?

    Absorbed a couple of multi-unit losses, probably cause of the dog days, so I am re-emphasizing focus on my regular betting and letting the moneyline experiment slide for a few days...

    Watching Celtics vs Seventysixers like a hawk today, and if the Celtics show the same lack of enthusiasm hey showed vs the Spurs, I’m putting a bunch of units on the Seventysixers...
  • jets96jets96 Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    fwiw i put little on the 6ers
  • rookrook Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    That’s good to know. What did you calculate for the line for that game?
  • jets96jets96 Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    phila 1.30 but there was another reason
  • rookrook Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    What was the other reason? Somebody is betting on the Celtics, they are at +1.5 now. It could be they were so lackadaisical the last couple of games because they were gearing up for this game in particular. So if the game starts and froth is oozing from their mouths, I might need to do a 180 and bet the Celtics...
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    rook wrote: »
    What was the other reason? Somebody is betting on the Celtics, they are at +1.5 now. It could be they were so lackadaisical the last couple of games because they were gearing up for this game in particular. So if the game starts and froth is oozing from their mouths, I might need to do a 180 and bet the Celtics...

    you really think those things are true and effect the game?
  • rookrook Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    Effort? Yes, effort frequently makes the difference between winning/losing, covering/not covering...
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    I highly doubt they have non effort days but I see the thought process.

    I have the 76ers at pickem on my model with Embiid out
  • rookrook Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    No, it’s more subtle than effort/non-effort...it’s just a few percentage points more or less effort, like the difference between running quickly under a screen to catch up with the player you are guarding, or fighting around the edge of the screener like a maniac so that you never really lose contact with the player you are guarding...
  • jets96jets96 Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    a subset thats hitting at about 65 %, for a long time...
  • danshandanshan Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    rook wrote: »
    No, it’s more subtle than effort/non-effort...it’s just a few percentage points more or less effort, like the difference between running quickly under a screen to catch up with the player you are guarding, or fighting around the edge of the screener like a maniac so that you never really lose contact with the player you are guarding...

    interesting seems like that would make all power rankings and modeling worthless if thats true.
  • rookrook Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    I don’t think so at all. The effort factor is just more granular. The models and power rankings are more general, showing the boundaries of how well and how poorly players are expected to perform and somewhere between those boundaries is the overall expectation for these players. The players’ effort level rarely takes them beyond those boundaries but helps dictate whether they perform more toward the better side of those boundaries or more toward the worse side.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I snuck 2 units on the Seventysixers at -2 at halftime (which is +5 for the game). I got the impression the Celtics were tiring a little...
  • rookrook Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    And, also, since the power rankings and modeling have decreed that the Seventysixers lose by 1.5 points, +5 seems like a bargain deal...
  • rookrook Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    Sorry they decreed that the Celtics would lose by 1.5 points.
  • jets96jets96 Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    i hope you sided with me , they taught us in school when taking tests, always go with your first choice.
    I hope you made out brother
  • rookrook Senior Member
    edited January 2020
    jets96 wrote: »
    i hope you sided with me , they taught us in school when taking tests, always go with your first choice.
    I hope you made out brother

    Looking at it live the Celtics from the start looked fully competent, so I held off. But as the first half started to close there were a bunch of Celtics shots clanking that had been dropping in just a few minutes earlier. So at the half I put 2 units on the Seventysixers at -2 which was the equivalent of +5 for the game. Deep in the fourth quarter the Celtics got within a couple points and I opened up a middle by putting 2 more units on the Celtics at +2. But bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush...
Sign In or Register to comment.