<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Even if a team went over 16 games in a row, its odds of going under next game is 50-50..
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
rarely is a sporting event 50/50 IMO.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Whether a team goes over or under a total is not a statistical 50-50 prop like flipping a coin, subject to balancing out over several million random games the way you expect a coin toss to.
The line is designed to attract two way action, not reflect the actual game result, therefore it just has to be set appropriately to generate that action, REGARDLESS of outcome.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I tend to agree with this. However, a lot of lines are not designed to get even action, some are designed to get one-sided on a number that is fair or even shaded the wrong way. Some LVSC numbers are not significant in regards to the actual outcome of an event, they are offered b/c they know they will get the best action for the house. One can argue this either way until they are blue in the face. No one is right or wrong, I enjoy reading other people's opinions as do many others. I feel there are two things at work in situations like this: 1. team mentality-- teams that usually play overs have that sort of gameplan in a lot of cases, they may try to outscore the opp. b/c they have a weak defense. 2. generally the numbers offered on a team that plays over are inflated until they hit an under. Rams two or three years ago hit a total of over 60 I believe. This topic can get so complicated that I forget what I am trying to say, and for me this one is difficult to put into words to begin with. I usually ride streaks if I am on a streak from the beginning, but I guage value and wager accordingly. I usually bet against streaks (like MINN today) if I have not been on it, I usually see value on the other side.