I like the Cubs in this one also. That said, The Reds are playing better lately. I've seen Harang absolutly dominate a few games this year. And when hes on, hes a decent match for Kerry Wood. Wood is somewhat overrated IMO. And the Reds are as bad as they come on the road, but are decent at Great American. Im staying away from this game.
A Lock or the word obvious doesn't exist this Season in Baseball !
Hello everybody,
just want to say you better delete the word obvious in your mind when it comes to betting baseball. You remember the Seattle/Angels game? A body lost 10 Dimes betting everytime on the Angels. He said it is not possible that a crappy team like Seattle beat the Angels 3 times on their ground. He said it is absolutely impossible. And i think everybody knows what happened. I also thought that a team like the Angels could never loose 3 times at home against a crappy team like Seattle. I was just lucky that i never bet heavy favs, no matter who is playing. And i could name you a lot of other examples. Just remember Tampa Bay/Yankees. And i don't think Seattle is much better than the Reds or that the Cubs are much better than Angels.
Just my two cents
cheers
Hello everybody,
just want to say you better delete the word obvious in your mind when it comes to betting baseball. You remember the Seattle/Angels game? A body lost 10 Dimes betting everytime on the Angels. He said it is not possible that a crappy team like Seattle beat the Angels 3 times on their ground. He said it is absolutely impossible. And i think everybody knows what happened. I also thought that a team like the Angels could never loose 3 times at home against a crappy team like Seattle. I was just lucky that i never bet heavy favs, no matter who is playing. And i could name you a lot of other examples. Just remember Tampa Bay/Yankees. And i don't think Seattle is much better than the Reds or that the Cubs are much better than Angels.
Just my two cents
cheers
Clip Joint said:
Harang is pitching another great game at home. It really is a shame how many leads their bullpen has blown for this guy. He has pitched well enough to be a 10 game winner already this season.
He is 3-4 with a 2.90 ERA (and dropping with the way he is pitching today) at home in 9 starts.
He might not need the bullpen today with the way he is pitching. Scoreless through 6 with only 2 hits.
Guys, I know this is after the fact, but like Kojak said way above up there early before the game....maybe a trap. Guys, I"m not talking about this game because it is late in the game. I'm talking about that Houston game that Kojak referenced. I saw that as a trap too. Clemens getting 'no respect?' Great value for Houston there. GREAT value.
I am getting much better at this business (if you would please ignore my two days of picks this week it would help my argument) and when something looks unbelievably able to win without fret, it is a losing bet not many, but MOST of the time. More than 50 out of 100 times. I really, really, really believe in the 'trap' line set by oddsmakers. They don't want normal return on those. They want to pull in extra money and earn more than vig. They are gambling on the outcome, sure. BUT, I really believe the trap exists and I think this was one of them, but of course the game is late and it is easy for me to say...I just saw this thread. I will say that forgetting this game...the last trap play that I recognized was the Houston/St. Louis game with Clemens pitching for Houston.
Anywho, I ramble, I know, but I'm letting angst go by typing as I am getting my ass handed my by the KC Royals and I would like to think that the Indians was a trap play but they weren't....they were too highly priced for the trap! I'm just an idiot. tulsa
I am getting much better at this business (if you would please ignore my two days of picks this week it would help my argument) and when something looks unbelievably able to win without fret, it is a losing bet not many, but MOST of the time. More than 50 out of 100 times. I really, really, really believe in the 'trap' line set by oddsmakers. They don't want normal return on those. They want to pull in extra money and earn more than vig. They are gambling on the outcome, sure. BUT, I really believe the trap exists and I think this was one of them, but of course the game is late and it is easy for me to say...I just saw this thread. I will say that forgetting this game...the last trap play that I recognized was the Houston/St. Louis game with Clemens pitching for Houston.
Anywho, I ramble, I know, but I'm letting angst go by typing as I am getting my ass handed my by the KC Royals and I would like to think that the Indians was a trap play but they weren't....they were too highly priced for the trap! I'm just an idiot. tulsa
Tulsa said:
I disagree with you on this one. Why do you feel Chicago should be favored in this matchup? Everything in this game pointed towards Cincinnati being favored except for one fact...Kerry Wood was pitching. He is one of the most over hyped and public backed pitchers in baseball.
If anything, this line was way off the wrong way.
70% of the public picked the Cubs yet the line dropped dramatically. A lot of the "right kind of money" was on Cincinnati. Only 30% had them, but a majority of the money was there. That tells you something.
Clip Joint said:
Look, I will say one thing about the money movements: It is difficult to discern whether the money moving the line is a lot of public money (by the way, they are right half the time) or is a little but heavy per player sharp money (well better than 50% but how do you know they are the ones moving the line?) This might have been one of those instances. I am only referencing the original post of this thread. I didn't follow the line movements or anything like that for my comment. This might not have been a trap play if the line was moving a lot. Trap plays, I believe, usually are lines that remain very firm EARLY to LATE and stay close to what they began regardless of money from whomever on the game.
Let me ask you this one thing then, Clip Joint, my wise and knowledgeable friend.... Whether or not this Cubs game was a trap line, do you believe that the oddsmakers ever (a significant number of times) shade the line to draw money to the 'wrong' side in an effort to make more than vigorish? tulsa
By the way, Patriot, thanks and I appreciate your posts at the Rx very much!
I really don't believe in the trap line theory simply because there are too many shops and too many linesmakers.
Let me ask you this...and I am not arguing, I would just like to know your opinion since you have said you believe in the theory:
How could every linesmaker have the same opinion about one game?
Let me ask you this...and I am not arguing, I would just like to know your opinion since you have said you believe in the theory:
How could every linesmaker have the same opinion about one game?
I agree with that assesment also....I think certains point spreads lines in college footbal are famous for this.
One thing that muddles and befuddles all of us is that in this sport of gaming we are in you can be wrong and still be right and be right and still be wrong.
But on this particular game if you were to think Cubs/Wood vs. Reds with out knowing the line and based on what the line was the two previous games you would have thought imediatley Cubs -160 or somthing...then you see cubs -130 you say ooohhh Cubs what a bargain.
Clip..if you don't mind me answering...I think they are in cahoots with each other...theres no doubt about it.
I have two barber shops in my home town and they all agree to close on monday and keep the same hours during the week...same logic.
Also, I tend to agree with tulsa on this discussion....that does not make you wrong.
I have two barber shops in my home town and they all agree to close on monday and keep the same hours during the week...same logic.
Also, I tend to agree with tulsa on this discussion....that does not make you wrong.
Patriot said:
I think only true squares would think Wood on the road against Cincinnati and Harang would be a -160 line.
Why does Wood get so much respect? He has an ERA near 5.00 and has never won more than 14 games.
This line was inflated (similar to how Yankees lines are inflated because of public opinion) because Wood was starting and the public backs Wood and Prior. I don't see how this could be called a trap when the line was off the opposite way.
