An old bookie (younger than I am) once told me that how a team performs on the road is a good measure of their character.
Last night, while looking at this matchup, I noticed that St Johns had 2 loss/no covers in their last two road games.
Since they were going on the road again, my excitement almost caused me to piss myself, so I circled BC- as a play and thought no more of it.
Enter Boston College.
In their last four home games they played Georgetown, Pitt, Holy Cross and Arkansas St.
BC was favored in all four games.
Anyone care to guess what their SU / ATS record was against those four teams?
Don't click your mouse. They were 1-3 SU / 0-3-1 ATS.
Playing on the road may be a measure of a teams character, but there's a difference between being a road dog and a road fav.
You're not expected to win as a road dog. Granted, if you get blown out of the water in both games, that's a red flag.
But being favored in four home games and not being able to cover in any one of them is a red flag, sirens, bells and blinking lights.
So, from a handicapping standpoint, what's worse?
Not being able to cover on the road as a dog?
Or not being able to win or cover at home as a favorite?
Hit me in the head with a four by four.
This game was there for the taking and I missed it BIG TIME.
A home favorite wins 1 of 3 SU, DOES NOT COVER IN ANY OF THE FOUR PREVIOUS HOME GAMES AND IS FAVORED AT HOME IN THEIR NEXT ?
They don't come much easier.
For a young handicapper, this matchup was a very good case study in handicapping. It has all the right criteria.
I would suggest you review this matchup.
1. Look at the road record of the underdog. Were they road favs or road dogs? How did they perform SU and ATS.
2. Look at their quality of opposition.
3. Look at the ats margin of win or loss
4. Look at the home record of the favorite. Were they home favs or home dogs? How did they perform?
5. Look at the quality of opposition.
A game is either a play on the favorite, a play on the dog or NO PLAY.
This one was obvious and I missed it.
Shame on me.
Last night, while looking at this matchup, I noticed that St Johns had 2 loss/no covers in their last two road games.
Since they were going on the road again, my excitement almost caused me to piss myself, so I circled BC- as a play and thought no more of it.
Enter Boston College.
In their last four home games they played Georgetown, Pitt, Holy Cross and Arkansas St.
BC was favored in all four games.
Anyone care to guess what their SU / ATS record was against those four teams?
Don't click your mouse. They were 1-3 SU / 0-3-1 ATS.
Playing on the road may be a measure of a teams character, but there's a difference between being a road dog and a road fav.
You're not expected to win as a road dog. Granted, if you get blown out of the water in both games, that's a red flag.
But being favored in four home games and not being able to cover in any one of them is a red flag, sirens, bells and blinking lights.
So, from a handicapping standpoint, what's worse?
Not being able to cover on the road as a dog?
Or not being able to win or cover at home as a favorite?
Hit me in the head with a four by four.
This game was there for the taking and I missed it BIG TIME.
A home favorite wins 1 of 3 SU, DOES NOT COVER IN ANY OF THE FOUR PREVIOUS HOME GAMES AND IS FAVORED AT HOME IN THEIR NEXT ?
They don't come much easier.
For a young handicapper, this matchup was a very good case study in handicapping. It has all the right criteria.
I would suggest you review this matchup.
1. Look at the road record of the underdog. Were they road favs or road dogs? How did they perform SU and ATS.
2. Look at their quality of opposition.
3. Look at the ats margin of win or loss
4. Look at the home record of the favorite. Were they home favs or home dogs? How did they perform?
5. Look at the quality of opposition.
A game is either a play on the favorite, a play on the dog or NO PLAY.
This one was obvious and I missed it.
Shame on me.
Last edited:
