College Hoops 2020
- Thread starter RBD
- Start date
Yes we do, tt.
Record: 12-13
Recap: A Force fit the > 13 spot, now 17-7,
10-3 Ov, 7-4 Un. And in that same spot today I have . . .
Buy:
Troy/App St Ov 128
Record: 12-13
Recap: A Force fit the > 13 spot, now 17-7,
10-3 Ov, 7-4 Un. And in that same spot today I have . . .
Buy:
Troy/App St Ov 128
Recap: Close loss with App St Ov yesterday.
Record: 12-14
App St fits again today, same situation.
I like playing the second game of back-to-backs to go opposite the total of the first one, and since yesterday' game stayed under with average shooting a decent day today can get a winner with this one, picking up two points on the total.
All buys below are 13 or >,
record on these is 17-8, Ov 10-4, Un 7-4
Buys:
Troy/App St Ov 126
Iowa/Rutgers Un 160
Charleston/Del Ov 130
Record: 12-14
App St fits again today, same situation.
I like playing the second game of back-to-backs to go opposite the total of the first one, and since yesterday' game stayed under with average shooting a decent day today can get a winner with this one, picking up two points on the total.
All buys below are 13 or >,
record on these is 17-8, Ov 10-4, Un 7-4
Buys:
Troy/App St Ov 126
Iowa/Rutgers Un 160
Charleston/Del Ov 130
Update: Got two W's already in, and I like my cap/position on the App State game. Two more spots today in this same play, >, not buying, posting in case anyone else is looking for an edge, Ov in N Dak/UMKC (starting in a couple minutes), Ov in A Force.
Update: Ov in Morehead St also fits, just tipping off, posting for record-keeping or second-half purposes, or live in game bets only.
Update: Ov in Morehead St also fits, just tipping off, posting for record-keeping or second-half purposes, or live in game bets only.
Last edited:
Recap: 3-0 day.
I had three spots left in the > play, but decided to not get greedy and just bank the three units from the early games.
Good move as the next one's went 0-3.
Record: 15-14.
There are four > spots today.
Ov in Charles/Del, KC/N Dak,
Un in Ind St/Mizz St, S I'll/Drake.
No buys for me I don't have time to look deeper at these too busy with NBA and NFL.
I had three spots left in the > play, but decided to not get greedy and just bank the three units from the early games.
Good move as the next one's went 0-3.
Record: 15-14.
There are four > spots today.
Ov in Charles/Del, KC/N Dak,
Un in Ind St/Mizz St, S I'll/Drake.
No buys for me I don't have time to look deeper at these too busy with NBA and NFL.
The four spots posted went 3-1, but Drake dropped off the play list by 1/2 pt.
I didn't like not making any buys but there's just no enough time some days to do the 'capping work I like to do before making a decision.
I wouldn't have used the Delaware loss. I won with the same match-up on Saturday, and I usually avoid going back to the well two days in a row. And, as posted somewhere above, I prefer to go the opposite way in the second game of back to backs - if game one went Over, I prefer the Under in the second game, if game one went Under I prefer the Over in game two. That preference would have kept me off the Delaware spot.
That same preference would have likely got me a W on Indy St Under, as it went Over the previous day.
Same situation with N Dak, though I would have likely stayed off that one because though it went Under the day before it did so by 31 pts. With only 48 pts at the half yesterday, needing a total of 128, it looked like another loss for the Over but KC scored 49 in the second half - which was more than both teams scored combined in the first half.
Kids Ball is crazy.
Today's > spot:
Monmouth/Sienna Un 152'
These two played yesterday. Total was 152. It went Over by 3 pts, on avg shooting %'s.
I had it rated at 12', meaning it just missed qualifying as > Un play by a half pt.
Today's # is just a hook above yesterday's #.
It fits the > profile (22-12, Ov 13-8, Un 9-4.)
It's in a spot I like - the total in game two to go opposite the total in game one.
But what concerns me is they went Over on avg. shooting %'s - nothing special.
This means if they shoot above avg today I lose.
If they shoot avg, I lose.
I need them to shoot below avg to get a W.
I'm going to do a little more research on both teams - such as how do they do when playing B2B games - is game two higher or lower total? And I want to measure yesterday's shoot %'s against their year long %'s to make sure my 'cap is correct that yesterday was just avg shooting.
Back with a buy if I pull the trigger.
Update:
I was correct, the shooting, FG & 3 pt %'s, on yesterday's games was avg for Monmouth, a little low on FT's.
It was only Sienna's first game of the season, so no history to match it up against.
Monmouth has had two other spots where they played B2B.
Against St. Peters, the total was the same, both scores 78-76.
Against Canisius the scoring in game two was higher by 16 pts.
Neither scenario makes a case for playing today's spot Under.
I don't like the line, don't like the situation. I'll sit this one out and wait for a better spot.
I didn't like not making any buys but there's just no enough time some days to do the 'capping work I like to do before making a decision.
I wouldn't have used the Delaware loss. I won with the same match-up on Saturday, and I usually avoid going back to the well two days in a row. And, as posted somewhere above, I prefer to go the opposite way in the second game of back to backs - if game one went Over, I prefer the Under in the second game, if game one went Under I prefer the Over in game two. That preference would have kept me off the Delaware spot.
That same preference would have likely got me a W on Indy St Under, as it went Over the previous day.
Same situation with N Dak, though I would have likely stayed off that one because though it went Under the day before it did so by 31 pts. With only 48 pts at the half yesterday, needing a total of 128, it looked like another loss for the Over but KC scored 49 in the second half - which was more than both teams scored combined in the first half.
Kids Ball is crazy.
Today's > spot:
Monmouth/Sienna Un 152'
These two played yesterday. Total was 152. It went Over by 3 pts, on avg shooting %'s.
I had it rated at 12', meaning it just missed qualifying as > Un play by a half pt.
Today's # is just a hook above yesterday's #.
It fits the > profile (22-12, Ov 13-8, Un 9-4.)
It's in a spot I like - the total in game two to go opposite the total in game one.
But what concerns me is they went Over on avg. shooting %'s - nothing special.
This means if they shoot above avg today I lose.
If they shoot avg, I lose.
I need them to shoot below avg to get a W.
I'm going to do a little more research on both teams - such as how do they do when playing B2B games - is game two higher or lower total? And I want to measure yesterday's shoot %'s against their year long %'s to make sure my 'cap is correct that yesterday was just avg shooting.
Back with a buy if I pull the trigger.
Update:
I was correct, the shooting, FG & 3 pt %'s, on yesterday's games was avg for Monmouth, a little low on FT's.
It was only Sienna's first game of the season, so no history to match it up against.
Monmouth has had two other spots where they played B2B.
Against St. Peters, the total was the same, both scores 78-76.
Against Canisius the scoring in game two was higher by 16 pts.
Neither scenario makes a case for playing today's spot Under.
I don't like the line, don't like the situation. I'll sit this one out and wait for a better spot.
Last edited:
PJ,
I just updated my post with additional info, if you're still trying to make a call on the game.
I'd like to ride the 9-4 Under spot here but too many game factors go against that record.
Still looking at it though, may take a shot if the # rises enough.
I just updated my post with additional info, if you're still trying to make a call on the game.
I'd like to ride the 9-4 Under spot here but too many game factors go against that record.
Still looking at it though, may take a shot if the # rises enough.
My dilemma is solved, since the line dropped to 151' the diff now drops below the threshold for that 9-4 play, it no longer qualifies.
And . . . as long as the line doesn't rise back to 134' or >, Hampton/Radford now qualifies as a play on the > Over at 133' or 134.
Update, buying a game.
Buy:
Hampton/Radford Ov 133'
And . . . as long as the line doesn't rise back to 134' or >, Hampton/Radford now qualifies as a play on the > Over at 133' or 134.
Update, buying a game.
Buy:
Hampton/Radford Ov 133'
Last edited:
Recap: 1-0 yesterday, got a W with Radford Over.
Record: 16-14
Talked myself out of a winner with the Sienna game, but picked up a nice 'capping job on Radford Over.
I joined here in July.
I've started seven threads for picks/analysis:
MLB, NBA Bubble, College football, NFL, NBA current season, Kids Ball current season, Boxing.
I have a profit in six of the seven, the only loss was in the NBA Bubble.
And now, after that gratuitous and totally unecessary bit of self-congratulatory back-patting, I have, no doubt, jixed myself and shall be mired in an extended losing streak as punishment from the Gambling Gods.
I have 5 plays that fit the base system I use, but nothing in the high W% categories, so I'll make no buys today unless line changes dictate a play. Doubtful though, as the highest diff I have is 10 pts on Rutgers, so unless the total climbs 3 pts to 152' (slim chance) I will enjoy a day off.
Record: 16-14
Talked myself out of a winner with the Sienna game, but picked up a nice 'capping job on Radford Over.
I joined here in July.
I've started seven threads for picks/analysis:
MLB, NBA Bubble, College football, NFL, NBA current season, Kids Ball current season, Boxing.
I have a profit in six of the seven, the only loss was in the NBA Bubble.
And now, after that gratuitous and totally unecessary bit of self-congratulatory back-patting, I have, no doubt, jixed myself and shall be mired in an extended losing streak as punishment from the Gambling Gods.
I have 5 plays that fit the base system I use, but nothing in the high W% categories, so I'll make no buys today unless line changes dictate a play. Doubtful though, as the highest diff I have is 10 pts on Rutgers, so unless the total climbs 3 pts to 152' (slim chance) I will enjoy a day off.
PJ,
I ended up not taking the day off, took a small $ action play on B Green Un 160.
I paid such little attention to it that hours later, when I checked in with the play-by-play ticker, I thought I had a play on the Over.
The game was on 159 with 58 seconds left.
I'm rooting for a foul on either team to get some FT's for that one more pt I needed for a Push, two for a Win.
In that final minute there were no shots from the field, BUT . . . I got five FT's.
And the little F'ers missed every one.
And I cursed them out with every one.
Later last night I went into my account to make a buy on the NFL and saw I had actually bet the Under, and was rooting against myself.
And I'm left wondering - would the stress/cursing have been worse if I knew I had the Under and had to suffer through the idiots on a team that was up by 21 pts fouling the other team, and five missed FT's?
It's a strange concept of "fun" that we bettors have.
Record: 16-14
Today, three games are 13 or >
Ov 137' in Utah St/N Mex (13), Ov 131' A Force/Boise St (15')
Un 152' in U Mass/GW (13').
Line changes may make the N Mex and GW games drop off the list, A Force should be safe.
Update: After I posted a buy on Ov 131', AF game is lighting up the board, 131' mostly gone, went straight to 132'.
Most who may want to buy it can't get 131' so I'll use 132' here.
Update #2: I checked the record of today's teams when they are in this play.
AF 13 or > 4-1
Boise 1-1 (diff of 12 & 12')
Utah St 13 or > 1-1
N Mex 0-2 (diff of 8 & 12)
U Mass 0-2 (diff of 9 & 11')
Only AF & Utah St have plays at 13 or >.
0-2 for N Mex and U Mass at the lower threshold (< 13) warn me off of them today.
Update #3: U Mass game postponed. Utah St/N Mex diff now at 14.
Buys:
AF/Boise Ov 131'
I ended up not taking the day off, took a small $ action play on B Green Un 160.
I paid such little attention to it that hours later, when I checked in with the play-by-play ticker, I thought I had a play on the Over.
The game was on 159 with 58 seconds left.
I'm rooting for a foul on either team to get some FT's for that one more pt I needed for a Push, two for a Win.
In that final minute there were no shots from the field, BUT . . . I got five FT's.
And the little F'ers missed every one.
And I cursed them out with every one.
Later last night I went into my account to make a buy on the NFL and saw I had actually bet the Under, and was rooting against myself.
And I'm left wondering - would the stress/cursing have been worse if I knew I had the Under and had to suffer through the idiots on a team that was up by 21 pts fouling the other team, and five missed FT's?
It's a strange concept of "fun" that we bettors have.
Record: 16-14
Today, three games are 13 or >
Ov 137' in Utah St/N Mex (13), Ov 131' A Force/Boise St (15')
Un 152' in U Mass/GW (13').
Line changes may make the N Mex and GW games drop off the list, A Force should be safe.
Update: After I posted a buy on Ov 131', AF game is lighting up the board, 131' mostly gone, went straight to 132'.
Most who may want to buy it can't get 131' so I'll use 132' here.
Update #2: I checked the record of today's teams when they are in this play.
AF 13 or > 4-1
Boise 1-1 (diff of 12 & 12')
Utah St 13 or > 1-1
N Mex 0-2 (diff of 8 & 12)
U Mass 0-2 (diff of 9 & 11')
Only AF & Utah St have plays at 13 or >.
0-2 for N Mex and U Mass at the lower threshold (< 13) warn me off of them today.
Update #3: U Mass game postponed. Utah St/N Mex diff now at 14.
Buys:
AF/Boise Ov 131'
Last edited:
Recap: Won with A Force Over.
Record: 17-14
13 or > spot is now 24-13, 15-9 Ov, 9-4 Un.
Good 'cap on A Force, and even better call to not play the other > spot with N Mex.
I didn't buy N Mex because a check of my logbook showed that they were 0-2 on Overs with a diff of 8 and 12. Both those games fell short of the spot they were in yesterday, the diff of 13 mark I use for a higher W %, but at 0-2 in the base play (a diff of 8 or >) I decided to just go with the stronger play on A Force.
And N Mex stayed Under by 15 pts. So instead of 1-1 and losing juice I banked a unit.
Today no games fit the base play of 8 or >, nothing even close to 13 or >, so it looks like I may get a day off, barring any line changes that give me a play. If one pops up I'll post it.
Record: 17-14
13 or > spot is now 24-13, 15-9 Ov, 9-4 Un.
Good 'cap on A Force, and even better call to not play the other > spot with N Mex.
I didn't buy N Mex because a check of my logbook showed that they were 0-2 on Overs with a diff of 8 and 12. Both those games fell short of the spot they were in yesterday, the diff of 13 mark I use for a higher W %, but at 0-2 in the base play (a diff of 8 or >) I decided to just go with the stronger play on A Force.
And N Mex stayed Under by 15 pts. So instead of 1-1 and losing juice I banked a unit.
Today no games fit the base play of 8 or >, nothing even close to 13 or >, so it looks like I may get a day off, barring any line changes that give me a play. If one pops up I'll post it.
Second day in a row with no games qualifying for 13 or >.
I have two games with a diff of 10 (Stetson Un and CS Full Un) and one at 10' (S Dak Ov.)
I'd like to offer a play but wanted to stick with 13 or > only this week as it has the higher W %.
If anything changes I'll post an Update.
Good luck with your plays today.
I have two games with a diff of 10 (Stetson Un and CS Full Un) and one at 10' (S Dak Ov.)
I'd like to offer a play but wanted to stick with 13 or > only this week as it has the higher W %.
If anything changes I'll post an Update.
Good luck with your plays today.
I have three > plays today.
Buying one now, going to add the Drexel game Over but the line is dropping so I'm just waiting on buying and posting it.
Update: Missed the Drexel 10am start, forgot to get it in, maybe I can get a decent number at halftime.
Update: I can't get in on Drexel Over at halftime because taking the Over would give me a number that is eight points worse than the one that was available before the game started.
Buys:
Baylor/TCU Un 144
Buying one now, going to add the Drexel game Over but the line is dropping so I'm just waiting on buying and posting it.
Update: Missed the Drexel 10am start, forgot to get it in, maybe I can get a decent number at halftime.
Update: I can't get in on Drexel Over at halftime because taking the Over would give me a number that is eight points worse than the one that was available before the game started.
Buys:
Baylor/TCU Un 144
Last edited:
Recap: Scored a W with Baylor Under.
Record: 18-14
I was pissed that I missed the start on Drexel because they were on a good pace for the Over. Scoring slowed down in the second half though and it stayed Under, so turned out it was a good thing I missed the start.
Stetson Un was the third > play and it won,
record on those now 26-14, 15-10 Ov, 11-4 Un.
Have one so far today, I'm posting it now because the board is split between two numbers, 128 and 128'. Same spot as yesterday, Drexel.
There were four games on my chart yesterday that also were plays charted on Friday. On Friday they were losers (for example, they were Overs that stayed Under.) Of those four Friday losers, three won yesterday.
It's a situation I alluded to earlier this week, where the first game of B2B's goes Under I like the second one to go Over, and vice versa. That's the spot Drexel is in today.
Buys:
Drexel/Char Ov 128
Record: 18-14
I was pissed that I missed the start on Drexel because they were on a good pace for the Over. Scoring slowed down in the second half though and it stayed Under, so turned out it was a good thing I missed the start.
Stetson Un was the third > play and it won,
record on those now 26-14, 15-10 Ov, 11-4 Un.
Have one so far today, I'm posting it now because the board is split between two numbers, 128 and 128'. Same spot as yesterday, Drexel.
There were four games on my chart yesterday that also were plays charted on Friday. On Friday they were losers (for example, they were Overs that stayed Under.) Of those four Friday losers, three won yesterday.
It's a situation I alluded to earlier this week, where the first game of B2B's goes Under I like the second one to go Over, and vice versa. That's the spot Drexel is in today.
Buys:
Drexel/Char Ov 128
Recap: Won with Drexel Over to end the week at 4-0.
Record 19-14.
Money Management Suggestion:
Work in weekly windows.
Start the week on Monday, end it on Sunday, with the goal being to finish the week with a profit.
"Compartmentalizing," thinking in terms of a weekly window, is a discipline that can be helpful to bettors struggling to make a profit.
I've eliminated a few situations I was tracking as they were hovering at the .500 mark and therefore are useless. Less work for me, less time 'capping.
Tweaking the base play and using 13 or > only worked out well last week, I'll try and stick with that, and hope it keeps hitting.
Here is the current record in my chart. The base system is 101-82, Ov 58-47, Un 43-35.
That's 55%. Not great, but pretty good for almost 200 picks.
The sub-system within (13 or >) is 27-14, Ov 16-10, Un 11-4.
With only 8 games on the card today I wasn't expecting to get a play, and that's what happened, just ran the numbers, nothing fits.
See ya tomorrow . . .
Record 19-14.
Money Management Suggestion:
Work in weekly windows.
Start the week on Monday, end it on Sunday, with the goal being to finish the week with a profit.
"Compartmentalizing," thinking in terms of a weekly window, is a discipline that can be helpful to bettors struggling to make a profit.
I've eliminated a few situations I was tracking as they were hovering at the .500 mark and therefore are useless. Less work for me, less time 'capping.
Tweaking the base play and using 13 or > only worked out well last week, I'll try and stick with that, and hope it keeps hitting.
Here is the current record in my chart. The base system is 101-82, Ov 58-47, Un 43-35.
That's 55%. Not great, but pretty good for almost 200 picks.
The sub-system within (13 or >) is 27-14, Ov 16-10, Un 11-4.
With only 8 games on the card today I wasn't expecting to get a play, and that's what happened, just ran the numbers, nothing fits.
See ya tomorrow . . .
