Consensus Thoughts/Questions

C

CWood97

Registered User
Forum Member
Jan 6, 2003
2,041
4
38
Michigan
Obviously the public (thus far) is all over the Giants, and it has me thinking...

1) When, if ever, have we seen the consensus all over a Super Bowl side like this? One site shows 80/20 NYG right now, both side and money line.

2) While this might be somewhat surprising to the books, shouldn't LVSC and others anticipated the public would be all over NYG since Week 17 and the upset of Green Bay are fresh in everyone's memory?

3) No books want this kind of exposure on one side in a game of this volume, so this is presumably an error on their part. Assuming this is the case, is it an "error on the side of caution" e.g. making damn sure they weren't flooded with Pats money? or is it just a flat out blunder?

4) Maybe it isn't a mistake after all and the books will get a flood of NE money this week and give them the two sided action they want? This seems doubtful in my mind.

Thoughts?

:shrug: :shrug: :shrug:
 
B

BigFatLooza

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 1, 2006
1,241
44
48
CWood97 said:
Obviously the public (thus far) is all over the Giants, and it has me thinking...

1) When, if ever, have we seen the consensus all over a Super Bowl side like this? One site shows 80/20 NYG right now, both side and money line.

2) While this might be somewhat surprising to the books, shouldn't LVSC and others anticipated the public would be all over NYG since Week 17 and the upset of Green Bay are fresh in everyone's memory?

3) No books want this kind of exposure on one side in a game of this volume, so this is presumably an error on their part. Assuming this is the case, is it an "error on the side of caution" e.g. making damn sure they weren't flooded with Pats money? or is it just a flat out blunder?

4) Maybe it isn't a mistake after all and the books will get a flood of NE money this week and give them the two sided action they want? This seems doubtful in my mind.

Thoughts?

:shrug: :shrug: :shrug:
Click to expand...


I was also thinking about this. Does anyone know the bet percentages in past superbowls? How often are superbowl bets this lopsided and what were the results? :shrug:
 
Mully

Mully

Is Blessed
Forum Member
Nov 7, 2004
5,619
31
0
53
reminds me a bit of last years Superbowl....

LOTS of early action on the Bears + 7.5 (72%)
Vegas dropped it to 7 right away and some Indy bettors where lucky enough to get it at 6.5

close to 80% was on Chicago ML as well


Slowly, the money started comming in on Indy, but even at kickoff, it was still 60-40 on the side and more like 70-30 ML

Vegas makes VERY FEW mistakes on their numbers, especially on the game more people will bet on than any other all season long.
 
B

BigFatLooza

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 1, 2006
1,241
44
48
Mully said:
reminds me a bit of last years Superbowl....

LOTS of early action on the Bears + 7.5 (72%)
Vegas dropped it to 7 right away and some Indy bettors where lucky enough to get it at 6.5

close to 80% was on Chicago ML as well


Slowly, the money started comming in on Indy, but even at kickoff, it was still 60-40 on the side and more like 70-30 ML

Vegas makes VERY FEW mistakes on their numbers, especially on the game more people will bet on than any other all season long.
Click to expand...

Thanks! This is EXACTLY the type of info I was looking for! Do you recall what the numbers were for the SB the season before (Pitt vs. Sea.)? This would be KEY information. All I remember was that there were three CRITICAL bogus calls against Seattle, which ensured a Pitt win and cover. If I find out that more bets were on Seattle that game I will be convinced that Vegas never loses huge games like the SB and that they will 'fix' it if they have to (I know you guys hate these 'conspiracy theories').
 
Mully

Mully

Is Blessed
Forum Member
Nov 7, 2004
5,619
31
0
53
BigFatLooza said:
Thanks! This is EXACTLY the type of info I was looking for! Do you recall what the numbers were for the SB the season before (Pitt vs. Sea.)? This would be KEY information. All I remember was that there were three CRITICAL bogus calls against Seattle, which ensured a Pitt win and cover. If I find out that more bets were on Seattle that game I will be convinced that Vegas never loses huge games like the SB and that they will 'fix' it if they have to (I know you guys hate these 'conspiracy theories').
Click to expand...


Don't have the offical numbers, but do remember a higher % of money actually being bet on the Steelers and the under....As far as conspiracy theories, If the refs were on take, it wasn't to help Vegas .

GL with whatever you decide to do...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Bet on MyBookie
Top