MONEY LINE VS. POINT SPREAD

[LBTSDBTS]

WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As a general rule in my handicapping, I always play the moneyline on dogs of a field goal or less in NCAAF. My experience has shown that the if the dogs don't win then the spread usually doesn't come into play. However, last weekend a couple questionable calls made me 0 - 2 on the moneyline, where as I would have been 2 - 0 on the spread:

Sep 18 2:28pm Football -
1. Football - LSU - moneyline (+100)
for the entire game held on Sep 18 at 2:30pm [loss]

LSU +1.5 would have covered...


Sep 18 5:43pm Football -
1. Football - Florida - moneyline (+125)
for the entire game held on Sep 18 at 7:00pm [loss]

FL +3 would have covered...


Looking for some thoughts??

LIVE BY THE SWORD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

pEACE

 

[Blackman]

I'd have to see a much bigger sample to be able to make a determination on this, but my thought it is you can get a point or two take it, why risk the possibility of this happening to you like it did last weekend? In the case of Florida last week, I'd definetly sacrifice 25 dollar extra profit on a 100 dollar base wager to be able to have a field goal cushion. If the line is only at 1 or 1.5 that might be a different story, but again the extra profit isn't all that significant.

Would be interested in seeing a bigger test sample though.

 

[gman2]

i absolutely agree with your approach. you will make a lot more money by moneylining dogs and taking +110, +115, +125 or +130 return than you will lose (every now and then) when the dog loses the game, but covers the point or two spread.

like you said, live by the sword and die by it, but i always take the moneyline approach.

everyone points to that one or two times that you might lose a tough one, but you will save money and make money at the same time because (dont forget) youre also saving 10% every single time your dog loses and wouldnt have covered any way. so not only is the return better on the wins, but it limits losses

its also a confidence thing - if youre playing a dog of less than 2 points, you expect them to win the game. i know some might disagree, but i dont like paying 10% for a cushion that more often than not is worthless

 

[pt1gard]

ive lost quite a few ML dogs, including the FL last week and dallas/reskins a couple years ago -1.5 too ... and enough others to force me not to do it anymore--interesting you brought it up, b/c I have had it after refs pimp slap call costing Gators that win

gl, gregg

 

[LBTSDBTS]

I promise to conduct some more research on this one, including games through the end of this year.

I agree that I handicap games for winners only... Meaning despite the points, I purely look at teams that I believe will not only cover but win... However, conventional wisdom dictates that because of the close outcome of most games that only playing the money line on spreads of 3 or less allows some margin of error.

Just for conversation sake, I must add that I also played the bills at +150 whereas if I had gotten them at 3 it was push and 3.5 was a win...

It really stung the bankroll to get pinched like that last weekend...

Peace

 

[Master Capper]

In the long run you will be better off playing the moneyline especially in the pro's! I don't have the data but here was a interesting comparison on teams in the NFL favored by 2.5 or less and the dog won outright around 60% of the time. In college games the lines can move so erratically that in a tight spread it is sometimes hard to gauge just whom should be the fav, NC ST and OSU was a classic example of this as OSU opened up as a fav and by games day the line had swung nearly four points. Rarely in the NFL do lines swing that much barring an injury!