The huge line is there to mess with everyone's head and I just want to put this thing into perspective one final time and I'm not saying another word about this game. Guys, just forget this line even exists and just lay down that hard cold cash on who you think will WIN this game, forget the cover. It is VERY tough to predict a final score right on the money in a football game, Super Bowl is even TOUGHER to predict a final. Letting that spread mess with your head is just like you laying that money down trying to predict the final score. Fellas this is all about playing your percentages and there is a much better chance of a Ram's double digit victory than a close game by New England or a backdoor job at the end. Forget the spread and let the numbers take care of themselves and fall where they may. Just pick the straight up WINNER and throw down! I'm OUT!!!
Super Bowl - Please Read
- Thread starter SpreadDestroyer
- Start date
nice logic, but......
nice logic, but......
yes, there is validity to picking a winner without factoring the spread. however, if you use any consistency in handicapping, you soon realize that you can't just pick the winner of a game each time and hope the number doesn't affect the outcome. that would be economical suicide. so, if you are saying just pick the winner here, fine, it's probably the rams, but don not think for a second that voodoo logic will work over the long haul.
nice logic, but......
yes, there is validity to picking a winner without factoring the spread. however, if you use any consistency in handicapping, you soon realize that you can't just pick the winner of a game each time and hope the number doesn't affect the outcome. that would be economical suicide. so, if you are saying just pick the winner here, fine, it's probably the rams, but don not think for a second that voodoo logic will work over the long haul.
I agree with Buck, Just exactly what happened LAST weekend with the Rams- they WON ,but DID NOT cover.
I understand what your point is ,BUT...............
Spanky
I understand what your point is ,BUT...............
Spanky
For this exact reasoning, I was on the wrong side of both games last Sunday
........so I am having a hard time laying all that lumber this weekend. I did have both overs and am considering having the over again this week. If I take the dog, I will probably play the under:shrug: .........this is a tuffy. Hell, we should all be smart and let Volfan do all of the work and play his plays
........so I am having a hard time laying all that lumber this weekend. I did have both overs and am considering having the over again this week. If I take the dog, I will probably play the under:shrug: .........this is a tuffy. Hell, we should all be smart and let Volfan do all of the work and play his plays The post that started this thread runs counter to everything to everything one believes in while trying to be a good handicapper.
"Just pick the straight up winner and throw down"???!!!!
You got close to a point when you said "Fellas this is all about playing your percentages and there is a much better chance of a Ram's double digit victory than a close game by New England or a backdoor job at the end," and expanding on this might have been worthwhile, but "Just pick the straight up winner and throw down". come on.
TheShrimp
"Just pick the straight up winner and throw down"???!!!!
You got close to a point when you said "Fellas this is all about playing your percentages and there is a much better chance of a Ram's double digit victory than a close game by New England or a backdoor job at the end," and expanding on this might have been worthwhile, but "Just pick the straight up winner and throw down". come on.
TheShrimp
On my last post I set the game for the Pat's to win 27-17 over the Steeler's, close! We all know that the last time they played in Foxboro the score was 24-17 Rams, people say the Rams got better throughout the season, I think the Pat's did too. I think DESTINY is in favor of the Pat's, they will play smashmouth D, and kick but on special teams. They may lose, but they will cover.
Except in the superbowl
Except in the superbowl
In the Superbowl,only a handfull of times has the loser covered,i.e. the points come into play.The dogs have won outright,but I'm pretty sure its been only three of four times ever that the points covered for the loser,which I believe is the point that SpreadDestroyer was making(or at least I hope so.)GL
Except in the superbowl
In the Superbowl,only a handfull of times has the loser covered,i.e. the points come into play.The dogs have won outright,but I'm pretty sure its been only three of four times ever that the points covered for the loser,which I believe is the point that SpreadDestroyer was making(or at least I hope so.)GL
3 of the last 6 years the Super Bowl winner has not covered, but it should happen this year. Take the Rams.
Spread Destr.
I don't think your 'handicapping ' method is quite the way I go over a game, but if you feel that's all you have to do,you should also run the numbers on the TOTAL. You will find the Over comes up more often historically. Does this make it :
1.Rams -14
2. Over 53
Are these the plays ,I have no problem with both of them ,I just question the "handicapping".
By the way, How is your buddy Swami doing. I can't believe you guys actually listened to that insane guy and thought he was actually betting big money. Nothing but a fool,most of us called 'him out' last year and exposed him.
Good luck on your Super Bowl bets
May they ALL be winners,as long as they are the same as mine (HA )
Spanky........
I don't think your 'handicapping ' method is quite the way I go over a game, but if you feel that's all you have to do,you should also run the numbers on the TOTAL. You will find the Over comes up more often historically. Does this make it :
1.Rams -14
2. Over 53
Are these the plays ,I have no problem with both of them ,I just question the "handicapping".
By the way, How is your buddy Swami doing. I can't believe you guys actually listened to that insane guy and thought he was actually betting big money. Nothing but a fool,most of us called 'him out' last year and exposed him.
Good luck on your Super Bowl bets
May they ALL be winners,as long as they are the same as mine (HA )
Spanky........
MW-"three of last six years winner didnt cover"?Baltimore covered,Denver was a dog that covered and won vs Gbay,Stl/Tenn was a push at seven for most so no one covered unless you got a local line off seven,same for Gbay/Ne which sat at 14 almost everywhere for the whole time.Pitt covered 11 vs Dall in the 27-17 game.Did Atl cover in their 34-19 loss to Denver?Can't remember the line in that one.If so that makes two in the last six years,unless your counting the pushes in Stl/Tenn and NE/Gbay.Who were the three favorites that won and did not cover?Unless you're counting pushes as a win only one fav in the last six years has won and lost the money.Its a very poor play in the Superbowl generally to take the dog if you don't think they can win outright.
Last edited:
Thanks Alaska... And please KEEP your cold weather up there.
Our 1st day of snow in Toronto this year and I hate it,Back to Hawaii for me..
Spanky......
Our 1st day of snow in Toronto this year and I hate it,Back to Hawaii for me..
Spanky......
edludes --
Teams that push do not cover. Thus three of the last 6 Super Bowl winners (STL, GB, and Dallas) did not cover. Comprende?
Teams that push do not cover. Thus three of the last 6 Super Bowl winners (STL, GB, and Dallas) did not cover. Comprende?
i dont think he meant this as a handicapping method, i see it as he was saying just in superbowls, or maybe just this game. Or thats how it sounded to me. i think the rams will win and cover... good luck
