under the way too go
- Thread starter verbalkint
- Start date
Going from memory, I'd say that the under historically rules in the NHL playoffs.
Anybody have any stats from the previous few years to support this? Gun it down?
Anybody have any stats from the previous few years to support this? Gun it down?
i have done extensive research on this. and yes it is over 80%. which translates to a money line in excess of 250
verbalkint said:
With all due respect, either I'm looking at the wrong hockey league, or you're not doing very good research on such an outrageous claim. I have breakdowns on every single round in the Playoffs over the last 5 yrs, and not ONE yr came anywhere close to 80% Under as you claimed, unless your bookie gives you winner on Pushes. But last time I checked, Pushes are not winners.
For example, just the 1st round of this yr, only 26 of 47 games went Under FIVE goals
last yr, only 37 of 89 total games went Under FIVE goals
in 2002, 48 of 90 total games went Under FIVE goals
I can go even deeper and all the way back to 1999, but just wanted to get the facts out before anyone follows this blindly, or please correct me if I'm wrong.
Good luck!
Last edited:
...u know what i think about stats:tonguei said hitting, i should have said undr 5 will lose less than 20%of the time.. you are rite 8 games have gone over 5 so far in the nhl playoffs .. there were 47 games in the first rd. that mean' sss
if you played under 5 goal you lost less than 20 % of the time.
to quote fast eddie felsen "this is fawking tedious, sometimes i wish we could just rob um, kill um and throw um in a ditch"
if you played under 5 goal you lost less than 20 % of the time.
to quote fast eddie felsen "this is fawking tedious, sometimes i wish we could just rob um, kill um and throw um in a ditch"
i case i dont make myselp clear .
less than 20% losers translates to a profit on any wager of under 5 goals at a moneyline of anything up too 250.
in a word cash cow, money machine, sure thing....etc
to quote fast eddie felsen "this is fawking tedious, sometimes i wish we could just rob um, kill um and throw um in a ditch"
less than 20% losers translates to a profit on any wager of under 5 goals at a moneyline of anything up too 250.
in a word cash cow, money machine, sure thing....etc
to quote fast eddie felsen "this is fawking tedious, sometimes i wish we could just rob um, kill um and throw um in a ditch"
and futhermore i made this claim simply because i too found it too be outrageous.. i first dicovered this statiscal anomaly totally by accident prior to the start of the nhl stanley cup playoff's back in 1984. yes that is 20 years ago.. I hve not played it for all 20 years., but have never lost. Also lost interest since it is boring, never losing. i dont like the game or any teams, & its boring to watch on tv. I dont pic games just play under FIVE GOALS IN EVERY game.
of course the rub, the total is not 5 in every game. just wait till it is and unload.
and further further more it is way above 20/80 but I knew no one will believe that.
to quote fast eddie felsen "this is fawking tedious, sometimes i wish we could just rob um, kill um and throw um in a ditch"
of course the rub, the total is not 5 in every game. just wait till it is and unload.
and further further more it is way above 20/80 but I knew no one will believe that.
to quote fast eddie felsen "this is fawking tedious, sometimes i wish we could just rob um, kill um and throw um in a ditch"
my memory sucks so i check ed my notebook, to be exact.
my conclusion remains the same.
opening rd. 47 trials and 9 went over 5 goals for %19%%%%%....
semi's 7 games 2 wnt over 5 goals total 11 over 5 in 54 games or 20.37%
rememer you only need a moneyline of -300 to make $$$$$$$$$
my conclusion remains the same.
opening rd. 47 trials and 9 went over 5 goals for %19%%%%%....
semi's 7 games 2 wnt over 5 goals total 11 over 5 in 54 games or 20.37%
rememer you only need a moneyline of -300 to make $$$$$$$$$