2005 revisited?

2005 revisited? There are some horrible teams out there: KC, Cleveland, TB, STL, and Oakland. Hard to bet them with my money.

God I hope not! And I hope Carolina isn't added to the list tomorrow night; I have them somewhat big to try and ease some of the damage from the last two weekends. Otherwise some adjustments may be necessary to avoid a 2005-like disaster. GL and keep picking off the good #s.

[QUOTE=Old School;3829]There are some horrible teams out there: KC, Cleveland, TB, STL, and Oakland. Hard to bet them with my money.[/QUOTE] I was thinking the same thing as I prepare my envelope to send to the man for the first time since that 2005 season. shane. I was almost ruined that year and refuse to have it happen again. may hv to heaad to coast casnios for some parlay cards...everybody's doing it ;)

My power ratings saved me in 2005, and have been dead-on this year. I had Baltimore 18 points better than Cleveland (too low, I know). Real "sharps" never lay over 10. The "sharps" keep betting against NYG on the road where they rarely lose, even steaming the shitty TB last week.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- My power ratings saved me in 2005, and have been dead-on this year. I had Baltimore 18 points better than Cleveland (too low, I know). Real "sharps" never lay over 10. The "sharps" keep betting against NYG on the road where they rarely lose, even steaming the shitty TB last week. Thanks for the reminder Old School...

Tell me why 2005 was a disaster. I haven't been betting that long.

[QUOTE=tradermac;3856]Tell me why 2005 was a disaster. I haven't been betting that long.[/QUOTE] 2005 was an odd year for results against the spread for a number of angles/sides/plays that had historically been solid plays. Favorites covered at an unusually high percentage, for example.

There was an abnormal lack of parity in 2005; a lot of good teams, very few average teams, and a lot of horrible teams. Favorites covered something like 56%(?) on the year, inflicting severe pain on a lot of sharps.

And plays like this lost Someone should have wrote a book about that season. It would've been better than The Odds.

Favorites went 137-102, 57.3% in 2005. Plus teams that were favorites 7 or more times (public favorites) went 106-67, 61.3%. Many ugly dogs, when they fell behind, had NO chance of competing. Can the dregs of 2009 compete?