SB THREAD PICKS, Take Gmen +3.5-120 5 weight.

Giants to Score 1st in game -105, 3 weight.

I really think $$$ will POUR onto Gmen to score 1st 1) $$$ is going to POUR onto them for the game 2) "Everyone" is going to read other people's reserach, and realize the Gmen are likely to get the ball 1st...... The 'good story' obvious bet is Gmen to score 1st............

ADD 1h UN 28-115 3 weight

Lines for 1Q and 3Q are exactly the same. That should mean value of either Gmen 1q or Pats 3q?

Probably both, but especially NE -' +130 in the third.

[QUOTE=joelshitshow;50363]Because if the game lands 3 then you get a middle.[/QUOTE] At -135 vs. -120? That seems a bit optimistic considering the juice you have to lay. Not that i'm a math guy (i'm certainly not), but is it really a roughly 25% chance that the game lands Patriots 1, 2, or 3? I would say no.

[QUOTE=Superskrub;50368]I was just looking at SBR half point calculator. It says about 14-15% chance of game landing at -1, -2 or -3. [/QUOTE] Is that EITHER team winning by 1, 2, or 3? Or just the favorite?

[QUOTE=DiscreetCat;50561]Is that EITHER team winning by 1, 2, or 3? Or just the favorite?[/QUOTE] Its just the favourite

Superscrub, regardless of what bet you made last weekend on the Giants at +146 or +3.5-120 I would say it is a scalpable bet. You'd need access to books that permit you to scalp the off point spread number such as Pinnacle maybe Matchbook and others to do it. Without the very best of books you might lose value in the scalp though. I have touched on this model before on the board but as far as I know there are 3 options for good bets. (1) Scalp them (2) Middle them. (3) Bet them If you have +3.5-120 it is clearly available that one option is to lay -3+110 at Matchbook or Pinnacle if feasible for you. In my language I would say "You have a 10 cent 3". It is readily accepted that a 3 is worth 22 cents or so on an NFL game as an approximation so you have "invested in the 3 for 10 cents". To buy something for 10 cents worth 22 cents of course so if you can afford to invest some juice in the Giants this is a very sound middle. Other options are -2.5-110 where for 30 cents you would "get it all on a 3". The value of "all the 3" might be 45 cents. I'm using cents of cost instead of probabilities of events occurring but you could solve the equations using the probabilities you've looked up to see how profitable your middle investment would be the same way. A moneyline on this game would also be a workable middle. Of course this is more expensive since the ML would be -135 let's say and an investment in PK to 3.5 would now be 55 cents. I will be middling this game myself and my target price on NE is -120 somehow some way. Will I ever see it? But I can easily live profitably at ML -125 or -130.

BRADSHAW OV 14.5 Carries 2 weight BRADSHAW OV 61 Yards 3 weight JAcobs UN 8 carries 2 weight Jacobs UN 31 yards 1 weight I was well aware of the $$$ that came in on Bradshaw last week, pushing his yrds total from 44.5 to 50.5. Someone(s) clearly knew that a healthier Bradshaw was suddenly going to get the bulk of the carries vs. Jacobs. THis played out as he got 20, Jacobs only 5. Further, at the end of the year in key Must win games the last 2 weeks, Bradshaw got 15-16 to Jacobs 7-7. Of course, I am concerned about the ATl game where they both got 14. However, I think the key here is Jacobs BLEW IT on a 4th an 1 carry vs. sf, he should have been able to get the yard, he didn't. The trend is our friend here, Bradshaw healthy means Bradshaw get most of the carries. The Pats stopped Ray Rice, but by selling out daring Flacco to pass. That won't work here, and the genius knows it. I expect Bradshaw to shred this soft Pats D that has played to prevent the big play most of the year.......