re: OFFICIAL NCAA FB Bet thread (Bowl Games Edition)

Im not saying its a competition. But if a guy cant pick a winner to save his life why in the hell would you care what his opinion is on a team if its going to be wrong 90% of the time?

quote:

---

I've encountered more exchanges like the above than I'd prefer.

---

Please link an example close to as absurd as you posted from a CFB bet thread this season (on here because if you are talking covers or somewhere then that place is full of trash).

Jeeze always turns into a shite show. Lets keep making that $$

Looking for some New Years Eve action

quote:

---

12/31/14 12:30pm College Football 250 TCU Under 30 -110* vs Mississippi (2u)

---

Betting on Ole Miss to bring that SEC D today

Got a bad number on state

what you get? i have them at 7.... wish woulda waited and got 6.5 but o well

quote:

---

-7 (+100). It's down to 4.5

---

shite, I'll throw a unit on that. Thanks for the heads up

quote:

---

Please link an example close to as absurd as you posted from a CFB bet thread this season (on here because if you are talking covers or somewhere then that place is full of trash).

---

I think the Ole Miss 10-1 ATS in last 11 bowl games is about as useless a piece of information as I can even fathom. I use scoresandodds for lines, and if you go to the "matchup" link under a given game, you'll see all kinds of information just like that. The fact that somebody is typing that shite out for publication on a website leads me to believe that they must think it's somehow relevant or even useful. I find that troubling for mankind generally.

A variation on the them would be something like "Florida always beats Tennessee", or the like. Those statements aren't necessarily irrelevant, just more often than not. If there are still-existing common denominators between the two programs that have caused, say, Florida to have success against Tennessee, then there could be merit to it. But usually the statement is followed up by some throwaway tripe that implicitly communicates "I like to go to Vegas and play roulette and then bet on black after there have been six blacks in a row because at this routlette table, by God, black just has red's number." At that point you tell the person that they're retarded and implore then to refrain from reproducing....or you just roll your eyes and move on.

A final category is one that I've gotten into many arguments about in these threads. I speak of the usefulness of tracking money. I think it's a waste of time. it surely meets the threshold of "relevance", but there can also be no denying that it's an analysis of somebody else's analysis of the game. It's an attempt to use information to try to infer what both George Genius and Ricky Retard think is gonna happen in the game. I'd rather just focus on what I think is gonna happen in the game.

It's more of a philosophical difference, I suppose. I've gotten a lot of shite for being critical of that type of analysis. And when I say "a lot of shite", I mean "8 consecutive posts from Blade asking me where my picks are even after I just posted a handful of them a few pages before." I suppose if you can do a "money following" analysis and have success with it, then keep on keeping on. And if I question the wisdom of it, tell me the reasons why you think it's a sustainable strategy. That's a better option than appealing to the authority of a 20 play sample size 59% record.

Anyway, the "orange uni v. white uni v. calendar date" example was obvious hyperbole. but I have gotten several "look at my record" responses rather than substantive replies.
(1)That's probably my fault because I do tend to (inadvertently) write with a bit of a dickish tone. And I guess that puts peeps on the defensive.
(2) But it's annoying. Nobody wins a message board pissing contest.

In closing: if I tell you or somebody else that I don't think there's any predictive value in the outcome of a two-decade old bowl game, just tell me why you think thee IS predictive value in the outcome of a two decade old bowl game.. Because, hell, you might just be right.*


*Well, in this example, I'm pretty sure I won't be convinced of the wisdom of using the supporting evidence in question, but you get what I'm saying.

quote:

---

hadnt looked today but yikes! would love 4.5 haha i still think 7 will be more than enough though

---

scoresandodds has it at -5, but still.....looks yummy.


12/31/2014 9:02 AM EST MISSISSIPPI STATE -6.5 -05
12/31/2014 9:43 AM EST MISSISSIPPI STATE -6 +191 -226
12/31/2014 10:50 AM EST MISSISSIPPI STATE -6 -05 60.5 +190 -225
12/31/2014 11:14 AM EST MISSISSIPPI STATE -5 60 +180 -210
12/31/2014 12:02 PM EST MISSISSIPPI STATE -5 -05

quote:

---

But you have GOT to chill with your combative style if you want these discussions to be productive and not turn into these pissing contests that derail the entire thread. I know some guys ITT have an axe to grind with ya, and they do their part to screw things up too. But can we PLEASE stick to actual discussion of games and quit attacking one another?

---

Yeah, I tend to write with a tone. It's my weak point in writing. I can be in the greatest mood ever and typing a post with some smoking hot girl fellating me while handing me hundred dollar bills just for the pleasure...but I'm making an argument I'll still come off dickish. I'm working on it.

Btw, who's Bobby?