I just got a mailing telling me that for an average of ONLY 15 Riviera
Advantage Bucks per day I can get my room comped. This works out to
30K per day on VP. I don't think they will get many takers. Oh yeah,
better hurry because the offer expires April 30.
George in SF
Riviera is 0.25% which would make it $6,000. Right?
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "catcat94114" <wxmen@s...> wrote:
I just got a mailing telling me that for an average of ONLY 15 Riviera
Advantage Bucks per day I can get my room comped. This works out to
30K per day on VP. I don't think they will get many takers. Oh yeah,
better hurry because the offer expires April 30.George in SF
The $30,000 figure is what I came up with after talking to one of
their marketing people. She said $2000 CI for VP gives one Advantage
Buck. I just called back and talked to another person and she said
$20 = 1pt and 100 pts = 5 Advantage bucks so that would give 6K, which
makes a lot more sense.
George in SF
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "kiwiboy4921" <waynes@k...> wrote:
Riviera is 0.25% which would make it $6,000. Right?
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "catcat94114" <wxmen@s...> wrote:
>
> I just got a mailing telling me that for an average of ONLY 15 Riviera
> Advantage Bucks per day I can get my room comped. This works out to
> 30K per day on VP. I don't think they will get many takers. Oh yeah,
> better hurry because the offer expires April 30.
>
> George in SF
>
Again, thanks to all who kicked around my Super Bowl betting deal. I think I'll just stick to the original 40 to 1 bet and see what happens. I really wavered on this as guaranteed money makes a lot of sense.
It finally hit me today though. I am flying to Vegas solo to hit some LVH pick 'em and watch/bet the game. If I bet it to get the guaranteed money it would not be nearly as exciting as having $800 riding on the game. Besides, I'm a teacher - were all rich....
If I do win the bet I am sure some comely lass will be available in the Tempo Bar who would gladly relieve me of my windfall. What's up with that? I dropped in their about 1:00am a couple weeks ago just to check the place out. Two "ladies" were right there as I walked in. I mean c'mon. I'm almost 50 years old - and look older. What ever could their motivation be?
Oh yeah, the way Yahoo! is going now it may be Monday before everyone gets this. Might just want to save time and email your congratulations now!
Go Hawks!
SK
"I got a sweater for Christmas. I really wanted a
screamer or a moaner."
Every time I walk into a singles bar, I can hear Mom's
wise words: "Don't eat that , you don't know where it's been."
"Love means never having to say, "Does that twenty include the spanking?"
"A little bit of love goes a long way in our lives. It can provide us with higher highs and lower lows. But, if it comes with a persistent burning sensation, see your physician."
---------------------------------
Brings words and photos together (easily) with
PhotoMail - it's free and works with your Yahoo! Mail.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Again, thanks to all who kicked around my Super Bowl betting deal. I think I'll just stick to the original 40 to 1 bet and see what happens. I really wavered on this as guaranteed money makes a lot of sense.
In case you change your mind, Stations and Fiestas had a pretty good
line on Pittsburgh today: - 175. I haven't seen any better for many
days and I've seen as bad as - 200.
I would not hesitate to hedge a big bet by taking -175 on
Pittsburgh, if the -175 is still available. The line (as I write)
at Pinnacle Sports is +172/-182, indicating that the fair line is
around -177. Therefore, taking -175 on the Steelers is a slight +EV
bet. And you get the variance reduction benefit.
--Dunbar
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Tom Robertson <thomasrrobertson@...>
wrote:
>Again, thanks to all who kicked around my Super Bowl betting
deal. I think I'll just stick to the original 40 to 1 bet and see
what happens. I really wavered on this as guaranteed money makes a
lot of sense.
In case you change your mind, Stations and Fiestas had a pretty
good
line on Pittsburgh today: - 175. I haven't seen any better for
many
days and I've seen as bad as - 200.
Such a bet can't be positive EV - just a bet. The line is et to even
out the action on both side, not predict the outcome. No such thing
as a "fair line" to gauge against.
I would not hesitate to hedge a big bet by taking -175 on
Pittsburgh, if the -175 is still available. The line (as I write)
at Pinnacle Sports is +172/-182, indicating that the fair line is
around -177. Therefore, taking -175 on the Steelers is a slight
+EV
bet. And you get the variance reduction benefit.
--Dunbar
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Tom Robertson <thomasrrobertson@>
wrote:
>
> >Again, thanks to all who kicked around my Super Bowl betting
deal. I think I'll just stick to the original 40 to 1 bet and see
what happens. I really wavered on this as guaranteed money makes
a
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "dunbar_dra" <h_dunbar@...> wrote:
lot of sense.
>
> In case you change your mind, Stations and Fiestas had a pretty
good
> line on Pittsburgh today: - 175. I haven't seen any better for
many
> days and I've seen as bad as - 200.
>
What if you could bet - 175 on Pittsburgh and + 180 on Seattle? The
combination of the 2 bets is necessarily positive, so at least 1 of
them, and possibly both, must be positive, no matter what the odds of
either team winning are. Even at + 175 and - 175, one of them must be
positive and the other negative.
Such a bet can't be positive EV - just a bet. The line is et to even
out the action on both side, not predict the outcome. No such thing
as a "fair line" to gauge against.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "dunbar_dra" <h_dunbar@...> wrote:I would not hesitate to hedge a big bet by taking -175 on
Pittsburgh, if the -175 is still available. The line (as I write)
at Pinnacle Sports is +172/-182, indicating that the fair line is
around -177. Therefore, taking -175 on the Steelers is a slight+EV
bet. And you get the variance reduction benefit.
--Dunbar
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Tom Robertson <thomasrrobertson@>
wrote:
>
> >Again, thanks to all who kicked around my Super Bowl betting
deal. I think I'll just stick to the original 40 to 1 bet and see
what happens. I really wavered on this as guaranteed money makesa
lot of sense.
>
> In case you change your mind, Stations and Fiestas had a pretty
good
> line on Pittsburgh today: - 175. I haven't seen any better for
many
> days and I've seen as bad as - 200.
>vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
It's true I can't know for sure if the bet has positive EV.
However, unless someone is an extremely strong handicapper, the
midpoint of the Pinnacle line is probably the best estimator of a
fair odds line. First, Pinnacle generally deals the lowest vig
lines; second, Pinnacle attracts a massive amount of action from
both squares and sharps. If one side of the Pinnacle line is off by
a bit, there are plenty of sharps who will bet it back
toward "fairness". This is particularly true for a huge-action
event like the Superbowl.
--Dunbar
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Boutot" <vegas_iwish@...>
wrote:
Such a bet can't be positive EV - just a bet. The line is et to
even
out the action on both side, not predict the outcome. No such
thing
as a "fair line" to gauge against.
>
> I would not hesitate to hedge a big bet by taking -175 on
> Pittsburgh, if the -175 is still available. The line (as I
write)
> at Pinnacle Sports is +172/-182, indicating that the fair line
is
> around -177. Therefore, taking -175 on the Steelers is a slight
+EV
> bet. And you get the variance reduction benefit.
>
> --Dunbar
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Tom Robertson <thomasrrobertson@>
> wrote:
> >
> > >Again, thanks to all who kicked around my Super Bowl betting
> deal. I think I'll just stick to the original 40 to 1 bet and
see
> what happens. I really wavered on this as guaranteed money
makes
a
> lot of sense.
> >
> > In case you change your mind, Stations and Fiestas had a
pretty
> good
> > line on Pittsburgh today: - 175. I haven't seen any better
for
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "dunbar_dra" <h_dunbar@> wrote:
> many
> > days and I've seen as bad as - 200.
> >
>
Again, thanks to all who kicked around my Super Bowl betting deal.
I think I'll just stick to the original 40 to 1 bet and see what
happens. I really wavered on this as guaranteed money makes a lot of
sense.
Good idea, but what everybody seem to miss is i would offer to buy
the ticket for $150 & hope you settle for $200.
You get 10 to 1 payoff on your bet & i get a 4 to 1 shot on a pretty
good team with a 50/50 chance to win.
M J
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kent <bayfieldkent@...> wrote:
words and photos together (easily) with
PhotoMail - it's free and works with your Yahoo! Mail.[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Tom Robertson <thomasrrobertson@...>
wrote:
What if you could bet - 175 on Pittsburgh and + 180 on Seattle? The
combination of the 2 bets is necessarily positive, so at least 1 of
them, and possibly both, must be positive, no matter what the odds of
either team winning are. Even at + 175 and - 175, one of them must be
positive and the other negative.>Such a bet can't be positive EV - just a bet. The line is et to even
>out the action on both side, not predict the outcome. No such thing
>as a "fair line" to gauge against.
As Tom stated, there are definitely money line scalp opportunities out
there. I watch the line at about a dozen online books, and currently
have wagers on PIT -170 and SEA +175.
The "square" books online (which typically shade the line according to
what the general public is betting) have moved the moneyline down to
~+150 on SEA which leads me to believe the ploppies are betting SEA
heavily on the ML. Pinnacle, the largest (and sharpest IMO) online
book is currently dealing +173 on SEA.
As far as the "traditional" line, it's pretty set at +/-4, with no
online books moving off that number right now. What's interesting is
many of the "square" shops are at PIT -4 -120, while the straight shops
are at normal juice on PIT.
Very interesting that the square shops are shading the ML and
traditional lines in opposite directions.
Do I have an opinion on the game? Not currently, but I took the free
$$ on the ML scalps and pounded PIT when the line opened -3.5 -101,
hoping for a middle. I think I'll have to eat about a nickle juice and
settle for SEA +4 (I was hoping for 4.5).
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Tom Robertson <thomasrrobertson@...>
wrote:
>Again, thanks to all who kicked around my Super Bowl betting
deal. I think I'll just stick to the original 40 to 1 bet and see
what happens. I really wavered on this as guaranteed money makes a
lot of sense.
In case you change your mind, Stations and Fiestas had a pretty
good
line on Pittsburgh today: - 175. I haven't seen any better for
many
days and I've seen as bad as - 200.
The line is where it's at not because of how strong these teams are
but because of WHO they are. Pittsburgh is an eastern team with a
high profile and the darling of the media while Seattle flies under
the radar. 75% of the sports betting public are the Will Rogers of
sports betting. They never seen a favorite they didn't like. If
they don't think the favorite will cover they won't bet. It's
absolutely foreign to their nature to take points. Meanwhile, I've
been hanging around this state for years and reading the published
stats of the books, published by the gaming commission on a yearly,
quarterly, monthly, and even weekend level. On weekends where the
dogs mostly covered the books cleaned up. On weekends where the
favorites mostly covered the books got fleeced. The dirty little
secret of sports betting is the books don't always go for splitting
the betting fifty/fifty. If they take in 55% of the money on the
favorite, but the favorite has only a 38% chance of covering they
are in a favorable position, hence, they clean up when the dog
covers and lose when the favorites cover. I don't spend a whole lot
of time on sports betting but I will jump when I see a line way out
of whack. I think that's what we have here. My only options are
to take the points or bet Seattle on the money line. Pittsburgh is
not an option. And if Pittsburgh covers this game it will only be
negative reinforcement for all the Will Rogers of sports betting.
You may also want to look at underdog proposition bets, in which the masses overbet the favorite. For example, I once got 2-1 on the underdog kicking the "first field goal". True enough they won the coin toss , made it to the 40 and kicked the first field goal. Good bet if you can get Seattle with that kind of payout on similar bets ( first to score, first to receive a 20 yard pass, first to drive 50 yards, first to recover a fumble...etc ) !
----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Boutot" <vegas_iwish@yahoo.com>
To: <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 4:11 PM
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Super advice
Such a bet can't be positive EV - just a bet. The line is et to even
out the action on both side, not predict the outcome. No such thing
as a "fair line" to gauge against.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "dunbar_dra" <h_dunbar@...> wrote:I would not hesitate to hedge a big bet by taking -175 on
Pittsburgh, if the -175 is still available. The line (as I write)
at Pinnacle Sports is +172/-182, indicating that the fair line is
around -177. Therefore, taking -175 on the Steelers is a slight+EV
bet. And you get the variance reduction benefit.
--Dunbar
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Tom Robertson <thomasrrobertson@>
wrote:
>
> >Again, thanks to all who kicked around my Super Bowl betting
deal. I think I'll just stick to the original 40 to 1 bet and see
what happens. I really wavered on this as guaranteed money makesa
This same "eastern team...darling of the media" Pittsburgh was a 9.5
pt underdog to Indianapolis 2 games ago. Where was the Eastern
money then? Pittsburgh was still a 3 pt dog vs Denver in the
Conference title game a week later. The bettors had no trouble
making either Denver or Indianapolis a solid fav over Pittsburgh.
The current line is Pittsburgh -4, and that is probably very
close to how much better the Steelers are than Seattle, given the
information now available.
You are correct that there has been a small historic bias in favor
of betting dogs. But this bias should not be over estimated or
overbet. This past season was a disaster for most cappers who rely
heavily on the dog bias. Favorites covered the spread at a
devastating rate. Some fairly savvy cappers are wondering publicly
if there has been a fundamental change, and questioned whether it
will still make sense to lean to the dogs going forward.
--Dunbar
The line is where it's at not because of how strong these teams
are
but because of WHO they are. Pittsburgh is an eastern team with a
high profile and the darling of the media while Seattle flies
under
the radar. 75% of the sports betting public are the Will Rogers
of
sports betting. They never seen a favorite they didn't like. If
they don't think the favorite will cover they won't bet. It's
absolutely foreign to their nature to take points. Meanwhile,
I've
been hanging around this state for years and reading the published
stats of the books, published by the gaming commission on a
yearly,
quarterly, monthly, and even weekend level. On weekends where the
dogs mostly covered the books cleaned up. On weekends where the
favorites mostly covered the books got fleeced. The dirty little
secret of sports betting is the books don't always go for
splitting
the betting fifty/fifty. If they take in 55% of the money on the
favorite, but the favorite has only a 38% chance of covering they
are in a favorable position, hence, they clean up when the dog
covers and lose when the favorites cover. I don't spend a whole
lot
of time on sports betting but I will jump when I see a line way
out
of whack. I think that's what we have here. My only options are
to take the points or bet Seattle on the money line. Pittsburgh
is
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "mickeycrimm" <mickeycrimm@...> wrote:
not an option. And if Pittsburgh covers this game it will only be
negative reinforcement for all the Will Rogers of sports betting.
You're exactly right about this season. The Las Vegas Advisor's tout,
Fezzik, got hammered since he picked mostly dogs all year. The sheep
that followed his lead, and who bet with a $100 base unit, got hit for
nearly $3100.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "dunbar_dra" <h_dunbar@...> wrote:
This past season was a disaster for most cappers who rely
heavily on the dog bias. Favorites covered the spread at a
devastating rate. Some fairly savvy cappers are wondering publicly
if there has been a fundamental change, and questioned whether it
will still make sense to lean to the dogs going forward.--Dunbar
This year there were a few strong teams and a lot of poor teams,
especially in the NFC. The historical balance just wasn't there.
But I doubt that is a "fundamental change" going forward.
Seattle and Pittsburgh had 4 common opponents, but comparisons based
on those games don't help much, except to suggest that Jacksonville
(it beat both teams) is better than Seattle and Pittsburgh.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "dunbar_dra" <h_dunbar@...> wrote:
The current line is Pittsburgh -4, and that is probably very
close to how much better the Steelers are than Seattle, given the
information now available.You are correct that there has been a small historic bias in favor
of betting dogs. But this bias should not be over estimated or
overbet. This past season was a disaster for most cappers who rely
heavily on the dog bias. Favorites covered the spread at a
devastating rate. Some fairly savvy cappers are wondering publicly
if there has been a fundamental change, and questioned whether it
will still make sense to lean to the dogs going forward.--Dunbar
Guess who had the dog in both those games. Indianapolis hadn't
played a meaningful game in a month and Dungy's kid destroyed their
morale. A clear cut case of taking the points. All those
woodchoppers laying the wood on Indianapolis just backs up my
point. One season of favorites covering might change long term
statistics by a couple of decimal points at the most. I don't
change VP strategy when I'm on a losing streak and I don't change
sports betting strategy when I'm on a losing streak either. If I
have mud on my face when this game is over, well, I've lost count of
how many times I've had mud on my face, so what the hell?
This same "eastern team...darling of the media" Pittsburgh was a
9.5
pt underdog to Indianapolis 2 games ago. Where was the Eastern
money then? Pittsburgh was still a 3 pt dog vs Denver in the
Conference title game a week later. The bettors had no trouble
making either Denver or Indianapolis a solid fav over Pittsburgh.The current line is Pittsburgh -4, and that is probably very
close to how much better the Steelers are than Seattle, given the
information now available.You are correct that there has been a small historic bias in favor
of betting dogs. But this bias should not be over estimated or
overbet. This past season was a disaster for most cappers who
rely
heavily on the dog bias. Favorites covered the spread at a
devastating rate. Some fairly savvy cappers are wondering
publicly
if there has been a fundamental change, and questioned whether it
will still make sense to lean to the dogs going forward.--Dunbar
>
> The line is where it's at not because of how strong these teams
are
> but because of WHO they are. Pittsburgh is an eastern team with
a
> high profile and the darling of the media while Seattle flies
under
> the radar. 75% of the sports betting public are the Will Rogers
of
> sports betting. They never seen a favorite they didn't like.
If
> they don't think the favorite will cover they won't bet. It's
> absolutely foreign to their nature to take points. Meanwhile,
I've
> been hanging around this state for years and reading the
published
> stats of the books, published by the gaming commission on a
yearly,
> quarterly, monthly, and even weekend level. On weekends where
the
> dogs mostly covered the books cleaned up. On weekends where the
> favorites mostly covered the books got fleeced. The dirty
little
> secret of sports betting is the books don't always go for
splitting
> the betting fifty/fifty. If they take in 55% of the money on
the
> favorite, but the favorite has only a 38% chance of covering
they
> are in a favorable position, hence, they clean up when the dog
> covers and lose when the favorites cover. I don't spend a whole
lot
> of time on sports betting but I will jump when I see a line way
out
> of whack. I think that's what we have here. My only options
are
> to take the points or bet Seattle on the money line. Pittsburgh
is
> not an option. And if Pittsburgh covers this game it will only
be
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "dunbar_dra" <h_dunbar@...> wrote:
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "mickeycrimm" <mickeycrimm@> wrote:
> negative reinforcement for all the Will Rogers of sports betting.
>