10-28-06, 05:49 AM
|
#1
|
|
|
These plays will go 3-1 Now guess which one will lose?
Chicago -15.5
KC -4
NO -1
SD -9
Which one will lose?
Let's see who is right...
|
|
|
|
10-28-06, 08:19 AM
|
#2
|
|
|
San Diego
|
|
|
|
10-28-06, 08:38 AM
|
#3
|
|
|
I think Chicago but maybe KC as well 
NO is a lock and I like SD too. |
|
|
|
10-28-06, 09:18 AM
|
#4
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by imgv94
Chicago -15.5
KC -4
NO -1
SD -9
Which one will lose?
Let's see who is right...
|
Who is the QB for KC????? That game was looking good, but now Huard might not start???? NO is no lock either, the only game I like this week is not even on this list....CAROLINA. They are at home -5 against a team that has an issue at QB........Romo at QB in a hostile environment, they are going to be in his face all day. |
|
|
|
10-28-06, 10:23 AM
|
#5
|
|
|
The Chiefs.
Just to much going on in that game with injuries, on both sides of the ball. Its a toss up type game.
|
|
|
|
10-28-06, 12:22 PM
|
#6
|
|
|
SD aint covering NO 9 pts i can tell everyone that right now. STL just won the world series and i bet they are hyped up more than ever. there going into SD and they sure as hell dont want to loose this week.
i think STL will win straight out.
|
|
|
|
10-28-06, 12:26 PM
|
#7
|
|
|
I think SD is the only one I would take...the rest IDK maybe NO won't win
|
|
|
|
10-28-06, 04:36 PM
|
#8
|
|
|
I think we're looking at 2-2 with those picks.
|
|
|
|
10-28-06, 04:36 PM
|
#9
|
|
|
Hopefully one of the first two, because I'm liking both of the last two.
|
|
|
|
10-28-06, 07:08 PM
|
#10
|
|
|
I am lovin' KC this weekend.
|
|
|
|
10-28-06, 07:46 PM
|
#11
|
|
|
I think the Rams will cover with ease on Sunday.
|
|
|
|
10-28-06, 08:50 PM
|
#12
|
|
|
If CHI's backdoor is open with more of a football number like
16 (which is where the majority of SBR-listed books currently
have it), then I'll say hopefully SF, because, like Razz, I'm liking the last 2 and though I'm not wagering on NO, I love
'La Law: Peyton, Brees, McCallister and Bush'.
|
|
|
|
10-29-06, 04:38 PM
|
#13
|
|
|
If someone can figure out how I came up with these plays you are one sharp phucker...
These plays are 2-1 so far and SD is up by 14...
|
|
|
|
10-29-06, 05:01 PM
|
#14
|
|
|
I hope you do go 3-1 because I ended up taking SD. Also took Den -3
|
|
|
|
10-29-06, 05:08 PM
|
#15
|
|
|
I didn't bet these games.. I was just doing an experiment..
|
|
|
|
10-29-06, 05:12 PM
|
#16
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Illusion
I hope you do go 3-1 because I ended up taking SD. Also took Den -3
|
so did I after being certain on the colts before coming on here.
Plays I nearly made and didn't
pits -9.5 playing hopless
bears -15.5 poo
giants/tampa under 3 poo
why are denver not running?? Pound those Colts |
|
|
|
10-29-06, 09:17 PM
|
#17
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Illusion
I hope you do go 3-1 because I ended up taking SD. Also took Den -3
|
that's quite a switch....going from the rams covering with ease to then going to san diego |
|
|
|
10-29-06, 09:21 PM
|
#18
|
|
|
I thought only touts switched there plays like that  |
|
|
|
10-29-06, 09:22 PM
|
#19
|
|
|
These plays went 3-1 like I knew they would...
Well I'll post these fades next week too... Yes thats right I am fading someone who is clueless in picking winners.. HAHA!!
|
|
|
|
10-29-06, 09:23 PM
|
#20
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by imgv94
These plays went 3-1 like I knew they would...
Well I'll post these fades next week too... Yes thats right I am fading someone who is clueless in picking winners.. HAHA!!
|
Please, share your info. 
Thanks for posting IMG.  |
|
|
|
10-29-06, 09:25 PM
|
#21
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by imgv94
These plays went 3-1 like I knew they would...
Well I'll post these fades next week too... Yes thats right I am fading someone who is clueless in picking winners.. HAHA!!
|
Nothing wrong with fading anyone bro. Hell, When I'm on a cold streak i'll do that from time to time myself.
BTW, Who you fading anyways if you don't mind me asking? (pm me if you don't wanna post it publicly) |
|
|
|
10-29-06, 09:34 PM
|
#22
|
|
|
Let me know too img...I have someone in mind.
|
|
|
|
10-29-06, 09:50 PM
|
#23
|
|
Nolite te bastardes carborundorum.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by imgv94
If someone can figure out how I came up with these plays you are one sharp phucker...
|
Fading Mudcat, are we?
Whatever your personal opinion of him you really do need to come to terms with the fact that this is in fact what he does for a living. |
|
|
|
10-29-06, 09:52 PM
|
#24
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ganchrow
Fading Mudcat, are we?
Whatever your personal opinion of him you really do need to come to terms with the fact that this is in fact what he does for a living.
|
Im not sure if they are MC's, because I dont know him to post his plays. Something he dont like to do. Unless I missed something? |
|
|
|
10-29-06, 09:55 PM
|
#25
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by onlòóker
Im not sure if they are MC's, because I dont know him to post his plays. Something he dont like to do. Unless I missed something?
|
Maybe they were his BTP entries. That's my only guess. |
|
|
|
10-29-06, 09:57 PM
|
#26
|
|
Nolite te bastardes carborundorum.
|
They were fades of his BTP entries.
|
|
|
|
10-29-06, 10:05 PM
|
#27
|
|
|
Ganch nailed it, here they are:
409 San Francisco 49ers +16½ X
413 Seattle Seahawks +6
415 Baltimore Ravens +2
417 St. Louis Rams +9
|
|
|
|
10-29-06, 10:14 PM
|
#28
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ganchrow
Fading Mudcat, are we?
Whatever your personal opinion of him you really do need to come to terms with the fact that this is in fact what he does for a living.
|
I do this for a living as well.. |
|
|
|
10-29-06, 11:06 PM
|
#29
|
|
Nolite te bastardes carborundorum.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by imgv94
I do this for a living as well..
|
If you're going to continue allow your personal opinions about a particular individual to color your thoughts on his picks then I predict that your tenure as a professional gambler is likely to be rather short.
If you don't like a particular bettor's set of picks it's perfectly reasonable to say so. However, using those picks as a thinly veiled excuse for an ad hominem attack should be beneath you as both an individual and as a professional gambler. |
|
|
|
10-29-06, 11:08 PM
|
#30
|
|
|
You are right Ganchrow..
|
|
|
|
10-29-06, 11:54 PM
|
#31
|
|
|
i agree
i don't think it's cool to go around gloating about fading people (unless it's a tout)
especially if you had a good week and they had a bad week
cause i'm sure if the roles were reversed you wouldn't want it thrown in your face
|
|
|
|
10-30-06, 12:00 AM
|
#32
|
|
|
Looks like IMG maned up and realized. Very nice IMG. |
|
|
|
10-30-06, 12:04 AM
|
#33
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by onlòóker
Looks like IMG maned up and realized. Very nice IMG. |
I concur looker  |
|
|
|
10-30-06, 12:06 AM
|
#34
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by onlòóker
Looks like IMG maned up and realized. Very nice IMG. |
not really "very nice" imo
very nice would be an apology |
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
