[DoctorX79]

Im planning to hit Gb money line at +240 risk 500 to win 1200
and also take Dallas -6.5 at -110 risk 550 to win 500

Can i do this or my book could kick me out for doing theses kinds of bets?

[seaborneq]

Originally Posted by DoctorX79

Im planning to hit Gb money line at +240 risk 500 to win 1200
and also take Dallas -6.5 at -110 risk 550 to win 500

Can i do this or my book could kick me out for doing theses

inds of bets?

Have you thought of the consequences of Dallas winning by 6 or less with that bet?

[durito]

I think the book will encourage it

[tblues2005]

No I don't think they would care, they would hoping that Dallas would win by less than 6 points so you lose both ends.

[WileOut]

You shouldn't make that bet man. Big time loser in the long run.

Scenerios: GB wins, you win 1200-550=650.

Dallas wins by 6 or less: You lose 1050.

Dallas wins by 7 or more: You break even.

The chances of you losing 1050 are at best equal to GB winning the game (i.e. you winning 650). There is at best equal chance that Dallas will win by between 0-6 than there is for GB to win the game.

[Gurni]

Your book will probably love you..why would anyone make those bets? You pay the juice for both bets, and than what? What do you gain by doing this?

[Rollins08]

Be careful when you think your outsmarting your book.

[HedgeHog]

Very few people middle themselves intentionally. I'm guessing you like GB outright, so why offset it with Dal -6.5. That 6 point middle is potentially deadly. I figure Cowboys by 3 or 4, which would cost you dearly.

PS Better protection might be found on a 6pt tease on Dal-1/2 with Indy -1/2 for $500.

[biggamer3]

dumb bet as mentioned in here

[DoctorX79]

Ok i calculated how many games this year the favorite team won the game but did'nt cover the spread out of 352 games a push or lost ATS happened 33 times.
20 times in the AFC in 176 games and 13 times in the NFC.
thats 9.38% .
Dogs won 57 games straight up this year thats 16.19% of the time.
Lets say the dog ML is +200
Lets say every game were +200
I would have risk a total of $70400 to play both side of every game so far.
lose:$6603.52 so far
win: $11397.76
for a net profit of : $4794.24
Am i right here?

[MrX]

Originally Posted by DoctorX79

Lets say the dog ML is +200
Lets say every game were +200

Sure, it's great to say every game was +200, but what was the average payout of those 57 dog wins. Even if it was enough to make the these bets profitable for the season, you're looking at a small sample size to justify a bet without giving a sound reason for why these two plays should +EV.

But yes, the book would most likely welcome that bet with open arms, but it never hurts to ask them first. If you're clearing a bonus they may not want action on both sides, even with the large middle potential.

[BigBollocks]

Yes, it's completely legal to answer your question. GL Thursday...

[Mr Charles 76]

Originally Posted by seaborneq

Have you thought of the consequences of Dallas winning by 6 or less with that bet?

Which would be the most likely scenario IF Dallas wins.

[Mr Charles 76]

Originally Posted by HedgeHog

Better protection might be found on a 6pt tease on Dal-1/2 with Indy -1/2 for $500.

Great Insurance bet.

[pavyracer]

Originally Posted by DoctorX79

Im planning to hit Gb money line at +240 risk 500 to win 1200
and also take Dallas -6.5 at -110 risk 550 to win 500

Can i do this or my book could kick me out for doing theses kinds of bets?

You are better if you just make one bet for game. Maybe make the $500 bet GB money line. If it looks good till halftime leave it as is and hope it will cash for game. If it looks iffy at halftime see if you can make a bet the other way to hedge or do nothing and take the loss.

[hhsilver]

Originally Posted by DoctorX79

Ok i calculated how many games this year the favorite team won the game but did'nt cover the spread out of 352 games a push or lost ATS happened 33 times.
20 times in the AFC in 176 games and 13 times in the NFC.
thats 9.38% .
Dogs won 57 games straight up this year thats 16.19% of the time.
Lets say the dog ML is +200
Lets say every game were +200
I would have risk a total of $70400 to play both side of every game so far.
lose:$6603.52 so far
win: $11397.76
for a net profit of : $4794.24
Am i right here?

Those dogs that won 57 games - how many were at +6.5 or higher. I imagine most were in the +1 to +3.5 range. Are you overlooking this with your oversimplified logic ?
And the money line for those +1 to +3 dogs certainly doesn't get near +200.

[kissthecup]

FYI, a little specific info about this type of bet which, of course, doesn't work in the long run, at least historically in the NFL.

Let's assume that we only place bets when we can possibly make a profit. That eliminates games with small spreads where, say, the underdog pays -102 and the spread pays -110. Obviously we're losing either way here, so let's skip those.

Further, let's be smart and not put even amounts on both bets. Instead, let's distribute our bets so that we make the same maximum profit if either a) the underdog wins, or b) the favorite covers the spread. So we'll place 1 "unit" total on each game, but split it up so that we'll have, say, 0.6 units on the dog to win outright and 0.4 units on the favorite to cover. For each win, our profit will be something between 0 and 1 units, and for each loss we'll lose 1 unit.

If we had bet this way all season (at Pinnacle), we would have placed bets on 160 of the 176 NFL games. We would, as mentioned above, have won 127 times and lost 33 times. Our cumulative profit so far would be -4.53 units or -2.83%. Last year, for the entire season, the same method would have returned -2.24 units.

Perhaps we might try to better our return by focusing on games with bigger ML payouts; after all, the bigger the dog, the bigger our payout will be. Without getting too much into the actual figures, I can set a limit to the betting that would have produced a profit of .82 units in 112 bets last year, for a return of 0.74%. But that hardly seems worth it, and you'd have to get the -105 Pinnacle line pricing. If you're paying -110, it couldn't have been done for profit under any circumstances last year.

Basically, this type of betting is a slow bleed, where all of your small steps forward are eventually eaten by your huge leaps back. I would advise avoiding this method, at least in the NFL. What it takes for this to work are either better pays on the line (see MLB runline, NHL puckline) or looser lines in general (try NCAA football).

By the way, MrX makes an excellent point. While the average underdog line in the NFL this year is actually higher than your estimate at +272, the average payout when an underdog wins is only +195.

[Doug]

You could also do a prop

* Dallas to win 1-5 +400 Click here to bet on Dallas to win 1-5
* Dallas to win 6-10 +200 Click here to bet on Dallas to win 6-10
* Dallas to win 11-15 +400 Click here to bet on Dallas to win 11-15
* Dallas to win 16-20 +800 Click here to bet on Dallas to win 16-20
* Dallas to win 21-25 +1100 Click here to bet on Dallas to win 21-25
* Dallas to win 26-30 +1600 Click here to bet on Dallas to win 26-30
* Dallas to win 31-35 +2500 Click here to bet on Dallas to win 31-35
* Dallas to win 36+ +3300 Click here to bet on Dallas to win 36+

[Justin7]

A better play is to tease Dallas 6 points (at -240) and take GB on the moneyline at +260.

[LLXC]

How would that be any better?