[pat venditto]

betting -110 all u need to hit to win is 53% so 55% would be ideal long term so **** the haters. gl

[SBR Lou]

I'm surprised you only like NO for game, I was thinking of betting 1st half, side, and ML.

[diogee]

Riding the Hornets as well. GL Iwin...first half should be solid as well. No chance in hell the Spurs come out and shoot 9 of 17 from deep again.

[SBR Lou]

If we do take the first half too, careful guys, we can't count it as a play or Betlilimbroke99 will go into conniptions.

[chipski]

it is actually sheer brillance to belong to 3 or 4 different books and play 3 or 4 different wagers on the same game . there really is no such thing as correlation but we dont want to even go there . the o/u plays can miss by a half pt or hit by a half pt or a pt . is almost a joke alot of times watching this unfold in the last seconds of the 1st q , half ..
can be no different than spinning the wheel ***

spurs at hornets over 93.5 1st half was one of my plays and the first half score was 94 pts .
lines aint no joke alot of the time . (the list is as long as ....
is brillant to capitalize off of one game with multiple wagers and spread it around ( esp when it works out perfectly . ) 3rd eye

[chipski]

we tend to think of the pistons in the east as defensive monsters right , so we tend to think under when they play .
we tend to think of the spurs as the same so we play under and correlate wagers like under for the first half ....
because we think like this does not mean the under will hit for the first half or for the game .
SO WHERE IS THE TRUE CORRELATION ?

LITERALLY > any game can go over or under by a pt or 2 or the half pt for 1st q , 2nd q , 3rd q , 4th q , 1st half and 2nd half . always

because we see teams matching up to reach certain #s does not erase the screw job , if it did we would not be in a forum . we would already know it all and there would be nothing to talk about .

dont forget about overtime too . we correalte a game to go under with 5 different wagers and the beaatch goes into ot .

[chipski]

yeah this is not the thread to break it down in , that would be the think tank . lol

[SBR Lou]

Thank you for enlightening me, I just wish you could enlighten bookmaker or betjam so that I could parlay these non-correlated wagers.

They won't let you parlay them but they don't give a sh*t if you bet each one individually.

[ChuteBoxe]

This whole debate can easily be ended. Why doesn't someone ask in the think tank, what the percentage over the past 10-20 years is, regarding a team winning both the half, and the game, in the same game ats. Then, we can see in the long run, whether his number is really inflated or not. Once and for all. I personally think the number will be lower than everyone thinks.

[babaoriley]

Who gives a sh!t? He could have just as easily lost both sides of these "correlated" wagers and had a horrendous record. I would like to see the back-checking done for entertainment reasons, but bottom line W-L% shouldn't be a question here, though the concern is duly noted.

[mofome]

Who gives a sh!t? He could have just as easily lost both sides of these "correlated" wagers and had a horrendous record.

obviously

[Panic]

Wow. This one's a tough one. Hard to go against the Spurs after an embarrassing lose. They usually respond very well after that. GL to everyone on this.

[dannyt76]

GL Iwin. I'm on the Hornets for the game and 1st half as well.

[EaglesPhan36]

Yeah I'm with the Spurs ML again. I thought going in they would get one of these 2 and still believe that.

[Panic]

Yeah. Duncan wont go 1-9 again. The hardest man on Duncan after a bad game is himself. He takes it personel. I'm thinking about laying the -120 on the prop bet that Duncan goes over 22.5 in pts. Hornets are a great team though and very tough at home. Just a hard game to roll on.

[SportNut]

....although I strongly disagree with you on the record stuff, lets just all get paid and get that cell back on!!!

[BuddyBear]

Line is up to 2.5. Its still a good bet

not really.....

[Panic]

They already lost by 19, this time Hornets by 10

Last time the Spurs went down 2-0 in a series was 2001 against the Lakers. They got swept. They have been to the playoffs for the next 7 years straight and it hasn't happened since. Dont act so cavalier about it. Like its an easy bet. There is a reason the Spurs havent went down 2-0 to a team in 7 years.

[ILMW]

Kind of like no horse since 1929 or something like that won the derby from the 20 spot. Things happen and their is no such thing set in stone.

[Panic]

Kind of like no horse since 1929 or something like that won the derby from the 20 spot. Things happen and their is no such thing set in stone.

Comparing horses to basketball. Nice.

[Panic]

I never set its set in stone. I just think Hornets win by 10

Hey, you know I'll be the first one to say you're a great player, but this game is a tough one. All the way around. I hope you hit. No doubt.