Hooligans Plays Baccarat

NFL Week #2 Plays

  • Start date •
  • Replies
    26 Replies •
  • Views 2,056 Views
Follow
wal66

wal66

Well-Known Member
Since
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
11,716
Score
2
Tokens
0
Went 3-2 last week which for me is actually pretty good.

These are the games I'm thinking about this week. None are plays yet since I have to wait until game day to get my action in.

Tampa Bay/NY Giants OVER
Kansas City/Buffalo UNDER
Oakland/Miami UNDER
Detroit/San Francisco OVER
Dallas minus the points
Washington minus the points.

I don't have a play yet on the Thursday night game but I did a little research on the TOTAL history between these teams. I went back through the previous 10 meetings between Chicago and Green Bay and the highest TOTAL set for these two was 47. Of those 10 meetings only once did they combine to score more than 51 points and that was in their last meeting in December of 2011. Trends are trends because they happen more than not. So I am currently leaning to the UNDER 51 tonight.
 
Well that didn't take long. No sooner than I post I managed to convince myself that "I was on to something"!
I'm probably on something more than on to something but I do tend to trick myself into thinking I have a clue more than reallity allows it to actually be true.

Play #1:

Chicago/Green Bay UNDER 51 :please:
 
Washington minus the points...

20100226-ackbar_trap_01.jpg
 
i'm on the over tonight. the trend i'm following is that there has NEVER been an under in a GB/CHI Thursday night game before December.

also, both defenses are pretty porous compared to what the general public seems to think of them, and the Bears offense is ALOT more potent now than it has been at any time in the last 10 years.

the last Over, was the most recent game and Cade McCnown was the QB for that game and Forte was injured.

I think tonight they make it two overs in a row
 
Vegas Dave
Washington minus the points...

20100226-ackbar_trap_01.jpg
Click to expand...

It's not a trap. The public will probably be all over this ONLY because of RGIII and the impressive win last week at New Orleans. I'm on this because I think outside of RGIII this Redskins team has some potential. I'm not overlooking St Louis entirely because they are an improving team themselves.

I haven't played it yell and may not but I probably will.
 
wal66
It's not a trap. The public will probably be all over this ONLY because of RGIII and the impressive win last week at New Orleans. I'm on this because I think outside of RGIII this Redskins team has some potential. I'm not overlooking St Louis entirely because they are an improving team themselves.

I haven't played it yell and may not but I probably will.
Click to expand...

The Redskins were 5-11 (5-10-1 ATS) last year in the historically brutal NFC East.

The Rams were 2-14 (3-13 ATS) last year in the historically laughable NFC West.

You think you are the only one that likes Washington on paper better than St. Louis? The Rams were one of the most profitable fades of the year last year, and this week they are hosting a guy that just hosed the Saints on the road for 40 points.

WAS -3 may win, but it is a trap.
 
Vegas Dave
The Redskins were 5-11 (5-10-1 ATS) last year in the historically brutal NFC East.

The Rams were 2-14 (3-13 ATS) last year in the historically laughable NFC West.

You think you are the only one that likes Washington on paper better than St. Louis? The Rams were one of the most profitable fades of the year last year, and this week they are hosting a guy that just hosed the Saints on the road for 40 points.

WAS -3 may win, but it is a trap.
Click to expand...


I used to get presents on Christmas mornings but Santa Clause wasn't bringing them.
We used to hunt Easter Eggs when I was a kid but no Easter Bunny was hiding those eggs.
This line is set to get action on Washington but it ain't a trap.
 
Dave, I guess I don't belive in traps as actual traps. I view the term "trap" as more of an excuse in terms of gambling. We bet a game that looks too easy and it loses and we immediately call it a trap.

Given your time and experience in the industry I'm a little surprised you use the term trap. I'm not blasting you or anything just surprised is all.

So yes in terms of this line appearing to persuade action based on the public perception in general of St Louis and especially with the hype over RGIII and the HUGE win at New Orleans last week for Washington this qualifies as a "trap".

That said though I honestly feel that Washington has built a decent team and as we saw with Denver last year when a team believes in their "face" it can make average players step up and good players become even better. I've never been a Washington fan but I see potential with this team and I like them as a play this week.

Not trying to convince you or anyone else and come Monday I won't have a problem with you returning to say "I tried to warn ya" if they lose or fail to at least cover.
 
wal66
Well that didn't take long. No sooner than I post I managed to convince myself that "I was on to something"!
I'm probably on something more than on to something but I do tend to trick myself into thinking I have a clue more than reallity allows it to actually be true.

Play #1:

Chicago/Green Bay UNDER 51 :please:
Click to expand...

Prayers were answered. That's a start. Tella better look out, she's next!
 
wal66
Dave, I guess I don't belive in traps as actual traps. I view the term "trap" as more of an excuse in terms of gambling. We bet a game that looks too easy and it loses and we immediately call it a trap.

Given your time and experience in the industry I'm a little surprised you use the term trap. I'm not blasting you or anything just surprised is all.

So yes in terms of this line appearing to persuade action based on the public perception in general of St Louis and especially with the hype over RGIII and the HUGE win at New Orleans last week for Washington this qualifies as a "trap".

That said though I honestly feel that Washington has built a decent team and as we saw with Denver last year when a team believes in their "face" it can make average players step up and good players become even better. I've never been a Washington fan but I see potential with this team and I like them as a play this week.

Not trying to convince you or anyone else and come Monday I won't have a problem with you returning to say "I tried to warn ya" if they lose or fail to at least cover.
Click to expand...

Use whatever word you like. I think that any line that is pretty clearly trying to entice people onto one side more heavily than the other can be called a "trap" line... the point being that the books are trying to trap you into taking that side.

You shouldn't be surprised, considering my "Philosophy picks" have been blathering about traps for years.

I'm not a "told ya so" kinda guy. At the end of the day, guys like you and me are just making the best educated guesses we can. For all of my "time and experience in the industry", I'm still a complete hack. But the one rule that I have come to find to be true more often than any other is that if the books are taking heavy action on one side without doing much to dissuade it, the other side comes out on top more often than not. But certainly not always; look at New England last week.

If St. Louis wins by two touchdowns Sunday I won't come back and talk shit, just as I imagine you won't be talking shit to me if Washington wins and covers. Was just offering my opinion; that's what these threads are for right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.