It was an UNDERPALOOZA! If you bet OVER yesterday--you're screwed!

Vituperate · Sep 11, 2017

I read a really good piece a few days ago about how the defenses are usually ahead of the offenses in week one of the NFL. I filed the info away thinking that I would shade a few under plays. But when the smoke cleared and the fog lifted I realized that the only under play I made was the damn Rams/49ers OVER debacle!

The worst damn handicapper in the country could have gotten rich off of just one word yesterday-UNDER!

FG O/U: 2-12

FH O/U 2-12

And usually low scoring first halves result in the coaches designing aggressive offensive game plans for the second half. Did that happen? HELL NO!

2nd Half O/U: 2-12!!!!

By the time I realize what was happening I thought I should just follow the trend last night in Dallas and play the under everywhere. Did I? Hell no! I could not believe this trend would continue and probably would regress to the mean.

WTF??!! I don't think I have ever seen this strong of pattern before over decades of pro football betting.

Since I missed the boat yesterday--should I play the FG/FH and 2nd half unders tonight? Sigh.

popcorn-eatinggif

chonce · Sep 11, 2017

I have bet two totals this season, both OVER and both cashed. BUT, one was Thursday and the other was a 2nd half Team Total (Jags OVER 7 -117) which was almost fucked by a missed 39 yard field goal by Myers (who made up for it by making a 39-yarder with a few minutes left).

But yes, it has been underville for sure. Too early for Vegas to start adjusting, I think. Probably just a statistical outlier.

Or maybe all these offenses/coaches suck. I mean the playcalling by SF was a joke. Indy, NYG -- are they capable of TDs? Some shameful offense this week. Only Detroit, KC, Jags, LAR, NE scored 27 or more. And I doubt Jags, Rams sustain that kind of thing. (Oak had 26, helped by an absurd onside kick call).

chonce · Sep 11, 2017

Vituperate said:
I

Since I missed the boat yesterday--should I play the FG/FH and 2nd half unders tonight? Sigh.

popcorn-eatinggif

One week is still a pretty small sample size. I would not bet the under just based on this week's trends. If you like the under anyway and this adds some confidence to you, that is fine. Hell, if you were on the fence and you think this is evidence of something systemic (officiating, rules, coaching, talent level etc...) that maybe it helps you jump off.

But just plowing on a bunch of unders in the hopes that this trend continues. Really, 14 games is just too small a sample size. I have won 14 bets in a row and lost 14 bets in a row. But neither was evident of my ability to pick games. Just a statistical outlier. But I am not a statistician, so others may have smarter things to say.

Serbone · Sep 11, 2017

Small sample size but were the refs allowing more contact by the DB's on the WR's?

Were they calling more offensive holding?

Or something?

The point of emphasis bullshit?

I do not know, just wondering...

Vituperate · Sep 11, 2017

Agree to all. But I will focus more on finding OVERS next weekend. I think OCs will be forced to innovate more in order to manufacture points and taking chances will either score more or lead to defensive scoring. I look for a slight reversal next week.