Gambling 911 and an article

printman · Aug 10, 2003

On the front page it says Carolina Panthers were the best last year as a favorite against the spread and the year before they were the worst. Clearly incorrect. I don't know was first but I do know the Raiders had a much better record vs the spread as a favorite last year. Bogus info

StoneCold+ · Aug 10, 2003

CONSIDER THE SOURCE

NICKYTHEFISH · Aug 10, 2003

I think it depends on what you use for a closing line as some may differ a bit from others but I have Clev. and Oak. both at 11-5 and then Car. at 10-6.

Reg season only.

SixthSense · Aug 10, 2003

Sorry, but during the regular season, they are right.

Team Wins Losses Ties %
Carolina 3 1 0 75.0%
Philadelphia 8 4 0 66.7%
Oakland 8 5 0 61.5%
Tampa Bay 8 5 0 61.5%
Baltimore 3 2 0 60.0%
Buffalo 3 2 1 60.0%
Miami 7 5 0 58.3%
New York Jets 4 3 1 57.1%
Atlanta 6 5 0 54.5%
Cleveland 3 3 0 50.0%
Seattle 2 2 0 50.0%
Tennessee 5 5 0 50.0%
New Orleans 5 6 1 45.5%
New York Giants 5 6 0 45.5%
Kansas City 3 4 0 42.9%
Green Bay 5 7 0 41.7%
Minnesota 2 3 0 40.0%
San Diego 2 3 0 40.0%
Washington 2 3 0 40.0%
Denver 4 7 1 36.4%
Indianapolis 4 8 0 33.3%
Jacksonville 3 6 0 33.3%
Pittsburgh 4 10 0 28.6%
San Francisco 3 8 2 27.3%
St. Louis 3 9 0 25.0%
New England 2 7 0 22.2%
Arizona 0 2 0 0.0%
Chicago 0 3 0 0.0%
Cincinnati 0 1 0 0.0%
Dallas 0 3 0 0.0%
Detroit 0 1 0 0.0%
Houston 0 1 0 0.0%

NICKYTHEFISH · Aug 10, 2003

Sorry read that wrong.Carolina was only favored five times and had a 4-1 record where Oakland was favored 13 out of 16 times and went 8-4-1.Just looking over quickly it looks like Sting or whoever wrote that was right percentage wise but you would have made more betting Oak as a chalk.

printman · Aug 10, 2003

It is when favored not the total games for the line so Carolina was only favored 4 times and the article was not talking percentage

SixthSense · Aug 10, 2003

They were talking about covering the spread (as in how much they coverd versus the line). Carolina averaged covering by 9.5 points last year as a favorite. That was tops in the league. They also had the best turnaround from the year before, where they were about -15.0, for average cover margin as a favorite. So the article was accurate.

SurfRat · Aug 10, 2003

Consider the source, right STONE COLD.

TheGeneral+ · Aug 11, 2003

So here we have a good article from 911 that gets scrutinized. Some guys can't win. Rarely if ever see good feedback about the articles. So many good ones, but the bad ones are all that are looked for or talked about unless someone gets the good info from 911 and takes it to other forums acting as if they had the breaking news.

It's all good.

www.cappersnetwork.com · Aug 11, 2003

I was thinking the same thing General. Funny where some people choose to draw their lines in the sand.

MC

printman · Aug 11, 2003

The reason it is scrutinized is because it is not a good article. Don't you get it? Who gives a rats ass how much as team beats a spread by? The article does not elude to that until you are well into it and can be easily missed. It is not a good article you morons