Have always heard it is
But then you have guys contradict themselves & say you should never middle/hedge at halftime WITH THE SAME OR USUALLY BIGGER OPPORTUNITIES TO MIDDLE and stick with your original wager......#%()
But then you have guys contradict themselves & say you should never middle/hedge at halftime WITH THE SAME OR USUALLY BIGGER OPPORTUNITIES TO MIDDLE and stick with your original wager......#%()
I'm not sure how you guys think it's a different situation......???
Option 1
A regular middle as Hines asks about in this thread
Lets use a 4pt middle
We take New York +7.5 vs Orlando
Rashard Lewis & Hedo Turkoglu are then scratched from the lineup & the line drops to Orlando -3.5, so we take the other side, Orlando -3.5.
That gives up a legitimate 4points to land inbetween & to hit 2 winners.
We have NO IDEA ahead of time how it will end up, we are simply rolling the dice hoping it lands in the middle to hit both wagers.
Option 2
We take Phoenix/Golden State Under 244
Only 110 pts are scored in the 1st half
2nd half line is 115
We now have the option to either sit on our original wager, or play the over 115 WITH THE OPPORTUNTIY FOR A 19 POINT MIDDLE.
Once again, just like a regular middle, in most cases we have no idea how it will end up, but just like that regular middle, we now have a chance to win 2 WAGERS instead of one at no risk except juice.......JUST LIKE A REGULAR MIDDLE
Now which is a better bargain in your opinion......a 4 point middle, which is unheard of usually anyhow, or a 19 point middle in which the exact same risks, circumstances, and outcomes are the same?
I'm not arguing guys, just having good discussion........:toast:
Option 1
A regular middle as Hines asks about in this thread
Lets use a 4pt middle
We take New York +7.5 vs Orlando
Rashard Lewis & Hedo Turkoglu are then scratched from the lineup & the line drops to Orlando -3.5, so we take the other side, Orlando -3.5.
That gives up a legitimate 4points to land inbetween & to hit 2 winners.
We have NO IDEA ahead of time how it will end up, we are simply rolling the dice hoping it lands in the middle to hit both wagers.
Option 2
We take Phoenix/Golden State Under 244
Only 110 pts are scored in the 1st half
2nd half line is 115
We now have the option to either sit on our original wager, or play the over 115 WITH THE OPPORTUNTIY FOR A 19 POINT MIDDLE.
Once again, just like a regular middle, in most cases we have no idea how it will end up, but just like that regular middle, we now have a chance to win 2 WAGERS instead of one at no risk except juice.......JUST LIKE A REGULAR MIDDLE
Now which is a better bargain in your opinion......a 4 point middle, which is unheard of usually anyhow, or a 19 point middle in which the exact same risks, circumstances, and outcomes are the same?
I'm not arguing guys, just having good discussion........:toast:
Rule of thumb I use -- 1/2 point on totals for NBA is worth about 1.2%, so a full point is worth 2.4%. So 4 points is worth almost 10%.
Of course, more than likely one side is right, so why play that one. Take the one that's out to lunch and have a 60% rate of return.
Another reason not to middle is the bad line might null the bet since they were so out of whack.
Of course, more than likely one side is right, so why play that one. Take the one that's out to lunch and have a 60% rate of return.
Another reason not to middle is the bad line might null the bet since they were so out of whack.
Me and Iceman got into a discussion about this last time I posted about middles.
I did some looking and I didn't find statistically significant evidence to just bet the side at one book rather than scalp or middle.
Tested it over a decent amount of games but just didn't find the evidence there. Now, if I'm finding 2-3 point differences on a regular basis that's one thing, but I'm not.
