Whats up with the NFL dogs? It seems to me that they never cover anymore. I started noticing this last season when teams were covering huge point spreads. It would seem at first glance that in a parity driven NFL the dogs would be the ticket right? You take off the top 5-6 elite teams from the stack and they all match up pretty well with each other. I just don't get it. Someone, anyone, tell me what the fvck is going on here.
Nfl Dogs?
- Thread starter ThunderGod
- Start date
ThunderGod,
If I recall correctly, there were indeed quite a few dogs that covered the point spread last week in the NFL with the NINERS being the most lopsided (the other way of course) one of them all....
If I recall correctly, there were indeed quite a few dogs that covered the point spread last week in the NFL with the NINERS being the most lopsided (the other way of course) one of them all....
I show favs 9 and dogs 6. Then you have Atl/Phil whichever way you want to score it.
Not only the dogs covered but they won s/u. Week 1 was kinda wacky imo, we will see how teams are really going to perform in Week 2.
When dogs do cover they win SU most of the time. So seeing that the dogs that covered this week won SU is no surprise.
I ran my qucikie numbers...
DOGS since 1989:
1251-2505-4 SU (33.3%)
1887-1764-109 ATS (51.7%)(ave line +5.6)
Covers that were not SU wins 636. NON losses that were not SU wins 745 (636 plus 109 pushes) So true covers (when the team lost but not by enough) is 33.7%. So you have a 2-1 chance of cashing a ML bet than you do getting a cover. The only thing that makes betting the line an option is your push possibility. it is only about 3%, but it is enough to make a profit a loss.
So when you break it down, it is more profittable to bet your dogs on the ML, than it is plus the points, on a couple points. But only at the right holds on both sides of the play.
At 33.3% you have to have a median ML price of +200. A +5.5 dog(the average dog spread) is generally going to be +215-225.
At 51.7% you are going to have to have a hold of -107. If you are betting at -110 you will lose in the long run. If you are betting -104 you will show a slight profit.
But when you factor in the non losses, then it makes you non loss rate 53% so even at -110 if you bet all dogs you would show a slight profit.
So it all depends on break downs on which approach make more sense. Obviously this is figuring that you are betting dogs and dogs only.
But IMO if I am going to bet a dog I am going to take them on the ML, especailly since I won't bet regular games with DD spreads.
I ran my qucikie numbers...
DOGS since 1989:
1251-2505-4 SU (33.3%)
1887-1764-109 ATS (51.7%)(ave line +5.6)
Covers that were not SU wins 636. NON losses that were not SU wins 745 (636 plus 109 pushes) So true covers (when the team lost but not by enough) is 33.7%. So you have a 2-1 chance of cashing a ML bet than you do getting a cover. The only thing that makes betting the line an option is your push possibility. it is only about 3%, but it is enough to make a profit a loss.
So when you break it down, it is more profittable to bet your dogs on the ML, than it is plus the points, on a couple points. But only at the right holds on both sides of the play.
At 33.3% you have to have a median ML price of +200. A +5.5 dog(the average dog spread) is generally going to be +215-225.
At 51.7% you are going to have to have a hold of -107. If you are betting at -110 you will lose in the long run. If you are betting -104 you will show a slight profit.
But when you factor in the non losses, then it makes you non loss rate 53% so even at -110 if you bet all dogs you would show a slight profit.
So it all depends on break downs on which approach make more sense. Obviously this is figuring that you are betting dogs and dogs only.
But IMO if I am going to bet a dog I am going to take them on the ML, especailly since I won't bet regular games with DD spreads.
True JJ. Remember last year Week 1: Cleveland 20, Ravens 3.
One live dog I like this week is the Bears to beat Detroit.
One live dog I like this week is the Bears to beat Detroit.
Jagermeister said:
After watching the BEARS playing against an anemic Redskin offense and LOSE, that would really suprise me but hey, you never know...
THE SHRINK
I was shocked that the Bears line went down. Det opened -2.5 and I figured it would hit 3 maybe even -3.5. Instead it dropped to -1.
OMNIVOROUS FROG
EOG Master
Here is the real breakdown. Out of the 16 lined games,
Home faves were 7-4
Home dogs were 3-2
Faves were 9-7.
Of the 7 dogs, 6 won outright.
The spread counted in one game, the Bears covering against the Gaming Tribes.
So taking a dog, hoping for a cover instead of a win worked 1 out of 16 times.
I think you will normally see more covers and less upsets, but in week one, no surprise there were surprises. There were no double digit spreads, and the highest 7 1/2, was covered.
Surprising also was the size of the dogs winning. 49ers, Saints, Miami and Bucs were all 5 to 6 1/2 point dogs winning outright. The baby faves just crushed opponents except for scoring challenged Gaming Tribes and false fave on MNF Philly. Again, it is just one week. Week two has a double digit spread, and one at 9. Much truer numbers will naturally surface over the next 3 weeks. But for now, hoping for that backdoor cover taking the dog is close to futile. Pick the team that wins the game.
Best Wishes...OF:+waving-5
Home faves were 7-4
Home dogs were 3-2
Faves were 9-7.
Of the 7 dogs, 6 won outright.
The spread counted in one game, the Bears covering against the Gaming Tribes.
So taking a dog, hoping for a cover instead of a win worked 1 out of 16 times.
I think you will normally see more covers and less upsets, but in week one, no surprise there were surprises. There were no double digit spreads, and the highest 7 1/2, was covered.
Surprising also was the size of the dogs winning. 49ers, Saints, Miami and Bucs were all 5 to 6 1/2 point dogs winning outright. The baby faves just crushed opponents except for scoring challenged Gaming Tribes and false fave on MNF Philly. Again, it is just one week. Week two has a double digit spread, and one at 9. Much truer numbers will naturally surface over the next 3 weeks. But for now, hoping for that backdoor cover taking the dog is close to futile. Pick the team that wins the game.
Best Wishes...OF:+waving-5
Losebet
EOG Enthusiast
KR/CB Allen Rossum (hamstring) was injured at the end of practice Wednesday, Sept. 14. He apparently tweaked his hamstring. He was listed as questionable for Sunday, Sept 18.
Interesting with Mathis already gone, looks like seattle :+firework
Interesting with Mathis already gone, looks like seattle :+firework
Injured CB would be of more concern to me win/losebet if Seattle was a more dangerous passing team. Even with no defensive coverage the Seattle receiving corps would continue to excell at dropping passes. Seattle really set up to run with Alexander but Holmgren still thinks he's in San Francisco with Young/Rice and Green Bay with Favre/Sharpe. Atlanta RBs are their strong suit with Vick/Mexico being an impressive intangible. Atlanta side for me in this one.
Bears play well at home. Especailly at Soldier Field. Watch the defense put up more points than the offense.