Very hot ex-wife Noles. I'm genuinely sorry things didn't work out. If Martina was still my girlfriend I would definitely share her with you.

Thanks I am always up for sloppy seconds. lol... Yea all of my ex girls are hot, been blessed in that area. lol

Update on my bet.

Today I put $10,400 on Wisconsin to beat Michigan by more than 6. If I win my bet I win $9,454.54. If I tie the spread I get my money back. However I actually did find one place that let me bet $1,100 on Wisconsin to win by 5.5. So if Wisconsin wins by 6, I actually make $1,000 which basically covers the cost of my trip assuming I get a massage.

So if Wisconsin wins by 7+ I'm a baller. If they win by 6 I get a free trip+massage. If Wisconsin wins by 5 or less, I'm a complete loser, irresponsible, compulsive gambler who should know better than to bet this much money on something he knows very little about.

Good luck... If you win you have to change your avatar.

Nice, I just bought a Springfield sub compact XD .40, I have had the Compact for about 2 years. Love the XDs

Ha! Can't do that. I will always bleed maize and blue. I just felt that this was an opportunity I couldn't pass up. Key word is "felt" cause I can't rationally justify my bet. Also, if I thought Michigan was a contender, I would never bet against them no matter what I felt about the spread. Given that Michigan is gonna go 4-8 this year, I don't mind betting against them since the games are already unwatchable anyways.

Laying 6 to Michigan as a home dog does seem pretty irresponsible.

you don't understand guys, michigan is awful. I know nobody watched them play Miami(OH) this year, or Utah probably unless you live in Michigan.

vs. Utah, we lost by 2, but that's because Utah had like a billion turnovers, and i think 4-5 15 yard personal foul penalties. It really should have been utah 21-3 at half, and ended like 28-10, and that was at michigan.

wisconsin > utah


also, the miamioh game, michigan was up by like 6 in the 3rd quarter, miami threw a fade into the end zone, receiver caught it, and the DB knocked it away at the last second.

in the fourth quarter, miami's QB overthrew a wide open WR on a fly by 2yrds tops, and if he caught it, he scores, miami is up by 4, and really, the game is over

michigan's "offense" is awful.

the spread should be like 12, but, since it's "michigan", and vegas doesn't realize that they suck, like really suck, the spread is 6.

this is actually a very EV bet. sure michigan will win sometimes, but wes is going to win this at least 80% of the time

call of duty 4, xbox360


noles, got any more pictures of your wife? they don't have to be nude, i just like looking at her

I did. Michigan isn't "awful" they just aren't good, but they are getting better. Threet is settling in and - other than putting the ball in the dirt six times - they outplayed Notre Dame (damning with faint praise, I know). More importantly though, Wisconsin isn't very good at all and betting against home dogs in general is bad policy. IMO the bet to make in this game is the Michigan ML which is paying +190. Surely Michigan wins this game 35% of the time.

No he won't. No game is that badly mispriced.

Plus, if I win this bet I get to take a month off of poker. Now that's really +EV.

I agree that Michigan outplayed ND. But lets not forget that ND is still one of the worst teams in college football right now, and Michigan found a way to lose to them.


This is the part of my bet that I can't defend on rational grounds. I simply don't know that much about Wisconsin. So you got me there. All I know is they're ranked in the top 10 and they have the most impressive road victory from the big ten, beating a solid Fresno State team.


This is a blanket statement that must be false.


This is another blanket statement that must be false. That's like saying no stock can ever be badly mispriced. While it may be nice to imagine that all markets are efficiently priced because all humans are perfectly rational utility maximizing agents, we know in reality this is a pipe dream. Things get mispriced all the time because humans aren't that rational and those that are good at spotting the inefficiencies become rich fairly quickly. My problem is I am not an expert in the sports betting realm. I'm an amateur trying to make an expert move. I know It's not rational. I'm just hoping to get lucky.

You're certainly permitted to knock my bet, and even the compulsive aspect of it, but don't make blatantly false statements cuz then I feel compelled to correct them and I don't want to clog this thread up with this topic because it's not that interesting.

here's the thing, wisconsin is one of the three top teams in the big ten, michigan is bottom half.

threet sucks, the offensive line suck, the defense is good most of the time.

look at what you said, they outplayed notre dame. so what, notre dame is just as bad or worse than michigan.


op, you are just like vegas, you just don't get HOW bad michigan is. i've been watching all my life, and that first half vs. utah was an eye opener. some mid-conference team comes in and just destroyed michigan in the first half. this isn't a case of last year where we got beat by two awesome quarter backs/spreads.

this is a case of we have a quarter back starting that would not even make the roster at ohio state, a freshman running back, who is two years is going to be awesome, and no offensive line.

that combination is not going to score many points vs. wisconsin, and wisconsin is going to score points on michigan.

the fact that it's at home doesn't change much.

i mean, if it was Ohio State at Kent State, would Kent be a favorite because it was home?

For the price its a hard deal to beat and the gun fits my hand better then the glocks and although I really wanted an H&K they just didnt fit as well either.

Had the pleasure of shooting a nice Kimber 1911 few months back....that got bumped high up my list after.....bit to big for carry but it will take the sigs place in the nightstand just fine

another question, how much does a new rifle or one of your new guns cost?


also, i played 2000 hands of POKER yesterday

It varies very widely....the ruger is prob the most expensive...around 1500 with a nice leopold scope.

The m4 will cost close to 2 before optics

The MP5 will cost close to 18k with permits

I could go and spend 40k on a nice shotgun if I wanted

You could also go and buy a cheap rifle or shotgun at dicks for a couple hundred

Why must it be false? There are plenty of blanket statements that are true and this is one of them. As a generality, betting against home dogs is a bad idea. That doesn't mean that all home dogs are mispriced, just that historically home dogs cover more than half the time.

Me too and I'm a lot older than you. I also suspect I know a bit more about sportsbetting than you. For example:

It isn't false. Since you don't believe me, go to the sports gambling board and simply ask what - lacking a fundamental change like a last minute injury - is the greatest possible edge a gambler can enjoy. The answers will range from 60% - 65%. Regardless of how badly you think that Vegas mispriced the game, bear in mind that there are a lot of smart people who make their livings on thin edges in sportsbetting. If the true line was actually six points off then you can be certain that it would have moved that way. Instead it has moved toward Michigan from the open.

Your claim is not just that you are smarter than all of the experts in Vegas but also all of the experts who make their living beating Vegas.

Can Wisconsin win and cover? Sure, but it isn't a slam dunk. Slam dunks don't exist in sportsbetting.

It has to be false because it's illogical. Where the game is played is theoretically already factored into the spread. What ultimately matters or not is whether the posted spread is inaccurate or not. If it's inaccurate then money can be made. I believe there are people out there who are smart enough to spot these inefficiencies and make money off them. The saying "It's generally bad to bet against home dogs" is just a platitude that only an amateur would say.

Even if this statement is true it is epistemologically worthless. Any sports argument that is based on history shoots itself in the foot before it can even get started. Looking at past results to figure out the future results is just another version of the Gambler's fallacy.

Give me the valid syllogism that works from the premise "I'm older than you" and reaches the conclusion "I know more than you about X"

Hint: You can't so don't try.

You're assuming the sports betting market is always efficient and that human beings are always rational. There's all kinds of examples in history that proves these notions are false. Here's just one example.

Please show me where I made that claim. I already said I can't defend my bet on rational grounds. I know I'm just gambling no matter what reasons are behind my decision and Ive made that very clear in this thread. Nice straw man attempt though.

I respect your opinion on that.

There you go again making claims that must be false given all we know about human nature. Yes, in theoretical economic models, slam dunks should not exist. But those models fail terribly to match reality because they assume humans are perfectly rational agents when they clearly are not.

There is none. iI was a response to your call to yourself as an authority based on 'I've watched Michigan my whole life [therefore I own superior knowledge]'. If your initial argument 'I am an expert because I have followed this team my whole life' has merit, then my response 'I am more of an expert for the same reason, given my much longer life' has equal merit. I agree that the argument is absurd, but it was your absurd argument.


No, you are reading things that I did not write. There certainly are exploitable inefficiencies in sportsbetting and there certainly are professionals who exploit them. What I dispute - and am quite sure about - is that the market is ever as inefficient as you think. Professional sportsbettors rely on a LOT of small bets with very small edges. If they could reliably get 65% - 80% edges then they would exploit those instead, more profitably and with fewer negative BR swings. DUCY?

While this is unquestionably true over small sample sizes, the sportsgambling market is sufficiently large, and the professionals who set and manipulate lines sufficiently dispassionate (unlike you or me) that the final line is reasonably close to the true line.

Here's one of many Kelly sources discussing bet sizing relative to your expectation:
http://www.albionresearch.com/kelly/default.php

Me and my pimped out set up.



ILP/TheHip,

Look in the upper right corner and tell me if you recognize anything.

Lots of facinating back & forth since my last visit a week or so ago.

The most timely comment I can make is that the line has moved to Wic-4.5.

GL with the bet. Generally a big line move in Michigan's favour represents 'smart money'. It's a shame you don't have your cash on UM +6. You could lay some off on Wisc -4.5 if you got cold feet, and enjoy the 'middle' op.

Opinion: the games at AP are going to get a lot tougher over the next month or two.

Yeah, I am in the process of moving most of my money off of AP. I will leave some on and try to run it back up playing mostly on huhu tables. I will jump in a juicy 15 or 30 game, but right now I feel like I need to play huhu until everyone solves it and the games dry up. Also, I want to start playing 50 and 1/2 at some point and those games just dont get going on AP so I figure its better to concentrate my efforts on Stars and FT.

I never said this. Look back in the thread and you'll see that you're mistaken.

It doesn't matter how inefficient I think the market is. The point is that markets are fundamentally inefficient and in a fundamentally inefficient market even slam dunks (the fact that we haven't defined "slam dunk" is kinda a major problem now) are possible. Perhaps very infrequent, but still possible.

I agree here. My only contention is that the lines will not be reasonably close 100% of the time because human beings are not reasonable creatures all the time.

I don't know what that move represents but I can tell you for sure that the smart money is definitely not coming from my wallet. All I can say is I "feel" like I made a great bet just like I feel like blue is a better color than purple. I'm definitely gambling and I hope I get lucky.

Ha! I almost didn't figure it out cuz that poster is so distracting. Are you an App St. fan or something? If I was a hot girl and I came into your room and saw that horrible SI picture I would so not put out.